- This topic is empty.
The "official line" from the National Trust
-
I think you’re starting to get my drift.
In the meantime I’m not going to get bogged down with the legalities and not create an issue when there really is none. I will continue to photograph “wild” NT landscapes for my own enjoyment and perhaps sell a few prints online. I will await a test case to resolve this matter and just hope that I won’t be the centre of it.
I personally believe that the NT would be a laughing stock if they ever tried to stop me selling the landscape prints of the Giant’s Causeway. I also await the land access reform to come to NI which has helped photographers in Scotland. The NT no longer has jurisdiction for instance on commercial photography of Glencoe and other wild mountain land.
Don’t get me wrong, I will continue to support the NT in any way I can. I will be paying my visitor fees and will continue to help them increase public awareness of these beautiful areas.
Andy
I’m posting this further comment simply for everyone in general who is interested in photography at National Trust properties – especially commercial photography.
I bought a copy of Professional Photographer last night to read the article on the National Trust in it. I learnt quite a bit from it and would recommend that any photographer who wishes to make commercial use of photos shot at National Trust properties, etc, gets a copy of the article. It is about four pages long and my summary here will not do it justice.
Many of the things I stated above are correct as far as they go. They basically cover the line that all National Trust property is private and cannot be photographed commercially without some agreement between the photographer and the Trust in place.
What I didn?t know is that the National Trust has a stock library of photos of its properties ? http://www.ntpl.org.uk
The article states that there are two main types of agreements which the photographer can enter into. Firstly the photographer can have an agreement to shoot for the stock library. The photographer submits photos and any which are accepted will receive 50% royalties on all sales, but those which are rejected cannot be offered to any other stock library. Secondly, the photographer can have an agreement to shoot landscapes, etc, and sell them directly but make a payment of 50% on all sales of the images to the National Trust.
The above agreements are ongoing agreements rather than for one occasion only. And they apply to general landscape and scenic photography. However, if a photographer wisher to shoot fashion, advertising images, or even weddings, this requires a special one-occasion agreement and carries an immediate fee.
On the subject of shooting anything ? even adjacent public landscapes ? while standing on National Trust land, it seems that that is not freely available and falls under the two main types of contracts mentioned above. However ? and I was a little surprised at this ? if a photographer is able to shoot any National Trust property from adjacent public land, etc, then the Trust has no control over those images and cannot demand the 50% cut of any subsequent sales. So the law seems to hinge on what the photographer does on private National Trust land rather than on overall image rights.
Another comment which the article contained, by way of explanation, was on the entry fee to public properties. When we pay a fee to visit a property/estate/whatever, that reperesents a contract to view and enjoy (and even photograph for private use). All commercial photography is a breach of that contract. Hence a specific contract/agreement is required for all commercial photography on National Trust properties.
Concluding on a positive note ? the article gave the impression that the National Trust does not have any dedicated photographers among its employees but commissions around 20-30 photographers throughout the UK for the photography it needs to have done. Many of these photographers are sourced from the group of photographers who regularly make good submissions to the National Trust stock library. There seems to be a good incentive there to play it by their rules.
Great stuff Bertie, nice to know…
Btw the ntpl website isn’t working at all for me.
Rodcunha wrote:
Great stuff Bertie, nice to know…
Btw the ntpl website isn’t working at all for me.
Thanks Rodcunha. Sorry about providing a duff link. It should read http://www.ntpl.org.uk
Very interesting thread..
Sorry to go off-topic a wee bit but does anyone know the official line as regards National Monuments down South with regards to taking photographs and also in relation to using such photographs commercially. Wondering what the stance is on sites such as the Rock Of Cashel, Newgrange, Cliffs of Moher etc. I’ve been looking for this info on the web but couldn’t find anything.
Regards,
Paulpaulocon wrote:
Very interesting thread..
Sorry to go off-topic a wee bit but does anyone know the official line as regards National Monuments down South with regards to taking photographs and also in relation to using such photographs commercially. Wondering what the stance is on sites such as the Rock Of Cashel, Newgrange, Cliffs of Moher etc. I’ve been looking for this info on the web but couldn’t find anything.
Regards,
PaulYou can photograph what you like and sell what you like down here. You might need permission to take photos in some instances though. Say, if you were making a motion picture, etc. But that’s more to do with blocking off parts of the site. The Office of Public Works are quite lenient in that regard and would think of it as publicity. They’re actually quite helpful. Some sites you are not allowed photograph inside (eg, Newgrange Tumulus). But photos of the mound itself and the compound it’s in are allowed and encouraged.
To balance things out a bit, up north a vast amount of national monuments are in state care but, even better, the state has also in many cases purchased land as a right of way for visitors and prevents farmers ploughing right up to the monument (I’ve been to almost 150 monuments in the south and many are on artificial platforms from the ground around being ploughed away, cauinsg packing materials to loosen and leading to some monuments collapsing), this is on top of the right to roam the countryside etc which we do not have in the south.
In the south you can do as you want in most places as long as you can get there, which means your at the mercy of the landowner. Newgrange is the exception where you are not allowed photograph inside the mound, its only relatively recently that this was introduced and as the mound is a cash cow for the OPW there is no excuse I can think of for it (with the possible exeception of holding up the tours of ever decreasing length), they are state funded and recieve unrivalled revenue from ticket sales. What annoys me most is that I heard it being explained by one or two guides as ‘respecting the sacredness’ of the chamber. Baloney, they should just come right out with it and point people towards the postcard stand. You can get a key for Loughcrew Cairn T then go and build a bonfire inside in your own good time, same goes for Carrowkeel.
I get the feeling that most of the staff at Newgrange would prefer not to have to prevent people from taking pics, its probably handed down from the head office. Anyone I have spoken to there was very helpful and accomodating up to the point where you reach the official policies.
In fairness to the OPW, most of their sites are accessible and the prices (if the site is not free to enter – which in a lot of cases they are), are very reasonable. The exception to this is Br? na Boinne (Newgrange). I don’t blame them for that. It’s hugely poular and costs a fortune to run, as a result. The National Trust can be quite expensive in comparison. But then, it is a charity. I begrudge them nothing.
I’ll try and find out what the official stance is on the photography issue. I remember once being told that photography wasn’t allowed inside Ashtown Castle, before the guide went outside and said, “Take your time, I’ll be downstairs….” with a knowing wink.
I think in a lot of the cases, the guides don’t know if photography is allowed or not and just err on the side of caution. I know flash photography is definitely not allowed in some sites (people are under the impression that flash is made out of lasers I think!), but that’s a protective issue. A guide talking about the sacredness of a site in relation to photography doesn’t have a clue about policy.
Most OPW sites are free to photograph inside and out.
The OPW don’t allow commercial photography of any kind of National Monuments, as a general rule. But, each case can be dealt with based on its merits.
If you’re going to be filming in St. Stephen’s Green (for example), and they have to close off some of it, there is a nominal charge but that’s just to cover their costs. Normally if they give permission, they’d prefer if the location wasn’t recognisable (for commercial purposes).
Like the National Trust, if you take a picture from outside their premises, it has nothing to do with them.
Copyright will be yours and yours alone if you do get permission.
I see their point re National Monuments. Respect for the heritage of the site should take precedence.
I got the impression that fine art photography would be acceptable. So long as the image wouldn’t be used in an advertising/commercial context.
Basically, if you can get the shot, it’s yours.
They seem to have a very reasonable approach.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
