Jim - I hear what you're saying and don't disagree at all. But, IMO, you're answering the wrong question - the question isn't whether a pro should seek an exclusive contract. The question is: in the given situation, does the pro HAVE and exclusive contract.
I'm pissed. And I have seemd to have set off a can of worms! Someone finally got back to me. After pressing the issue of exclusive contract, they said that parents do take pictures of their kids and they finally stated that they couldn't stop me from taking pictures or giving them to my friend. The photographer's contract seems to involve a kickback to the tourney. They suggested that I "work" for the contracted photographer and "strongly discouraged" me to sharing my photos or even taken photos in the future.
The person then proceeded to contact my friend and stated that she could not share my photos because they have a contracted photographer at the event, but had permission to look at *only* her kids. My friend is *very* angry. And she's stuck in a hard place because she has many kids that play. In the end, I think the photos will not be shared.
I completely understand about not being able to shoot if there was an exclusive contract, but it's not in my case. In general, I don't like exclusive contracts, especially at a kids events because I think it gives a photographer a bad rep of being expensive and having a monopoly, especially with the kickbacks. I can understand it at places where there is a safety concern like a race track or a things with stage lights. I will always respect those boundaries and their right to obtain one and will follow the signs posted.
In this case, it seems that I'm being punished because I have a dSLR. I did not let people know that I sharing photos, give anyone my contact info, take shots of a full game or take shots of even more than one game! I was only there for TWO PERIODS! And I only knew the family members and no one else who were playing... I went there to cheer them on and just had my camera with me.
I sat in the forth row for the first period and shot through the very scratched glass (pro hockey team plays at this rink). I moved around the boards during the second period.
And ended up with shots like this when I didn't time things incorrectly:
The offical guy shoot from the ladder behind the glass,
I'm in trouble because there is a perceived conflict of interest because I took good pictures in a less than ideal situation and I got my friend and her kids in trouble. I don't think they would have any issues with me if I shot with a P&S and ended up with crappy results. This is a shot pre-dSLR, same rink, same lighting, league game earlier in the year, with standing next to the boards with nearly the same view point as the first photo. I don't think the people running the tourney (or anyone) would have any problems with me sharing if all of my shots came out like this.... It's look horrible even though I used a decent P&S.
What am I going to do now? Just give the photos to my friends as I stated before.... I think I'm most angry at having my right to shoot taken away because I own a long lens and know how to use it. I'll just keep my camera to games and shooting as long as there is not exclusive clause or signs that keep everyone from taking pictures. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Thanks again. I now know about difference between contracts, and exclusive contracts. I guess I'll stick with adult rec. hockey; the lines are not as fuzzy...
In general, I don't like exclusive contracts, especially at a kids events because I think it gives a photographer a bad rep of being expensive and having a monopoly, especially with the kickbacks.
Whether you like exculisve contracts or not is a moot point. Its not your sandbox. Its their sandbox, they get to make the rules. And if they want to give an exclusive contract in exchange for kickbacks, well, its their sandbox to do so. Nothing says you must buy the photos.
If I was the photographer, and if I was giving a kick-back, I would demand an exclusive contract. Otherwise its not a level playing field, correct? And most leagues want a cut of everything generated by the event: photos, concessions, etc. etc.
In the very least remember this: without those kickbacks the league would have to get that money directly from your wallet to cover their budget.
In this case, it seems that I'm being punished because I have a dSLR.
Be careful not to slip into a persecution mentality here.
In this case, it seems that I'm being punished because I have a dSLR. I did not let people know that I sharing photos, give anyone my contact info, ............
Jim -
Whether you or I think an exclusive contract should be awarded is sligtly beside the point. If it exists, don't you agree such a contract should be honored? As a parent or hobbyist shooter or competing pro, if you disagree with the policy or contract then take it up with the organization policy makers.
I agree it should be honored if it exists, but I am not sure I would agree that it is the responsibily of the hobbyist to research to find out if such contract exists. I would think that responsibility should fall on the people running the event and/or the contracted photographer. If the hobbyist tried to sneak in and hide the fact he was taking pictures, that would be one thing; but this does not seem to be the case.
I would be pissed too. I have a feeling these types of predicaments will happen and continue to happen. Not sure I have any advice as to what I would do in your shoes. I think one of the keys would be to be careful of things like tournaments. If you go to regular games, their is probably not a contracted photographer.
I just shot a public beach wedding in Cancun that had a contracted photographer, contracted from the Hotel I was staying at.
I put the pics on my site and left a note at the front desk of the hotel that I would, but they are not up for sale. I just geniuinely enjoyed laying out on the beach and being surprised by them starting a wedding close to where I lay.
Now, say if the photographer wanted to use a couple of my pics since I got different angles than him and in addition his camera may have been destroyed by a rogue wave, I would consider charging him to use them.
So I guess is it ethical for us to sell our pics or rights to use those pics to the event photographers? Whether it be a wedding or hockey game?
Canon 40D : Canon 400D : Canon Elan 7NE : Canon 580EX : 2 x Canon 430EX : Canon 24-70 f2.8L : Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM : Canon 28-135mm f/3.5 IS : 18-55mm f/3.5 : 4GB Sandisk Extreme III : 2GB Sandisk Extreme III : 2 x 1GB Sandisk Ultra II : Sekonik L358
Comments
I'm pissed. And I have seemd to have set off a can of worms! Someone finally got back to me. After pressing the issue of exclusive contract, they said that parents do take pictures of their kids and they finally stated that they couldn't stop me from taking pictures or giving them to my friend. The photographer's contract seems to involve a kickback to the tourney. They suggested that I "work" for the contracted photographer and "strongly discouraged" me to sharing my photos or even taken photos in the future.
The person then proceeded to contact my friend and stated that she could not share my photos because they have a contracted photographer at the event, but had permission to look at *only* her kids. My friend is *very* angry. And she's stuck in a hard place because she has many kids that play. In the end, I think the photos will not be shared.
I completely understand about not being able to shoot if there was an exclusive contract, but it's not in my case. In general, I don't like exclusive contracts, especially at a kids events because I think it gives a photographer a bad rep of being expensive and having a monopoly, especially with the kickbacks. I can understand it at places where there is a safety concern like a race track or a things with stage lights. I will always respect those boundaries and their right to obtain one and will follow the signs posted.
In this case, it seems that I'm being punished because I have a dSLR. I did not let people know that I sharing photos, give anyone my contact info, take shots of a full game or take shots of even more than one game! I was only there for TWO PERIODS! And I only knew the family members and no one else who were playing... I went there to cheer them on and just had my camera with me.
I sat in the forth row for the first period and shot through the very scratched glass (pro hockey team plays at this rink). I moved around the boards during the second period.
And ended up with shots like this when I didn't time things incorrectly:
The offical guy shoot from the ladder behind the glass,
I'm in trouble because there is a perceived conflict of interest because I took good pictures in a less than ideal situation and I got my friend and her kids in trouble. I don't think they would have any issues with me if I shot with a P&S and ended up with crappy results. This is a shot pre-dSLR, same rink, same lighting, league game earlier in the year, with standing next to the boards with nearly the same view point as the first photo. I don't think the people running the tourney (or anyone) would have any problems with me sharing if all of my shots came out like this.... It's look horrible even though I used a decent P&S.
What am I going to do now? Just give the photos to my friends as I stated before.... I think I'm most angry at having my right to shoot taken away because I own a long lens and know how to use it. I'll just keep my camera to games and shooting as long as there is not exclusive clause or signs that keep everyone from taking pictures. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Thanks again. I now know about difference between contracts, and exclusive contracts. I guess I'll stick with adult rec. hockey; the lines are not as fuzzy...
If I was the photographer, and if I was giving a kick-back, I would demand an exclusive contract. Otherwise its not a level playing field, correct? And most leagues want a cut of everything generated by the event: photos, concessions, etc. etc.
In the very least remember this: without those kickbacks the league would have to get that money directly from your wallet to cover their budget.
Be careful not to slip into a persecution mentality here.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
Better to be pissed off than pissed ..... (that's what my dad always said)
and from a previous quote
quotes kind of conflict
Don't think it's the shots they are concerned about but the distribution of images.
Hey, lighten up it's not that big of a deal. Seems as though the contracted photog gives you the out you said you wanted
"Tis better keep your mouth shut and be thought of as an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"
I agree it should be honored if it exists, but I am not sure I would agree that it is the responsibily of the hobbyist to research to find out if such contract exists. I would think that responsibility should fall on the people running the event and/or the contracted photographer. If the hobbyist tried to sneak in and hide the fact he was taking pictures, that would be one thing; but this does not seem to be the case.
Glass: >Sigma 17-35mm,f2.8-4 DG >Tamron 28-75mm,f2.8 >Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro >Canon 70-200mm,f2.8L IS >Canon 200mm,f2.8L
Flash: >550EX >Sigma EF-500 DG Super >studio strobes
Sites: Jim Mitte Photography - Livingston Sports Photos - Brighton Football Photos
Glass: >Sigma 17-35mm,f2.8-4 DG >Tamron 28-75mm,f2.8 >Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro >Canon 70-200mm,f2.8L IS >Canon 200mm,f2.8L
Flash: >550EX >Sigma EF-500 DG Super >studio strobes
Sites: Jim Mitte Photography - Livingston Sports Photos - Brighton Football Photos
I put the pics on my site and left a note at the front desk of the hotel that I would, but they are not up for sale. I just geniuinely enjoyed laying out on the beach and being surprised by them starting a wedding close to where I lay.
Now, say if the photographer wanted to use a couple of my pics since I got different angles than him and in addition his camera may have been destroyed by a rogue wave, I would consider charging him to use them.
So I guess is it ethical for us to sell our pics or rights to use those pics to the event photographers? Whether it be a wedding or hockey game?
dak.smugmug.com