| 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
Strange photo usage question/rental question
Liam Foley, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Tucson/Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 9:11 PM on 11.03.09 |
->> Ok, I have two totally unrelated questions:
1. Former Arizona walk-on David Bagga recently wrote a book called "the Walk-On" and the O.C. register wrote a story about it and put a gallery on their website. All great stuff, except that 2 of the photos are mine, and I know a couple of the other photographer's whose photos are there. The photo credit for all the photos is listed as: "PHOTO COURTESY DAVID BAGGA" and some of the photos even have watermarks on them. Do I have any chance of being paid? Anybody ever been in this position before?
2. Is there a way to try out Canon equip. before purchasing it if you don't live in a city with a legitimate photo store? For example, a Canon 2x ext?
Thanks |
|
Brian Cripe, Photographer, Assistant
|
East Lansing | MI | USA | Posted: 9:18 PM on 11.03.09 |
->> The first question I'll defer to someone who knows more about rights and usage (I would guess it depends on the web usage and context - if it's a review of the book, I would not expect to get paid).
As for the second question, you can try gear through CPS if you are a member. They have a free loaner program.
If you want to know what a 2x teleconverter is like, just take your photos, crop them down the proper amount, and run a blurring filter over them - it'll be just like a 2x teleconverter. |
|
Tom Story, Photographer
|
Tempe | AZ | USA | Posted: 10:05 PM on 11.03.09 |
->> I'm not going to get in the useage thing.
Tempe Camera probably has a 2x extender to rent, along with a buncha other stuff.
My experience with 2xs on a 300/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 were not very satisfactory. I have found that the 1.4 works pretty well on the above mentioned lenses.
I sorta remember the 2x idea was pretty lousy on the Nikons I used back in the Jursassic period of film. Again the 1.4 was good. |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 10:09 PM on 11.03.09 |
->> "Do I have any chance of being paid?"
Yes. Call the photo editor at the paper and explain. |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 10:16 PM on 11.03.09 |
| ->> I just looked at the OCR web site and found nothing of David Bagga that wasn't credited by a staff photog or a wire service. Can you be or specific with your accusation? |
|
Mike Janes, Photographer
|
Attica | NY | USA | Posted: 10:47 PM on 11.03.09 |
->> This seems to be what he's referring to as they all say it.
http://www.ocregister.com/photos/bagga-book-basketball-2633533-wildcats-fou...
Personally I'd take screen shots of the website using the images and call the editor to discuss it. Seen it happen before when the player gives a company the photo claiming to have the rights to it. When I talked to the company about it they ended up paying the photog but said they really did not have to and the player should have because he claimed he had the rights. So you have to find out who screwed up, if Bagga gave it away claiming he had rights or the OC just used it and didn't ask who had the rights. |
|
Michael Granse, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 11:04 PM on 11.03.09 |
->> The Canon 2x converter works very well on my 300mm f2.8 in strong sunlight but gets very little use outside of that. That said, in the right light and with proper care the results can be very good. If your subject is low contrast, the 2x is not going to work very well as your AF system will rub its eyes, squint, and give up and start guessing. With bright light and high contrast, the AF system will be a bit slower but will still be capable of locking on. Bright sunlight is the key here, and my 2x is generally not allowed out of its cage without such light.
Taking that a step further with proper care, strong sunlight, a bit of patience, and the ability to successfully use manual focus you can actually get away with using the 1.4x and 2x stacked together.
The AF system will fight you tooth and claw if you try this, so better to turn it off or just stop pressing the AF button. I used this configuration at an NCAA football game a few weeks ago, not to shoot game action but to get a tighter shot of University of Illinois head coach Ron Zook.
Zook was pacing up and down the sidelines, so I prefocused to where he was heading, waited until he got there, and fired off three or four quick frames while doing a bit of fine tuning with the manual focus ring (almost forgot that the 300mm even had one of these). The entire process of attaching both teleconverters to my 300mm f2.8, changing ISO, f-stop, and shutter speed, getting the shot, and then putting both teleconverters back in my belt pack, and returning my camera settings to their previous configuration was all done during the span of a single TV timeout. I have absolutely no idea what possessed me to try this, but I get bored sometimes during TV timeouts and I felt like doing something a bit different.
It is certainly not an amazing photograph, but it is absolutely usable and it was a fun experiment in any case. When you consider that with both converters this became 840mm of focal length before adding the 1.3x crop factor of the 1D Mark II. With the 1.3x crop factor, this is 1092mm of reach.
Liam, you might be able to get someone to meet you for lunch and let you try their 2x in a parking lot sometime. If you lived a bit closer to Illinois, I would do this myself. Good luck!
Link to 300mm f2.8 + 1.4x + 2x photo:
http://gransephoto.com/zookconverter.jpg |
|
Chris Morrison, Photographer, Assistant
|
Tucson | AZ | USA | Posted: 4:26 AM on 11.04.09 |
| ->> On the gear question, you can rent gear from a couple of places. I've had good experiences with lensrentals.com. They ship it to you FedEx with a return label. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 10:27 AM on 11.04.09 |
->> Mike,
Copyright infringement is like the game "Hot Potato." The person left holding the ball (actually publishing the work) loses. The end user might have recourse to sue somebody who falsely represented that they had usage rights that they did not, but they will still be on the hook for infringement.
--Mark |
|
Bob Ford, Photographer
|
Lehighton | Pa | USA | Posted: 10:33 AM on 11.04.09 |
| ->> Liam, the first thing I would do is try to find out if the photos were used in the book, too. Book usage rates are a lot higher than web usage rates. |
|
Jeff Crace, Photographer
|
Temecula | CA | USA | Posted: 3:37 PM on 11.04.09 |
| ->> Obviously the photos are on the website but are did he also use them in the book? I would think you could get a lot more money out of a photo published in a book than the paper. |
|
David Bailey, Photographer
|
Flower Mound | TX | USA | Posted: 12:06 AM on 11.05.09 |
->> OC Register has no excuse as some of the photos are watermarked and they aren't watermarked by David Bagga Photography. OC Register knows better and someone there just decided to use them anyway. They owe you money for their usage.
Like everyone else said, check out a copy of the book and if the images are published there too send a bill to the publisher. Books pay A LOT more than web site usage.
Keep us updated. |
|
Alan Walsh, Student/Intern, Photo Editor
|
Tucson | AZ | | Posted: 12:17 AM on 11.05.09 |
->> One photo is mine I believe and the other is a colleague's from the Daily Wildcat. Another is from the Athletic Department website.
I guess we'll have to see when the book comes out and invoice him if he does use them. Although the student media department owns the rights. Mike and I will get like 5%. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|