Why you shouldn't work for a photo credit....

Blaker

Just replace "sports photographer" with whatever your dream job is -

http://www.sportsshooter.com/news_story.html?id=2210

johng

Unfortunately, there will always be an endless stream of people willing to do so. On one hand there will be new photographers lured by the 'you'll get your name out there' and 'you'll make contacts' and 'you'll build your portfolio'. And then there will be the people who enjoy it as a hobby and their 'payment' is the ego boost of seeing their photos used (and I don't say that in a derogatory way - that really is payment to a lot of people). There was an interesting thread on sportsshooter last week about this and shooting for a stock photo agency. The sports photography industry is on a huge decline (with regard to the number of jobs available and amount of money to be made).

What will be interesting is if wedding photography takes a similar hit in the next decade. 10 years ago, the gap between the pro and Uncle Fred was usually pretty huge. But, I think you may find quite a few customers that will find the $500-$1000 part-time photographers do a 'good enough' job vs. spending $5,000 on an experienced pro. No argument the experienced full time pro isn't better. But, as happened in sports photography, it's a matter of "good enough"

Snowgirl

Applies to many creative endeavours
I am a freelance photographer / writer. Over the years I've invested thousands of dollars and eons of time in training, professional development, education and equipment.

"Good enough" is become the standard out there - whether for writing, photography or any other creative endeavours. It is incredibly depressing.

I see articles in magazines that have DROPPED their word rates to unconscionable levels being written by anyone with a computer, regardless of linguistic or creative skills. As you said, Uncle Fred and his digital camera get the 'good enough' photos at major family events.

It was interesting to hear some comments during a trade show last week-end. Two people I know that are good amateurs both commented that it was much more difficult to achieve a good photograph than they had originally thought when they purchased their DSLRs. I explained that good/better equipment will help to improve the clarity etc. of an already good shot, but that it is the skill. training and experience of the photographer who creates that good shot in the first place, regardless of what equipment they're holding.

Unfortunately, joe q public doesn't care.

So endeth my rant.

Toshido

Then again we have other professionals that are hiring amateurs and inexperienced photographers to cover events, paying them peanuts and taking the photo credits for those shots.

I am in talks currently with a Sports Shooter member to assist in covering an event. I am waiting for clarification but it sounds like the "Pro" will take all my photos, put their copyright on it and display it on their website. I am still waiting to hear clarification on whether or not I get photo credits for my work on their site. But looking at their site I am unimpressed by their photos and see them crediting nobody else for photos.

Another pro I know hires people with zero photographic experience to cover hockey tournaments for him.

So unfortunately the pros also realize that any John Q can do good enough with quality camera and are now hiring John Q to do some of the work for them.

johng

Toshido - hate to break it to you, but that's the nature of being a freelance shooter and being a hired gun for events. The person running the show sells the photos and you get a pay check. The benefit of that arrangement is - you get a salary - guaranteed money. You have to decide what's more important - your ego or the paycheck. If credit is more important to you, you're not going to get much work as an event shooter for other outfits.

Cygnus Studios

johng wrote:

The person running the show sells the photos and you get a pay check. The benefit of that arrangement is - you get a salary - guaranteed money. You have to decide what's more important - your ego or the paycheck.

Absolutely true. 99.9% of my photos fall into this category, and I got over the credit thing very early into it.

As for John Q. Public and their acceptance of mediocrity, this is not new, and certainly not limited to photography.
It seems larger today because we all hear about it more often due to the ease of communication on a mass scale.
We live in a very Walmart oriented world. We expect more for less, faster, and most could not care if the quality is less than what was expected before.
There are still plenty of people who are seeking better quality. They understand the difference between quantity and quality.
It is our job as photographers who choose not to give away our talent to seek out these individuals.

Toshido

johng wrote:

Toshido - hate to break it to you, but that's the nature of being a freelance shooter and being a hired gun for events. The person running the show sells the photos and you get a pay check. The benefit of that arrangement is - you get a salary - guaranteed money. You have to decide what's more important - your ego or the paycheck. If credit is more important to you, you're not going to get much work as an event shooter for other outfits.

If it was for an outfit, some company, I would certainly understand. but this is for an individual photographer.
I know I would feel, dirty, if I hired another photographer to take pictures then posted them on my personal website claiming them as mine.

Just sounds wrong to me.

johng

Toshido wrote:

If it was for an outfit, some company, I would certainly understand. but this is for an individual photographer.
I know I would feel, dirty, if I hired another photographer to take pictures then posted them on my personal website claiming them as mine.

Just sounds wrong to me.

You have a decision to make then. Look, a website for pros isn't facebook. It's a storefront. The photographer posts the photos because they are HIS. He purchased them to sell. It's a product. If you can't think of your photos like that - as a product, then this type of work isn't for you. If you have to get the credit along with the money then you need to stay on your own rather than work for someone else. Neither way is wrong and neither way is better. But, it's all about business. And whether a person takes the photos themselves or pays another to take them - in the end they have the right to sell them. And you have to realize that's what the website is for - sales & marketing of the products you sell. Clients for this type of work don't care who it is pressing the shutter button - they really don't. If you need credit then seek out a staffer job for paper or magazine or try to get work with a wire service.

Toshido

Or just stay on my own.

I guess it was just naive of me to think the photographs on a photographers website, copyrighted by that photographer are actually photos that that photographer took.

Either way I may still do the job. Will be a great experience and likely to make enough money for my next purchase. But mostly for the experience.

Blaker

Toshido wrote:

Or just stay on my own.

I guess it was just naive of me to think the photographs on a photographers website, copyrighted by that photographer are actually photos that that photographer took.

Either way I may still do the job. Will be a great experience and likely to make enough money for my next purchase. But mostly for the experience.

What JohnG said in the pp is absolutely true.
A copyright is just a legal term which gives a specific person the rights to a specific work. Copyrights are bought and sold all the time.
Aspiring photographers give away their copyrights all the time, too , either out of ignorance, lack of discussion/contract, in exchange for credentials, or the misguided notion that it will somehow ingratiate the photographer with the client and get them paying work down the road.

You have to make up your mind whether you want to do this for a living, and come up with a business plan whereby you will charge enough to pay your bills, or whether photography is just a hobby with an ego boost- seeing your name under your (free) photo in a magazine, getting access to an event for the bragging rights, etc.

johng

Blaker wrote:

Aspiring photographers give away their copyrights all the time, too , either out of ignorance, lack of discussion/contract, in exchange for credentials, or the misguided notion that it will somehow ingratiate the photographer with the client and get them paying work down the road.

I just wanted to add - photographers also give up copyright in situations like Toshido's when they are paid freelancers working for someone else for event coverage. In those instances, you are paid by hour or 1/2 day typically and the person paying your wage takes copyright. Especially the case when on-site printing is being done. So, I would not necessarly say doing that type of work is misguided. Let's say you get hired on to help shoot a soccer tournament and get paid $250 for a day's work. The outfit running the photography show takes your cards and takes the photos - loads them on to their stations and they take ownership. But you made $250. The good news is - you get guaranteed money, you don't spend a second of your time post processing images, etc - you shoot, you collect your pay. Unless you have the ability to hire the number of shooters necessary to cover the tournament and have the on-site printing capability it's unlikely you'll get that contract and be able to make that kind of money. For some people that is not a bad business decision. Others might not like it. But in this example you are getting paid. I just wanted to point out that giving up copyright isn't always a bad business decision.

Blaker

johng wrote:

I just wanted to add - photographers also give up copyright in situations like Toshido's when they are paid freelancers working for someone else for event coverage. In those instances, you are paid by hour or 1/2 day typically and the person paying your wage takes copyright. Especially the case when on-site printing is being done. So, I would not necessarly say doing that type of work is misguided. Let's say you get hired on to help shoot a soccer tournament and get paid $250 for a day's work. The outfit running the photography show takes your cards and takes the photos - loads them on to their stations and they take ownership. But you made $250. The good news is - you get guaranteed money, you don't spend a second of your time post processing images, etc - you shoot, you collect your pay. Unless you have the ability to hire the number of shooters necessary to cover the tournament and have the on-site printing capability it's unlikely you'll get that contract and be able to make that kind of money. For some people that is not a bad business decision. Others might not like it. But in this example you are getting paid. I just wanted to point out that giving up copyright isn't always a bad business decision.

Oh, ITA- I was responding to Toshido's comment : "I guess it was just naive of me to think the photographs on a photographers website, copyrighted by that photographer are actually photos that that photographer took."

I was making the point that a copyright isn't sacred only to the photographer who pressed the shutter- I was trying to show that the copyright to works, just like any other commodity, can be bought, sold, or given away .

Toshido

I completely understand about the copyright. I also understand that the default, legally here, is that if I take a picture while being paid to do that then that picture belong to the person paying me.


Again what I disagree with, even if it is normal in this business, is that the pictures i take for another photograph. Whether helping them at a sporting event, second shooting a wedding, covering for them due to illness, etc... Those pictures can be placed on the photographers personal site with no credits to the person that actually took the picture.

I had always assumed the pictures on a photographers site were their own pictures, unless otherwise noted.

Otherwise, what prevents me from filling my website with photos I purchased from others. Then visitors assume those photos are from me and when they contact me assume I can take the pictures I have displayed on the website.

I had just always seen a photographers website different than say, a stock agency, or art dealer, etc...

Of course like I said I am waiting for clarification to some things as well.

Blaker

Toshido wrote:

I completely understand about the copyright. I also understand that the default, legally here, is that if I take a picture while being paid to do that then that picture belong to the person paying me.

That's not necessarily the default, so don't assume that it is. This is why it's so important to discuss these details whenever you are hired to shoot anything, for any client, and then put it down in writing ( a contract) and sign it.
Don't assume anything- you, as the photographer, are free to license your photos in a way that benefits you, and if you don't like the terms , then either negotiate them to better benefit you, or walk away.

Toshido wrote:

Again what I disagree with, even if it is normal in this business, is that the pictures i take for another photograph. Whether helping them at a sporting event, second shooting a wedding, covering for them due to illness, etc... Those pictures can be placed on the photographers personal site with no credits to the person that actually took the picture.
I had always assumed the pictures on a photographers site were their own pictures, unless otherwise noted.

Again, if you disagree with it, then don't enter into it. Ask questions and negotiate terms BEFORE entering into a working relationship.

Toshido wrote:

Otherwise, what prevents me from filling my website with photos I purchased from others. Then visitors assume those photos are from me and when they contact me assume I can take the pictures I have displayed on the website.

Again, this goes for consumers, too- ask questions! IF you are hiring a large photo agency to shoot your wedding, find out which specific photographer will be shooting your wedding, meet with that photog, ask to see examples of THAT photog's work.