Dilemma - Free Photos or No Photos

[Biomech]

I've checked - this isn't covered in Jim Bryants recentpost

So here's the dilemma. You're at an event taking pictures as the official photographer, members of the public are snapping away too. Then a magazine wants to publish them. You want to licence your photos but know that the magazine will just refuse and use the photos from a snapper giving them that little bit of "fame". What do you do?

Example: The wedding I just shot used the worlds smallest car. It will now be appearing in all of the national tabloids. I wanted to licence my images and get something for them but people are already collecting images from the snappers that attended. Infact, todays local papers have covered the wedding and have used the images from a gatecrasher instead of mine!

[Jim Poor]

Originally Posted by Biomech

I've checked - this isn't covered in Jim Bryants recentpost

So here's the dilemma. You're at an event taking pictures as the official photographer, members of the public are snapping away too. Then a magazine wants to publish them. You want to licence your photos but know that the magazine will just refuse and use the photos from a snapper giving them that little bit of "fame". What do you do?

Example: The wedding I just shot used the worlds smallest car. It will now be appearing in all of the national tabloids. I wanted to licence my images and get something for them but people are already collecting images from the snappers that attended. Infact, todays local papers have covered the wedding and have used the images from a gatecrasher instead of mine!

Let teh "snappers" have their fame. You got your pay (hopefully) from the couple.

[Niresangwa]

as has been pointed out a few times here re: photo credits, no one looks at the photo credit byline aside from other photographers, if anyone looks at all. i don't see a prosective bride seeing the picture in the local paper and saying "oooh i want to hire that guy!"

A better angle might be to approach the manufacturers of the car rather than the local or even national rags... not that i can think how they would use the images really..

better to let it go and move on maybe..

[pril79]

Wasn't your job to shoot the wedding regardless of the other opportunities that were shown to you that was also shown to others.
so your options you can do what they are doing and just submit the photo for name credit. but to have it licensed others will get the worm quicker!!

[Jim Bryant]

We were covering a recent event, printing pictures onsite and had a slideshow showing on a HDTV screen. People actually got out their cell phones to take pictures of our pictures, we told them that was a No No. But in your case, you can't stop folks from taking pictures.
In our wedding contracts, we have a clause stating that we are the official photographer and no other photography is allowed due to interfering with our remote onsite strobes.

[bhursey]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

In our wedding contracts, we have a clause stating that we are the official photographer and no other photography is allowed due to interfering with our remote onsite strobes.

I have that also, even though mostly I use radio triggers. marahahahaha... Occasionally I do use an optical slave.

[BK553]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

We were covering a recent event, printing pictures onsite and had a slideshow showing on a HDTV screen. People actually got out their cell phones to take pictures of our pictures, we told them that was a No No. But in your case, you can't stop folks from taking pictures.
In our wedding contracts, we have a clause stating that we are the official photographer and no other photography is allowed due to interfering with our remote onsite strobes.

Exactly. Something like this:


3. Exclusive Photographer. The Photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the Client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the Client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer’s duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer.

[Drkranger]

I just recently turned down something just like this. I have shot for the city for years and had provided photos for flyers and websites. Another magazine was doing an article on the city's programs and asked to publish a photo. Knowing that no one would care about the photo credit, and at the point now where my name is out there and I'm getting more business, I gave them a price. They turned it down and I walked away. Give someone else their 15 minutes. Get paid for your hard work.

[prince]

I wouldn't just give away my photos like that in such a case.

I teamed up with a pet trainer (new in business) for whom I shoot pet graduation photos and offer a free 4x6 (completely on me). I allow her to use the watermarked photos on her website and other promotional materials. Some times she offers free training/consulting sessions for my dog. Overall we both get benefitted when she gets good word for offering pet graduation photos and when her clients book me for portrait sessions.

[Photologyst]

Originally Posted by BK553

Exactly. Something like this:


3. Exclusive Photographer. The Photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the Client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the Client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer’s duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer.

I have been to lots of weddings and plenty of guests photographed virtually all the poses arranged by the photographer.

Because, how many different poses are there of the B & G, family and friends? Many couples place disposable cameras on the tables.

Clauses like that will cause a photographer to lose business. As the paying host of an event, I would strike such a clause.