| 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
SI "Faces in the Crowd"
Jim Work, Photographer
 |
Alpine | TX | USA | Posted: 10:02 AM on 10.23.09 |
->> I just found out that I had a photo of mine show up in the SI "faces in the crowd" section. Not a real big deal, but it does bother me a bit that a copyrighted image get published with no notice, compensation or permission.
I know that someone could have scaned it and sent it in, but it still bugs me.
Anyone have a thought on it........ |
|
Marc F. Henning, Photographer
|
Bentonville | AR | USA | Posted: 10:44 AM on 10.23.09 |
->> FWIW, i shot one for SI years ago and it paid $400. if your photo was used without your permission, at the very least they owe you that.
marc |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 11:10 AM on 10.23.09 |
| ->> If it's your work you should get paid. Call SI and ask them where to send the invoice. |
|
Kevin Seale, Photographer
|
Crawfordsville | IN | United States | Posted: 3:34 PM on 10.23.09 |
| ->> If you do work for MaxPreps, it is possible it came via them since they are now partners. It might also have came from the school so you might check with the coach or AD. |
|
Mike Janes, Photographer
|
Attica | NY | USA | Posted: 3:59 PM on 10.23.09 |
| ->> It is a pretty big deal, and SI is obviously not one to go snagging photos so someone gave it to them. As Kevin mentioned if you're with MaxPreps they are working with SI so I'd ask them first, if not then anyone else who might have access. If all else fails you contact SI and sure they'll have records of where it came from. |
|
Jim Work, Photographer
|
Alpine | TX | USA | Posted: 4:41 PM on 10.23.09 |
->> I guess that SI checks out the SS message boards. About an hour after I posted here I had a call from SI. They say that the AD gave the photo to them along with "rights" to use it saying the AD told them he owned the rights.
I called the AD who agreed he did send SI the photo.I do provide him a CD with all photos for yearbook and school publication use. He told SI that I shot it. The file he sent has (c) 2009 jim work embedded. SI knew it was copyrighted and credited me with the photo.
The AD sent me all copies of his emails with SI, no where does he claim to have the rights to the photo.
I am not in any way trying to accuse SI of any impropriety, but I have to ask, would I be getting paid if I had not found that the photo was used on my own.
They are offering $150.00 as their "standard" Faces in the crowd use fee. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 4:57 PM on 10.23.09 |
->> Jim,
They screwed up. Their usual fee should not apply. The fee should be what YOU tell them it is.
--Mark |
|
Russ Isabella, Photographer
|
Salt Lake City | UT | USA | Posted: 5:25 PM on 10.23.09 |
| ->> I'd say this depends completely on the nature of your agreement with the SID at ths school you're shooting for. If you have in writing that you provide the photos for limited, specified usage and the AD provided the photo to SI for other usage, you have a bone to pick with the AD. On the other hand, if you do not have in writing that usage by the school/AD is limited, I can't imagine you have a leg to stand on as providing the photo to SI would be within the unlimited usage implied by your provision of the photos. |
|
Jim Work, Photographer
|
Alpine | TX | USA | Posted: 6:03 PM on 10.23.09 |
->> Russ.......thanks for your input. My agreement with the AD (no SID at a 2A school in SW TX) is purely verbal. He is a friend of mine(hey in a town of 5000 people, we all pretty much know one another). He is well aware that he had no right to give the image to any third party. This has never happened in our little burg, and probably won't happen again.
He was excited to get one of his players in SI, he knew better than to give my work away but in his excitment, my copyright was one of the last things on his mind.
That being said, I again stand on the fact that SI knew it was a copyrighted image, why else would they have credited it a such. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 6:29 PM on 10.23.09 |
->> Jim,
I guess the question would be, why didn't your friend, the AD, point SI in your direction and have them get the image directly from you rather than emailing it to them? And why didn't he give you a heads up that he had sent them the image?
I'm certainly not suggesting that your friend had any evil intent, but in the future if he routes the requests directly to you then this avoids the issue all together. I have serious doubts that SI had any intention of violating your copyright either... just a mix up with an easy fix. |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 9:33 PM on 10.23.09 |
| ->> Regardless of the outcome, congrats on getting into SI! |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 10:32 PM on 10.23.09 |
->> "They are offering $150.00 as their "standard" Faces in the crowd use fee."
That, plus the 200 percent we-f**ked-up charge, means they owe you $450. |
|
Russ Isabella, Photographer
|
Salt Lake City | UT | USA | Posted: 2:30 AM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Jim: Got it. I don't know enough about how these things work to know where 'fault' really lies. At the Div I school where I shoot, the SID willingly offers stuff to the places that don't pay anyway, but directs SI and others to the photographer in question, as Brian suggests. At any rate, as Jody says, congratulations on getting into SI. It's too bad this had to involve a mix-up. |
|
Jeff Martin, Photographer
|
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 1:01 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Russ, if your AD is giving stuff to the ones who won't pay, Aren't you training your paying clients to go this route. If it were me buying, I wouldn't be happy to be paying for stuff that is available free to others.
Just a thought. It's worth what you paid for it.
Jeff |
|
Peter Silver, Photographer
|
Baltimore | MD | | Posted: 10:56 AM on 10.26.09 |
| ->> Jim, while it sucks and you might not get paid what the photo was actually worth, I'd say make the most of it. Be professional (it sounds like you already have that part covered) and build a relationship with the SI point-of-contact. Over the years it might pay 1000 times more than a single usage fee; people make mistakes, and they remember those who forgive and move forward. Hope it works out well for all involved. |
|
Richard Denham, Photographer
|
Toronto/Buffalo/Niagara | On | Canada | Posted: 12:30 PM on 10.26.09 |
->> Quote Mark Loundy
"->> Jim,
They screwed up. Their usual fee should not apply. The fee should be what YOU tell them it is.
--Mark"
And this my friends is one reason why agencies, mags, media, etc keep hunting for people to give them images for free.
It was an honest mistake in my opinion. the AD made it sound like they could have the image. he informed SI that it was Jim's image, but no where do I see in Jim's posts that the AD said to contact him directly. If I worked for SI, and an AD had a photo, I would expect that they had the copyright usage.
Take the $150 and enjoy it. All you are going to do by demanding more is make enemies you may not have had. |
|
Albert McCracken, Photographer
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 2:38 PM on 10.26.09 |
->> Richard,
My point was that Jim should be telling SI what the appropriate payment should be based on his own business model. As professionals, the SI editors would expect a professional photographer to do just that. They understand that they made a mistake and that there are usually perfectly reasonable consequences for such mistakes.
For a photographer to accept "whatever" and the glory of being published in SI would simply label that photographer as a neophyte who doesn't know better than to allow themselves to be taken advantage of.
--Mark |
|
Richard Denham, Photographer
|
Toronto/Buffalo/Niagara | On | Canada | Posted: 3:45 PM on 10.26.09 |
->> Mark
I don't know about you but I don't know too many media outlets that let you decide what your price will be unless it is a very specific shoot.
I think $150 is a pretty good deal, considering the going day rate for a pro event is like $300-$400. I don't think $150 is 'whatever' but I do think that $400 is 'way to much'.
Just my $0.02 |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 3:54 PM on 10.26.09 |
->> I sold a stock image to SI for Faces in the Crowd a couple years ago for $150. I think it ran a little larger than a postage stamp. In fact, I know it couldn't have been much larger because my boss tore a canceled stamp off an envelope, attached it to one of those mini Post-it notes and wrote "Congrats for getting in SI" on it in really small letters, then stuck it next to the photo in the magazine and put it on my desk.
Personally I think the honest thing to do would be to determine (as Mark L. said, based on your business model) whether you would sell this image to SI for this usage for $150 had they approached you up front. I agree with Richard D. in that I think it was an honest mistake and it sounds like SI is trying to make it right by paying you their normal rate.
However, if you believe this image is worth more than $150 for use in SI then you should ask for more. |
|
Mike Janes, Photographer
|
Attica | NY | USA | Posted: 7:23 PM on 10.26.09 |
| ->> Mark - I would agree if SI deliberately stole the image, but it seems more like a miscommunication more than anything. That happens all the time unfortunately and hard to tell when on the outside looking into a situation. Also would agree if they tried to underpay and offered $50 (which would classify as "whatever") instead of their usual of $150 - but that's not the case. |
|
Robert Beck, Photographer
 |
Carlsbad | CA | USA | Posted: 12:36 AM on 10.27.09 |
->> I have to defend the team....and not just mine. Beef 'A' is with your buddy at the school with whom you have a verbal agreement who just happened to give your photo to SI. The magazine is giving you photo credit because you made the image, not because it is copyrighted. The magazine doesn't know who you are or where you live or how to pay you. They got the photo from the school that dished it out with rights. Did your guy give it to them on the condition that they WOULDN'T use it? Doubt it. What did the AD say in the the e mails? Did he say to call you first? Why didn't the AD tell you about the whole deal BEFORE you found out about it on your own? Forget?
You say you "provide" the school with a disk to use in yearbooks and school publications. Do you get paid for that?
And getting paid to shoot an assignment has always been a different rate that picking up a photo. $400 day rate "years ago" to create a photo sounds right. $150 for a thumbnail sounds right. Stop it with your "demand this" and business model" that.
Let's face it, Jim's first mistake was "providing" the AD with a disk and a handshake. |
|
Wesley Hitt, Photographer
|
Fayetteville | AR | USA | Posted: 7:56 AM on 10.27.09 |
->> Hooray Robert! This is between Jim and the AD. I shoot for a school and my agreement is that they can use the photos however is needed to promote and advertise the school. Getting a photo in SI, of any kind, is great PR for a small school. Sure they were excited. Good for them and if they are paying Jim, then good job...
I think it is good of SI to offer to pay you their rate for the photo as soon as you contacted them. Good for everyone. |
|
Richard Denham, Photographer
|
Toronto/Buffalo/Niagara | On | Canada | Posted: 8:58 AM on 10.27.09 |
->> Robert
that's exactly what I was trying to get accros in my initial post.
re - "It was an honest mistake in my opinion. the AD made it sound like they could have the image. He informed SI that it was Jim's image, but no where do I see in Jim's posts that the AD said to contact him directly. If I worked for SI, and an AD had a photo, I would expect that they had the copyright usage."
You put it so much nicer though, cheers |
|
Jim Work, Photographer
|
Alpine | TX | USA | Posted: 9:44 AM on 10.27.09 |
->> et all. I am willing to admit,there were mistakes made by all 3 parties involved. Me for not being more protective of my images and how they are to be used. I do share a cd with all the schools I work with. They need the imagges for their programs and yearbook. No, I do not charge them for that. I provide it as a "service". The conditions of use are printed on the cd and also on the cd cover. The conditions include to not share the images with anyone outside the school's use.
As a said before, the Coach got excited to get his player in SI, they asked, he had an image. He did not think about me. He has also shared with me all the communication (all email) with SI, he never implies or says the he owns the image or the rights (as SI claims he did). He figures it has a (c) on it, SI will know what to do.
SI has agreed to psy me a usage fee higher than their standard rate, not has high as I asked. We all compromised and put an end to it.
I will, try to learn from it and move on, adjusting my biusiness practices as needed to try and prevent it from repeating. |
|
Robert Beck, Photographer
|
Carlsbad | CA | USA | Posted: 2:19 PM on 10.27.09 |
| ->> Hmmmmmm....Actually, you said it was AD who was involved. Now it is the coach giving your images away? The images you gave away to the school in the beginning? You have a right to do whatever you want with your photos but why you give them away in the first place makes me scratch my head. Business practice models? Do you audit the companies you work with and price your work accordingly? Nothing personal Jim. I see this kind of bitching here all the time. It's getting tiring. |
|
Jim Work, Photographer
|
Alpine | TX | USA | Posted: 2:31 PM on 10.27.09 |
| ->> Robert........the AD and the coach are one in the same. Hope you get your itch scratched. I think we all do things that make others wonder why. I didn't see my post as "bitching" just asking questions to get answers. Thanks for yours........... |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|