The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 105
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep. 2, 2005
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    11,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post
    I agree with the fact that it is wrong, but you will be hard pressed to find a junior who doesn't have 25 albums full of pictures from their horse shows - and honestly, most of these people buy the pictures.
    If they bought the photo I would not have a water mark that says it is stolen.

    And everyone else doing is not a real good reason.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec. 12, 2009
    Posts
    664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alternativename View Post
    Thus brings back my theory about wanting to leave the watermark on for the "cool" factor. Why not post the non-watermarked version if she owns the pictures?
    The show was Friday/Saturday, pictures take around 6 weeks to come, so even if the picture has been purchased you don't get the watermark free photo for a while. I believe she had just done the high juniors for the first time, and was probably pretty excited. I just don't see how it's much different from the common posts on here about "Little brag - First time doing x division with my horse!" with a link to the pro proofs.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2009
    Posts
    4,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post
    Based on the details you have provided, I know exactly who you are talking about. I know for a fact that she has purchased the pictures, including the one you commented on, as well as many others.
    I agree with the fact that it is wrong, but you will be hard pressed to find a junior who doesn't have 25 albums full of pictures from their horse shows - and honestly, most of these people buy the pictures.
    Look at the article on that Commentary horse, and why they reregistered it. Larry Glefke's response to having a horse with an international record showing in the greens was "everyone is doing it!", and he is a grown man. In this case, you're talking about a fourteen year old kid - if everyone else is posting pictures, they will too.

    ETA - I counted, and I believe there's seven total stolen pictures on her Facebook, and 8-10 properly purchased pictures. It's not like she has two hundred thousand stolen pictures plastered everywhere.
    I am actually very glad to hear that this is the case. Although that does make me wonder why on EARTH she wouldn't just have responded to say that, yes, they had been purchased. You know, instead of deleting my comment (I think there is actually a separate small fee for photos in electronic form). And if there really are not very many stolen watermarked photos in her albums now, then she has deleted some (which is also the right thing to do, and encouraging). The number you cite is about the correct number from just that one photographer, but there were many others from other photographers. There were at least a few that were watermarked with the photographers name, but NOT with the STOLEN emblem, which would indicate to me that those particular photos were properly purchased.

    Maybe she caught me on a bad day or something, but I do get really tired of seeing "STOLEN" watermarked photos plastered all over FB. Not all kids do this, so "everyone else is doing it" isn't an excuse. If this particular person did in fact purchase every professional photo that has been posted, then good for her. That's the right way to do things, and I am happy to hear it. In that case, I think the photographers need to come up with a better way to get fast "electronic" copies of photos to their buying customers so that excited kids can get the photos up on FB right away with all of the proper clearances.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun. 26, 2012
    Posts
    604

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post

    ETA - I counted, and I believe there's seven total stolen pictures on her Facebook, and 8-10 properly purchased pictures. It's not like she has two hundred thousand stolen pictures plastered everywhere.
    It doesn't matter if there's 9 or 1,000, all it takes is one photo for it to be stolen.


    10 members found this post helpful.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2009
    Posts
    4,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post
    The show was Friday/Saturday, pictures take around 6 weeks to come, so even if the picture has been purchased you don't get the watermark free photo for a while. I believe she had just done the high juniors for the first time, and was probably pretty excited. I just don't see how it's much different from the common posts on here about "Little brag - First time doing x division with my horse!" with a link to the pro proofs.
    I think the difference there is that you are linking TO the professional proofs. So anyone looking at the pictures has to agree to the copyright conditions in order to view the photos. They are on the professional's website, which is used by the professional for marketing.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar. 27, 2001
    Location
    North County, San Diego
    Posts
    573

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by englishcowgirl View Post
    I heard somewhere that if you put a photo on facebook they automatically own the copyright, per the user agreement... If thats true I wonder how that works with a stolen photograph that has been posted there?
    When you use Facebook, you agree to give Facebook the right to do what is necessary to post the photo on the site. They do not own any other rights to the photo.

    And if someone who doesn't own any rights to a photo (like someone who lifted a photo off a photographer's site) posts it on Facebook, Facebook considers it a violation of their terms.

    The photographer can then file a take down notice with Facebook. Facebook is quick about removing the photos in question. Be aware that after a certain number of take down notices have been filed against an individual, that person runs the risk of their entire page being shut down.

    This is a rampant problem, and it's one that should be addressed by USEF: if people were as blatantly stealing flakes of hay from the show feed vendor as they are stealing show photos, you can be darned sure that the thieves would have a little chat from the Mother Ship coming to them.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan. 5, 2011
    Posts
    199

    Default

    I understand that photographers have gotten very touchy about this subject and I don't blame them one bit for it. However, I think they need to be a little nicer to their legitimate customers. I purchased two pictures at a show this weekend ( 1 8x12 and 1 5x7) for a total of $105. I then asked if I could then take a picture with my phone -bad question She got pretty snarky and told me no, but if I wanted to pay another $14 I would then have the rights to post on social media, but after paying my $105, I still did not have this right. Sorry - I know they are having a hard time in this day and age - but in my situation, I felt like they were being greedy and not very greatful for my business.


    10 members found this post helpful.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2009
    Posts
    4,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ponytoes View Post
    I understand that photographers have gotten very touchy about this subject and I don't blame them one bit for it. However, I think they need to be a little nicer to their legitimate customers. I purchased two pictures at a show this weekend ( 1 8x12 and 1 5x7) for a total of $105. I then asked if I could then take a picture with my phone -bad question She got pretty snarky and told me no, but if I wanted to pay another $14 I would then have the rights to post on social media, but after paying my $105, I still did not have this right. Sorry - I know they are having a hard time in this day and age - but in my situation, I felt like they were being greedy and not very greatful for my business.
    Well, she did give you the option to purchase social media rights for $14. I'm not sure what the problem is? I think younger people sometimes don't realize that the right to post show photographer photos on social media isn't a God given right that everyone is born with. When I was a kid, the show photographers would send me tiiiiny little copies of photo proofs in the mail, and then I would select one or two from those to order in a larger size. Then, months later, the full sized photos would arrive in the mail. Having to wait for photos is not the end of the world.

    Not everything in life results in instant gratification.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan. 5, 2011
    Posts
    199

    Default

    I would think that after paying $105 for TWO pictures, social media rights should be included, just felt greedy to me........
    Quote Originally Posted by FineAlready View Post
    Well, she did give you the option to purchase social media rights for $14. I'm not sure what the problem is? I think younger people sometimes don't realize that the right to post show photographer photos on social media isn't a God given right that everyone is born with. When I was a kid, the show photographers would send me tiiiiny little copies of photo proofs in the mail, and then I would select one or two from those to order in a larger size. Then, months later, the full sized photos would arrive in the mail. Having to wait for photos is not the end of the world.

    Not everything in life results in instant gratification.


    11 members found this post helpful.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2009
    Posts
    4,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ponytoes View Post
    I would think that after paying $105 for TWO pictures, social media rights should be included, just felt greedy to me........
    Maybe, but photographers do have the right to set their own pricing. And, in order to get those two pictures they had to stand at the show all day taking a ton of pictures, using expensive equipment, etc. Then they have processing costs for the photos themselves. I don't think show photographers exactly make a killing on their photos. I could be wrong. Maybe they do.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    4,606

    Default

    Well I hear what everyone is saying. I went to a show last month and wanted to purchase two photos for sales ads. Unfortunately there weren't many great shots to choose from (often photographs were taken from too far away, or just at the wrong moment in the jump) but after a long time going through them I picked my two.

    Unfortunately the photographer's site was so impossible to understand as to what rights I was buying (digital image/editable/commercial purposes) that I ended up not purchasing anything at all. (ETA: I did not steal proofs! Just decided not to purchase.)
    Last edited by Blugal; Jun. 10, 2013 at 07:35 PM. Reason: clarification
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng


    1 members found this post helpful.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Nov. 22, 2010
    Location
    Where they've got all Hell for a basement
    Posts
    1,133

    Default

    Going to play devil's advocate here a little bit. Maybe it's such that with the changing culture of everything now being online, photographers need to alter their pricing and product structure a bit to accommodate the changes that are happening.

    Gone are the days that people want printed versions of all of their photos. Of course there are still the one or two absolutely stellar shots that you want in print to frame and hang up, but lots of people (myself included) now seem to want higher numbers of photos in lower-resolution digital copies for (let's be honest with ourselves) Facebook.

    Some photographers seem to have caught on well to this trend and are capitalizing on it. Others, not so much. I won't name names or throw anyone under the bus here, but I usually deal with two main photographers during my show season.

    Photographer A charges a relatively expensive rate for their 8x10 prints, but offers me the opportunity to have all of my photos in low-res digital copy from the horse show for a flat rate of around $150-$200 per week. Photographer B offers a very inexpensive rate for printed 8x10s - something in the $10 range. However, photographer B charges upwards of $50 per digital image copy of their photos.

    I usually can manage to find at least 20 photos that I like from each photog. If I bought 20 low-res photos from A or 20 8x10 prints from B, I'm going to spend about the same amount of money. However, I don't want 20 8x10 prints. They're going to end up sitting in a box on a shelf collecting dust as I simply do not have space to hang up 20 relatively big photos of my horse and I (per show!) on my walls (not to mention that the rest of my family members might gripe about that). They also take a lot of time and effort to print and ship them to me, unlike the quick disc-writing process that Photog A offers me at the point of purchase.

    In the end, Photog A gets $200 of my money, while B gets between $0-$20 for doing the same amount of work, if not more. Photog A also virtually eliminates the desire for people to steal photos from them. They provide a large number of images already in digital form for a reasonable price and satisfy the newest generation's instant gratification desires by handing over the pictures at the point of ordering.

    Are the purists going to bemoan Photog A's practices and claim that they're ruining the art of taking and selling the one or two beautiful high-reso printed photos that really show off the talent of the photographer and are instead selling out to the Facebook generation that has no appreciation for a truly great photo? Probably. But in order to survive in this business, photogs need to adapt to the changing demands of their clientele.

    Just my two cents.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb. 1, 2001
    Location
    Finally...back in civilization, more or less
    Posts
    11,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post
    The show was Friday/Saturday, pictures take around 6 weeks to come, so even if the picture has been purchased you don't get the watermark free photo for a while. I believe she had just done the high juniors for the first time, and was probably pretty excited. I just don't see how it's much different from the common posts on here about "Little brag - First time doing x division with my horse!" with a link to the pro proofs.
    I get the desire for instant gratification, so to speak... when you move up or do particularly well, it's natural to want to share the good news with friends. It seems to me that there should be a way to facilitate an immediate download of a purchased photo (at whatever price the photographer sets, of course) so the rider can have something to share when they are excited about an event like this.

    Interestingly, the pro photographer at my (dressage) show this weekend did exactly that. I got a link to the gallery of my images (identified by rider number, I think... as I got just my own photos, and did not have to page through everyone else's.) There were options to purchase prints in a wide variety of sizes and finishes (glossy, matte, luster etc) as well as to put them on canvas and so forth. The prices seemed much lower than what I was used to paying at H/J shows; I was offered a CD of all images (4 pages worth!) for $100 including shipping, and then there was a download page where I could purchase any of the photos for immediate use, if desired... either high or low res, personal or commercial use.

    There were so many really well composed, beautiful shots that I bought the CD even though my DH shot a bazillion pics with his very nice DSLR that I did not need to pay for. I really enjoy having pro photos from my shows and I try to support them so they will continue to attend and provide that service. It ticks me off when I see people stealing show photos and then posting them on FB or elsewhere... stealing is stealing, and it's wrong.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Spree at Conyers GHS copy1.jpg 
Views:	81 
Size:	17.2 KB 
ID:	38309

    Photo credit: JLM Photography/Jennifer Maki
    **********
    We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
    -PaulaEdwina


    3 members found this post helpful.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post
    The show was Friday/Saturday, pictures take around 6 weeks to come, so even if the picture has been purchased you don't get the watermark free photo for a while. I believe she had just done the high juniors for the first time, and was probably pretty excited. I just don't see how it's much different from the common posts on here about "Little brag - First time doing x division with my horse!" with a link to the pro proofs.
    "A link to the pro proofs" is a totally different thing from downloading and then reuploading the photo yourself.

    If you just post the link, the photographer still has control over the photo by either deleting or restricting access to the original.

    Once you have downloaded and reuploaded though the image is under your control.

    Many photographers also charge EXTRA for webuse. Randi Muster for example, if you buy a print, you can wait 6 weeks for it to come in the mail but she still charges $40 for a FaceBook digital version. This is IN ADDITION. So if you purchase a print from Randi Muster or a photographer with similar policies and then scan it in to FB, you are essentially stealing the $40 FB charge.

    Just because a photo isn't watermarked anymore doesn't mean whoever is posting it has web rights.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Oct. 1, 2008
    Posts
    518

    Default

    I hate the rampant theft of proofs. i won't allow my kids to post them EVER - they can wait until the paid for print version with electronic jpeg file to arrive. I notify the photographers of people who steal proofs too.

    I like the photographers who actually ban and stop taking photos of those who steal. It is NEVER OK.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2005
    Location
    Chicago. Again.
    Posts
    2,366

    Default

    Digital images come rather quickly, if not immediately at the time of purchase, from most of the photographers I know. It's not like that painful 6-8 weeks we used to endure to get prints. And if you do order prints it is still not permissible to scan them.

    90% of the amateur shots we get for marketing are just that, amateur shots. Passable at best, and not even a close comparison to those of James, Shawn, Lili, Anne (ahem.), etc. I understand people say they don't care, but I don't get why you'd get yourself and that gorgeous animal all dressed to the 9s, and then settle for a less-than-best remembrance of it. Sorry if you can't afford to buy all 10 awesome images they took, but that doesn't mean you're entitled to them.

    I filled in with Shawn this past week at Lamplight. 4 days and 45+ working/standing/running hours later I'm not only floored by the science and effort they put into their photos, but absolutely dead on my feet. But I was paid well, and he will need to sell many pictures to cover my pay AND the 4 other photographers, trailer staff & card runner to cover it, and before he pays himself. I'm also a local and don't come with corresponding hotel fees.

    All I can hope is my pictures were good enough that you all will buy them :-) He doesn't put photos from that show online and that certainly cuts down on theft. It seems some regions are more prone to this behavior than others ... interesting huh?
    ExchangeHunterJumper.com
    Shop our 50+ sale horses available at 2014 WEF, Thermal, Ocala & Gulfport here.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2003
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    10,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ponytoes View Post
    I then asked if I could then take a picture with my phone -bad question She got pretty snarky and told me no, but if I wanted to pay another $14 I would then have the rights to post on social media,
    $14 is a good price for a digital image. I am not suprised she didn't want you taking what would no doubt be a lesser quality picture of the picture with your phone. Then it looks like the pro takes m'eh pictures.

    Quote Originally Posted by dags View Post
    I filled in with Shawn this past week at Lamplight. 4 days and 45+ working/standing/running hours later I'm not only floored by the science and effort they put into their photos, but absolutely dead on my feet. But I was paid well, and he will need to sell many pictures to cover my pay AND the 4 other photographers, trailer staff & card runner to cover it, and before he pays himself. I'm also a local and don't come with corresponding hotel fees.
    I've always said that all you need to do is work for a pro and you will then understand the pricing structures. It is hard work in uncomfortable circumstances.
    Keith: "Now...let's do something normal fathers and daughters do."
    Veronica: "Buy me a pony?"


    5 members found this post helpful.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2009
    Posts
    4,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RugBug View Post
    $14 is a good price for a digital image. I am not suprised she didn't want you taking what would no doubt be a lesser quality picture of the picture with your phone. Then it looks like the pro takes m'eh pictures.
    Exactly.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Mar. 30, 2001
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    4,822

    Default

    It's not just Facebook. Scroll through BigEq, Dreamhorse, and you'll find a bunch of stolen photos.

    That throws up a big red flag for me. If they're dishonest enough to steal a photo for a sale ad, how can I trust their representation of the horse?


    5 members found this post helpful.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    May. 21, 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    481

    Default

    I am a horse show photographer at local shows in my area, and I get my pictures stolen all the time. When I see them on Facebook, I typically first send a private message to the user. If that doesn't get a response, I send a report to Facebook. If I see it again, I post a public comment that everyone can see.

    I recently saw some pictures of mine on Instagram, from a rider IN THE BARN WHERE I WORK AS A GROOM, whom I have addressed this issue with before. I immediately posted a comment to the photo that read "*name*, these pictures are still my property, protected by copyright laws. If you want to post them on instagram or any other social media site, please buy them from me and wait until you receive the actual copy with my signature before posting."
    This received a comment back saying, "Sorry, I thought I had bought these."
    I commented again, "No, but even if you had, you need to wait until you receive the real copy, instead of posting pictures with PROOF stamped across them."
    This resulted in my comments getting deleted, and the person in question blocking me from her instagram and deleting me from Facebook.

    I can't even count the number of people who I say something to who simply "unfriend" me but do nothing about removing the pictures. It drives me crazy. You might as well post "I'M A THIEF" as your profile picture.

    In addition, my prices are not high. $15.00/4x6, $20.00/5x7, $25/8x10, $20.00/digital image. I don't require additional purchase for social media rights. I figure once you have the print or the digital image, there's not a whole heck of a lot I can do anymore. I'm even considering only offering digital images in the future as it's easier for me to get clients their pictures, they get their pictures more quickly, and they can do whatever they want with them.

    As for other people seeing my pictures around Facebook, I actually a friend message me this afternoon commenting about it. I told her that someone else had talked to the person in question as well, because I am not FB friends with the person, but if she wanted to leave a comment, I would appreciate it.


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. WEF/Lake Placid/KY Horse Show Photographers
    By hgz in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Jan. 13, 2012, 05:01 PM
  2. California Horse Show Photographers
    By two sticks in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Nov. 12, 2009, 10:07 PM
  3. Replies: 19
    Last Post: Oct. 21, 2009, 02:16 PM
  4. Thank Goodness for breed show photographers!
    By Oldenburg Mom in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: Aug. 27, 2009, 02:38 PM
  5. <Advice for would-be horse show photographers>
    By Little Indian in forum Dressage
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Feb. 29, 2008, 08:15 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness