Paying for autographs/photos

[david4wt]

Why does it matter what fame they'reliving off? What does it matter which job it is? If they're popular, and people want autos, so What?

I think it's fair to be paid only if you are actually doing something, acting-singing-writing whatever. Sitting down and smiling and signing autographs are not a way to show your creativity or talent and I don't think you should be paid for it. Sure, the celebrity stays there the whole day when he could be somewhere else but no-one forced him/her to do it.

And what do you mean by reinvent themselves? Plastic surgery, being on soaps so they get attention? If people want to be themselves and act at the same time, and can make a living off it through conventions, why not?

Of course I'm not talking about "getting attention". Amber Benson started writing and Felicia Day started a webseries.
What I'm saying is that the pure concept of asking money to sign a damn piece of paper is rude. Who are you? If you aren't lucky enough to make a living out of your talent and don't manage to have your own show...do something else! It's not written anywhere that you have to be a movie star. I'm not saying that you have to go wait tables, but you can still do something that involves your creativity and make some income since they already made tons of money when the spolight was on them.


Again, it's a matter of principle. I would be terribly offended if anyone asked me for money just cause I love his/her work wanted they autograph.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

This post had parts deleted but I think I can reply correctly.

Well how should I know? I'm not a celebrity and I certainly don't pretend to know how much one gets paid to make appearances at conventions and stuff. But I agree with David; fans already have to pay to get into these things. Why should they have to pay for someone's signature on a piece if paper? If you ran into a celebrity in a restaurant or on the street thy wouldn't ask you for money to give you an autograph... Why charge money for autographs at conventions?

Photo ops are different to me though because it is their likeness. Chances are people are going to be posting the picture different places and maybe even using it to promote certain things so I do not see a problem with charging a small fee for a photo package.

If we don't know how much they're paid, how can we know they're overpaid?

And if I got to a convention I don't want the price of admission to include autograph costs for actors I might not even like. I bet for those kind of cons, the admission fee would be much higher to include autographs for everyone.

And the reason they charge money at a convention is that it's not running into a fan on the street and feeling like signing something(which they have the right not to do, after all, if someone wanted to dicuss your work outside the office, you might not always want to); then it's work. They do it for hours in a very formal professional way. They offer a service/product and we pay.

---------- Post added at 04:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 PM ----------

I think it's fair to be paid only if you are actually doing something, acting-singing-writing whatever. Sitting down and smiling and signing autographs are not a way to show your creativity or talent and I don't think you should be paid for it. Sure, the celebrity stays there the whole day when he could be somewhere else but no-one forced him/her to do it.

I'm not saying it's hard work, but it is a job. They perform a service and they are paid for it.

Not sure why you would bring up that they're not forced to do it. No one else is forced to pay either. A job is done and a job is paid for.

Of course I'm not talking about "getting attention". Amber Benson started writing and Felicia Day started a webseries.
What I'm saying is that the pure concept of asking money to sign a damn piece of paper is rude. Who are you? If you aren't lucky enough to make a living out of your talent and don't manage to have your own show...do something else! It's not written anywhere that you have to be a movie star. I'm not saying that you have to go wait tables, but you can still do something that involves your creativity and make some income since they already made tons of money when the spolight was on them.

Why should they need to be creative? Either they can't or don't want to, and why should anyone say they should? Why is writing a book that will make people happy, and then charge for it, better than signing autos, that will make people happy, then charge for it? Everyone everywhere could be using their time for greater things, but people don't have too.

If there is a good easy way for people to make money, which they may or may not need for themselves and their family, and it's not hurting anyone, why shouldn't they?

Again, it's a matter of principle. I would be terribly offended if anyone asked me for money just cause I love his/her work wanted they autograph.

If you would do it hours on end for no pay, bless your heart, but don't you realize it's everyone's right to not be that selfless? And if you're going to do things for free for several hours, then one could argue that charity work would be better than signing pieces of paper.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

They already have money that would last for lifetime to anybody else

I wonder if you saw my post where I broke down what someone like Nick Brendon got paid for "Buffy" and how much he would likely be left after taxes and paying for an agent, right away. In case you didn't, the final number was around 4 million dollars, for the rest of his life. That amount of money, over just 20 years, is equivalent to a steady income of 200,000 dollars a year. The average cost of a home in LA is around $300,000. After mortgage, paying social security and healthcare, (which we do in the United States), continuing to pay a manager and agent, he's got enough to get by (in those 20 years) and that's all.

These people are not dripping in money and diamonds like people seem to think. They are not A list Hollywood actors. They got one big break and in spite of their enormous talent, have not worked steadily since.

and if they can't manage to get another successful job I'm sorry and I imagine how hard it is, but they shouldn't be living off the one they had before. You know what you signed on for when you started, reinvent yourself....
If you aren't lucky enough to make a living out of your talent and don't manage to have your own show...do something else! It's not written anywhere that you have to be a movie star. I'm not saying that you have to go wait tables, but you can still do something that involves your creativity and make some income since they already made tons of money when the spolight was on them.

This comment made extremely upset. I'm sorry, it's not personal and I'm sure you didn't mean it to be hurtful, but it was. Yes, artists know what we sign on for when we start. By the way, I started when I was 3 years old. We dedicate our lives to becoming great at something and sacrifice a lot. We take auditions all the time. We put blood and guts into our work in order to do so--to be the best and hope to get noticed. We continue going through this gut wrenching process because we are artists and we can't imagine ourselves doing anything else. Often, what we're sacrificing is money. We know that and we accept that.

And yes, if it came to the point when, as a result of what we do, we were nearly destitute, then we would have to suffer the loss of a major part of what makes us who we are--not just what we love but how we define ourselves and how we contribute to the world--and try to find other means of employment. But a struggling actor or a struggling musician does not deserve to be told "find another job." It is not as simple as someone who has had one profession since college deciding ten years later to go another route. You're talking about people who have often had a lifelong dream and have spent so much of their lives honing their skills to get where they are that the mere concept of "doing something else" is utterly frightening. And as I said, if we had to, we would. But to make light of it is to underestimate how much of our souls are tied up in what we do.

 

[david4wt]

Why should they need to be creative? Either they can't or don't want to, and why should anyone say they should?

Then get another job. If you're into the entertainment industry and you don't want to do anything creative then find a different kind of job.

Why is writing a book that will make people happy, and then charge for it, better than signing autos, that will make people happy, then charge for it? Everyone everywhere could be using their time for greater things, but people don't have too.

Because writing a book is actually doing something. Just because you spent the day nodding, smiling and signing it doesn't mean to me that you worked.

If there is a good easy way for people to make money, which they may or may not need for themselves and their family, and it's not hurting anyone, why shouldn't they?

Of course it's not harmful to anyone, as I said before my argument is just out of principle. I think the whole idea of it is "wrong" or at least rude.

These people are not dripping in money and diamonds like people seem to think. They are not A list Hollywood actors. They got one big break and in spite of their enormous talent, have not worked steadily since.

Believe me I don't think that people like Amy Acker, Amber Benson or even Alexis Denisof (if it wasn't for marrying Alyson Hannigan) are dripping in diamonds. But they for sure have some money aside...I read the whole think about Nick Brendon, and that's were my opinion originated. I know I sound harsh but sometimes you just have to face reality and understand that you can't live on the lap of luxury all your life just because you were really lucky that one time. If 4mil dollars aren't enough for you (which I'd like to point out that are 80k dollars a month for 50 years), you still don't need to get a job that pays you that much money, just something to keep some money coming in.

I apologize if I hurt your feeling. I'm sorry if I'm being harsh describing what is a reality for many talented people, but if you can't manage to make a living out of your art then I think it's wrong to try to round off your general income by signing and meeting fans. As I said before, to me the whole idea of paying to meet someone is just wrong.
I understand that people are fighting to live their dream, I know it's not about talent but about luck if some make it and some don't and I'm not saying that you should give up and forget all about your dreams and do something else. I understand the whole thing about ambition and dreams, I have just one job in my mind too and there's nothing else in the world that I would like to do. But if I won't be able to make a living out of it then I would face reality and do also something else.



Again, the whole argument comes down to a matter of principle: I think it's offensive to ask money just to meet someone, you don't. We'll just have to agree to disagree 😉

 

[Gum Gnome33]

Skytteflickan88 agrees: I'm happy there are people as dedicated as you out there. I don't get it, I'm a pretty ambitionless person, but I'm glad your guys work your entire life for stuff like this. I'm saying it out of selfishness of course, so we can enjoy your work.

Thank you for saying so. I really hope I didn't come off like some sort of martyr in my last post--I mean we do this because we love it so it's entirely selfish in that regard. But the idea of being told "just go do something else" after dedicating our lives to it is just infuriating.

Forgot to mention this in my last post:
Actors, regardless of their previous success, are constantly auditioning but things rarely stick. Sometimes, when they are lucky enough to get cast, they film something that doesn't even get picked up for pilot season. For them, (all of us), it's a series of successes and failures. It's a lifetime struggle. So at what point do they draw the line and say "I'm not going to do this anymore?" It's monumentally hard, nearly impossible to make a decision like that. Because the truth is, if you're getting by, it's hard to know when to call it quits on something you love, that defines you.
Take Emma for example, who is probably not going to go back to school to become a lawyer at this point in her life. She will continue to do what she's doing, to be creative, to take auditions, to hope for the best. She's an artist, and she's brilliant at it. If, in the meantime, she wants to charge money for public appearances and autograph signings to help her get by, why the heck shouldn't she?
As members of the BB, we obviously are so attached to the work that she and a bunch of artists helped create, that we spend our precious time here discussing it, nearly 10 years since it's been off the air. These people and their work obviously have incredible value to all of us and I don't understand why we would take issue with the idea that they would charge us for an appearance directly related to that work.

ETA: just saw your post [MENTION=8401]david4wt[/MENTION]

I think you meant that 4 million comes out to 80K a YEAR over 50 years, not a month. 🙂 Sure that's enough to get by, and in LA it's very difficult especially if you have a family to support. It's far from the lap of luxury...

Another important point: you mentioned that they should "also do something else" to get by. Auditioning is a full time job. Literally. Even if it doesn't result in a paying gig. Practicing, auditioning, traveling, performing, filming. It takes up nearly all day, every day. We rarely get weekends off. So it would be a matter of switching careers entirely, not supplementing income.

Anyway, I understand that you feel it's rude, but I strongly believe it's their hard earned right. And yes, we'll agree to disagree. 🙂

 

[brinkster130]

I personally think it is a bit lame to ask for money for an autograph or picture; especially when the said fans have already purchased a ticket to the event and have spent time waiting to meet the actor. I suppose it is their right to charge, just like it's my right not to bother paying them for so little. IMO it seems like they are already being paid to be there so I don't see a need for then to charge more.

Also, another thing to consider when hypothesizing about actors financial situations, is that any actors who were on a successful show like BTVS will likely be receiving royalties for a long time while the show is in syndication.

I think it would be kinda interesting to see what sort of financial benefit actors get from signing autographs at conventions.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

I personally think it is a bit lame to ask for money for an autograph or picture; especially when the said fans have already purchased a ticket to the event and have spent time waiting to meet the actor. I suppose it is their right to charge, just like it's my right not to bother paying them for so little. IMO it seems like they are already being paid to be there so I don't see a need for then to charge more.

Also, another thing to consider when hypothesizing about actors financial situations, is that any actors who were on a successful show like BTVS will likely be receiving royalties for a long time while the show is in syndication.

I think it would be kinda interesting to see what sort of financial benefit actors get from signing autographs at conventions.

But if they included the price of several actors in the ticket price, it would be pretty high. Can you imagine huge conventions?

They would have to pay for the area they're in, probably workers, taxes, material, you name it, then maybe 10 actors. I would not want that included in the price, since then I would feel like I had to get everyone's autograph to amke up for the price.

Then the actors who didn't do that much signing compared to the others would also get a unfair amount of that money(unless they're somehow paid per signing).

We have no idea how much ends up in the actors pockets.

 

[brinkster130]

We have no idea how much ends up in the actors pockets.

Very true. And until we do know the break down of the expenses all we really have are our opinions that are based on assumptions we've made.

While I certainly agree that there could be good and valid reasons why some actors charge for their autograph, I can't shake the negative feelings that I get when I see actors charging fans for a couple seconds of their time.

 

[sk]

I have no issue at all with it.

Have no interested in paying for one myself though.
But as long as no one forces me to buy them, or bother me about it, they can charge as much as they want.

I'm more bothered over stuff that you actually can't live without that is overpriced.

/SK

 

[BuffyElevated]

Are they paid that much?

Well how should I know? I'm not a celebrity and I certainly don't pretend to know how much one gets paid to make appearances at conventions and stuff. But I agree with David; fans already have to pay to get into these things. Why should they have to pay for someone's signature on a piece if paper? If you ran into a celebrity in a restaurant or on the street thy wouldn't ask you for money to give you an autograph... Why charge money for autographs at conventions?

Photo ops are different to me though because it is their likeness. Chances are people are going to be posting the picture different places and maybe even using it to promote certain things so I do not see a problem with charging a small fee for a photo package.

 

[WileyDairyGnome]

I agree that having to pay for an autograph or a photo is totally rude and selfish. I mean, these fans take time out of their lives to listen to your music, watch you in your movies and tv shows, support everything you do, look up to you as a role model, go through fangirl/fanboy emotions over you and basically, keep you in business. Fans buy their products, their albums, DVDs, posters, and even post blogs dedicated to them, I think the least the celebs can do is thank the fans by easily giving them an autograph or a photo. I don't see what the big deal is. 😛

 

[Skytteflickan88]

I agree that having to pay for an autograph or a photo is totally rude and selfish. I mean, these fans take time out of their lives to listen to your music, watch you in your movies and tv shows, support everything you do, look up to you as a role model, go through fangirl/fanboy emotions over you and basically, keep you in business. Fans buy their products, their albums, DVDs, posters, and even post blogs dedicated to them, I think the least the celebs can do is thank the fans by easily giving them an autograph or a photo. I don't see what the big deal is. 😛

Did you read the rest of the thread? I don't want to repeat what's already been said in case you already read it.

 

[SinisterPledge]

It's interesting to see the differences between concerts and conventions. I mean I've never went to a concert where the band asked for payment for autographs, whereas I've heard the opposite stories from conventions.

It's very possible that they take advantage of peoples geekiness whereas fans are a bit more "moderate"....ehem... and now I just offended everyone on this forum 😀

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is: Geeks are probably more likely to pay for autographs than fans that go to see a band. I think when you go to a concert there's a personal connection between the crowd and the band (if its a good show) and then it'd feel really weird charging for autographs, whereas (god I've used that word a lot in this post) actors are just sitting there doing a PR-job.

I think it's important to separate concerts and conventions, as the autograph-signing-situations are actually completely different.

Uh... sorry for the rambling, I'll be quiet now. 🙂

 

[WileyDairyGnome]

Did you read the rest of the thread? I don't want to repeat what's already been said in case you already read it.

No, actually I didn't read the rest of the thread... Am I missing something? 😛

 

[funsmiley]

I don't agree with it in all honesty, I think its distasteful.

Their are so many people out there who go to conventions, premières, all sorts of events and wait for hours just to get a glimpse and an autograph of there Favourite stars and yet we have celebs who charge for an autograph. But there are celebs who sell their autographs for charity which I support.

I'm not saying the stars who do charge for an autograph are bad or anything i just don think its right.