[paul]

October 30, 2017 at 9:12 pm

Editors are editors – sometimes they just take a dislike to someone. Sometimes they are not happy that they were chased for payment (even when payment was rightfully due).

Just move on. Submit elsewhere.

[paul]

October 19, 2017 at 10:02 am

A lot will depend on what sports you want to photograph and how close you can get to the action.

[paul]

April 28, 2016 at 12:09 pm

JustExposin’ wrote:

You do know that anything you upload to face book is more or less the property of facebook as they can licence them as they wish.? Some like to say this is not so but the T&C’s say it is.

It is clearly not so. Unless you have specific T&Cs that are not the same as those for everyone else on Facebook.

In short, anything you put on facebook is still your copyright property. Facebook simply have a license to display and use, in conjunction with Facebook.

The actual text from Facebook T&Cs –

You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition:

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License).

Clearly from this, it does not make things you post their property.

[paul]

February 2, 2016 at 10:34 am

Love the image, but would have to agree with Mark. Crop out the back of the chair and the top of the window.

Love the use of natural light and the B&W. Brilliant photo.

[paul]

January 4, 2016 at 8:43 am

Usually the first edition of the next day paper is set by 8pm. Your deadline really is 7:45pm. Anything after that is usually not considered for the first edition. Some papers don’t have different editions though, so if you don’t make the deadline, you don’t make the paper.

[paul]

August 7, 2015 at 1:22 pm

You need to chase to get payment, at times. Invoice, reminder invoice, final notice invoice, then phone calls, and if all that still fails, solicitor letter.

You only know what is printed when you check the papers. It’s never easy and a pain to do. Some people glance over the papers in the shop first thing in the morning to check for images, other buy online subscriptions to services that host all printed papers, so you can scan the pdf versions.

It’s hard work making money from this stuff.

[paul]

June 13, 2015 at 11:13 am

Ashley wrote:

paul wrote:

Sorry … what dispute? Why were they demanding money? For what? Under what legal basis were they making a claim?

Since this is an Open Forum, I’m sure you understand, that I’m obviously not prepared to answer those questions here.

Actually, no, I don’t understand at all. If they are trying to claim a breach of some law, then surely a public discussion board of such an alleged crime would be the perfect place to discuss it.

Ashley wrote:

But what I will say is, that IF a Law firm gets involved, then you may be amazed at what they will say and what they will try to sue you (or your client) for – which you may actually find very hard to disprove, especially after the images have been used.

Just imagine a picture on the front cover of your local newspaper, showing a mother holding her very distraught looking child, who is in tears as a result of your actions – and then picture the headlines too.

Judges tend to rule on points of law, not on emotive images in papers.

I shoot many many public events, mostly including children. Images I shoot are published in local and national papers, and are also available online. They are posted on FlickR and Facebook. I shoot a lot of parades, festivals and other public events. As an events photographer, I am not aware of any legislation that prohibits the photography of children in public. There is no legislation that separates the photography of a child from the photography of an adult. You don’t even need the permission of anyone to take such a photo. Now, the storage and use of the photo would then be covered under the Data Protection Act, but again, this only somewhat limits your use of the image. Editorial use of images is definitely protected, as long as the images honestly depict the scene.

I have never had a complaint from a solicitor, but if I did, I would gladly consult proper legal counsil and would not cave in to some bully, nor listen to threats of nothing from a solicitor. I would also be very sceptical of advice online saying you should cave in, without knowing facts.

[paul]

May 31, 2015 at 4:50 pm

JustExposin’ wrote:

What settings would pros use in a situation where some big news story is happening. Do they use auto camera settings?

Most of the cameras in use don’t have “auto”. They would usually be good enough at photography to know how to use aperture priority, shutter priority or even full manual.

[paul]

May 27, 2015 at 7:11 am

Ashley wrote:

Also note: We had a Dublin law firm last year, demand we pay them 20,000 euros to settle this ‘same type of dispute’ out of court – which at first we thought was a joke, but I can assure you, we weren’t laughing and neither were they :oops:

Sorry … what dispute? Why were they demanding money? For what? Under what legal basis were they making a claim?

[paul]

May 27, 2015 at 7:09 am

If you took the photo in public, a child has no special rights above an adult.

If someone asks to have a photo removed, in general, I would remove it. But, you have no legal obligation to.

[paul]

May 22, 2015 at 11:18 am

One reason why I watermark my images.

It does sound poor of them not to at least credit you.

[paul]

May 13, 2015 at 9:33 am

Seaview wrote:

If I didn’t have permission from the organizers would it make any difference.

No, I can’t see how it would make any difference at all. You’re in a public space taking photos of a people in a public space doing a public activity.

As for Data Protection issues/requests, that’s a separate matter. You can have very long winded discussions over it, including some I have had with the DPC. In the end, there have been no case law precedents, that I am aware of, where the DPC have forced removal of photos taken in public for breach of DPA following a subject complaint.

[paul]

May 11, 2015 at 8:34 am

From a legal point of view, you are well within your rights to take and post the photos.

They have no right to privacy in a public road/space like that.

So, totally up to you if you want to keep or remove them.

[paul]

April 2, 2015 at 7:26 pm

An “accredited diploma” always sounds dodgy to me.

It’s a totally basic course, ideal for someone who has never used a camera before. For anyone, with even basic knowldge, it would be too simple.

[paul]

April 2, 2015 at 7:33 am

Don’t stand. Sit or kneel.