bmattock
Veteran
Here's a question out of left field for ya'll...
I was looking at ways that I could obtain legitimate press credentials. Not the kind that you buy from IFPO, but the real thing. And not so I can get into sports events for free - I don't really care for most sports, and I certainly don't mind paying the entrance fee if I do want to go as a spectator. But I would appreciate the opportunity to be able to get access beyond what the general public gets to events where I can take better photographs, such as sporting events and musical performances and so on.
I found a local (state-wide) organization that is similar to the National Press Photographer's Association, but smaller of course. They have reasonable dues, they seem quite legitimate, their leadership appears to be made up of photographers from the larger newspapers in the state. You don't get a 'press pass' by joining this organization, but you get a membership in a group that is known and respected, and would be one step closer to getting assignments that would get me press credentials so I could do the kind of photography I'd like to do. It's like a stepping stone, as I see it.
Their rules for joining - you have to be a 'working photojournalist'. They don't define what that is. So what *is* a 'working photojournalist'?
I asked, and was told that if I can submit a newspaper story with two of my photographs in it, that would be acceptable as 'proof'.
I have that - I had two of my photos from a recent Knights of Columbus event published in the Wilson Daily Times. But I was not paid for this, nor was the work solicited.
I have also been given an assignment by a magazine that is just starting up in North Carolina - they asked me to write 450 words on our local church and interview the pastor, take photos, etc. I have a 'real' assignment from a 'real' magazine with a 'real' deadline, etc. Still no pay, though.
I don't work as a photographer - I work in computers. I don't work for a newspaper or a magazine, I work for a bank. I'm in my 40's, I have no desire to begin a new career as a professional photographer and journalist. On the other hand, if it turns out that I have the talent, who knows? I guess I would at least consider an offer to become the real deal.
But I haven't 'paid my dues'. I did not graduate from college with a degree in journalism, I didn't work starvation wages for years in podunk newspapers around the country waiting for my big break (or whatever happens to 'real' photographers). I just have an amateur's zeal and some small modicum of ability with a lens and a pen.
So...excuse the long-windedness, please...
What's a 'working photojournalist'? Would I be taking unfair advantage if I applied for membership under this set of circumstances?
Your opinion would be greatly appreciated!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
I was looking at ways that I could obtain legitimate press credentials. Not the kind that you buy from IFPO, but the real thing. And not so I can get into sports events for free - I don't really care for most sports, and I certainly don't mind paying the entrance fee if I do want to go as a spectator. But I would appreciate the opportunity to be able to get access beyond what the general public gets to events where I can take better photographs, such as sporting events and musical performances and so on.
I found a local (state-wide) organization that is similar to the National Press Photographer's Association, but smaller of course. They have reasonable dues, they seem quite legitimate, their leadership appears to be made up of photographers from the larger newspapers in the state. You don't get a 'press pass' by joining this organization, but you get a membership in a group that is known and respected, and would be one step closer to getting assignments that would get me press credentials so I could do the kind of photography I'd like to do. It's like a stepping stone, as I see it.
Their rules for joining - you have to be a 'working photojournalist'. They don't define what that is. So what *is* a 'working photojournalist'?
I asked, and was told that if I can submit a newspaper story with two of my photographs in it, that would be acceptable as 'proof'.
I have that - I had two of my photos from a recent Knights of Columbus event published in the Wilson Daily Times. But I was not paid for this, nor was the work solicited.
I have also been given an assignment by a magazine that is just starting up in North Carolina - they asked me to write 450 words on our local church and interview the pastor, take photos, etc. I have a 'real' assignment from a 'real' magazine with a 'real' deadline, etc. Still no pay, though.
I don't work as a photographer - I work in computers. I don't work for a newspaper or a magazine, I work for a bank. I'm in my 40's, I have no desire to begin a new career as a professional photographer and journalist. On the other hand, if it turns out that I have the talent, who knows? I guess I would at least consider an offer to become the real deal.
But I haven't 'paid my dues'. I did not graduate from college with a degree in journalism, I didn't work starvation wages for years in podunk newspapers around the country waiting for my big break (or whatever happens to 'real' photographers). I just have an amateur's zeal and some small modicum of ability with a lens and a pen.
So...excuse the long-windedness, please...
What's a 'working photojournalist'? Would I be taking unfair advantage if I applied for membership under this set of circumstances?
Your opinion would be greatly appreciated!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Unfair advantage? Let me start by just saying, NO WAY, go for it!!!! Everyone who gets a break deserves it, and if your work leads to more opportunity to you, that means it is worthy.
Have you talked to the newspaper about getting a press pass or credentials from them? If it comes with ties, I might not accept, as you say, you are not a journalist working for a specific publication. But if their credentials can get you on the other side of the rope occasionally, your work can benefit the Wilson Daily Times.
Honestly, based on your successes you should at least consider yourself a freelance I guess. I am sure you will get advise from other more experienced members here.
Have you talked to the newspaper about getting a press pass or credentials from them? If it comes with ties, I might not accept, as you say, you are not a journalist working for a specific publication. But if their credentials can get you on the other side of the rope occasionally, your work can benefit the Wilson Daily Times.
Honestly, based on your successes you should at least consider yourself a freelance I guess. I am sure you will get advise from other more experienced members here.
JOE1951
Established
Hi
I'm new here, but I've been lurking for a while. This answer might not help you much, but the question brought up a memory that I had completely forgotten about.
In the mid-80's, I had a friend who tried started his own "photo-news agency" in Halifax, N.S., Canada.
He had asked me, and a couple of other friends if we would take on the photography. I've never shot professionally before, so I thought it could be interesting sideline. He went ahead and got us credentials under the agency name. Most interestingly, we had to go through a security check with the local police that gave me access inside police activities.
The credentials were supposedly good for accessing concerts, and sporting events at various places in the city!
Needless to say, the agency never got off the ground as my friend just lost interest and he folded it. I never got a chance to use the credentials, but I still have it around somewhere.
It probably wouldn't be that diffecult to get credentials, but a sucurity check is something that a potential employer may want from you.
regards
I'm new here, but I've been lurking for a while. This answer might not help you much, but the question brought up a memory that I had completely forgotten about.
In the mid-80's, I had a friend who tried started his own "photo-news agency" in Halifax, N.S., Canada.
He had asked me, and a couple of other friends if we would take on the photography. I've never shot professionally before, so I thought it could be interesting sideline. He went ahead and got us credentials under the agency name. Most interestingly, we had to go through a security check with the local police that gave me access inside police activities.
The credentials were supposedly good for accessing concerts, and sporting events at various places in the city!
Needless to say, the agency never got off the ground as my friend just lost interest and he folded it. I never got a chance to use the credentials, but I still have it around somewhere.
It probably wouldn't be that diffecult to get credentials, but a sucurity check is something that a potential employer may want from you.
regards
bmattock
Veteran
Thanks for posting a reply, Joe!
I realize that one can 'buy' credentials - there is always the IFPO if one really wants to have something to impress himself and friends and *maybe* be able to get into events with.
But I'm really not interested in that. "Credentials" to me means being able to take some photographs from down on the field, not being able to get things for free. I see credentialling as a means to getting my foot in the door and being published more often - which I freely admit is an ego boost for me! I'd love to sell some of my work from time to time.
On the other hand, I'm fourty some years old. I'm not likely to become a full-time employed newspaper photographer. Some would say I'm a dabbler and taking a spot away from someone who had worked hard in the field to have that spot, ya know? I'm sensitive to that - I don't want to be taking away from someone who deserves it more.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
I realize that one can 'buy' credentials - there is always the IFPO if one really wants to have something to impress himself and friends and *maybe* be able to get into events with.
But I'm really not interested in that. "Credentials" to me means being able to take some photographs from down on the field, not being able to get things for free. I see credentialling as a means to getting my foot in the door and being published more often - which I freely admit is an ego boost for me! I'd love to sell some of my work from time to time.
On the other hand, I'm fourty some years old. I'm not likely to become a full-time employed newspaper photographer. Some would say I'm a dabbler and taking a spot away from someone who had worked hard in the field to have that spot, ya know? I'm sensitive to that - I don't want to be taking away from someone who deserves it more.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
JOE1951 said:
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
It's simple. A working photojournalist is a photojournalist who is working for an established periodical.
Who decides what counts as "working" and what counts as "established"? Again, simple: the person who controls access to the event to which you hope to gain entry.
What that means is that the acceptability of press credentials doesn't depend on who issues them so much as who is being asked to accept them. For example, in most towns, the only valid "press card" that police officers will accept is one that's issued by the police department. (When I was a newspaper reporter, this meant going into the chief's office with a letter from the managing editor, filling out a form, and receiving a laminated ID card.) You can flash your ASMP membership card, White House Press Association badge, whatever you want... but the cop at the scene isn't likely to care unless you have the card recognized by HIS department.
For events such as concerts that often are covered by freelancers, the controlling authorities may be somewhat more flexible. After all, it's in their interest to receive publicity for their events -- so if you can show that you're likely to be able to generate that publicity, they'll often authorize you.
HOW you do this varies from event to event and venue to venue -- but a general guide is that you find out who issues photo credentials, get some kind of assignment letter (even 'on spec') from some kind of publication that that person is likely to recognize, then send that person a copy of the assignment letter and a cover letter asking for authorization to photograph the event. Sometimes they will and sometimes they won't, but that's how you go about it.
Note that it's different if you're asking a group that already gets plenty of publicity and when you're asking one that doesn't. What that means is that if you want to go backstage at the next U2 concert, the bar is likely to be a lot higher than if you want to photograph preparations for the next community theater production.
With smaller, less-well-known groups (which often are more rewarding to photograph anyway) you may not need any kind of publication reference or assignment at all: Simply indicating your interest in shooting photos, demonstrating vague general competence at doing it, and showing a willingness to make the photos available for the organization to use is enough to get you welcomed with open arms.
Again, the drill is: Find out who is in a position to say "yes" to your request; contact that person; show that person that you can do him/her some good by being allowed to photograph; and you're probably in. No journalism degree required! (I happen to have one, but I've NEVER been asked to show my diploma!)
(Warning/tip: After I did this often enough with the same groups, THEY started calling ME. Later, they started inviting me to become a member. Eventually, a couple of them recruited me to be on their boards of directors!)
Who decides what counts as "working" and what counts as "established"? Again, simple: the person who controls access to the event to which you hope to gain entry.
What that means is that the acceptability of press credentials doesn't depend on who issues them so much as who is being asked to accept them. For example, in most towns, the only valid "press card" that police officers will accept is one that's issued by the police department. (When I was a newspaper reporter, this meant going into the chief's office with a letter from the managing editor, filling out a form, and receiving a laminated ID card.) You can flash your ASMP membership card, White House Press Association badge, whatever you want... but the cop at the scene isn't likely to care unless you have the card recognized by HIS department.
For events such as concerts that often are covered by freelancers, the controlling authorities may be somewhat more flexible. After all, it's in their interest to receive publicity for their events -- so if you can show that you're likely to be able to generate that publicity, they'll often authorize you.
HOW you do this varies from event to event and venue to venue -- but a general guide is that you find out who issues photo credentials, get some kind of assignment letter (even 'on spec') from some kind of publication that that person is likely to recognize, then send that person a copy of the assignment letter and a cover letter asking for authorization to photograph the event. Sometimes they will and sometimes they won't, but that's how you go about it.
Note that it's different if you're asking a group that already gets plenty of publicity and when you're asking one that doesn't. What that means is that if you want to go backstage at the next U2 concert, the bar is likely to be a lot higher than if you want to photograph preparations for the next community theater production.
With smaller, less-well-known groups (which often are more rewarding to photograph anyway) you may not need any kind of publication reference or assignment at all: Simply indicating your interest in shooting photos, demonstrating vague general competence at doing it, and showing a willingness to make the photos available for the organization to use is enough to get you welcomed with open arms.
Again, the drill is: Find out who is in a position to say "yes" to your request; contact that person; show that person that you can do him/her some good by being allowed to photograph; and you're probably in. No journalism degree required! (I happen to have one, but I've NEVER been asked to show my diploma!)
(Warning/tip: After I did this often enough with the same groups, THEY started calling ME. Later, they started inviting me to become a member. Eventually, a couple of them recruited me to be on their boards of directors!)
Last edited:
ddutchison
Well-known
bmattock said:
I don't know if I'd be all that worried about that. Phot-Journalisim is one of the most competitive careers possible, and there's always going to be someone trying to take their spot away. On a big city daily, it probably happens daily - in the form of unsolicited work.
I'm not a career photog or journalist, but I've sold pics and stories, and every editor I've encountered has only cared about one thing - it's not who deserves to get printed that concerns them, it's what deserves to get printed. Sounds like you have a shot at a career change, or an intersting freelance side-line if you want.
bmattock
Veteran
rover said:
I am holding off asking the newspaper for work as a recognized freelance or for credentials - for now. I'd like to get a few more photos accepted and then ask. I guess I'm kinda shy that way.
My successes are definitely on the small side for now. I mean, a couple of photos in a local newspaper that serves a town of 40,000 does not a Pulitzer make!
On the other hand, it's something, and something is better than nothing. I've kicked at the door, and it seems to be opening a bit. Perhaps opportunity is just where you make it.
Anyway, I'm going to keep trying and see where it leads.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
bmattock
Veteran
jlw said:
[SNIP - Lots of good advice]
Thanks! I see your point - it appears that different people will have different views of what a 'working photojournalist' is and is not, and will apply those distinctions without regard to what a person considers themselves to be.
OK, fair enough!
So tell me - if you had the opportunity to join a large professional organization that you met the criteria for - even if only by the slightest of margins - would you join, assuming that's what you wanted to do, or would you think that perhaps you were stretching their meaning and intent by so doing?
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
bmattock
Veteran
ddutchison said:
David,
Perhaps it is the relative ease with which this has happened to me that has me feeling like a thief in the night. I mean, I moved to a small town, took a few photos, emailed them around. Got some published on the city web page. Then I took some more photos of an event, emailed them around, and got them published in the local newspaper. Then I went and found this magazine just starting up, emailed the editor and said "I've done this and this, and can I do anything for you?" and he gives me an assignment right off the bat.
Fluke? Luck? Talent? Doubting that last one - I mean no false modesty and I'm not fishing for compliments - I know I have mastered the basics of photography and I can take a half-way decent photo once in awhile, but I also know that I'm seriously outclassed by many of the folks here.
Like you said, people are slashing each other's tires to get jobs in this industry. Here I am dabbling - just playing, really. I know it's not like I've been offered a job with the NY Times, but I can clearly see that one thing CAN lead to another if I really wanted to put all my energy into it. And I'm wondering - what's going on here?
Does that make any sense?
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
stet
lurker.
jlw pretty much laid it all out, and it's the right advice. I've worked at papers in varying editing capacities, but never on the art side. The only thing I would add is that if you're going to shoot photos on private property, be sure that this is cleared with your media liaison. If you saw NPPA's current issue of News Photographer magazine, you know what I'm talking about. This can make for a big mess, for you and for the publication you're working for.
As for public stuff, you probably know you can already shoot away (you maybe just have to run very fast from angry citizens misinformed about the law), but it helps to know what specific laws cover your state. Say, for instance, if there's a high-profile trial in your area, and you want to shoot it. Try the NC MediaLaw Resource Center and the NC Press Association and search for "photograph."
As for public stuff, you probably know you can already shoot away (you maybe just have to run very fast from angry citizens misinformed about the law), but it helps to know what specific laws cover your state. Say, for instance, if there's a high-profile trial in your area, and you want to shoot it. Try the NC MediaLaw Resource Center and the NC Press Association and search for "photograph."
chmeyer
Member
Hi my name is Chris and I'm a recovering photojournalist. I've now been photojournalism free for about a year and a half.
I've worked for several newspapers and the only times I needed to show a press credential was to obtain access to some spot news scenes, a select group of college sports and large concerts. Many times access to some spot news events is difficult even with a state issue media id.
Shooting larger concert acts is also very limited. Many venues have regular contract photographers that are the only people allowed to cover the event. Even then you are not permitted to use flash and can only shoot the first 3 songs. This is fairly standard for acts touring nationally.
Paying dues to an organization will not help you obtain such credentials anyway. It will allow you to network with other freelancers and professionals at all levels of the business which may land you an assignment in my opinion.
I would agree with previous posts that suggest that shooting local events, sports, concerts and festivals will be far more rewarding. You may find that editors at papers or magazines in the area will purchase rights to some of those photos which may lead to more freelance opportunities.
Just be careful what you wish for and do some research. There's a book called Photographer's Market that lists publications that accept work and their pricing structure. That information can help you make an informed decission as to whether it's worth it for you.
Good luck and make sure photography continues to bring you joy rather than more work!
Chris
I've worked for several newspapers and the only times I needed to show a press credential was to obtain access to some spot news scenes, a select group of college sports and large concerts. Many times access to some spot news events is difficult even with a state issue media id.
Shooting larger concert acts is also very limited. Many venues have regular contract photographers that are the only people allowed to cover the event. Even then you are not permitted to use flash and can only shoot the first 3 songs. This is fairly standard for acts touring nationally.
Paying dues to an organization will not help you obtain such credentials anyway. It will allow you to network with other freelancers and professionals at all levels of the business which may land you an assignment in my opinion.
I would agree with previous posts that suggest that shooting local events, sports, concerts and festivals will be far more rewarding. You may find that editors at papers or magazines in the area will purchase rights to some of those photos which may lead to more freelance opportunities.
Just be careful what you wish for and do some research. There's a book called Photographer's Market that lists publications that accept work and their pricing structure. That information can help you make an informed decission as to whether it's worth it for you.
Good luck and make sure photography continues to bring you joy rather than more work!
Chris
stet
lurker.
oh yeah ... with at least one connection to a paper and a couple clips under your belt, depending on your location, you might want to check out your nearest AP bureau. If your luck streak holds, something may pop off near you, and if you're the nearest one in their contacts list, you're in.
Charlotte
1100 S. Tryon St., Suite 310
Charlotte NC 28203-4297
(704) 334-4624
376-4813 Fax
Raleigh
4020 WestChase Blvd, Suite 300
Raleigh NC 27607-3933
(919) 833-8687
834-1078 Fax
Charlotte
1100 S. Tryon St., Suite 310
Charlotte NC 28203-4297
(704) 334-4624
376-4813 Fax
Raleigh
4020 WestChase Blvd, Suite 300
Raleigh NC 27607-3933
(919) 833-8687
834-1078 Fax
bmattock
Veteran
chmeyer said:
Hi Chris!
Thanks for the great advice! I'm not daydreaming of myself covering U2 and partying with Bono backstage, ya know? Just a couple of decent photos from the field at the local Mudcats game.
I realize that membership in a professional organization will not bring me credentials in and of itself. But as you said, contacts. When you meet professionals in that manner, they tend to think of you as 'one of them' if you know what I mean. When some editor asks them - "Hey, you ever hear of this guy Bill Mattocks? He sent some junk in over the transom." They might say "Oh yeah, I know that guy, we're both members of XYZ association." Or so I imagine - let me know if I'm way off base.
It seems that my good fortune in getting a couple of photos published could lead to my getting membership in organizations that could lead to my getting more photos published, ya know? Kinda builds one thing on another. Again, so I imagine.
I guess I'm looking for the natural progression here. Do I just ignore the professional associations unless and until I've got more going on in the way of getting paid for work, or do I try to leverage what I've got so far?
I appreciate your advice!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
bmattock said:
What's going on is, again, very simple. Here's an example:
A couple of months ago, one of my photos was published at about half-page size in Dance Magazine, a very large and respected publication with international distribution.
Was this because it was a great photo, or even one of the best photos they received that month? No. It was because it was a usable photo of something they wanted to cover. (And it may have helped that the photo was supplied by the dance company pictured, so Dance Magazine didn't have to pay anything for it.)
And that's really all there is to it. If you can supply a photo that's good enough to use, of something that a publication wants to print, on terms they're willing to accept, you'll get published.
Yeah, this is very ego-boosting and validating the first few times it happens, but eventually the novelty wears off and you realize that all you're doing, basically, is furnishing images that meet some editor's preconceptions. Some people enjoy this, and make it into an enjoyable career or at least a rewarding source of a second income.
Other people (you can pencil me into this space) conclude that turning out photographs to suit someone else's preconceptions is intellectual drudgery, and either let their photography turn into "just a job" or decide to do something else for a living and keep their photography for themselves.
In other words, the best advice posted so far in this thread was "Be careful what you wish for"! Maybe this IS what you wish for, so don't let me throw cold water on your dream, but be aware that there's a downside...
chmeyer
Member
Bill,
I think JLW makes some good points. The market is more saturated than ever with photographers willing to accept $50 to get photo credit in a daily newspaper or national magazine. And many of these organizations are looking to just fill holes in their publication. Photography is seen, by the ones with the power to publish, as an instrument of production, not art and creativity.
Editors are notoriously fickle about photography. You will get more diverse and constructive feedback about your images from this very forum.
Professional organizations can be a wonderful way to meet other people and be "one of them." Just remember that one definition of freelancer is an unemployed photographer waiting for the phone to ring.
People that make money on the side or as a living licensing their photos not only retain the copyright, but have excellent business plans and most likely something else that helps pay the bills.
Since you're a member of rangefinder forum, my guess is that you enjoy taking pictures. I would strongly suggest that whatever you do, don't let the business side of photography be a source of frustration.
Getting your photos printed in local and national publications is cool, but unless you own the publication you will never have as much editorial control over your photos as you have in the gallery section of this website.
And as far as the Mucats game, most teams have a media day at the beginning of the year. Find out who is resposible for media relations and request a photo credential. If they decline, you are no worse off than before you asked.
If they issue you a pass, shoot a ton. Offer them some prints. Maybe they will want to use them in a program or something.
It really all depends on your ultimate goal, whether that be money, publication or just the experience of shooting a particular game.
Be persistant, make contacts, make phone calls, make friends and you might make a few doors open that were previously closed.
Chris
I think JLW makes some good points. The market is more saturated than ever with photographers willing to accept $50 to get photo credit in a daily newspaper or national magazine. And many of these organizations are looking to just fill holes in their publication. Photography is seen, by the ones with the power to publish, as an instrument of production, not art and creativity.
Editors are notoriously fickle about photography. You will get more diverse and constructive feedback about your images from this very forum.
Professional organizations can be a wonderful way to meet other people and be "one of them." Just remember that one definition of freelancer is an unemployed photographer waiting for the phone to ring.
People that make money on the side or as a living licensing their photos not only retain the copyright, but have excellent business plans and most likely something else that helps pay the bills.
Since you're a member of rangefinder forum, my guess is that you enjoy taking pictures. I would strongly suggest that whatever you do, don't let the business side of photography be a source of frustration.
Getting your photos printed in local and national publications is cool, but unless you own the publication you will never have as much editorial control over your photos as you have in the gallery section of this website.
And as far as the Mucats game, most teams have a media day at the beginning of the year. Find out who is resposible for media relations and request a photo credential. If they decline, you are no worse off than before you asked.
If they issue you a pass, shoot a ton. Offer them some prints. Maybe they will want to use them in a program or something.
It really all depends on your ultimate goal, whether that be money, publication or just the experience of shooting a particular game.
Be persistant, make contacts, make phone calls, make friends and you might make a few doors open that were previously closed.
Chris
Jason_K
Shooter
My name is Jason. I am a working photojournalist, and wonder of wonders I get paid well and love my job but that’s beside the point.
Joining a professional association is not going to get you assignments but is a good way to learn more about the business.
Most venues are going to require that you have an assignment from somebody before they issue a credential, and most publications are going to require that you have the proper equipment and ability before giving out that assignment.
If you want to shoot more for your local paper first find out if they even use freelancers. Make an appointment to talk to the photo editor or managing editor, show him/her some work and find out what the paper needs. Also don't feel that because you're new to this that your work is not worth payment.
Joining a professional association is not going to get you assignments but is a good way to learn more about the business.
Most venues are going to require that you have an assignment from somebody before they issue a credential, and most publications are going to require that you have the proper equipment and ability before giving out that assignment.
If you want to shoot more for your local paper first find out if they even use freelancers. Make an appointment to talk to the photo editor or managing editor, show him/her some work and find out what the paper needs. Also don't feel that because you're new to this that your work is not worth payment.
S
Socke
Guest
With tree friends I edited our own magazin and got an official press pass by the german association of journalists.
Its part a club, part a union and part an insurance and you have to pay a fee. Admittable is any employed journalist or freelancer who can prove that he earns at least half his income with journalism.
You need the press pass to get access to most official events, say the President of the USA meets our Bundeskanzler, and it helps to get to better locations at parades etc..
Here I have my first shots with a Contax G2 as a journalist at the G-Move in Hamburrg
http://www.hett.org/html/modules/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=G-Move2003
Nothing spectacular, it was more for fun than for profit but without my press pass I wouldn't have had access to the bridge.
Although I'm still earning my money from computers, I retain my union membership and pay some 200 Euro a month for it. It's worth it, as it contains insurance, health and legal, as well as a pension plan. They haven't asked me to prove where my income comes from, but if they do I'm out.
To be true, I don't expect this to happen
Its part a club, part a union and part an insurance and you have to pay a fee. Admittable is any employed journalist or freelancer who can prove that he earns at least half his income with journalism.
You need the press pass to get access to most official events, say the President of the USA meets our Bundeskanzler, and it helps to get to better locations at parades etc..
Here I have my first shots with a Contax G2 as a journalist at the G-Move in Hamburrg
http://www.hett.org/html/modules/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=G-Move2003
Nothing spectacular, it was more for fun than for profit but without my press pass I wouldn't have had access to the bridge.
Although I'm still earning my money from computers, I retain my union membership and pay some 200 Euro a month for it. It's worth it, as it contains insurance, health and legal, as well as a pension plan. They haven't asked me to prove where my income comes from, but if they do I'm out.
To be true, I don't expect this to happen
Last edited by a moderator:
chmeyer
Member
Anyone who followed this thread would be doing themselves a great service by reading the story linked below:
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news_story.html?id=1373
Rick Rickman offers a ton of advice on the sportsshooter website about business practices and being a working photojournalist.
Their story archives can be easily searched.
In short, anyone trying to get their foot in door covering sports, news, entertainment etc. needs to be aware of what they may up against.
take care,
Chris
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news_story.html?id=1373
Rick Rickman offers a ton of advice on the sportsshooter website about business practices and being a working photojournalist.
Their story archives can be easily searched.
In short, anyone trying to get their foot in door covering sports, news, entertainment etc. needs to be aware of what they may up against.
take care,
Chris
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
I read that article and it was interesting, but (naturally) rather biased toward the way the author prefers to market his work.
I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with the Getty deal, as long as the photographers who participate price their services to reflect the fact that they no longer will have marketing rights to the images. Yes, that may deny them some income, but it also exempts them from the responsibility of archiving, cataloging, maintaining and distributing the images -- which in turn would allow them more time to spend on income-producing photography.
The conjunction of planets that I think bodes ill (how's that for a metaphor?) is this type of big-photo-agency deal in combination with the stock-photo-browser feature built into the just-announced Adobe Photoshop CS2.
With huge amounts of picture-agency stock imagery available right out of Photoshop, it seems as if the individual stock-photo marketer would be in an even more difficult position than he is right now (until consumers wise up and get tired of seeing the same hip-20somethings-against-greenish-background images in every stinking ad, kind of like people now make rude noises during presentations when they see overused PowerPoint clip art.)
I think the business model is changing to the point that the photographer is paid for providing a service (i.e., showing up and taking the pictures) rather than for delivering a product (the finished photos.) That's not necessarily a bad thing -- for example, doctors do pretty well getting paid for providing a service -- but it means photographers who want to shoot for a living are going to have to be agile thinkers in the coming era.
I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with the Getty deal, as long as the photographers who participate price their services to reflect the fact that they no longer will have marketing rights to the images. Yes, that may deny them some income, but it also exempts them from the responsibility of archiving, cataloging, maintaining and distributing the images -- which in turn would allow them more time to spend on income-producing photography.
The conjunction of planets that I think bodes ill (how's that for a metaphor?) is this type of big-photo-agency deal in combination with the stock-photo-browser feature built into the just-announced Adobe Photoshop CS2.
With huge amounts of picture-agency stock imagery available right out of Photoshop, it seems as if the individual stock-photo marketer would be in an even more difficult position than he is right now (until consumers wise up and get tired of seeing the same hip-20somethings-against-greenish-background images in every stinking ad, kind of like people now make rude noises during presentations when they see overused PowerPoint clip art.)
I think the business model is changing to the point that the photographer is paid for providing a service (i.e., showing up and taking the pictures) rather than for delivering a product (the finished photos.) That's not necessarily a bad thing -- for example, doctors do pretty well getting paid for providing a service -- but it means photographers who want to shoot for a living are going to have to be agile thinkers in the coming era.
chmeyer
Member
jlw said:
Each working photographer must decide if this sort of contract fits within their business structure.
If a large corporation gets a corner on the market, it makes it very difficult or impossible for the photographer to continue to set prices that reflect their cost of doing business. And if they refuse to sign such a contract, that working photographer may find that he or she is no longer working NHL events.
In addition, a working photojournalist (whether freelance or new to the field) may see signing the deal as their way to get a foot in the door of shooting major sports events. By signing they give up their rights to the images they create. Maybe the money is good enough and the satisfaction of shooting the games and having Getty post your images is also enough.
But let's suppose that during the game a hockey player gets upset with a fan who was yelling at him. The hockey player then makes his way up to the stands, takes off a skate and stabs the fan to death.
Our working photojournalist captures images of the incident, but they belong to Getty.
Under the terms suggested, Getty doesn't need to give the photographer anything in return. Maybe they will pat the working photojournalist on the head. Maybe they will give that photographer an extra $50 for a job well done.
And maybe that photographer could have bailed Leica out of their financial troubles with the profits from selling those images. If only that working photographer had retained the copyright to the images.
I don't want to be argumentative, but people seriously interested in being working photojournalists need to have one eye in their viewfinder and one eye on their back. This is especially true if that photographer does not get benefits from working on staff at a publication. The current market is very tough. That's all.
Chris