Julie,
I've done it both ways but the way that works best for me is to send out hard proofs with order forms. The on-line option is OK but if you use a host site, you wait 30 days for payment and my cashflow is bad enough without having to wait a month.

As long as you don't try to shoot formals at a show, most photographers won't have a problem with you. As I've said, they don't shoot candids or portraits (generally) so they shouldn't have a problem with photographers that do. If they did, folks like Gay Glazwell and Christina Freitag wouldn't be able to capture their advertising images at shows.

In fact, I'm going to Louisville next week to bring up my Rottie girl who is trying to get her last major to complete her Championship and while I'm there, I'm shooting a dog that we do the advertising for. I probably won't do any ring shots but we will do some outdoor stuff and some head shots and maybe even some moving shots outdoors.

Have fun,

Jim

That is pretty far north for a Floridian! My friend with the Danes/cresteds will be in Louisville too. I think she may take Cinnamon and get her intl' champion title on her.

I may go up there, but, I am not sure if I want to do that much driving. Franklin is 3 hours tops and Louisville is probably closer to 5.

I also think that is the Cartersville, GA lure coursing match(sunday)

I am dying to get some shots of running dogs


Oh and as for the "What camera are you using?" You are so right, it isn't the camera, but the operator, the retouching, the ability of when to press the shutter, exposure, knowing how to get the dogs to pose.

When someone asked that I had to laugh. The E-1 is not the camera of choice for sports, or really anyone but people who like a solid build that is weatherproof and dust free. You ought to see the looks I get from my pro friends. They think I am sadly misled and eventually will come around

Also, you aren't using the XT kit lenses that their buddies are. And I Doubt you are using scene modes. What it comes down to, is the proof is in the pudding.

" Interesting thread since I'm in the process of investigating the use of my "proofs" in full-color ads without my permission and without payment."

Hey Jim,

Do you mind if I ask what company did this, or do you want to keep that close to the vest at this time? Also, when you send out physical proofs, do you embed the images so that it makes it harder to scan/sell? i.e. a beveled 'proof' in the middle of the photograph but made vaguely opaque so that it is not too distracting?

James

James,
the magazine is The Canine Chronicle and I've had several long and somewhat heated discussions with the publisher about the entire issue of copyright usage. The folks at PPA are doing a lot of work in this area and I've asked them to contact this publication along with others to make sure they understand their obligation in running photographs.

The person who created the ad happens to be a well-known photographer/designer who, I'm told, "is a very nice person". Swell. She also must be a moron if she didn't know the photos were proofs. Since she's a competitor of sorts, I need to be careful not to imply that she did it on purpose -- although that is certainly a possibility. My attorney is sending her a letter questioning her judgement.

As for proofs, I usually put the word "proof" across the image at 65% opacity. For that particular show, I left off that step for the Group photos since there was a rush to get them to publications for year-end issues and since the folks who own Group placing dogs are generally pretty knowledgable about using photos in ads. Wrong! Never assume competency.

One of the advantages we have is the insight gained from publishing our own breed magazine The Rottweiler Magazine. We receive hundreds of win photos from all over the country and Linda creates most of the ads for each issue. We never accept a photo without written release from the photographer and we never accept a bad scan from the owner because we know they didn't get a release. If they send us the photo to be scanned, we contact the photographer and get written permission. Most photographers are thrilled to have their work published so it's never a problem. And if the original were shot digitally, we get a really good copy of the original file.

Regardless, we feel it is in fact our duty and responsibility to protect photographers' copyrights. Maybe that's because I am one but I'd like to think it's because we value intellectual property.

The copyright issue is a complex one and most of us have neither the time nor the economic resources to fight numerous infringements. And so people get away with it. Such is the life of a show photographer

Jim

I sell direct also. I don’t advertise, it's all word of mouth for me. There are three outfits that do advertise, but not me. I really like it when the first line out of a persons mouth is, "how much do you charge." Even people that know I'm the best sports action photographer in the area ask me how much do you charge.

I always chuckle and say to myself, "for what." And then I think, what are your options? You cant get better images, and in some cases, you cant get an image period because no one took one but me.

I know if the first question from someone’s mouth is, how much? They are shopping price, not great images. I do more for my clients and charge less than anyone within 300 miles of my house.

Just a small gripe, but I wish someone would call and say, I want you to photograph my kids. . .

As for $25 bucks for an 8x10, that's a great price. Don’t budge; it's a fair and appropriate price in your markets. I can’t get $25, because I live and photograph people who have no money, and where the unemployment is 87%. I provide my services in part to a community that can not afford the big-shot photographers that charge a grand for senior photos, and give them that senior photo look from the studio to boot. Hey, maybe they ask me my prices, because they can't belive they can get a $1000 worth of photography for $250 bucks - hum, never thought of that till now, I'll have to think it over. . . .

No disrespect to you senior port guys/gals, I know you have a margin too, and I'm not trying to undercut anyone either. My business monto is, "I believe images should be in the hands of the subject - I make that happen at a price that you can afford." I post that right on my brochure!

Maybe this thread shold be in the business forum?

Take care,

Interesting discussion! Jim, I saw your Afghan BIS shot in Canine Chronicle in the last month or so. Nice shot!

In regards to camera snobs, I have run in to them as well. One of the common misconceptions that irritates the heck out of me is when people ask what type of camera I have and when I tell them, they remark that they are going to go buy one so that they can take good photos as well. Ah well, relegated to a glorified button pusher yet again ;-)

Awhile back there was an interesting thread on the UKC discussion forum regarding proper dog show photography "etiquette." Nothing earth shattering but it gave me a little more insight into the amount of respect (or lack thereof) that show photographers are shown:

http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80429

When I head to dog shows, particularly big clusters, I will take my camera and take candids as well as ring shots. The majority of the time I am working on honing my skills and do not even know any of the dogs entered. For example, last month I headed to Denver for their big cluster and spent the afternoon shooting the GSD ring. Took the shots for practice *and* I watched the judge who would be judging my breed the next day (paid off - got a 3 point major!) ;-)

However, I always respect the show photographer. Below is a photo I shot this weekend where a group of us train. Lighting is not great and the setter sort of blends into the background. I need to do some post processing to fix that and the sharpness but all in all I am pleased with it as an "off the cuff" shot.

Ingrid

Ingrid,
thanks for the compliment on the Afghan BIS shot. Now, those people represent the other side of the proverbial coin. They called me the Monday after the weekend shows; I e-proofed them the BIS shots; they pre-paid by credit card for both the prints and for the image I RUSHED to their ad designer; and the designer sent me a proof of the ad for my review. That was a very nice experience all the way around.

I like your photograph. Very dramatic angle and nice dog. Those are the types of shots I love to have the time to take.

I never have a problem with folks taking candids at the shows I shoot. I'm busy running from ring to ring taking the formals so why should I complain about people doing the fun stuff?!!!

Having said that, I had another show photographer try to have me thrown out of a show he was shooting even though I was only shooting candids. After I explained life to the Show Chairman in terms he will forever understand, the issue was dropped but that photographer was simply trying to give me a hard time. I don't play that game. Unless somebody is trying to take a formal at the same time I am, I'm cool with folks shooting at the shows.

The link was interesting. What wasn't mentioned was the number of exhibitors who have a photo taken simply to be able to schmooze with the judge with no intention of actually buying a print. Several of the top show photographers have gone to charging folks a "sitting fee" which gets waived if they buy a photo.

I am constantly amazed by the behavior of dog show people. And I say that with the clear understanding that I am one.

Take care,

Jim

"I am constantly amazed by the behavior of dog show people. And I say that with the clear understanding that I am one."

LOL. That is quite a statement, unfortunately. Have you had any luck with PPA with this magazine or any sort of resolution ahead?

-JM

Ingrid,

Spectacular photo of the dog. Great angle and pose. BTW, thanks for posting the UKC site. I had never seen it before but it looks like a useful resource.

-JM

James,
PPA is willing to notify the publication (and others that do similar things) about copyright law but it is strictly educational in nature. They are certainly not going to go after them legally.

Nor am I: that would be suicidal in terms of getting my photos reproduced in the major magazines. However, if the publications are using my images and I'm not getting any credit for them, it's pretty useless anyway.

Let me just clarify what happens here: most Breed and All-Breed publications include creation/production of the ad in their advertising rate. So folks either send a scan, a photo or have the photographer send a file to the publication which they in turn use in the creation of an ad.

When an "artist" starts creating ads, they often overlook some of the finer detail in an effort to get a clean layout. Often, they means they cut out the sign with the actual win or cut out a portion of the sign that contains the name of the photographer that took the photo. And that's the issue. I only release an image for advertising use with the proviso that my by-line be visible in the ad or, if they crop the photo, that they put in a line "photo by CPM" somewhere at the bottom of the ad.

So, how do you know if that has happened? You get copies of all the publications and go through them all to see which ads have violated your copyright. Then you contact the publication and find out who created the ad. If it's the publication, you remind them of the restrictions on usage. If it's an independent designer, you contact them and offer to move the sign to make sure in future ads that it gets shown in total. That's what happened with the BIS Afghan image: the designer wrote me to ask if there was any way I could move the sign because she wanted to crop the photo pretty tightly. Since my signs are inserted in PhotoShop, it was easy to do. That designer wanted to be sure my by-line was visible. Good for her.

Policing the major All-Breed publications is tedious but necessary. Now, try doing that with 150 Breed-specific publications and you have another career . Protecting our copyrights is an essential part of our business and it seems to get harder rather than easier with the advent of digital imaging. PPA is doing their part but, ultimately, it's up to each of us to police our own work.

Jim