| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Major newspaper selling prep sports photos - Part 2
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 11:40 PM on 11.16.05 |
->> Since this has been an interesting and civil discussion so far - In our last episode . . . er thread Trent wrote:
"I think if you push it, here's the scenario:
The president of the league calls the publisher of the paper and tells them to stop selling reprints. Then, assuming there are any legal grounds to the request (public field, public school, etc.), the publisher says okay, we're not going to cover your league. At this point, I'm putting money down that the league says "Hmmm, do we keep Dave around, or the local paper?""
Trent has a point here, Dave.
If if the league say, "screw you Mr. Publisher." It wouldn't be long before the contract will have an media exclusion back in it. Parents, especially those who think their kid is Allah's gift to sports, will demand to know why their school or league is no longer getting the press coverage. If parents in your neck of the woods are anything close to what I'm blessed with here, the media blackout would last about three weeks . . . may be.
Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper, Dave, to just publish your own publication? Then you no longer need to "pay" for access, just like the media guy shooting next to you. |
|
Hal Smith, Photographer
|
Emporia | KS | USA | Posted: 1:01 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> "1gig flash cards anybody! WHO wants a 1gig flash card only $15 bucks!" screams a man from outside the fence of the local football field.
"Mommy..mommy..who's that guy with the big camera, and what's he doing with that cup filled with flash cards," Jimmy asked.
"Ohh.. Jimmy, thats's the photographer who thought he had exclusive rights to take pictures at Billy's high school football games, now the only way he can make money is by selling his flash cards to parents on the sidelines." Mommy said.
"But why," Jimmy asked.
"well Jimmy.... he thought the local newspaper was cutting into potential profit margin and tried to have its photojournalists banned from the local games." Mommy said.
"But why," Jimmy asked. "its a big field, isn't their room for everybody."
"If only he could understand like you little Jimmy," Mommy said.
I'm just an employee of the newspaper I work for. The newspaper owns the images I take, what they do with them is out of my hands. If I'm told by some photographer that I can't do my job because he has exclusive rights its fine by me. My hours are long and I need a break, but after I explain it to my editor all hell will break loose.
I've had the experience of an event photographer telling me that I couldn't shoot a certain event. I told the guy to look at the sponsors list on the back of the program, and behold at the top of the list was my newspaper. I made a few calls and a few minutes later the guy shooting from the bleachers.
I have a job to do, just like you event photographers. My needs are much different. I'm not making any extra money from the sale of outtakes. What I'm doing is for the readers, not the parents. If I get a picture that someone wants that's great.
The amount of time I spend shooting a game, and the amount of frames that I shoot isn't helping the newspaper make enough money to pay for my time, it's just a service to the community that we cover.
My feeling is that if we can't work the event together it won't be me leaves the field, or at least not for long. |
|
Dave Amorde, Photographer
|
Lake Forest | CA | USA | Posted: 1:07 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> My vendor's fee at each event averages $200 per day. The league would have a tough time walking away from that.
But your scenario does beg this question: Is your paper there to cover the news, or sell prints? If the right to sell prints of outtakes causes a newspaper to decline coverage, then I guess we all know the answer to that one.
But I'm sure the editors realize the reason why they cover prep sports to begin with: because it sells papers.
And no, I'm not so disengenuous as to actually start a print rag just to get into events without a vendor's fee. If the fee is used properly and my contracts honored by everyone, then that vendor's fee is worth every penny I pay.
P.S. - To Joe Cavaretta and all of his "informatives" on thread http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=18227
I apologize if this poor, lowly event photographer is wasting your bandwidth. I didn't realize there was a Caste system at work here. I honestly thought my $50 was as good as anyone else's. When it comes to the body of members as a whole, I believe that I and other event shooters like myself have contributed our fair share to this community. I know I've done my share of answering threads, emails, and phone calls. I've given of my time, money, and my equipment to those needier than myself. And if this community does indeed include a large number of event photographers, then I guess it makes our contributions all the more relevant.
I've had my fill. Thank you to Clark and a few others for the civil discourse. |
|
Jeffrey Furticella, Photographer, Assistant
|
Muncie | IN | US | Posted: 1:29 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> There needs to be a site-wide ego check in how people deal with each other. Regardless of talent level, genre of business, or experience, we're all photographers. We're here to discuss photography and its business, not sit around and criticize each other or make judgements of each others character. It's not the first time that it's been said that sportsshooter isn't what it used to be. I've been around these parts since March of 2004, and I can say this site is even more beneficial to me the older I get. And, in my opinion, the site does not benefit from members piping up on the boards merely to damage its reputation, or the reputation of its members. There's plenty of room for everyone on the sidelines, and there's plenty of room for eveyone on the message boards. Just let your photos do the talking, the rest will work itself out. Just my humble opinion.
-Furt |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 9:27 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> I wrote: "Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper, Dave, to just publish your own publication? Then you no longer need to "pay" for access, just like the media guy shooting next to you."
Sorry, Dave, for not finishing this line of thought last night, but I forgot to add the other reason for publishing a rag not solely gaining access sans a compensating the league with a vendor fee, but to compete with the paper(s) who are selling prints for dollars from their advertisers. Thinking in the line of putting the shoes on other two big feet.
And, admittingly I guess I'm confused about part of this dialogue in regards to event photography. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but by "event photography" this reference shooters who spend all day at non-school related sports events providing onsite or online sales, correct? We are not talking about a scenerio where photographers have contracts with individual schools or districts to provide event photography services, right? |
|
Andy Mead, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 10:06 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> I think a lot of you folks missed Dave's very technical point. Either his contract needs to be honored - or the contract needs to be changed.
In a very technical sense, stuff like "sponsorship on the back of the program" or "parents calling the paper" isn't germaine.
Dave has a very good point. He signed an exclusive contract for good money. If there were an exception granting news organizations to sell prints, too, his fee would doubtless be much lower. But there isn't such an exception. At this point, I would say that the onus is on Dave to renegotiate his contract.
But he's got a valid point. |
|
Trent Nelson, Photographer
|
Salt Lake City | UT | USA | Posted: 10:24 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> Andy-
I agree. If he signed a contract and it's not being honored, he's getting screwed.
There's another issue here as well- newspapers who open up their entire takes to public scrunity run the risk of losing their ability to fight subpoenas from anyone who want to gain access to reporters' notes or raw takes of events caught up in legal or law enforcement situations.
Say you shoot a riot and looting situation and the police want to see all of your unpublished shots so they can start arresting you. How can you say no to the cops when you're letting football parents see you entire take?
That's why a lot of newspapers won't sell shots that aren't published. |
|
Bob Ford, Photographer
|
Lehighton | Pa | USA | Posted: 10:48 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> As far as unpublished photos and shield laws, I think it's going to get interesting soon.
I don't know of a case yet, but I think eventually it will get played out in court. Our paper is going with the understanding that our photos in our Web Photo Galleries are "PUBLISHED" on the web.
Any out takes from a news story will not be published in the paper or on the web so are afforded protection by shield laws. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:57 AM on 11.17.05 |
| ->> Trent - First, I don't think a newspaper is going to publish on their website entire takes of an event. No professional media outlet is going to make available a fuzzy, poorly exposed, or lousy composed photo. Second, if the images are put online for viewing by the general public they have become published. In which case a law enforcement agency can skip the subpeona process entirely by just buying the photo online just like any other consumer and use it for evidence, thus saving the taxpayers quite of bit of money. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:58 AM on 11.17.05 |
| ->> Dave Amode: In regards to the vendor fee, you are referring to youth sports events and not high school sports like football, basketball, ect, correct? |
|
Dave Amorde, Photographer
|
Lake Forest | CA | USA | Posted: 11:29 AM on 11.17.05 |
| ->> Clark, the business model and contracts apply to both. I'm in the process of working with my local high school for access for volleyball, swimming, wrestling, water polo. The bottom line is that schools expect a piece of the action just like membership based sporting clubs. |
|
Brian Jackson, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
South San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 11:54 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> Clark- Sometimes it can be. Event photography isn't just limited to youth sports events. I've shot HS events with/as an event photographer before. Luckily they didn't charge a vendor fee, heck one event even picks up the hotel rooms :) I doubt anyone would pay a vendor fee for an individual game, these are usually reserved for tournaments and shootouts.
Say you're shooting a basketball/volleyball tournament running on 4 courts for 2 days, that's lots of team/images. You might have to pay a vendor fee or a percentage back to the booster club, in exchange no other photographers are allowed to promote/sell prints/images from that game to the players/parents/etc.
Now this isn't to say that a newspaper photographer can't come in and shoot the event. I don't think anyone ever made that assumption, but if that newspaper does sell photos from the event, then what good was the contract that was signed? |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 11:56 AM on 11.17.05 |
->> Thanks for your reply, Dave. Now I and probably others understand your recent posts and frustration better. I don't think it was clear that we were talking about contractual agreements with both school and club venues.
I'm not sure if there are other areas in the country where schools have the expectation of receiving compensation for a service provided to the families and athletes. But it would be interesting to hear from others like you in the same situation.
Good luck with your business! |
|
Sam Santilli, Photographer
 |
Philippi | WV | USA | Posted: 12:28 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> Clark, schools and State wide athletic associations do expect to get a cut of the pie. This includes HS state assoc., tournaments, and rec leagues. The days of showing up and expecting to keep 100% of your gross are pretty much gone. Most state assoc in HS sports are bidding out the action photography to just have one company cover their playoffs and championships. This pushes small companies out of the picture, since they usually are not big enough to cover each and every champ event in all of the sports and activities that need to be covered.
BTW, do dailies in with NFL coverage sell their images online? |
|
Thomas Boyd, Photographer
|
Eugene | OR | USA | Posted: 12:29 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> I'm curious about this vendor fee Dave is talking about. In fact, I'll pose this question directly to Dave:
Is the vendor fee you pay so you can set up a table and post signs at the venue to sell photos or is it more of admission fee just for access?
I ask because it occurred to me that you might be paying for space at a venue similar to any other vendor similar to someone who shows up to sell class rings or something.
If that's the case, there's really no contract problem. You are getting what you pay for. A newspaper doesn't set up a table or post signs to sell their reprints.
Can you shed some light on this? I really don't know much about how this works, and I'm sure it's different from one district to the other. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:25 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> Sam, I was aware of the required pie sharing for event photogs at the state contest level.
I am surprised however that the practice has, at least in Dave's area, meandered down to the individual regular season game level. I'm not sure about other states, but our state HS assocation offers an exclusive contract to one company - something I don't agree with. I would prefer to see more competition, which benefits the consumer, with anyone willing to pay a set fee can belly up to the table can play as well. |
|
Dave Amorde, Photographer
|
Lake Forest | CA | USA | Posted: 3:38 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> Thomas, the vendor's fee and its contract encompasses several things:
1) The right to set up a table, be provided power, etc.
2) For all day events, food from the volunteers table or booster club.
3) Minimul advertising. I usually buy more.
4) Field position and access.
5) Exclusivity, enforced by the event staff. There are usually two exceptions; parents photographing their own kids (but they have to do it from the stands,) and media.
The exclusion for media has always been based on the presumption that they are there to provide content for their printed rags, mirrored web content, and reprints.
Where the issue becomes murky is the relatively new practice of papers selling their outtakes as well. That violates my contract. That's why I'm upset. |
|
Mike Purcell, Photographer
|
goodyear | AZ | USA | Posted: 3:46 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> interesting dialogue.
I haven't looked, but are the pictures in the newspaper gallery(s) for sale captioned appropriately as they would be in a paper or just up for sale? |
|
Mark Smith, Photographer
|
Elk City | OK | USA | Posted: 3:55 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> "No professional media outlet is going to make available a fuzzy, poorly exposed, or lousy composed photo."
Wasn't there a live feed a while back of a pro football game, where the images were being uploaded to a webpage immediately? Did I dream this? If I did, then I also dreamt that there were some fairly crappy images being posted, all nicely backfocused and poorly composed, etc. I don't recall them being for sale, but they were certainly being displayed.
(muttering to self, off to make an attempt at finding the above referenced thread) |
|
Carl Auer, Photographer
 |
Eagle River | AK | USA | Posted: 4:04 PM on 11.17.05 |
->> On the topic of the newspaper selling prep sports photos and how it can effect event photographers, I am one photographer here in Alaska that does a little of it all. Wire service shooting, freelancing for a bunch of weekly papers and deal with the local daily too, my weekends are filled with shooting youth events, prep and rec leagues. That is where the majority of my income comes from but I do not feel threatened by it at all. The local daily not only sells reprints of the their prep photos, but all the photos they have in the paper. 8x10 only, and for like $20. About the same price that I do for some events. However, with the prep games spread out like they are, the staff photographer for the newspaper may only be at 1 game for 10 or 15 minutes before he has to go. I will be their the entire game, and have 5 times the photos for people to choose from. If he gets a great shot that I missed, then I would fully expect them to sell that photo. They might even sell 3 or 4 of them. But while they sell that one photo, I am selling 30 different photos 2 or 3 times over. And at other sizes. Some of my leagues have given me that lovely "Exclusive" selling rights contract, and I have not even bothered to say to them "You know, the newspaper is offering images from the game yesterday for sale. Maybe you should come down on them." Nope. It really does not bother me. What would bother me is if the newspaper started having 2 or 3 photographers shooting the same event as me and posting 3 or 4 hundred photos for sale and not paying the vendor fee's or supporting the boosters, or whatever. I take a cut out of my profits for all the leagues I shoot. Not as a thank you or anything, but to help support the league. Most of the non prep sports are non-profit, and they have a hard time getting officials or new uniforms sometimes, so every little bit helps them, so if I give them 50 cents from a 8x10 sale, no big deal. The prep schools here sometimes have to travel all over the state, and unlike the rest of the US (not including Hawaii) you usually drive to all the games. Here, you have to fly or take a ferry sometimes. Airfare here is outrageous and so, I support the boosters to help with travel expense. So if I am doing that, and suddenly the paper comes in, starts selling hundreds of photos, and does not support the schools, then I would see a problem, but then again, since newspaper shooting is what I love, I would have a real hard time griping about it.
My overall view of the whole thing is actually that this, if it gets larger than one or two photos a week, is it will force me to produce even better shots. So if it makes me a better photographer to keep my business, hey, all the better. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|