Jump to content

photomark

Members
  • Posts

    815
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. After the recent phishing debacle I changed my login credentials for photo.net (mostly because I couldn't figure out how to delete my account). I changed my email address to name+photonet@domain.com so I could identify emails originating from photo.net (or those who hack it). It will no longer let me log in (I can post this because I'm still logged in after changing it). Additionally, it won't send me an updated password because it says: "You must enter a valid e-mail". I think you should support tagged email address like that. But I REALLY think if you don't support them, you shouldn't let users change their address to such an email. At the moment, my account seems to be associated with an email address the system only occasionally recognizes as valid.
  2. <p>Regan, I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest lawyers, school, or ASMP are wrong on this issue. I was hoping you had a specific example, though, because there is a lot of case law suggesting that magazine and book covers have a first amendment exception when they reflect the content of the magazine or book. </p><p>There are some classic examples of the courts favoring incidental advertising use for editorial content. One is Shirley Boot, v. Curtis Publishing Company. Shirley Booth was photographed and appeared in an issue of <i>Holiday</i> Magazine </p> <blockquote> Concededly, the publication in <i>Holiday</i> was not a violation of Miss Booth's right of privacy, for this was reproduction for news purposes as the phrase had been used in applying the statute. However, in June, 1959 defendants caused to be published the same photograph in prominent full-page advertisements of Holiday, in the <i>New Yorker</i> magazine and <i>Advertising Age.</i> </blockquote> <blockquote> To be sure, <i>Holiday's</i> subsequent republication of Miss Booth's picture was, in motivation, sheer advertising and solicitation. This alone is not determinative of the question so long as the law accords an exempt status to incidental advertising of the news medium itself. The exemption extends to the republication because it was illustrative of magazine quality and content, even though, realistically, it is recognized that the republication also served another advertising purpose, that is, initially attracting the reader to the advertisement. </blockquote> <p>There's another similar case between Joe Namath and Sports Illustrated where Namath appeared in the magazine and SI used his image to advertise the magazine. Namath sued and the courts said: </p> <blockquote> Where use of professional athlete's photograph was merely incidental to advertising of publisher's magazine in which athlete had earlier been properly and fairly depicted, and language of advertisement did not indicate athlete's endorsement of the magazine, there was no invasion of athlete's right to privacy in violation of Civil Rights Law. </blockquote> <p> A good example involving a book cover is <a href="http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/nickel&dimed2.pdf"> Christianson v. Henry Holt and Company, LLC</a> (page 6 - 11 for a quick rundown and related cases). In this case the person on the cover won, but reading the opinion spells out clearly that it is because she wasn't mentioned in the book at all - she was purely used as an advertising image. Had she been even a small part of the book, the use on the cover would fall within the first amendment protection:</p> <blockquote> …if Plaintiff’s identity was incorporated into that non-commercial speech, then her claim would fall within this exception.<br/> …<br/> When it comes to the use of an individual’s image on the cover of a book, the case law reflects a strong First Amendment interest in allowing authors and publishers to use images that reflect the free speech contained in a book. </blockquote> <p>So while using a random person for the cover of your novel without a release is definitely a bad idea, it's hard to understand why a magazine or fine-art photography bookcover would require a release or even why you would need a release to use images in the book to advertise the book.</p><p>Some of the state laws are explicit about how you can advertise works protected by the 1st amendment. For example <a href="http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2241&ChapterID=62 ">Illinois</a> has the standard appropriation restrictions:</p> <blockquote> A person may not use an individual's identity for commercial purposes during the individual's lifetime without having obtained previous written consent from the appropriate person…</blockquote> <p>But then says this (emphasis mine):</p> <blockquote> This Act does not apply to the following:<br/> (1)use of an individual's identity in an attempt to portray, describe, or impersonate that individual in a live performance, a single and original work of fine art, play, <b>book,</b> article, musical work, film, radio, television, or other audio, visual, or audio-visual work, provided that the performance, work, play, book, article, or film does not constitute in and of itself a commercial advertisement for a product, merchandise, goods, or services;<br/> (2) use of an individual's identity for non-commercial purposes, including any news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political campaign;<br/> (3) use of an individual's name in truthfully identifying the person as the author of a particular work or program or the performer in a particular performance;<br/> (4) <b>promotional materials, advertisements, or commercial announcements for a use described under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this subsection;</b> </blockquote>
  3. "Now, regarding art books and the use of street photography within those...the images contained inside the book are considered art and exempt but the image on the cover--the image presumably used to sell the book--needs a release" Regan, how do you know this to be true? Generally using work that originated in an editorial context to promote and advertise that publication (aka incidental advertising use) has been allowed by the courts.
  4. I'm in Amsterdam on my way home from Turkey. In the past year I've shot I Japan, India, and throughout Europe. And guess what, I would never use the term 'International Photographer' in any of my branding. The reason is because it instantly indicates you are a poser. The only people who use this term are those who, like you, posted something online, or went on vacation and took some snap shots. Nobody who matters takes the term seriously and most people with any experience chuckle and shake their head we they see it. If you are serious about the business of photography focus on what you can do for clients, how you are truly different from your competition, and forget cheap, easy, and ultimately meaningless terms like 'international photographer.'
  5. The Oklahoma City case Ellis mentioned is worth reading if you want to understand some of the difficulties. Here's the opinion from the Court of Appeals: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/156/1244/481858/
  6. <p>This went up on the aphotoeditor blog today. It's unlikely you'll be aiming at these numbers for your first commercial job, but I think it's helpful to see:<br> <a href="http://aphotoeditor.com/2016/01/27/pricing-and-negotiating-lifestyle-shoot-for-a-pharmaceutical-company/">Pricing and Negotiating: Lifestyle Shoot</a></p>
  7. I agree with Craig. The WSJ isn't some fly-by-night organization in the business of stealing images from photographers. They hire freelancers and deal with image rights many, many times, every day. It seems unlikely that they would just grab an image and use it unless there's something else going on. It could just be a misunderstanding or maybe they feel the use is fair — it's impossible to know without more information.
  8. Hey Skip, I'm in Anchorage and get out and about from time to time. It wasn't clear from your post — does your cruise finish in Sitka? Is the plan to fly to Anchorage and drive from there? Turnagain Arm is the body of water just south of Anchorage. As soon as you leave Anchorage to the south, you are driving along Turnagain Arm. If you continue, you will drive along the coast for about 45 minutes until you hit Girdwood, which is a ski town in the winter. In the summer, you can take the life up the mountain, which on a clear day has great views. Girdwood also has decent food. Although spendy, helicopter trips from Girdwood over the Chugach mountains are unbelievable. Continuing, you'll pass a turn off to Whittier which offers access to Prince William Sound. It's the clostest jumping off point for kayaking, fishing, and glacier cruises to Anchorage. It's about an hour drive. Whittier is accessed via a one-lane tunnel, which means inbound and outbound traffic alternates on a schedule. It's worth plannning around the schedule in advance if you don't want to park for an hour. Portage Lake is a quick and easy stop along the Whittier turn-off before you get to the tunnel. On a good day wind blows icebergs from the glacier at the end of the lake to the accessible shore by the road and visitor center. If you continue south past Whittier you can either turn off toward Seward or head to Homer. Soldatna doesn't have a lot of flashing stuff unless you want to fish the Kenai river (world class rainbow trout and salmon), but it has big grocery stores and gas, so it's good for a quick stop. If you instead head north, the Matanuska glacier is a nice side trip. It's a little out of the way if you're heading to Denali, but no too bad. Guides will give you crampons, axes, and instructions and take you on a glacier trek. It's good for the whole family (8 years-old and up), and has some spectacular photo ops. Of course, any time you can get in the air on a clear day, Alaska will blow you away. The flight seeing out of Talkeetna to Denali is truly spectacular. Operators from Homer (and probably Kenai/Soldatna as well) can take you across Cook Inlet to see bears on the Coast of Lake Clark N.P and buzz the glacier-capped volcanoes.
  9. Jordan, There's a lot of nice work there and the site is clean and easy to navigate. I especially like the Urban/Suburbs work. You made a few choices that I would question. The main one is the diagonal sweep transition between images. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. It's slow and distracting. The editing with the Urban/Suburbs work is tight and consistent I love it. But the editing in the landscape work is a wreck with a mix of different aesthetics and subjects. Generally speaking, it's really hard to mix black and white and color in the same portfolio. I think if you want to show the grey, minimalist desert photos, great…or misty fall foliage, fine…or contrasty B&W long exposures of waterfalls, okay. But you need to decide because having them all together dilutes your work too much and it all ends up looking like student work. One last nitpick — why doesn't the link to your blog just go to your blog? Why do I need another page with a link to the real blog? This, incidentally, is sending me to yet another page from blogger saying I'm about to be redirected, which redirects to itself. This looks like maybe a DNS issue or other bug that hasn't been worked out.
  10. Kristo- it was Safari and Firefox on the Mac. The slideshow is working as of this morning. It looks like it might have been a javascript problem. When I looked closer last night it was generating something like 900 javascript errors in the console. To begin with, I agree with Jeff — the glamour work is out of place, especially since you give it it's own top level category. And I wouldn't call it 'celebrity' photography. So now that I've poked around, I think it's way too busy. As a prospective client there is too much stuff on the page that I don't care about. I don't care about your tags, or categories. I don't need to know that the portfolios is 'Created By: Kristo Di Giorio' — I already know that. I don't know what I'm supposed to do with the pencil icon or what the strange round avatar of you is. I don't need to know the date of the post. I *really* don't like the animated 'pin it' button. All of this stuff can just go away without negatively impacting my experience of your work. The photos are arranged in categories under the heading 'portfolio' but everything about the pages suggests 'blog post'. In fact, everything about this site from the coding on up suggests that you took a wordpress theme made for a blog and tried to force a portfolio site into it. From a branding perspective, it's a disaster. The logo is creepy, the typography is all over the place, with mixed centered and justified type (I'm looking at the about page). If I am getting married in Greece, what is there in the branding of your page that would make me choose it over say: http://www.vangelisphotography.com or http://www.annaroussos.com ? And — for me this is a BIG problem — on your contact page you are running a photo with the caption "Our Studio is always open to serve you." This was a red flag for me because the lighting gear in the photo is pretty nice, but I didn't see anything in your work that suggests you are lighting in a studio or shooting indoors. It appears that image is not actually your studio because a reverse image search finds the image everywhere. This is bordering on fraud. Considering how much care you put into explaining copyright on your disclaimer page (http://www.studiokristo.com/disclaimer/), there's no excuse for using a photo that is not yours to promote your business.<div>[ATTACH=full]1005087[/ATTACH]</div>
  11. Kristo, I'll try posting a screen shot of what I saw on your home page. It was blank except for the side bar. Scrolling down revealed some links, but not much else. For most visitors, this is your only chance to make a first impression, and this was quite poor. From there I clicked on portfolios in the side bar and then 'outdoor portraits.' I was taken to a totally blank page with only the text: "Professional Photography Services in Greece. We are a licensed photography company. You are always welcome to visit our Studio and meet our creative team. E-mail: info@studiokristo.com" No menu, sidebar, links. Nothing, just plain text. At this point I gave up. I don't think it's quite ready yet. Have you considered just using a service like squarespace? Their templates are better than what 90% of designers can do let alone photographers.<div>[ATTACH=full]792307[/ATTACH]</div>
  12. "Two wheels and a seat held together by metal tubes is pretty generic." Not to mention that these have useful functions, which are not protected by copyright. As far as the use of the people's image with the watermark, I don't think asking whether the watermark constitutes advertising is really the right question. You should be asking whether your use of these images constitutes a violation of your states privacy laws. Maybe the watermark could be a factor, or maybe not. Several states have clauses in their privacy statues that allow photographers to exhibit images about their business. For example, this is from the Illinois Right of Publicity Act (1075/35 b(5) - http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2241&ChapterID=62): "use of photographs, videotapes, and images by a person, firm, or corporation practicing the profession of photography ("professional photographer") to exhibit in or about the professional photographer’s place of business or portfolio, specimens of the professional photographer’s work, unless the exhibition is continued by the professional photographer after written notice objecting to the exhibition has been given by the individual portrayed."
  13. For the record, I didn't suggest she shouldn't shoot the job pro bono.
  14. More power to you Michael — I've never been comfortable scheduling shots that tightly. There is definitely a history of great photographers working quickly. I was once photographed by Marc Hauser in Chicago. This was back in the film days. He took four exposures and told me he had it (he did). I still have that print on my bookcase. I also had the good luck to spend some time with a man in Texas who worked on some of the old Marlboro ads for Leo Burnett. He had all sorts of stories about photographers, including Ernst Haas who apparently would complain about 'bullshit photographers' always asking for 'one more shot' over and over. He said Haas would show up, find the shot, make a few exposures and call it good. You gotta respect that.
  15. I understand that Jeff and addressed it. Nevertheless, she asked how we would price the job, which is the question I answered. What doom and gloom are you talking about? I don't think I mentioned her financial life — I did mention expenses, which at least in my experience are a pretty important part of determining how to price jobs. Maybe you do it differently.
×
×
  • Create New...