Re: extreme editing
- From: "dadiOH" <dadiOH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:17:37 GMT
Surely though the copyright of photographs should be applied to
freelance photography like artistic pictures where release has been
aquired by the photographer as in taking pictures of people for
publication or exibition etc. As for example if you are an employed
photographer of say... a newspaper; the copyright is owned by the
employer not the employee photographer. Is the photographer of a
wedding not an employee/contracter?
Then doesn't the copyright fall
to the employers (the couple).
They are not employers...they did not withhold taxes, pay social
security, unemployement and other taxes.
Also what is the photographers
interest in copyright if not to extort more money for a job already
done and paid for.
By using the word "extort" you display both your bias and your
ignorance. His interest is twofold...
First, a considerable portion of this type of photographer's income is
derived from the sale of addition prints. Both in the immediate and
not so immediate future. Should a writer give up his copyright?
Should a musician? Should anyone who creates something?
Second, most customers haven't the foggiest idea of how to go about
getting decent prints from negatives (or digital data). I can not
begin to tell you how many thousands of hours were spent by me or my
staff in preparing negatives for printing by a professional lab...in
writing instructions as to color/density/cropping...in finishing the
prints...in other myriad ways.
There is also the matter of handling the negatives properly. I recall
a job for an owner of a largish garment factory who wanted the
negatives. They got them and I priced the job much higher than normal
to accommodate that fact. Some weeks later they returned some
negatives wanting prints...all were badly scratched. Not my
So, your answer is, "His interests are both financial and esthetic".
And practical to boot.
Also what use is the copyright to the
photographer as; if he/she did decide to reproduce the pictures for
his/her own use wouldn't they then have to get release from all
others in the pictures beside the hiring/contracted couple?
Nothing prevents him obtaining any releases necessary.
I feel that copyright should be applied to photographs by
photographic artists, not to wedding photographers or portrait
photographers. I feel that this idea of repeatedly charging for
work done is extortion.
And I feel that the government shouldn't be extracting taxes from me
via extortion - the threat of jail and/or fines. So?
Wedding photography is not artwork; it's a
job with limited choice of subject matter. It is industrial.
Tsk, tsk, displaying your ignorance again. Wedding photography can be
just as much "art" as any other subject or medium.
And the subject matter isn't all that limited. There are four basic
elements that can be photographed at a wedding...
1. "things" - gowns, cakes, flowers, etc
2. "people" - bride, groom, attendants, families, guests
3. "locations" - church, reception hall, garden, whatever
4. "emotions" - the feelings and relationships among the various
It is the function of the photographer to weave these elements -
jointly and severally - into an interesting, attractive set of story
telling photos. And if you think that's easy, chief, you've either
never done it or you haven't done it right.
Best advise to employers of photographers ensure your contract
gives you the negatives/digital files and gives you unlimited use
of those pictures with recognition of the photographic company in
the file &/or on the back of the hard copy photo.
Some photographers freely give negatives/files, others sell them,
others will do neither. *My* best advice is for them to select a
photographer based on his expertise, how well they can work together
and one within their price range.
An example using photo impact (free version) compressed to 20% of
original scan and edit for internet. This work was done in 2001. I
know it's not perfect but it is quite wonderful what can be
acheived simply by getting up close with pixels and cutting and
pasting. I didn't use a preset fixer. Took about 2 hours.
I couldn't post the pics for some reason so if you want to see my
examples post your email and I'll send them to you. I realise now
this is not a binary group... it should be.
Bloody shame the world doesn't conform to what you think it should be,
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
- Re: extreme editing
- From: Vater
- Re: extreme editing
- Prev by Date: Infrared question please
- Next by Date: Re: In the hands of Magritte
- Previous by thread: Re: extreme editing
- Next by thread: Re: extreme editing