• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Professional pictures and fees for use

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Here at good old Silverwood Farm we live very hand to mouth--since everything is paid for from our horse & my husbands art business. Both my husband and I are artists (graduating with Bachelors) We totally understand having to make a living as artists and this is what photographers are. BUT I can no longer afford the costs of some of the "best" photographers out there, I use to be able too and had plenty of farm shoots with both Susan and TM (excellent work by the way!) and once again Susan managed to get some of the best photos of my stallion Spectrum this year at the 100 DT, but had to go with others shots for advertising because of the cost.

    One photographer I have used a lot is Suzanne Sturgill (now maybe costs have changed since it's been a few years) her farm shot fees have always been reasonable and her photos are EXCELLENT. But Suzanne is way down in FL and travel expenses get up there, so now I am trying newer photographers in the area and I went out and bought myself a top notch digital camera and camcorder (about to upgrade to professional digital camera--about $2000 and my husband already has all the cool lens for his film camera which will work on the high quality digitals) with my current equipment I have taken about 50% of the photos on my site (all the photos of Spectrum) and the great thing is you can just shoot and shoot and delete any bad pics you get (I have a big card so can shoot about 300 quality pics before it fills) with the digital camcorders you can pick the exact second of a great moment and it is high enough quality for the web, but you do have to know some Photoshop to get them at their best. The truth of the matter is that for what I save not buying the commercial use I can buy top of the line digital products that last me for several years and take 100's of photos that I can use. One of the first things I tell my web clients is to go out and buy themselves a digital camera!

    I like to have lots of photos on my site and change them often, I can not see paying those fees as many photos as I use, that may not be used very long and for the many times I change photos over on the site. I also shoot digitals for my clients and charge a very minimal fee (like $10-$20 for complete commercial use). This has worked out well for all of us and these photos have also been used in printed ads. I did struggle this year with possibly paying for commercial rights of one of the pros photos to advertise with, but at the last moment decided to go with another photo, since I am doing payments on my ads already, just couldn't push it!

    I will say that I keep proofs from years ago and go through them at lest twice a year and many times will order shots from long ago--I am always calling Suzanne and saying "hey can you dig up that photo from 98?" and then pay for the print again.

    Ok this is long and rambling, I guess it boils down to the fact that I LOVE THE QUALITY, THE TALENT and THE BEUATY of the pro's photos, but it has gotten to the point expense wise that I have had to become self sufficient, that’s not to say I wouldn't use a pro photo in the future--I most certainly will, but my situation financially would have to be right, that is pretty rare and the photo EXCELLENT to justify the costs to do so.

    Liz Hall silverwoodfarm.com
    Pinto & Colored Warmbloods Stallions
    Liz Hall silverwoodfarm.com Warmblood Pintos

    Comment


    • #42
      interesting.

      i am just creating a price list for my own new business, thanks for raising some great points.

      "Practice does not make perfect - perfect practice makes perfect" - Christilot Hansen
      "I'll allow the baby-eating silliness, but y'all can't just ramble on about everything under the sun out here." - Erin
      Nothing worth having comes easily.

      Comment


      • #43
        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tm:
        &gt;However, what irritated me was when photographers started charging extra for use on the web. Now, I'm not talking commercial use - I just wanted to put one of these images on my personal website, to share with my family and friends. Nope, I was going to have to pay a substantial additional fee - because it was the web. &gt;

        Think about this: back in the days B.I. (Before Internet) if you wanted to share professional photos with your friends and family, you purchased extra prints and mailed them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

        No, I didn't. I purchased my one print and put it in my album or on my wall. Sometimes I'd take my album with me to show off. I prefer to spend my money on different images, or on larger copies, rather than duplicates. Now I don't have an album - I send people to my web page.

        My friends and family have only casual interest in pictures of me riding - enough to say, oh, nice, not enough to actually want one in their posession.
        If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

        Comment


        • #44
          You can rent VERY good equipment these days for much much cheaper than it costs to pay all these photographers and with a little practice, no one can tell the difference.

          We leased a $15,000 camera and lens setup for about $120 per day and the resulting photos were out of this world. We had requests from some of the big name sponsors at the event we were shooting at to buy a large number of photos. The best part is that you can use them for WHATEVER you want without any further charges!

          Personally, I think if you pay $350 for a photo to LEASE, then you shouldn't have to put a copyright on it.

          Also, for website use, the quality required is really low, so to pay for that "super quality" is somewhat wasted. In addition, most good web site designers can clean up a photo....even the "professional" ones.

          And, the photographers have really gotten out of hand with this one price to use the photo "as is" in an ad, then more if a graphic designer wants to say cut out the photo or add a different background.

          Comment


          • #45
            &gt;And, the photographers have really gotten out of hand with this one price to use the photo "as is" in an ad, then more if a graphic designer wants to say cut out the photo or add a different background.&gt;

            Northbeach,

            There is a legal reason for not allowing changes as a a general rule in a photo being used in an ad. Here's a possible scenario:

            I give a blanket okay to your designer to change my photo of your horse. However, instead of just removing the background, the designer also retouches the photo in a way that vastly improves your horse's appearance. On the basis of this enhanced photo, a potential client travels a long way to look at your horse. The client realized that the horse looks nothing like my photo, and decides that you have been deceptive in your marketing. You have now left yourself open to a lawsuit, and I, the photographer, can be held liable as well.

            Therefore, I am pretty specific about what sort of retouching can be done on my photos!

            On the other hand, I have never heard of a photographer charging for the *right* to retouch a photo. I, and many other photographers, charge by the hour for Photoshop work that we do ourselves, and if your graphic designer does the Photoshop work instead, they will usually charge about the same amount to do the job.

            Terri Miller
            www.terrimiller.com
            www.TerriMiller.com
            Photos & Commissioned Paintings

            Comment


            • #46
              but the blatent screwing that some photographers try to do - scenerio: Client hires photographer to come out to farm to take photos of horses, pays photographer to photograph sale horses and stallions for sole purpose of ads and web site, after client pays for photos and client turns them over to the web designer, the photographer tells client that the web designer can ONLY use the photographs "as is". The graphic designer can NOT use the photograph in any other way other than a scan of the photo. ie, can not cut the horse out, can not crop a close up of the horse, can ONLY use the photo in it's original form, period! UNLESS the client pays more money alluding to a rather steep fee that would be involved.


              Also, Terri, you know, it can work both ways. Photographers need to start PAYING the owners of the horses that they take pics of and then resell the images of - this is from the Cigar lawsuit where the racehorse Cigar was photographed and the photographer then sold lithographs for a profit. The owners of Cigar sued and won. The courts stated that if "artists" were going to use the likeness of a horse to make money, they had to have the permission/compensation of the owners. So anyone out there that has a photographer taking pictures of their horse and then selling the photos for profit has a right to be compensated by the photographer. This could count for magazine covers, calendars, articles, and art. If photographers want their fair share, horse owners should get their fair share too.

              Comment


              • #47
                As I said, I totally respect the right of a photographer to restrict the copyright of their work. I respected the photographer I mentioned earlier, even though I'm sure I never would've been caught. If I had been worried, I could've put it on a private website or distributed it by email, for example, but I didn't do those things.

                However, I get really really really irritated when a contract goes in with the idea that I'm a thief. Some contracts I've seen nearly start to rant about the idea of people duplicating their photos. I find such documents just make me think every time about taking the image, instead about respecting the copyright, if that makes any sense.

                I don't steal music, either, but I refuse to buy the copy-protected CDs. Why? Among other things, they don't play on my mac, which is where I listen to CDs most of the time. So the music companies lose my business.

                My suggestion to photographers: do take the time to spell out how you want your rights respected, but just make sure it's clear and friendly.

                A second suggestion: I know that annual use fees are popular in the industry, and graphic designers are very familiar/comfortable with that. However, non-industry types, I find, want to be able to purchase rights in perpetuity. They hate the idea that they pay for all the labor to make a layout and then can't use it forever. Even though it may in theory be cheaper to buy annually, it's kind of a mental block. Setting up separate price breaks for forever rights and annual rights may be worthwhile, even if it turns out people only buy one way. It's like with computers or cars or digital cameras - you have an entry level model that gets people in the door thinking they can buy the product, and then they realize for just a little more they can get something even better.

                Hope this is helpful.
                If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                Comment


                • #48
                  Poltroon, graphic designers are NOT happy with the way photographers are handling things.

                  Graphic designers are PISSED OFF at having to deal with all these prima donna photographers that don't deal upfront. We buy photos with the understanding that it will be used a certain way, then the photographers, after the fact, try to charge more, especially if they find out the photo will be used by a deep-pocketed client. Or the photo you buy at a VERY high price with the understanding that no one else can buy it, starts turning up all over the place.

                  There are many photographers that are upfront and honest. You buy a photo from them at a certain price and then it is yours to do with what you will. All the rest of the stuff is just plain out price gouging.

                  I encourage everyone who has had a photographer use a photo of their horse in the PHOTOGRAPHER'S advertising, artwork, reselling your horse's image to a 3rd party, etc. to contact that photographer and demend compensation. Legally they have to comply or you can take them to court with the Cigar lawsuit as your backup, not to mention the lawsuits over the unauthorized use of Elvis's, Marilyn Monroe's, etc images.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Northbeach, it seems like you had a specifically bad experience. That is a shame.

                    In General -

                    Any reputable photographer will discuss with you upon contact their fees and services. These will be based upon the information you provide them. If the usage of the images changes after the shoot that should be addressed in the contract you and the photographer sign prior to the shoot.

                    As for usage in magazines, editorial usage is allowed without a model/property release. That is the way the law works. As for ANY commercial usage, if the subjects are recognizable a release is needed. When it comes to photographers using the image to display in booth or website, that is normally addressed in the aforementioned contract.

                    We are business owners. We provide a service. You can choose to use us or not. It's the same as buying anything else. There is a set price, sometimes there is some negotiating room. But there is a value to our product. We know what the industry standards are and what our cost of doing business is. These are the factors that go into our pricing.

                    Amy

                    "I'll use CAPITALS, lowercase or sanscrit until the font police come and get me," Josh Lyman, The West Wing
                    http://www.akdragoophoto.com

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      &gt;&gt;Also, Terri, you know, it can work both ways. Photographers need to start PAYING the owners of the horses that they take pics of and then resell the images of - this is from the Cigar lawsuit where the racehorse Cigar was photographed and the photographer then sold lithographs for a profit. The owners of Cigar sued and won.&gt;&gt;

                      The lawsuit you refer to was againt the painter Jennes Cortez, not a photographer. The issue involved the fact that Alan Paulson, the owner of Cigar, had trademarked not only "Cigar", (just as many star athletes will trademark his or her likeness), but his Brookside Stables silks as well, both of which appeared in her commemorative painting of Cigar, which was being sold as a lithograph. Cortez countersued on First Ammendment grounds. According to my research, the courts found in favor of Cortez, however, her legal bills were staggering and she was forced to change her business because of them. The case was *not* about the unauthorized selling of the likeness of an individual, it was about the unauthorized selling of a trademarked item. This is a big difference!

                      As for *paying you* to take your picture: We photographers hire models when it is appropriate to do so, such as the long tedious days of shooting catalogue work. It is not necessary, nor appropriate, for us to pay you, as an individual in a public place, for showing up in a photo. The Constitution guarantees our right of Freedom of Expression, of which taking photos of whoever we choose is a part. The laws support us in the selling of those photos.

                      As was explained on another thread on this board, we do not even need a model release from you in order to sell your image editorially, and according to most legal reference, we are within our rights to make a profit from our photo of you in many other ways. We may not, however, use a recognizable image of you to *advertise a product* without your express written permission. This is the other thread:

                      http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/f...1&m=2466090981

                      Now, do photographers get model releases to keep ourselves safe? You bet we do! Do we enjoy sending pictures to magazines of people who don't like to be photographed? No! I'd much prefer to send a photo of someone who loves photos -- I know that they'll be happy when their photo appears!

                      &gt;&gt;There are many photographers that are upfront and honest. You buy a photo from them at a certain price and then it is yours to do with what you will. All the rest of the stuff is just plain out price gouging.&gt;&gt;

                      The licensing of images for various uses is how most of us make a living. It is not considered gouging, and it is completely supported and encouraged by all copyright law. When you need a photo for a particular use, we only lease to you the specific set of rights that you need: for instance, if you are advertising in the Chronicle, you don't need the rights to advertise on billboards, so you are *not* charged the much larger fee that this use would entail.

                      Same with Poltroon's suggestion about purchasing rights in perpetuity: Most of us do break down the leasing into blocks of time: I, for instance, have the option of a one-time use fee, and then a use fee for two years. I used to offer perpetual use, but I found that for most people, two years was about the span that they used their photos, after which the ads were updated.

                      &gt;&gt; Or the photo you buy at a VERY high price with the understanding that no one else can buy it, starts turning up all over the place.&gt;&gt;

                      Northbeach, I'd be pissed off at a situation like this too. If you have purchased a photo with a written contract stating that you have exclusive use of the photo for a certain period of time, and the photo then shows up elsewhere, that is a breach of contract and must be taken up with the photographer. If, however, you just assumed that the photo was for your exclusive use, then you may have just assumed wrong.

                      &gt;&gt; We buy photos with the understanding that it will be used a certain way, then the photographers, after the fact, try to charge more, especially if they find out the photo will be used by a deep-pocketed client. &gt;&gt;

                      This street goes both ways. The client must be sure that she is up front with the photographer, too. For instance, if you contract for photos for one ad in a local publication, and then after the shoot mention that the photos will also be used in four other national magazines, and on your website, and your fliers, etc., that's different from the original scope of use you requested, and the bill is probably going to be a little different. In this cases, it isn't a matter of finding out that the pockets were deeper, but of finding out that the use was more extensive than originally described.

                      Most of the points you've brought up seem to be based on a little bit of misinformation on your part and a large lack of communication between you and the photographer. Rather than continuing the rant here, perhaps you should call the photographer in question and start a dialogue?

                      Terri Miller

                      www.terrimiller.com
                      www.TerriMiller.com
                      Photos & Commissioned Paintings

                      Comment


                      • #51
                        Okay, I finally figured out exactly why the annual royalty charges bug me.

                        If you take pictures for me, upon my request, and I pay a shooting fee, there is no risk for the photographer. I see this as a work-for-hire situation. It annoys me that I am supposed to pay up front - for which I may get one or more images - who knows - and then pay for prints - and then pay annually to put this image on my website, whether the use is commercial or not.

                        On the other hand, with a picture shot on 'spec' - without a shooting fee - I have no reservations at all for paying royalty fees for whatever images I might use. In that case, the risk was completely on the photographer.

                        I suggest that photographers might want to consider both pricing options, or at least figure out for yourself how you would price them differently. But I do not think it is fair to ask the customer to pay up front, take the risk that the photos will be what they want, AND STILL ask them to pay royalties. I think some customers really would prefer to pay a larger shooting fee, and then get prints and usage rights bundled with that for a flat known amount at the outset.

                        The graphic designer or the website producer do not get a royalty, no matter how long their work is used. That is because they do a work for hire. Similarly, if your doctor cures you of cancer, you don't pay him an extra royalty for each year you survive.

                        Of course, this remains a suggestion. To all you photographers, if your current pricing model is working for you - terrific! I'm glad to see talented photographers making a good living. I am a big admirer of both Terri's and Susan's work, and I don't mind paying for a really great shot. My suggestions aren't meant to lessen the amount you make, just to end the customer perception of nickel-and-diming.
                        If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                        Comment


                        • #52
                          Poltroon - The reason we break the pricing stucture into usage, intead of charging on blanket fee, is that everyone's usage is going to be different. This is the most fair way to the CLIENT.

                          If we charge everone as if they were an international company embarking on a major ad campaign very few of you would be able to afford the rates.

                          "I'll use CAPITALS, lowercase or sanscrit until the font police come and get me," Josh Lyman, The West Wing
                          http://www.akdragoophoto.com

                          Comment


                          • #53
                            Thank you, Poltroon, for your suggestions, and thank you, Northbeach, for bringing up many important points.

                            Don't think that we photographers aren't listening: many of the members of the Equine Photographers Network are also members of this board, and we have been watching and discussing the issues posted here.

                            We want our customers to be happy, both with their photos and with their experience of purchasing or using their photos. When problem exists, I for one am grateful to be apprised of it so that I can make the situation right for all involved.

                            Terri Miller
                            www.terrimiller.com
                            www.TerriMiller.com
                            Photos & Commissioned Paintings

                            Comment


                            • #54
                              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tm:
                              Rather than continuing the rant here, perhaps you should call the photographer in question and start a dialogue?
                              Terri Miller
                              <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                              Actually, Terri, the points raised by the poster are useful for most of us to think about. And if I were the poster, I'd be miffed that you referred to her posts as a "rant."

                              By the way, the suggestion that ordinary non-professional-photographers RENT a really super camera for $120 a day to get ourselves boatloads of photos is GREAT.

                              Alternatively, I also suggest people ask their budding friend photographers to spend a day at a show taking pictures. I have a couple of good friends who would happily go to shows or come to the farm, shoot ROLLS of film (which I have purchased), give the film to me (to develop or reproduce as I wish), in return for nothing other than a thank you (though I always give them $50 or $100 anyway).

                              My suggestion is that those who wish to avoid paying fees that, to me, are inflated beyond a resonable level just get creative about getting good pictures in other ways.

                              Comment


                              • #55
                                Sorry, thought I'd edited that phrase out!

                                Terri Miller
                                www.TerriMiller.com
                                Photos & Commissioned Paintings

                                Comment


                                • #56
                                  On a separate note, do you prefer painting or taking pictures? Because both on your website are to die for.

                                  Comment


                                  • #57
                                    Hi Mrs Mouse,

                                    Nope, sorry. I can't use any assistants cuz I already have the best there is: my daughter. Stephanie has shot with me for about 10 years. She'll be doing all the Lamplight Shows this summer in northern Illinois, so look for her there.

                                    As far as Terri is concerned, I can speak for her a little. She also already has the best assistant there is, too, and that would be me. At least at DAD, that is, and not just me, but Stephanie, too!

                                    Susan Sexton

                                    Comment


                                    • #58
                                      &gt;&gt;Terri,
                                      On a separate note, do you prefer painting or taking pictures? Because both on your website are to die for.&gt;&gt;

                                      Thanks, Coreen!

                                      I love them both, equally but differently. My photos are my "public" side, with which I get to interact with lots of different people; my paintings are more my "private" side, which is where I get to spend the time getting to know an individual horse or dog or riders well enough to paint them convincingly. It is a pleasure for me to do either, and to have been able to combine both in my business is a blessing beyond words.

                                      Terri Miller
                                      www.terrimiller.com
                                      www.TerriMiller.com
                                      Photos & Commissioned Paintings

                                      Comment


                                      • #59
                                        Can't blame a girl for trying to work with the best!

                                        (I only believe in shameless flattery if it's true, and I think you two are some of the best in the field. )

                                        *****************

                                        A bank teller's pet peeve: "What part of Wait Here For Next Available Teller do you NOT understand???"
                                        *****************************************

                                        Book: If you take advantage of her, you\'re going to burn in a very special level of Hell, a level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theater. Firefly

                                        Comment


                                        • #60
                                          Terri we have chatted here before, and I just went and had a good look at your paintings/drawings and I am floored.

                                          They look like photos they are so detailed and lifelike.

                                          When I want to get a portrait done, I am looking you up in the yellow pages. amazing!

                                          "Practice does not make perfect - perfect practice makes perfect" - Christilot Hansen
                                          "I'll allow the baby-eating silliness, but y'all can't just ramble on about everything under the sun out here." - Erin
                                          Nothing worth having comes easily.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X