PDA

View Full Version : Redlands Horse Trial Photographer?



knightrider
Apr. 21, 2010, 10:18 PM
Does anyone know if it was GRC or another company? Trying to find some pics...thanks!

lifeofreilly
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:02 PM
It was Redline. They charge $10 to see the photos, so I didn't...

LexInVA
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:04 PM
The photographer posts here so he's easy to get in touch with if you want something.

Snapdragon
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:06 PM
Redline Event Photography took stadium pics. However, you have to pay $10 to view the photos on the web; that fee will go toward buying a photo from the show.

I'm a bit disappointed in this policy; I think I had 7 pics to choose from, and I think only 3 or 4 were over jumps.

I completely get charging a fee, but if you're going to do that, take some more pictures to make it worth my $10.

LexInVA
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:06 PM
It is what it is.

Snapdragon
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:09 PM
That's very zen of you.

Dr. Doolittle
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:12 PM
If everyone didn't STEAL the photos (when posted on websites), the photographers wouldn't feel compelled to do this. :sigh:

STOP IT! It's making life more difficult for the rest of us (AND for the pro photographers) just because you want to post pix of your horse on Facebook, for your friends to see. (Just steams me, since I KNOW my teenaged students do this--shame on 'em!--and it results in these policies that then punish the rest of us. :rolleyes:)

LexInVA
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:16 PM
You should discipline them Yvonne.

Snapdragon
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:17 PM
I agree. I like Redline Guy, but if I'm going to pay $10, I would just like to have more photos from which to select. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Dr. Doolittle
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:26 PM
You should discipline them Yvonne.

I may be a Kraut by heritage, but when it comes to action, I am too @#$dammed nice (and too much of a kindheart) to "discipline" anyone. Except perhaps my teenaged daughter. (And of course THAT goes over well :rolleyes:) This same attitude does NOT apply to dogs and horses, of course...

Dr. Doolittle
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:34 PM
And stop calling me Yvonne! :p (Shades of Airplane.)

My daughter calls me this (and various other Facebook friends--of which you are NOT one!)

Okay, back to our regularly scheduled programming.

Just saying, I understand where Redline is coming from, and unfortunately, the reason they HAVE to do this is because they (among other pro photographers) are losing money as a result of people stealing images from them. Since there is no way to STOP people from doing this, we must must all pay the price. (If it were my computer savvy DAUGHTER doing this instead of my students, there would be some major ass being kicked! She is not a rider, though--and doesn't do this on *my* behalf...plus knows that I wouldn't sign off on it.)

LexInVA
Apr. 21, 2010, 11:44 PM
I have made it a policy not to put COTH-folk on my Facebook Friend list. I get enough of their personal drama here as it is. :lol:

yellowbritches
Apr. 22, 2010, 09:18 AM
You know, I'd probably pay to see some pictures if there were some FREAKING CROSS COUNTRY PICTURES. I bought my last picture from him last year because I'm so sick of getting excited about xc pictures just to find out there is nothing but stadium. I'm an eventer...it's ALL ABOUT the xc to me. :mad: And I know he's a one man operation and it's easier to take lots of pictures in stadium, but I find it hard to believe that you can't find a good spot on the xc course that you take multiple pictures of multiple fences.

Rant over.

Dr. Doolittle
Apr. 22, 2010, 09:23 AM
You know, I'd probably pay to see some pictures if there were some FREAKING CROSS COUNTRY PICTURES. I bought my last picture from him last year because I'm so sick of getting excited about xc pictures just to find out there is nothing but stadium. I'm an eventer...it's ALL ABOUT the xc to me. :mad: And I know he's a one man operation and it's easier to take lots of pictures in stadium, but I find it hard to believe that you can't find a good spot on the xc course that you take multiple pictures of multiple fences.

Rant over.

Seriously!

Why would a photographer NOT take x-country pix at a HT?!? That's what *everyone* wants to see! (And yes, it would seem like a no-brainer--but apparently not. :p Maybe someone can mention this to him?)

LexInVA
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:02 AM
And I know he's a one man operation and it's easier to take lots of pictures in stadium, but I find it hard to believe that you can't find a good spot on the xc course that you take multiple pictures of multiple fences.

Rant over.

If only it were so easy. Sometimes you can get lucky and land a spot that does in fact cover multiple fences, like on the outer edges of FPP where things wind around the perimeter, but it's typically very hard if not impossible to attempt to cover multiple fences unless you're smack dab in the middle of a tightly packed course with a relatively unobstructed view or you have one seriously expensive lens with a long focal length that can reach across the course. The standard is 70-200mm which doesn't really go that far when you get right down to it. You can extend it to get more coverage but you introduce a lot of distortion by doing that. The easiest thing to do is to look for a good spot that gives you great coverage of a single point and stay there.

yellowbritches
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:09 AM
unless you're smack dab in the middle of a tightly packed course with a relatively unobstructed view
You just described Redland.

Catalina
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:18 AM
You just described Redland.

Yeah, aren't there a whole bunch of jumps on and around the crest of the hill :winkgrin:?

I had a super crappy stadium ride and even lost my stirrup over the last two fences (can you say rusty as all he!!?), so I imagine the pictures are horrid- not because of the photographer but because of the rider. Based on that, I am having a hard time justifying paying to see pictures that are potentially not worthy of buying.

LexInVA
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:22 AM
Isn't that the mindset of most riders, Catalina? :lol:

Catalina
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:34 AM
Of course, but mine is more then mindset, it really was a baaaaad ride that I am still kicking myself over and I don't need to pay $10 on the off chance that there actually was a good jump that was captured on film somewhere :lol:.

LexInVA
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:35 AM
Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Catalina
Apr. 22, 2010, 11:00 AM
:yes:

CapturinYerRide
Apr. 22, 2010, 11:02 AM
Catalina, I'd bet if you were REEEEALY nice to him he'd let you see them..

I can't speak for Redline Bill, but I know that the HT photogs who are charging to see galleries are doing it for more like the $25 range, but these are folks who are doing the whole show, not just a single phase. So in that light, $10 doesn't seem like too much of an inconvenience. But everyone's price is their price, so if it was just that bad of a ride, well, maybe just move on to the next show!

Kap
Apr. 22, 2010, 11:24 AM
Idea: instead of charging money to see your photos, the photogs start awarding a picture discount (maybe $10 towards a photo of you?) if you alert them to someone else who has pilfered photos. That is to say, if Sally sees Betty posting proofs on Facebook, she alerts the photog they belong to and gets $10 off her next photo order from that photog.

Then again, I could see this ruining a friendship if Betty finds out it was Sally who turned her in. I bet photo stealing would stop really quick, though!

asterix
Apr. 22, 2010, 11:34 AM
well, i completely understand the need to charge for this given the stealing, etc.
And I like getting nice photos of myself, and want to support the photographers.
So I paid the 10 bucks, just this time, to see.

I got
1. Picture of my butt. Not a "number" shot, just my butt, and my horse's butt.
2. 2 nice over fences shots.

2 photos.

Not really feeling the love there.:no:

bambam
Apr. 22, 2010, 12:21 PM
and that asterix is exactly why it is unlikely I will be buying from Redline again and (sorry Redline Guy) I will be putting in my event evaluation of any event that uses someone who charges just to look at proofs that I would prefer they use someone else
Unless it is my first prelim or some other momentous event, I personally am not going to pay just to look at proofs
I totally understand why Redline Guy did it and he, of course, is free to do whatever he wants since it is his business but I will be disappointed whenever I show up and find out that the event photographer charges to see proofs because that means no pics for me

LexInVA
Apr. 22, 2010, 12:25 PM
Ouch.

knightrider
Apr. 22, 2010, 04:04 PM
Sheesh!!! $10 to view pictures???? Please. I won't ever buy from that company and anyone that events where they are, call me....I'll come take pictures of your entire day and you can 1000 pictures off a cd from me. I have my own camera that is fancy and take great pics.

I wanted to see the pics of a friend of mine...IF THEY WERE DECENT, I may have bought one for her birthday present or christmas, but I'm not paying $10 just to view the site. I have the ability to take my own or will wait for GRC to buy from them.

Thanks but no thanks...that is really bad for their business if you don't mind my saying...half the reason GRC gets to sell so many photos is because people can see them whenever they want.

Sorry not venting at you, but no wonder that company doesn't do many of the Area II events.

Redline Guy
Apr. 22, 2010, 06:12 PM
Regarding our policy to charge a deposit to view photos online: Thanks so much to those who get it.....

I agree that in an ideal world riders should not have to pay a fee to view their proofs. That's why I've invested in a trailer -- so that riders can view the photos I take of them at shows at no charge and I have no risk of having the images stolen. IMHO that's a win-win situation for everyone.

If you don't like the photos I took, you have no obligation to buy them. Not a problem. It seems, though, that lots of people out there don't like an image enough to buy it but like it well enough to post the proofs on their website or Facebook page. If you want to post "free" photos of your horse, then ask a friend to take them with their DSLR.

People seem to forget that as a professional photographer I make my living by selling pictures, not by giving them away. When you buy my photos you're not paying a mark up over the price of printing an image. You're paying for my eye, my years of experience, my investment in my equipment and my time. You have the choice to buy the images that you like, but not the choice to use my images without compensation.

Every time someone posts a stolen photo in a “Look at my cute boy” thread, the riders foist accolades on the poster, rather than pointing out that the thief’s behavior is impacting other rider’s ability to view the photographer’s photos.

I don’t mind posting my work on the web for potential customers to view. What I do mind is having my work stolen, while everybody else in the community sits around and pays lip service to the problem. What’s the old saying? Oh yeah, if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.

I would add, I find it difficult to accept criticism about this policy, from some who have been caught red-handed stealing my work, yet feel compelled to complain about the policy on this thread.

knightrider
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:11 PM
Redline - I totally understand the theft of photos, but also know you can prevent that right click and save feature depending on what programs you are using...then only a superb thief would get hacker authority...or you could like GRC is doing now and create a free log in...then you can have a program that detects when someone takes the picture to save and you can actually do something about it if you don't have the program to prevent the save as on pictures.

I get it...I have photos posted on the web too and I have a business with a blog and pictures that I have taken .... my copy right has been stolen...there are ways to deal with it....but, if I required people to give me money to view what I sell, I wouldn't have any business AT ALL....its hard enough to get people to log in and give me their email address...

Why on earth would I pay you $10 to view a picture I may buy in 6 mos.? I cna't tell you how many times GRC has photographed my horses and I went to view them after the event only to buy the best of the bunch 6 mos later...but I will never buy if you force me to pay something that I haven't even seen yet...thats not right...sorry, but with this method in place, I'll encourage everyone I know to not buy from your sight...its bad business....

If you change the policy and invest in other methods to prevent your theft, great, let us know....in the meantime going to see the 10 horses my trainers barn took to Redlands and checking out which pictures I may buy for them or my friends at the barn for presents isn't worth...its only April and there are a lot more events.

PS - as a competitor myself I can honestly say that by the time the photos are loaded and ready in your trailer, I'm ready to go home...other photographers do that and the last thing I want to do during my breaks or at the end of the day is to spend another 15-20 min. waiting in line to see my photos or to look at them while I'm at the event...why bother when most of the time, its easier and better clarity to look at my big screen at home when I'm not dead exhausted from being outside either working all day or competing all day....the trailer is great, but I still would want to see my photos later...and maybe much later.

Sorry if this sounds bitchy, but I'm a consumer that wants to purchase photos and you need to hear the feedback...with online/written communication it often comes out harsher than it is...but the message is clear...I'm not paying you for something I havne't tried out yet. Sorry.

knightrider
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:14 PM
If you want to waive that fee and let me view your site, of which I don't even know the address for, let me know. I've been known to buy many cd's at a time, but it is often 6 mos. after the season.

Sakura
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:15 PM
Let me get this straight... You guys are complaining about a policy that allows you to view your proofs for free at the show in the trailer, but where you will have to pay a fee online where they can be lifted...?

I'm surprised more photographers aren't covering their asses with this kind of a policy... It seems like a commonsense approach to me, and I'm pretty surprised many of you seem too daft to comprehend. However, it does seem that the ladies who doth protest too much are perhaps the ones prone to a little five finger discount shopping of images... just sayin... Are you willing to post links to your (or your students/child's) photobucket/facebook/MySpace albums? :)

Y'all don't even think twice about the photographer out there in the heat/rain/mud/bugs taking photos of you... for you to enjoy the memory of that day... how trivial can you be?

Kap
Apr. 22, 2010, 10:24 PM
Redline - I totally understand the theft of photos, but also know you can prevent that right click and save feature depending on what programs you are using...then only a superb thief would get hacker authority.

Wow. Really? You're going to lecture this guy when you are ignorant of the very common, easy, well-known method that tons of people use to lift photos? If you don't even know the function of the PrtSc button, and you haven't a clue that tons of people use this to lift proofs, you should really avoid lecturing on the subject. How else do you think these online proofs get on Facebook? Almost all pro photography sites are right-click protected now, but it doesn't protect from screen-capping. Please educate yourself before you try to throw down.

Dr. Doolittle
Apr. 22, 2010, 11:17 PM
Have to agree with Redline guy...

Really, folks--considering how much we spend on this sport (JUST to be able to compete: horse, tack, board, upkeep, coaching, vet bills, farrier, supplements, trailer, truck, insurance, the list is endless), and this doesn't even include entry fees, facility fees, gas, sometimes hotel and stabling, etc., etc., etc...and we are *protesting* a TEN DOLLAR FEE to look at photos? :rolleyes: And this is *only* necessary because some of us STEAL the photos that the pros take of us? Maybe a reality check is in order...How much do you spend at Starbucks? (Personally I never go there, but that's just because I don't want to stand in line for an overpriced latte ;) Would rather spend my $$ on Adequan...)

Do you truly appreciate what the photographers have to go through just to get those pix? (To then have the images stolen and posted on websites--in a very cavalier fashion, no less.)

So yeah, sorry...Personally, I would pay the $10, even if there were only a small chance that they got the "perfect shot." Then again, I don't have 30 years of competing ahead of me, so every competition pic is precious to me.

Maybe instead of complaining about the photographers, we should instead try to discourage the stealing of images off of websites. I have scolded my teenaged students about this, but it falls on deaf ears. (Modern culture, I guess.)

If you are doing this, cut it the hell out! You are just making it more difficult for the rest of us (as well as the pro photographers.) Okay, rant over...

bambam
Apr. 23, 2010, 11:51 AM
...and we are *protesting* a TEN DOLLAR FEE to look at photos? :rolleyes:
why am I not allowed to dislike this policy? I do not think disliking it is so unreasonable as to be eye rolling worthy.
Yes, I bleed money into horse expenses and this is one expense that I am not willing to pay, particularly when I have no idea before I pay to look whether the photograoher took 2 photos or 22 or whether there are pics of 1 phase or 3- shrug- I do not happen to think that that point of view is unreasonable
As I said, I understand why the fee exists and I think it is inexcusable that people steal photos and have driven Redline to make this decision- doesn't mean I have to like the policy or support it with my money

knightrider
Apr. 23, 2010, 01:07 PM
edited for dup post

knightrider
Apr. 23, 2010, 01:08 PM
"As I said, I understand why the fee exists and I think it is inexcusable that people steal photos and have driven Redline to make this decision- doesn't mean I have to like the policy or support it with my money"...


i agree with the above statement....I don't agree with people stealing photos, I have my own photos online with photo clubs, my blog, etc...if I was trying to sell my product and market myself as a company, I would not institute that policy, no way, no how...

I would watermark the heck out of my photos so they are not useable, enable the right click functionality and put other security measures in place...the print screen happens, but it does just that...prints the picture...with my big fat advertisement of a name across it...there are all kinds of things you can do to your photos to remove the urge for theft....

Just because I disagree with the policy does not make me a thief by the way....for my articles and websites, all my pictures are original and taken by me or purchased from a stock photo site with legal use of the photos

Joan from Flatlands
Apr. 24, 2010, 07:14 AM
Dr Doolittle - You have a PM!

mylittlepony23
Apr. 25, 2010, 06:20 PM
I totally agree with what everyone is saying about the charge being ridiculous. I was at Plantation Fields this spring and the photographer there did a very smart thing... The watermark on her picture said: THIS PICTURE HAS BEEN STOLEN or something like that all over the picture. That is what all photographers who are concerned about stealing should do.

Dr. Doolittle
Apr. 25, 2010, 07:46 PM
I totally agree with what everyone is saying about the charge being ridiculous. I was at Plantation Fields this spring and the photographer there did a very smart thing... The watermark on her picture said: THIS PICTURE HAS BEEN STOLEN or something like that all over the picture. That is what all photographers who are concerned about stealing should do.

This is an excellent idea. Will it be a deterrent to those who "simply don't give a damn" that the photos that they display publicly have been stolen--and don't care that everyone knows it?? Maybe, maybe not. :sigh: Possibly a sense of "pride in having gotten away with it"? Ugh. (Youthful absence of a "feel for the big picture" and how hard it is in the real world for people who work for a living, modern times, moral laxity, electronic savvy and a sense of entitlement--all of these factor in, alas.)

Though I certainly understand people's resistance to paying (in advance) to see photos *in principle* (I don't like that either!); the reality is that photographers are having to go to great lengths to COPYRIGHT their material, which is a pain in their ass(es), and takes time and effort away from what they should be doing--focusing on the quality of their product.

Brant Gamma told me this weekend that she previews EVERY proof taken by her or one of her photographer, improves and crops each one if/when necessary, and won't publish (for public viewing) those she considers "sub par"; this kind of attention to detail is worth paying for, and should be the standard for equine photographers.

dkcbr
Apr. 26, 2010, 08:48 AM
It all sounds like a dilemma with no good answer. :no:

I will add that while I understand the issues, I probably wouldn't pay $10 on spec if there aren't going to be cross country photos, either.

Although I don't event anymore, I did event from the early 1980s to the early 1990s and I have lots of professional photos from the cross country phase at Redland, Waredaca, Commonwealth Park, Water's Gift, etc. So I'm not understanding why it's so difficult currently to get them. :confused:

Whisper
Apr. 26, 2010, 08:20 PM
If you don't know how many pictures they took, and didn't stop by the trailer to look while you were there, why not e-mail with their number and ask how many photos they got of you? :D

knightrider
Apr. 26, 2010, 09:10 PM
Love the idea of posting a watermark of "this photo has been stolen"....I can't think of anyone who would want to post that anywhere.

I guess the point is that I'm going to the photographers websites to Shop...not necessarily to buy. So call me a tirekicking window shopper...but when/if I see a good photo that is worth gifting or buying, I'll buy it. More than likely I'm not going to pay $10 to window shop and maybe come back in 3 mos. after I've seen all of the spring photos...I'm going to compare which ones I like best and decide.

I'm not going to pay for something that I don't know if I want to buy...and I won't know until I see the photos...what if this photographer totally sucks? What if they are unclear photos? What if they didn't use a tripod? There are countless issues with photos and not everyone is good at them.

Window shoppers are the best advertisers and buyers....would you pay $50 or $100 to test drive a car that you may not buy with the money only allowed to be credited when you purchase? What if you don't purchase and the dealership doesn't give you your money back? You gonna do that? What about paying to walk into Macy's to buy shoes or some clothes? You gonna do that? Doesn't make sense.

CapturinYerRide
Apr. 26, 2010, 09:35 PM
Love the idea of posting a watermark of "this photo has been stolen"....I can't think of anyone who would want to post that anywhere.
I can! Since I changed my watermark to clearly say that the image shouldn't be seen with that watermark anywhere but on my site, I've had five (5) brand new Junior riders who have screen-captured entire shows from me. Makes no sense that they would want the images like that, especially after the way I have publicized this whole issue in the past few months, but it's true. It seems only since I began making all Juniors request a password, thereby also agreeing to pay me if I ever found them stealing images from me, that I seem to no longer find my watermarks out there. I even have a small list of riders who don't get to see their galleries, either online or at a show, until they pay me for what they have already taken.

The photo buying market bears a variety of ways to handle this. In upper level dressage, many photographers charge a deposit just to come shoot your ride(s) before you ever see a picture. It's not uncommon in the hunter ring that you pay a minimum $25 deposit to have your gallery posted and unlocked, and you may have a time limit in which to use it. Then they take them down after a time, perhaps after 60 days. While I don't find that any of that particularly works in eventing, with the amount of theft that has been uncovered as of late, I don't blame Bill for charging the price of a few pizzas to open up a gallery for viewing.