Jump to content

PARENTS MAY BECOME SUSPICIOUS...


dave_brown17

Recommended Posts

This past week two teachers were accused of photographing (videotaping)

students inappropriately. The media has slanted the story to the point that

parents may become suspicious of photographers covering local sporting events.

I do not want to discuss the legal aspects of photography. I just want to

share a couple talking points.

 

Access to sporting events is a privilege and should only be given to working

members of the media or established photographers with an existing working

relationship with a school, athletic organization or local publication. Having

a camera and a dot com should not be the only criteria when being given access

to a sporting event.

 

If you do not have credentials you should be shooting from the bleachers. In

most of the venues that I am shooting at space is very limited. For safety

reasons, Site Directors and game officials will not allow photographers

without credentials or school passes to shoot from field or court level, and

flashes are not allowed.

 

I have developed a Document of Community Standards that clearly explains what

I will and will not photograph, process, print or submit to local/school

publications. Copies of my Community Standards are given to parents, coaches

and athletic directors prior to the start of the season. My standards are

strict and I follow them to the letter.

 

I would like to know that you are doing to avoid the possibility litigation.

 

Dave Brown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I would like to know that you are doing to avoid the possibility litigation."

 

Staying as faaaar away from US shores as possible!

I don't appreciate a country where big brother rapes democratic laws and morals for its

own shifty purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your post would be complete if we could read your Document of Community Standards. I

hope you are not promoting suspicion in order to do business.

 

Your position was stated briefly, and we know there will be many exceptions, for example

children's soccer. Here we have a very large plot upon which several teams play at once.

Everyone is on the sidelines. Lots of parents and other take pictures - so many that it has

democracized the process; trading of pictures occurs. It is a very good thing. And we don't

need to worry about litigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teachers in many states have a tighter standard for foul play with students. Their juvenile actions should not screw up other folks rights to shoot grade and high school sports by others who have actual standards. Its really abit whussy to block others from shooting sports by some teachers actions that are wrong. <BR><BR>I was at my high school that I shot photos for decades ago last year shooting in the same darn gym. One parent objected to his kids image being shot, so I photoshopped him out and supplied the images to the school. Now the annual has shots with a missing team member, which is a good thing. It shows how narrow and selfish baby boomers are in being parents. The kid now is not on the team in the annual, he is safe now, projected by the jackassery of selfish parent. The parents probably didnt know I am a professional retoucher that has a yellow pager advert, or shot images in the same gym before they were born. One never knows if the parents are sane, have worms in their brains from too much bottle water, or are in the mafia. Thus just photoshop their kids out of images if they object.<BR><BR>In many schools the having one photographer dogma is to prop up the sales of a marginal photographer, since he is the only chap allowed, a monopoly. The concerned suspicious parent gambit is just another way or propping up shoddy work, sometimes there is a kickback<BR><BR>Students under 18 often shoot, youtube, myspace and web publish sports stuff that adults dont do, since many are in a different legal arena. The school girl next door shoots sports from the floor and bleachers and emails the good ones to the newspaper from her wireless laptop. This ticks off the token approved shoot and scoot photographer, and has often replaced them since the images are from any part of the game, instead of a quicky appear, shot, scoot to another school.<BR><BR>Often so called blocking of shooting images is just a money thing. The concerns are overblown to create a monopoly for the new shooter who amplifys BS. Thus one might have shot in the same gymn since Eisenhower was President and sold some images to parents even with TLR's and Exaktas, and a new person wants to be the solechap; and the smoke screen of suspicioous activity is amplified.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

since i have grandkids in school....

photography should be restricted to parents, grandparents and siblings or othetr close relatives.

here in pa the boys and girls sports are on local network tv.

as well as the cable station. this is of interest to the community as well.

friends, other photographers and the rest should be requied to get permission in writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I wrote in the thread immediately preceeding this one, for me it's moot: I'll no longer be photographing school events for grades 12 and below. Even tho' I've done it primarily as a family member for family and their friends and for the school if they wished to use them, it isn't worth the risk until Texas courts make a definitive ruling on how this statute should be properly applied.

 

However, if I decided to continue photographing *my* family at school events it's nobody elses goddamn business. That includes professional or designated photographers working for the news media, to record events for the yearbook or for sales to parents. They have *zero* priority over the rights of family members to take photographs.

 

By definition it should be *impossible* to take "inappropriate" photographs at school events because school officials should ensure that students are not *engaging* in inappropriate activities. If the schools default on this responsibility it is illogical to place the burden on photographers and viewers to look away and pretend it isn't happening. For decades the public school system in the U.S. has been demanding more and more control over childrens' lives, dominating their time with excessive homework (while the kids are more poorly educated than ever) and imposing other policies that place parents second in authority. At my niece's school if she wishes to participate in *any* sport she is required to participate in *all* sports, no matter how expensive and time consuming. If the schools want that much authority then they must assume the greater responsibility for activities and the consequences. Restricting photography is an assinine "solution", the equivalent of binging and purging instead of eating sensibly.

 

But obviously professional photographers who intend to work in this field must deal with the constraints, regardless of whether we disagree. I would draw up specific contracts and release forms for everything photographed - for example, separate contracts and forms for athletic events, cheerleaders, musical and theatrical performances, etc. Parents would be required to sign the contracts and release forms in advance at the beginning of the school year or sports season. If they don't sign they don't get any photographs. If they don't sign to *decline* and specifically request that their children not be included in photographs, they have automatically waived their right to exclude the use of their kids' images in group photos of the activities. It is unreasonable to insist that the image of one child be excluded from from a group of kids scrambling for the ball. Blurring out the face is not an option - it defaces the photo for everyone else who paid.

 

In my opinion, children whose parents object to their children being photographed at school events should not be permitted to participate in school events. Period. Bring some sense to this issue.

 

BTW, I certainly would not use the term "community standards" in any contract. That term implies a link to local, state and federal law that could backfire. The term "community standards" is usually associated with laws regarding obscenity, pornography, performances (ranging from stripping to comedy and performance art), etc. I wouldn't want that term associated with my contract or release forms because it might imply that I am agreeing not to violate these laws. IMO, the two should never be mixed. It's a door that shouldn't even be touched, let alone opened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a difference between covering a local sports event - getting a couple representative shots for local media publication - and trying to get action shots of everyone on the team for the benefit of the players and their parents. It's also a question of whether they're expected to pay for somthing they think they can get for free from other parents or friends who own cameras.

 

I took hundreds of shots of my daughter's HS pom squad for four years. . . . nothing but encouragement from the parents and no grief from the school as long as I wasn't in the way.

 

Later, I managed to get access to the press box to shoot the Hofstra dance team during half time of homecoming. You can bluff your way with an F5 and a Gitzo, but it's also about who you're competing with to take and sell shots. Nobody else was up there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave -- Your initial post is interesting, but two questions:

 

1. Will you share your "Document" so we can see the contents; it would facilitate a meaningfull discussion.

 

2. What context are you coming from - Principal, Parent, Police, Legislator, Attorney?? Again, it would facilitate a meaningful discussion.

 

As a parent I have not run into any problems with this issue, and I generally always have a camera with me. Only once was I asked to refrain from photographing... and the issue was use of flash from the floor of a basketball game. Since I was at the end of the court and it was a free-throw shot, the referee was right. Other than that I more often than not have parents practically begging me for copies of photos htat have their kid in it.

...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PICO: I do not see the relevance in posting policies and procedures specific to my operations in this forum. The purpose of the document is to clearly establish what I will and will not do as a photographer, instead of promoting suspicion I believe the document removes any doubt of who I am, what I am doing and why I photographing a game.

 

I encourage parents to take photographs of their children and in some situations I will even assist them to help them get the best possible image. However, I do not want to jockey with a parent or a dot com photographer for a shooting position. Unless you have credentials or a pass issued by the league, city or athletic organization you should be shooting from the bleachers or sidelines. Once again this is just my opinion.

 

Photographers should be prepared for the possibility of litigation. Should a judgment be awarded in any of these situations there will be a precedent and the possibility of future ?copycat? lawsuits. Just common sense and good business practice to be prepared.

 

KELLY: You are correct teachers and coaches are held to a higher standard and nobody should be denied access to photograph local sporting events, but access should be limited.

 

I do not support schools having a monopoly with a dot com or any other photographer, and like you I believe that giving kickbacks is just another way for marginal photographers to get assignments. Quality will always sell and most of the marginal photographers won?t be around long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<b>Dave Brown</b><i>PICO: I do not see the relevance in posting policies and

procedures specific to my operations in this forum. </i><p>

It is perfectly relevant. Without the document your statement is perfectly empty,

meaningless, a mere pose. If you do not post it, I will have to believe you are just blowing

smoke.<p>

<i>Photographers should be prepared for the possibility of litigation. </i><p>

Don't forget to park a herse and ambulance out front when trolling for an insurance

policy.<p>

<i>Quality will always sell and most of the marginal photographers won?t be around

long.</i><p>

More smoke.<p>

Marginal photographers with exclusive access will prevail .They have for a hundred years,

and the free market and new technology has demonstrated that the public will accept

convenience in place of quality. See the impact of phone cameras on camera sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WALTER: I disagree with you. Photography at public events should be not be limited to family members, but I do think access my those without credentials or passes should be limited to bleachers or sideline.

 

LEX: I have no problems with you or anyone else photographing there child. But photographers without credentials should be given limited access, shooting too close to the field of play could become a safety issue. Bottom line is that with or without credentials final placement is up to game officials and site directors.

 

Parents do have the right to request that their child not be photographed. I have turned down assignments due to school district privacy policies, my editor has done the same. I do not know why the parents have requested that their child not be photographed, and it?s really none of my business. In my opinion it would not be fair to exclude the children from participation because of privacy concerns.

 

My Community Standards document is NOT a contract and clearly states that it is not a legal document and is simply a section of the policies and procedures that I use to conduct my business.

 

BRIAN: No, I will not post the document. It is simply the portion of the policies and procedures that I follow while conducting business. Posting a document that was created for a specific area would not be responsible.

 

Members of the working media are often held to different standards because than parents due to the location that we are shooting from. I have only seen game officials stop parents from using a flash once or twice, just my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PICO: Sorry, posting a document that was written for a specific area would not be responsible.

 

Litigation should always be a concern for everyone conducting business. I am not expecting any litigation but there is nothing wrong with being prepared, it is just makes sense.

 

Quality will sell. I have not seen any photo studios operating with camera phones or point and shoot cameras. I live in an area where the same photographer has been taking photos for the past 25 years, team photos along with individual senior and athletic portraits. He has lost some big accounts due to the quality of his work. Each one of the accounts that I have signed said that they are happy to pay a little more for the quality of my work.

 

It is not smoke it is commonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP - Spoken like a person who has no kids in school. Who are you to decide that only some people have photographic access? Jeez, another one who has entitlement on the brain. The are so many things wrong with your arguments on so many levels, it's sad. And you don't see anything wrong with it and that's worse.

 

I'm sure you'll find some delusional or pathetic school admin who'll buy into your line in this day and age. It's not anything special nowadays though. Using your argument, you can always finds some paranoid loser willing to go along. But you could use the same argument over the past 50 years to "protect the children" and always find a sympathetic ear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not for us to debate why... but it is up to us to follow procedures and get proper permission or be subject to harrassment or worse. Seriously... who wants to risk being labeled a creep, shooting high school sports with no legit reason?

 

Before going onto a court or field of play, it is prudent to have some sort of authorization from the school AD or administrator. Even an authorized Press Pass isn't sufficient for every setting as I found out this fall.

 

Shooting Div2 football, I was barred from the field level because I didn't go through the proper channels with the college SID. This was a week after I shot a high school jamboree on the exact same field. Because I had alot of other shooting opportunities, I didn't bother with them again. However, I shoot nearly every basketball game and I'm never questioned.

 

Coming from the view of a freelance newspaper photographer... IMHO, unless you have a child on the court, work for the school, work for the media, or were hired by a parent/team to photograph their child, I really see no reason for you to be allowed access. And you could seriously be asking for trouble.

 

Even NCAA rules state that if you try to sell images of their athletes, whether the school is aware or not, then that school is violating NCAA rules. Minor league baseball is another minefield. You have zero rights to any image you take. Without any model release, you can't use a persons image for anything other than your own enjoyment.

 

There are legit ways to pursue your passion. There are seven weekly and one daily newspaper in my area. It's not that hard to approach a newspaper and get press credentials if you do good work.

 

One weekly newspaper had its editor shooting with a P+S. I gave them a few images, but they were worse than cheap. Freelance really meant free.

 

I HIGHLY advise this route. It's fun, challenges you to improve your skills, you win statewide awards, and get paid enough to buy a hot dog and a drink at halftime. It leads to access to really cool events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave,

I'd like to bring this back to reasonable discussion. Your question was, "I would like to know that you are doing to avoid the possibility litigation."

 

My initial response was that my staff have and will always work in a professional manner. After reading some of the posts, you may have a point that this is not enough.

 

Having a dozen or even a hundred customers testify that I have never done anything contentious sometimes may not be enough. Will former customers be willing to come forward if I am charged with child porn? I'm just not sure. The stigma seems far worse than a murder these days.

 

A written statement is a good idea. Beaurocrats love written documents. Is that realistically any help either if you are charged with that type of offence? I'm just not sure. If you are accused, how is the document going to protect you against a 'crazy person'? That crazy person could be a child, a mother or a DA.

 

In my mind, it's about the same as getting smucked by a car. You do your very best to be careful every minute of every day and if & when the time comes, you can only hope that there is true justice.

 

The problem is not only 'crazy people' but also people who may have grudges (it does happen) and well meaning people who may think they have seen something done from their angle or viewpoint that was in fact not real. Remember the accusation in the newspaper is as bad as the charge itself.

 

I think there is no perfect solution. I do think that your post should have included a brief summary of your Document. Why post this without it? That's what this forum (minus the crazies) is all about.

 

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug said "A written statement is a good idea. Beaurocrats love written documents. Is that realistically any help either if you are charged with that type of offence? I'm just not sure. If you are accused, how is the document going to protect you..."

 

The sad fact is that a personal manifesto, promise, affirmation, etc. is probably of no value at all. There is nothing guaranteeing the recipient that you/us are sincere in that affirmation and no basis for such a belief that it means anything at all. If a client has personal knowledge of your/our good character... that means something. If not, why should anyone believe a self-authored, self-certified declaration that you/us are "good guys"?

 

With or without such a document... if an accusation of any type of wrong-doing is made, the accusation has been made. The manifesto, promise, etc. probably holds no weight to either law enforcement or the judicial system. All it may do is help build the confidence of a gullible client or ease the uncertainty of a suspicious client. After all, people make promises/affirmations before God all of the time... and then break them without thinking twice.

 

I don't believe whatever Dave has authored has any role in avoidance of the possibility of litigation in any way.

...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If you do not have credentials you should be shooting from the bleachers." In fact, if you want to take inappropriate photos, you can do it just as well from the bleachers as not. A couple of cases have come up concerning laws relating to photographing people in public for purposes of gratification. That has absolutely nothing to do with where you shoot from, but rather, why you are shooting. If you were a perv, and wanted to avoid suspicion, handing people a "Document of Community Standards" would probably be a good way to do it. If a school lets people shoot from where ever they want (IE, no credentials required), there would be no reason not to take advantage of it- just don't go around shooting crotch shots, either.

 

I'm not aware that either case involved litigation (IE, lawsuits)- more like arrests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the spirit of getting back on track discussing solutions rather than bitching about the problem (which I've already done to death the past few days, here and elsewhere), I can think of another possible solution, tho' it probably isn't cost effective for most of us.

 

Loren Eidahl, who sometimes participates on the Nikon forum, photographs concerts with a team of assistants and appears to do well enough to make it profitable. Key to his operation is wireless transmission of all images as they're taken to a person operating a laptop. That person quickly selects and edits photos which are almost immediately displayed on the large overhead monitor for the audience to see. A CD or DVD is burned for the promoter or other client before the team leaves so it's basically a cash and carry operation - no need for billing.

 

However this might not be economically feasible for most free-lancer photographing school events, unless you work with a spouse and run it as a couple or family operation, as I've seen several wedding photographers do.

 

The person running the laptop can immediately delete not only the bad photos (we don't want clients to even see our goofs - out of focus, poorly exposed, etc.) but any photos that some pathologically prudish dolt might misrepresent as being sexually inappropriate, when it was simply a matter of misframing.

 

Of course this solution introduces problems of its own. The larger monitor of the laptop would make it easier for bystanders and peepers looking over your shoulder. It would be best to find a seat with the back to your wall and get one of those monitors that makes it difficult for people on either side to see what you're seeing.

 

Also, this sort of paranoia might serve to break us of chimping. It's a bad habit that I'm trying to break. No chimping, no risk of peepers looking at your photos before they are edited and ready to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are forgetting one basic thing. Loren is hired to be at the event.

 

It's very simple... Unless it's your child or you are paid in some manner to be at an event (ie... high school wrestling match) you should obtain permission or else be subject to harassment or worse.

 

You really have no business being there with a camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lex, the only one "bitching about the problem" (respectfully submitted, of course) appears to be you. I read your prior postings. The crime that you described is a serious problem... and one that is not unique to USA. Finding a general-purpose set of solutions to societal evils that are exhibited by a small segment of the population leads to repression of all of our freedom. (Damn, now I'm starting to sound like W. Smith!?!?!?!?) Didn't you find your personal solution when you stated that you would no longer be shooting at school events. If that is your choice, fine. In fact, that might be the best solution for someone who is concerned about "being confused by parents/authorities" as a potential pervert. There will always be someone who is irrationally suspicious. Just like there will always be some honest, law-abiding, highly-moral photographers who will fear being mistaken for a pervert when they are really engaged in honest, law-abiding, highly-moral photography. Worrying like that comes close to the clinical definition of neurotic. Please don't feed the societal neurosis.

 

You said you found your personal solution... go with it. That sounds like a good solution for you. I will continue to shoot school events (credentialed or not)... and if I happen to get a pic of a cheer leader, so what? That is my personal choice. Dave alleges to have prepared a personal statement of ethics/credibility... good for him... if it works, that is his solution. None of us ever want to be accused of anything we haven't done wrong, but if that is the concern the only real solution is to stop doing whatever that is. This should be a personal choice, not one that is imposed on us. (Damn, now I'm continuing to sound like W. Smith!?!?!?!?)

 

What more do you want from this thread, though... I'm just a bit lost on why you want to keep seeking solutions for a problem that is serious but not worthy of negatively affecting the lives/livelihood of everyone else? "I'm not concerned about the possibility of being mistaken for a pervert and won't change my photography behaviour" is just as good of an answer to your (or Dave's) post as hypothesizing expensive and/or difficult to implement monitoring/approval systems.

 

Only the guilty should be punished. The rest of us should be allowed to live without irrational fear.

 

(My sincere apologies if you find these opinions to be off-topic or not to your liking.)

...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i>I don't believe whatever Dave has authored has any role in avoidance of the possibility

of litigation in any way.</i><p>

Certainly no more than if anyone were to wear a priest's suit and collar and expect

exceptional treatment. His document is a costume. And the fact that he won't share it

suggests it does not exist, or he is in fact exploiting fear.<p>

Take a few pervs, mix with a few dimwitted paranoids, and add a dash of polititical fevor,

and blend in the bowl of popular media and you have the recipe which might purge

freedoms from the rest of us. Keep in mind that 50% of freedom is <i>access</i>.

Without out it, there is nothing.<p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...