| 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
"I'm already credentialed"-type classified ads...
Brian Blanco, Photographer
 |
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 11:49 AM on 03.07.11 |
->> So earlier today a "student/intern" member posted an ad here in the classified section (I waited for the ad to come down before starting this thread so as not to call him out). In his ad he offered to shoot a particular round of NCAA basketball finals for "any publication" and added that he was "already credentialed" for that round.
I sent him an email advising him why that ad sends the wrong message and why that ad (as it was worded) might not be the best idea. He emailed me back and was very appreciative and accepting and took the ad down. I then explained to him the correct way to go about shooting for multiple clients during a tournament (having each potential client apply for a credential and shooting position in his name for the various games, or at the very least, advising the NCAA of your intention to shoot for multiple clients off of one credential). But I'm a flawed individual and I want to make certain that I didn't steer him wrong.
I'm posting this because I recall over the years, particularly around tournament time, seeing many ads posted here that essentially say the same thing and I guess I'm just wondering... am I missing something? While most of the ads are from younger/less experienced shooters, some are from shooters who have been around, so I'm honestly asking, "When, if ever, is it permissible to double or triple dip off of a single credential without prior approval?"
I'm firmly in the camp of "Never permissible without prior approval or separate credentials" and will be shooting our round of the tourny for a single client so I have zero intention of shooting for anybody else, but, again I want to make sure that the info a gave the young man was as accurate as possible and the shear number of ads I've seen over the years has me second guessing myself. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 11:56 AM on 03.07.11 |
->> I'm curious how he was able to secure a credential without having turned in a specific entity to be shooting for. the ncaa folks are pretty darn strict about credentialing. I know in the first and second women's rounds they'll give almost anyone a shooting pass because they are so poorly attended/covered.....but the men are pretty strict about
who they hand out shooting positions to. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 12:00 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> He apparently had a credential approval for a student publication Chuck. |
|
Bob Ford, Photographer
|
Lehighton | Pa | USA | Posted: 12:13 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> This thread comes at a perfect time. I'm shooting an NCAA event in a couple of weeks. We were expecting to have a few to several participants from our local area competing. When the participants were announced we found out that only one local athlete made the cut.
The sports editor just came to me about 20 minutes ago and told me that I should contact other papers and try to double/triple dip. Rather than get into explaining that it was wrong I just shook my head and kept working. |
|
Craig Mitchelldyer, Photographer, Assistant
|
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 12:34 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> I think Brian's advice is sound. An even better thing to do would be to research who will be at you location and figure out who might want images from those schools (SID, Athletic Dept, Local Newspaper, etc etc) and contact those people directly offering your services and then be sure to let the host school SID/person in charge of credentials know what you are doing should any of them take you up on it. Posting a "hey I'll be here, call me if you need me" ad is lazy, does not make you look good and I can't imagine it ever works. Much better to figure out who needs images and contact them directly. |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 1:25 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> who cares?
not to sound flip, but really, what's the concern? is someone being cheated in this scenario? in what case would an SID say: 'i've credentialed you to shoot images for publication A, so you better not be sending any images to publication B without my approval.'
i'm won't argue if you guys say there is something unethical about this, but i can't think of what it is. can someone explain further? |
|
Bradley Leeb, Photographer
|
Champaign | IL | USA | Posted: 1:46 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> If the publications are "competing" publications, it may be of concern to the original credentialer. |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 2:12 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> exactly.
and this has nothing to do with "separate credentials". it's somewhat obvious that the original client might want the undivided attention of their hired freelancer, but that is not what is being discussed here.
let's say the original client wants some specific images for a feature they are doing on a local kid. they only want the kid. it just so happens that the kid gets very little playing time, and spends most of the game on the bench. the client can care less if you shoot cheerleaders the entire time, but when the kid makes it into the game, they want some images.
the point is: nobody knows what each photographer's assignment is. maybe one guy is there getting images of the head ref for one client, the star center for another client and the fans for a third client while gathering stock of the mascots for himself. let's assume none of the clients care what else the guy does, so long as their request is satisfied. that's 4 credentials if i reading this thread correctly. since no SID is going to issue a credential for stock photography, the personal images of mascots could be a potential sticking point.
since we are all working professionals who have learned first and foremost to mind our own business, the question is still: respectfully, who cares? |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 2:25 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Mike,
First off, this has nothing to do with the desires of the SID at any particular school. These credentialing decisions are made by the NCAA.
Second, the reason it maters is because the NCAA doesn't credential an individual photographer. It credentials the media outlet. There are a host of reasons why the NCAA would limit which "media outlets" they wish to allow access to, so when the credentialed photographer goes behind their backs and starts shooting for whomever he/she wishes, that is indeed a problem and is indeed the "business" of the schools, the NCAA and the photographers who are doing things the right way and shooting with a legit credential from the legitimate spot that were assigned to. |
|
Sam Santilli, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Philippi | WV | USA | Posted: 2:37 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> Are we talking DI, DII or DII? |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 2:57 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Hmmm...I see the concern and agree for the most part, I will say though that all the Olympic/Paralympic Games I've shot I have pretty much gone in freelance and built my clients along the way, mostly through researching the athletes and their hometown papers or taking notice of breakout athletes during events and finding out who would pay to have images of their performance (for instance, I had several Fijian and Asian publications buy coverage from me in Australia in 2000 when their athletes pulled surprise wins in their events and didn't have anyone other than me provide images.)
So, I don't know, In the end, as long as you aren't giving it away, you are making business work for yourself too.
I know for NCAA and the like, its a little different, and for all I know, the rules with the Games will change too, but it seems if you have a credential that you got honestly on your own (ie, you didn't lie, make promises you can't keep, or publications that don't know you used their name), then building client interest in buying your work shouldn't be a bad thing once you have it already set up. Heck, I've had publications not have interest in covering an event change course and pay well for coverage that I am credentialed for. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 3:16 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Do we really want to support the concept that the NCAA can pick and choose among publications? Other subjects of stories don't get to be a part of that process. Nor should they.
Everything else is between the shooters and their clients.
--Mark |
|
Sam Santilli, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Philippi | WV | USA | Posted: 3:25 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> So is this an ethical debate or credential debate? If I am in the NCAA event for XZY publication, and DEF publication calls me for images of the same event...can I sell to DEF? |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 3:42 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> bah.
sounds like that's the ncaa's problem. brian, if you are arguing that the ncaa should have their say in what publications they credential and what publications they choose not to allow access to, that's fine. let me ask...are you cool with an ncaa employee looking over your shoulder with veto power as you edit, caption and transmit so that they can more thoroughly control the message? why not? if you're the ncaa, why not go the distance?
better yet, why doesn't the ncaa just hire and assign one or two pool photographers for each tournament game and allow only publications of their choosing access to the images for news purposes? total control.
jeez. the kid is working the game and looking to make an extra dollar. this community is absolutely riddled with unwritten rules of business and procedure. now the wording of ads looking for work are being nitpicked? it's impossible to keep up! there weren't as many rules when i filled out my tax summary last week.
mark, a-men.
sam, sounds like no, if this thread is to be believed. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 3:45 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Mark,
I see your point, but let me explain the scenario that I'm talking about:
A large publication assigns freelancer John Doe to cover the Final Four for them and sends in a credential request to the NCAA. The NCAA approves the credential for that publication and assigns a shooting position appropriate for that publication. It's a good shooting position on the front row on the court because that publication has a big circulation and has covered every game.
That publication only needs the game between Ohio State and Florida covered so that freelancer offers his services to the hometown Weekly Shopper of a school in the next game so that he can make a few extra bucks, let's call it Michigan and FSU.
That photographer doesn't notify the NCAA of the fact that, for the next game, they're not shooting for the client for whom the credential was issued so that photographer still gets that sweet shooting position and now the photographer for a big international wire service gets bumped to the back row or an elevated shooting position because the photographer shooting for the "Weekly Shopper" is fraudulently sitting in the a prime spot that their client is not entitled to and he's wearing a credential for a publication that has a much higher priority than the "Weekly Shopper" though he's not actually shooting for them... essentially passing himself off as someone he's not (at that moment).
If that same shooter wanted to shoot the second game for the Weekly Shopper then there is a procedure for that. The Weekly Shopper is supposed to apply for credentials just like everyone else. They may get told that they have to shoot from an elevated position. They may get told that they have to rotate a position with a smaller publication and they may very well get told that there are not enough spots for their publication at this particular tournament due to the high demand.
You and I know that not EVERY publication can get credentialed to every game or tourny and that's why there is a credentialing procedure in the first place. If not, then we'd just be able to show up at the venue and flash our CPS or NPS cards and Waltz in pulling our Think Tank rollers behind us and tape down a spot on the court.
I'm not saying that the photographer shouldn't shoot for multiple clients during the tourny but what I'm saying is that it all has to be on the "up and up" and they should go through the apporpiate channels rather than just saying, "Cool, I scored a credential!" and then farming out their services to anybody without going through the NCAA. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 3:48 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> Mark Loundy +1 |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 3:51 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Mike,
Have you ever read the back of an NCAA credential?
I wouldn't exactly describe this as "unwritten rules" or something I just dreamed up last night. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 3:58 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Oh and Mark, sorry I meant to answer your question when you asked, "Do we really want to support the concept that the NCAA can pick and choose among publications?
Well of course they have to pick and choose who they allow in to cover their games and tournaments.
You, of all people, know that there is a new "wire service", blog, website, e-zine etc... everyday. Some of them are doing great work, but if the NCAA allowed every "publication" that wanted a credential to cover the Final Four then there would be no room left for fans... it'd be wall-to-wall shooters.
Should they base it on editorial content? No. But they have space restrictions and limited shooting positions so they have to have a credentialing procedure and everyone should follow it. If a publication gets denied a credential then there is a procedure to grieve that too. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 4:20 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> the bottom line to this is this might work out in the first and second round but I find it highly unlikely anyone trying to get spec work (which is kinda what this is) would make it to a regional. and final four? impossible.
if I was this kid, and already had a credential to s site (which I'm unclear how he has been credentialed since I don't think they even start that until next week (unless you're a hometown paper/publication at said site) I would have waited until the pairing were announced and approached it from that direction....as far as shooting for two schools and getting paid by both? if they know that's the deal more power to 'em. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 4:32 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> My point exactly Chuck. If they know that's the deal then I think that's great and I think he should make as much money as be can, provided he's not using a credential from one publication to shoot for another one when the original credentialed publication wouldn't otherwise have him taking up that spot on the floor.
This wasn't a question of licensing as much as one of credentials and shooting positions. I agree that if you own the rights, then license away. But if the credentialed client doesn't have you shooting a particular game then don't use their credential and shooting position to shoot for someone else without first clearing it or reapplying for a separate credential.
I think the confusion is the fact that I'm talking about credentials and shooting position priority and some people think I'm talking about licensing Images for editorial use. Two different animals. |
|
Lee Weissman, Photographer
|
XXXXX | NY | USA | Posted: 4:34 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> Just curious....Has anyone had success securing multiple credentials/shooting positions under the same name for the same event? I would think the NCAA might not like the idea. I know plenty of people who shoot under a credential and sell to multiple clients. Lets not act like this is a first. I am sure we can all agree that we have all dealt with people in our industry with less than stellar morals. You may not know all the circumstances for every case. |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 4:53 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> "Have you ever read the back of an NCAA credential?"
yes.
i'm not sure how that adds or subtracts from the discussion. there is no mention of freelancers shooting for multiple clients on the back of any ncaa credential i have. i just scanned the media/photo policies for this years tournament. also, no mention of multiple clients on a single credential. it is for this reason i mention "unwritten" rules. maybe among some, it's not acceptable. but, it's certainly not written.
it's likely we are all talking about different scenarios. you have mentioned multiple games. your scenario sounds like getting credentialed for game 1, and sticking around for game 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 on the same credential. it's up to the ncaa to manage their floor positions at each contest...and i'm sure they do. i'm commenting on shooting for multiple clients in one contest. simple misunderstanding.
i agree with you. if your credentialed for game 1, i think you shouldn't expect a shooting position on the floor for game 5. i just can't muster the concern for what that photographer does AFTER game 1. so long as he not refusing to leave MY assigned position during game 5, i couldn't care any less if he stays, goes, picks his nose, hits on cheerleaders, etc. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 5:01 PM on 03.07.11 |
| ->> I knew someday we'd agree on something Mike. I'll scribble this date down in the calendar that Mike Carlson makes fun of me for using. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 5:10 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Brian,
All I can do is repeat my original post. (See above)
This is not about a photographer bringing more photographers into a crowded event. What non-commercial uses the photographer does with the images is none of the NCAA's business.
--Mark |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 5:32 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> Mark,
I'm talking about access to the venue and shooters being upfront about who they're shooting for to get that access. I'm not talking about editorial licensing to another publication after the fact... so I've re-read your earlier post and I guess I'm still confused.
If you're saying that the NCAA shouldn't have a say in what gets published then of course I agree with you 100%. But my post (while I admit I could have done a better job narrowing the scope of my question) was ALWAYS about who they physically allow into the venue and how they prioritize where that publication shoot from.
I doubt that you're saying that you think they should just have a blanket approval process for everyone who sends in a credential request? Do they not have a right to prioritize access?
I'm really asking. Again, my original post said that I was seeking input and that I was questioning my stance so you won't offend me, but something tells me that you're thinking licensing and I'm talking access. |
|
Michael Ip, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 7:49 PM on 03.07.11 |
->> My two cents - I just think this isn't much of an issue.
In my limited experience of shooting the NCAAs, there was a guy reseating shooters for each game. He did this for the first round games as well as the second.
For the first round games, I shot for two different publications. Subsequently, because the second game I shot wasn't for the publication I was credentialed for (I was given a lesser spot on the floor). I think that's totally fair.
I would imagine this scenario would be similar in most of the regionals. They'd have to spot on the floor with four publications written on the spot. Each publication referring to the game of the day.
As for the prime spots, I don't think someone shooting on spec would be getting those anyways. From what I recalled they all went to SI, Getty, AP, Reuters, etc., who would be most likely shooting all the games for their respective organizations anyways. |
|
Ryan Kelly, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Newport News | VA | USA | Posted: 10:40 AM on 03.08.11 |
->> This is an interesting discussion I'd never really considered before.
Just this week, I researched who was playing in our state high school basketball championship tournament (Virginia). Now obviously this is nowhere near as big as an NCAA tournament, but same basic principle.
I figured out which out of town papers covered teams that were playing, and contacted the photo editors to offer to freelance. Some took me up on it, some are sending staffers, some just didn't respond. Basically what I expected.
I'll be credentialed through the publications. Although I'm covering multiple games, I'm only shooting for one publication each game. As far as I'm aware, I didn't do anything wrong in this process... but it couldn't hurt to double check here.
Does this sound kosher? I'm pretty new to the freelance world, most of my past sports shooting experience has been with my local paper and university. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 5:15 PM on 03.08.11 |
->> Brian,
The NCAA has a perfect right to determine who gets in. But it's none of their business if the photographer also serves additional clients.
--Mark |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 5:31 PM on 03.08.11 |
->> Hypothetical here Mark.
IF the NCAA has a contract with a certain agency to be the "official" photo agency and does not let photographers from other agencies in due to this exclusivity -- then a college (or other) photographer sells images to a competing agency.
IF the credential conditions, like the NFL, NBA and NHL, state that images you shoot can ONLY be published by the credentialed organization.
Doesn't that violate the rules and can leave the photog in hot water for selling where they are not allowed?
I'm not saying this is the case with the NCAA, but over the years some other leagues have purposely not credentialed certain agencies due to contracts with competitors. And they have cracked down on photographers who were shooting for one properly credentialed organization but selling to an outside agency not listed on their credential.
I know one organization that was threatened with losing its season credential to one NFL team after a freelancer sold to an agency other than the league's official partner. The organization had to apologize and no longer used that freelancer at games in order to keep the credential. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 3:21 AM on 03.09.11 |
->> George,
I think that one should adhere to any legal agreements that they make.
Of course, as you said, your examples were not the case in the original post in this thread.
--Mark |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 8:00 AM on 03.09.11 |
->> Mark,
I'm talking about a situation where someone is credentialed for a WHOLE tournament for a single client BUT that client only needs ONE game in the tournament shot and the photographer comes on the SS classified board to try to use that SAME credential to shoot ALL the other games for DIFFERENT clients (games the credentialed client has no interest in and will not have that shooter shooting).
I'm not talking about a situation where a shooter is sitting in their rightful spot, wearing their appropriately-obtained credential and shooting for their credentialed client AND IS ALSO moving some photos to some other publications in addition to moving images to their credentialed client. I think that's great, provided that the original client would have had him sitting there shooting anyway.
You said that "The NCAA has a perfect right to determine who gets in". I agree. So how does the NCAA doesn't get the opportunity to make that decision when someone comes on the SS classified board and tries to farm out their credential on games/days that they're NOT using it? Why not just loan that same credential to a different shooter... it's essentially the same thing since credentials are not issued to individuals but rather to publications.
I'm sorry but I think it's less-than-professional to come on a website geared toward professionals and post a classified ad that essentially says "Hey, I'm credentialed for the tournament but my school only needs me to shoot one game but I now have this golden ticket so I can shoot for anybody who wishes to circumvent the official credentialing procedure during those games that I won't otherwise be covering and I'll just pretend I'm shooting for my credentialed client when, in fact, I'm really shooting for you."
I'm sorry, but if that scenario is on the 'up-and-up' then I'd love I'd love to hear a shooter explain to an NCAA official that that's what they intend to do with their credential.
Mark, I appreciate your blog, column and your commitment to the industry and reading and following your advice is one of the reasons I'm lucky enough to run a profitable business but on this I guess I'd have to respectfully disagree.
I see no problem shooting for your client AND licensing images to others but wearing a credential for one publication while shooting for a completely different one is, in my opinion, unprofessional and is a sneaky way to get around the credentialing process.
And yes, I've seen, more than once, someone misusing a credential in this way (even at an NCAA tournament). There have been times when I've had a season-long credential to a team or a tournament-long credential for an event and when a separate client calls and asks me to shoot for them on a day when my credentialed client doesn't need me.... I go through the credentialing procedure for that new client. Or, at the very least, if I know it's a venue that I know won't care, then I shoot a 15-second email to let them know that that's my intention.
Again, licensing images to other editorial outlets has never been the point of this thread. |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 12:37 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> brian-
since we never got to see the ad, we simply have to take your word that the kid had the intention to sell his services to clients who would like to have ncaa pictures, but not be likely to qualify as an entity that would be issued their own photo credential. because really, that's what we are talking about. i thought the ad was a notification to potential clients that the shooter was local and would be in attendance in a photography capacity, and available to work. including that he was already credentialed seems to be the beef here. if the ad doesn't include that, we aren't having this discussion, right?
sounds like this shooter- whoever he is- should just put his ad back up, minus the bit about already being credentialed, as it doesn't much matter anyway.
interesting though, how the word 'credential', or the idea of access, is such a hot-button topic in these parts. access is the single most difficult element of making a go at freelancing news and sports. here on sportsshooter, if you even ask about how to obtain access, you're roasted. if you already have it, you're questioned. if you attempt to obtain it by trading for it or purchasing it, you're labeled and black-listed. the lesson here- boys and girls- is if you want access to a closed event, don't ask how to do it. work your magic (if you happen to know magic) on your own, as there are no publicly available secrets to share about getting a golden photo pass. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 1:17 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Just what the NCAA needed, a website with 500 active credential cops..... It almost seems like people here are as concerned about who is on the sidelines as they are who is on the court.
@Brian I was actually agreeing with you right up to the point of Michael Ip's post. If the NCAA is making sure that everyone is in their assigned positions for each game of the tournament and then allowing holders of golden tickets to fill in the holes I fail to see the issue and would go one better and say that IF they know that certain spots should be empty for a game and aren't that the NCAA is by default turning a blind eye to the situation. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:33 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> I agree with Mr. Anzaldi's suggestion that the student should put the ad back up. To date he has not done anything that I would consider unprofessional. I saw the ad and thought nothing of it. The ad itself is non-issue.
As indicted in an earlier post by Mr. Blanco, the cred was granted via a student publication to the photographer. If this was the case and he was shopping additional clients for his publication who would pay him for the additional work, more power to him and publication for taking the initiative.
If the student was seeking to use the publication's cred to shoot for personal clients that is between him and the accredited publication. For all anyone but the student and publication knows, they may have had an agreement in place for the privilege to also shoot for themselves, which was quiet common in the old days.
On the other hand, if the intention was to use the cred issued to the pub to make money for himself without the publication's prior knowledge, then there certainly is an ethical issue between the publication and student photographer.
In either case, if the NCAA or the host SID have/had a problem with that then they would sanction/blacklist the publication if such agreement was in place or not after it occurred. Furthermore, does anyone know that if the student was contacted by a publication, would he not contact the NCAA or the host site SID and seek permission to photograph the additional games for the second or third potential client with same credential? For all we know at this point without his input, he might actually be working it the right way.
As far as seating is concerned, as long as the shooter is properly credentialed, has all the necessary blessings and in his assigned spot during the game, doing his job, I and everyone else should be wishing him many happy pictures. His ad is a non-issue. Period. I, for one, am not going to publicly roast the young man for trying to make a living doing what we do, especially if he is going about it the right way. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 2:09 PM on 03.09.11 |
| ->> Eric, the fact that you and Mike disagree with me actually has been a big help in me determning if I was right or wrong. I appreciate both of your thoughts and input. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 2:29 PM on 03.09.11 |
| ->> Oh, and Clark, I never once "roasted" this young man. I posted a question and took issue with the common practice. This, after noticing his ad was down so that I wouldn't be calling him out. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 2:34 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Brian one of the 'Funnies' is from me. If you are going to base how right you are by how wrong others think you are... You and Charlie Sheen should hook up for a beer.....
Clark pass a cold one down this way..... plse. |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 2:40 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Looking at the NCAA credential language for last year's Final Four, there is language that may preclude you from selling to anyone besides who credentialed you.
"The photography credential confers on Bearer a limited, non-exclusive and non-transferable license to take photographs of the Events, and to allow the entity that engaged the Bearer to take the photographs to use such photographs, only for news coverage of, or magazines, or stories about, the Events, other editorial purposes, and reprints of news pages from such entity's publication...."
and goes on to state
"Neither the Bearer nor the entity that engaged the bearer may sell photos taken at the Events to third-party entities including but not limited to other commercial entities or the general public"
So this may be construed to say you can only provide images to the organization that credentialed you and shooting for a non-credentialed organization is not allowed.
Now, do you want to be the one to tell the publication paying you that you can't shoot the next game because you have been kicked out?
That said, I doubt if you sold to a legitimate newspaper that there would be questions raised, but it could violate the rules and cause your pass to be revoked. But it would probably serve you with goodwill if you told the SID in charge of your regional that "hey, the local paper from Cinderalla State can't send anyone so they asked if I could shoot it for them. Is that cool?" |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 2:53 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Dang Eric, I thought those Funnies were both legit. Oh well, and for the record, you know (through personal emails we've traded) that that was intended to be "funny" since we both respect each other and agree that we always disagree.
And another "for the record": I never emailed this young man and forced him through my non-existant powers of intimidation to remove his ad. I emailed him and said "This is non of my business, but...." The went on to tell him how I read the ad and that others might read the ad the same way and then gave him some suggestions on how he might re-word the ad to get more clients and avoid any issues. I then explained to him that I'm no authority and that I COULD BE WRONG and that I was going to start a thread to get more input. He and I exchanged NOTHING but polite emails and I still feel I was being helpful and gave him sound advice. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 3:13 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Dude what are you saying?!?!? My funny aint legit?! It's legit I thought it was funny.....
There are only a handful of people who base their correctness on being on the other side of an issue from me.... And we've already established that you have better 'features' than one of those people. |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 4:24 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Brian:
The other funny is from me and that's only because there wasn't a ROTFLMAO button :-)
Sorry, but I did not write that you or anyone else "roasted" the young man. I simply stated that I would not 'roast' him for his efforts. I am sorry you felt that statement somehow was somehow direct toward you or any other individual who contributed to this thread.
It would have been nice to hear earlier, somewhere between the OP and third one in the thread how you unselfishly mentored and offered the benefits of your wisdom and experience. You did a great thing by helping him. I'm sure he appreciated it and will learn from it and this thread, all which is the point of the message board and the sportsshooter community. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 4:25 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Eric wrote:
"... pass a cold one down this way..... plse."
No problem, bud. Chips or pretzels? |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 4:38 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Pork rinds.... plse.... no carbs..... down 18# in three weeks.... it's working.... don't want the wheels coming off the bus now....
On a much more serious note. Taking the language that George posted in a literal reading, that would mean that if one Gatehouse, CNC , Gannett paper requests the credential that the rest of their properties aren't allowed to run the images.... Heck in the strictest reading if I'm shooting for the Toenail Telegram then the photos aren't supposed to push to the wire and shouldn't show up anywhere other than Toenail Telegram's newsprint/website. Or am I wrong? |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 5:32 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> it's a good point eric.
the current ncaa language prohibits any "photo wire" services from being credentialed as well. the exceptions provided included AP, getty, reuters. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 5:38 PM on 03.09.11 |
->> Brian, I just don't see whose ox is being gored -- with the exception of the control freaks at the NCAA.
--Mark |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 6:09 PM on 03.09.11 |
| ->> Well Mark, I'll give you that. But I'd just hate to see someone's credential get pulled over a poorly worded classified ad. |
|
David A. Cantor, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Toledo | OH | USA | Posted: 11:59 AM on 05.20.11 |
| ->> I've got my credential for The Rapture so if anyone else needs some shots, just make sure you get the FTP password before Saturday for full res uploads. The Divine News Service says I can move images to as many sources as possible since it is most likely my last assignment. I'm confused about billing though...Should I post this in Classifieds too? |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 12:11 PM on 05.20.11 |
| ->> Bill Satan. Or send the check to me and I'll make sure he get's it when I boot his ass out of Hell. |
|
Michael Granse, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:32 PM on 05.20.11 |
| ->> I'm not bothering with credentials for tomorrow, I'm just going to sit on my roof with a single camera body and 17-35mm f2.8 and a cooler full of beer. I'm going to get a great shot of The End or a series of out of focus shots of myself drunkenly falling off the roof. In either case, tomorrow promises to be interesting! |
|
This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|