Photo Credentials. Why?

Sports Corner Rules
Sports Corner Resource

FM Forums \| Sports Corner \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 4 … 8 9 end

Archive 2010 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · Photo Credentials. Why?

butchM wrote:
I have been "credentialed" for well over 32 years ... because that is my full-time job .... about the only area that has changed over that time (except for technology) is the number of folks who want credentials and the number of folks that are issued credentials.

I remember the first Penn State football game I worked (you know ... back when Joe Paterno was coaching

Mar 19, 2010 at 04:15 AM

bill henry
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve in addition to my other post I'll add this comment to this on.
It is my believe that credentials are to be earned not given out because someone knows someone. An individual has to prove him/her self by how they conduct themselves, and the knowledge of what they are doing. OK soap box caved in.

Mar 19, 2010 at 04:47 AM

Bikeracer3
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · Photo Credentials. Why?

I think about 75% of photographers want credentials to shoot, 20% because they like sports and think its a good way to get in and get close and 5% just want to brag about it.

The 75% group are mostly students, event & youth sports photographer wanting to learn and move up in the craft. And of course the seasoned pro that knows that credentials will get you on the other side of people that just wander around and get in the way.

So many people fall into the breed that just wander and block a great shot. Don't let them get close enough to ask which TV station you shoot for when they see you have a still camera.

Please! Give me credentials so that I can talk shop and network. It's fun meeting other photogs that you have admired their work over the years or that you have communicated with on a forum. Keep me away from the wandering breed.

Steve- This may kick your page count up to 4. Hang in there!

-Terry

Mar 19, 2010 at 06:21 AM

skyvan
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve Ickes wrote:
butchM wrote:
I have been "credentialed" for well over 32 years ... because that is my full-time job .... about the only area that has changed over that time (except for technology) is the number of folks who want credentials and the number of folks that are issued credentials.

I remember the first Penn State football game I worked (you know ... back when Joe Paterno was coaching

) ... there were seven of us shooting from the sideline ... including one AP photographer and one shooter for the school ... there wasn't a 300 2.8 anywhere to be found and only one shooter with a motor drive .... there was little equipment envy back then ...

The last PSU game I worked, it was so crowded that I could have reached out and touched more than seven photographers at any point during the game and not have to stretch ... not to mention the tv crews, the freshmen recruits, big-time donors or just the guys and gals who were on hand because they know someone who, who knows someone, who knows someone else that was a second cousin twice removed of the ball boy's step mother's nephew .....

Steve, what I think your question should have been ... "Why do you think you deserve a credential, and why are you upset that you can't get one?" It's like any other job ... you aren't granted access to the work solely based upon desire to do the job .... how many folks graduate law school one day and argue a case before the Supreme Court the next day? How many drivers climb out of a go cart today and are behind the wheel at the Daytona 500 tomorrow ...

Geez .... lot's of folks want tickets to the "Big-Time" games and events ... but does everyone that wants a ticket end up with one? Of course they don't .... but some folks get upset if they can't have what they want and think the "pros" aren't playing fair. Personally I don't have a problem sharing the sideline with anyone as long as they are there for legitimate purposes.

I think, as always, opinions on the credential matter are split on this forum because on one side of the issue, credentialed access is a job and livelihood for some and what could be considered a hobby for others ...

I have had the opportunity to work with some really awesome writers and photographers over the years ... and I have had to work with some real bone-headed numb skulls too ... I never had much time for the ones that got caught up in the "big games" and paid little or no attention to the mundane, yet important lower levels of sports where access is much easier to attain.

I take as much pride in shooting a Pop Warner football game like it was the NFL Game of the Week ... as I do actually shooting the NFL ...

In the end ... it's not so much about what level of the game you shoot .... it's how well you shoot the game ... regardless of the level of play ....

It's like any other field of endeavor ... the cream will rise to the top ... if your work warrants the effort and your services are sought by the right client ... the credentials will come ....

Thanks for sharing Butch and you pointed out something that I think is a key point. Even back in the day as a dedicated hobbyist and amateur I never viewed a credential as a ticket to shoot my own images for fun. It just seems like the whole concept of why credentials exists and what and who they are for has been grossly reinterpreted. Aside from the friends of friends who get sideline access, a media credential is for "WORKING" media, people doing a job, not for themselves but for their client and/or employer.

By the way, I see on your web site that you were in Hershey for PIAA wrestling. Wish I had know would've looked you up. Let me know next time you're in the Harrisburg area, we'll meet up.

EXACTLY! It's for the working media, in fact it even says so on the back of the credentials
from a Dodgertown Classic Credential:
"...using a credential represents that such Bearer is acting on a specific assignment for a newspaper, or for a press, news or photographic service."

from a UCLA basketball credential
"This working credential is issued as a courtesy to an accredited agency for the sole purpose of providing stadium venue access to an individual who has a legitimate working function in connection with the event."

and even on the back of a credential for Metro State, a Division II school
"This working credential is issued for the sole purpose of providing facility access to an accredited...employee who has a legitimate working function in connection with Metro State athletics events."

Though i must say that Air Force Academy puts the fact that credentials are for working media most bluntly:
"This working credential is issued for the sole purpose of providing access to a person who has a legitimate working function in connection with said event."

So there you have it. You only need a credential if you are working media, and according to every credential that is one of the conditions of utilizing it.

Hope this helps to drive home the idea of photo credentials as things for the working media and not just for the casual fan.
The working pros go home with images that they are proud of after working their ass off preparing before a game, editing and captioning during intermissions and staying late after a game while a fan with a camera goes home with a belly full of beer, a good experience and hopefully some images they are happy with, for the fan with the camera it was entertainment, for the credentialed photographer it is work.
-Andrew

ps: let the poo begin to fling...I can see it coming and have revised my estimate from 4 pages to 40 bazillion pages.

Mar 19, 2010 at 07:08 AM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #5 · Photo Credentials. Why?

I guess I was hoping that more aspiring pro sports photographers would have responded that their desire for a credential has to do with securing a position or shooting for a legitimate media outlet rather than they want a better shooting position, or want lasting memories of their favorite players.

My mindset in posing the question was really to better ascertain the mindset or goals of today's aspiring pro photographers. Although there's no one best answer to this question I'm a bit dismayed by the lack of responses that show a true desire to gain credentials beyond some self-fulfilling need.

Mar 19, 2010 at 07:23 AM

RCGuy
Offline
Account Locked

p.3 #6 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve Ickes wrote:
Although there's no one best answer to this question I'm a bit dismayed by the lack of responses that show a true desire to gain credentials beyond some self-fulfilling need.

Are you also dismayed when the pro-photographer gains credentials for his/her own "self-fulfilling" need? (that being the self fulfilling need to make a buck)

Mar 19, 2010 at 07:33 AM

RCGuy
Offline
Account Locked

p.3 #7 · Photo Credentials. Why?

skyvan wrote:

EXACTLY! It's for the working media, in fact it even says so on the back of the credentials
from a Dodgertown Classic Credential:
"...using a credential represents that such Bearer is acting on a specific assignment for a newspaper, or for a press, news or photographic service."

from a UCLA basketball credential
"This working credential is issued as a courtesy to an accredited agency for the sole purpose of providing stadium venue access to an individual who has a legitimate working function in connection with the event."

and even on the back of a credential for Metro State, a Division II school
"This working credential is issued for the sole purpose of providing facility access to an accredited...employee who has a legitimate working function in connection with Metro State athletics events."

Though i must say that Air Force Academy puts the fact that credentials are for working media most bluntly:
"This working credential is issued for the sole purpose of providing access to a person who has a legitimate working function in connection with said event."

So there you have it. You only need a credential if you are working media, and according to every credential that is one of the conditions of utilizing it.

Hope this helps to drive home the idea of photo credentials as things for the working media and not just for the casual fan.
The working pros go home with images that they are proud of after working their ass off preparing before a game, editing and captioning during intermissions and staying late after a game while a fan with a camera goes home with a belly full of beer, a good experience and hopefully some images they are happy with, for the fan with the camera it was entertainment, for the credentialed photographer it is work.
-Andrew

ps: let the poo begin to fling...I can see it coming and have revised my estimate from 4 pages to 40 bazillion pages.

Agreed...and the term "working" could have different meanings to different SID staff. "Working" could range anywhere from shooting for an unofficial fan website, to shooting for AP. Depends on the SID's definition, as his definition is the only one that counts.

Mar 19, 2010 at 07:36 AM

Rick Denham
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve Ickes wrote:
I guess I was hoping that more aspiring pro sports photographers would have responded that their desire for a credential has to do with securing a position or shooting for a legitimate media outlet rather than they want a better shooting position, or want lasting memories of their favorite players.

Ahem, check out my first post
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/879124/0#8255518
I believe that is what I said

Mar 19, 2010 at 12:46 PM

Rick Denham
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Grantland wrote:
skyvan wrote:

. . . I'm thinking more and more that Me_XMan has no idea what he is talking about in regards to just about anything.

not real sure why you say this about ME_XMan (carl). he is a really great guy!

He could be the greatest guy in the world, but that doesn't mean he knows what he is doing.

Take me for instance, I know what I am doing, but trust me I'm not the nicest guy in the world, in fact I am pretty much just a big o'l a$$hole

Mar 19, 2010 at 01:08 PM

hleidich
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Photo Credentials. Why?

My 2 cents...I'm a parent taking pictures of 3 different high school sports for the last 5 years...first year was P&S camera and you all know that does not work especially if you are not close to the action. I aquired better gear and tried to develop better skills. I have permission from the AD and donate pictures to the yearbook. I am one of the few parents to attend every meet (home and away) and the only one taking pictures. I alway spoke with someone in charge to get permission (verbal "credentials") and never had a problem.

One example: Last year the team had four wrestlers qualify for the state tournament...even the school could not get me or any representative access so I shot from the stands the best I could...of the ~35 matches in the first round, I saw a photographer maybe 3 times so the only pictures any of the four kids from our school have are the ones I took (they did not make it past the first round). So my reason for wanting a credential would be to have the ability to document an important event that was NOT documented because only the "working media" got access and they could not cover all the action. I didn't want to be there for all the matches, only those involving our kids...I didn't want to sell any pictures to make money. The school had four state qualifiers...the school has no pictues for the yearbook, the parents nor the kids have any pictures of this major event. I have enough skill to be competent and use the proper etiquitte so I do think there are legitiment reasons someone besides the "working media" might want access.

Mar 19, 2010 at 01:11 PM

john_a_g
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Photo Credentials. Why?

OK, time to come back to Kansas Dorothy. For those who say credentials should be only for working media - I get it. In the world of Oz that's how things would work. In today's world, however, there is value to those credentials. And, to the people who control said credentials there is often more benefit in 'gifting' them to other people than in reserving them solely for working media. You don't have to like it. But your dislike of that won't change it. It's like rock bands giving back stage passes to groupies. Groupies have no professional reason for being back stage but they're given special privilege because the band gets benefit. Credentials have value and cost very little to the issuing agency - unlike seats in the stands. So, in this wonderful world of back scratching we live in, credentials will continue to be given out as currency for favors past or future.

And why? Because while the working pros would prefer the issuing agency and rest of world think of credentials as being solely for the working media the truth is the rest of the world (including many issuing agencies, SIDS, ADs, etc) doesn't necessarily share your opinion. Someone mentioned recruits being on the sidelines - a perfect example. They have no professional reason to be there. But the college is using a credential in a way beneficial to them. They do not care that it causes media discomfort.

So yes, I get the idea of why it upsets you. And I don't disagree with you - but your not going to change that practice. Simply because the people that issue them get benefit by giving them to others. They already have plenty of media coverage and giving credentials to others does not reduce the amount of coverage they get. So from their perspective there simply is no downside. Yep, it makes your job more difficult but what do they care? They work for the organization (school, team, whatever) not for your media outlet. And the credentials are THEIR property, not media property. So they are free to do as they please with them. Just my opinion.

Mar 19, 2010 at 01:27 PM

Jon Uhler
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #12 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Joe Zimmerman wrote:
Jon Uhler wrote:
You know what I think would be a more telling thread then this one. I think it would be more informational if all the working pros here would say how they got on the side lines the first time instead of telling those who are trying to get on the sides line why they shouldn't.

I mean we all had to start somewhere. It is a catch 22. We are all told that we shouldn't be there, yet we need to be there to get portfolio shots so we can get the jobs that makes us belong there. Yes, I know...go shoot the lower level sports to get the feel and to get the port shots. But you and I both know that having pro shots in your port helps. I said helps, it doesn't always matter. In this day and age every little thing helps.

Anyway....

I got my first sideline pass because I work for Central Michigan University as an IT manager. I also shoot sports as a side job. So I do not make 100% of my income from being a photographer. So CMU came to UGA to play football. The media director from CMU did not plan on sending a photographer to cover the game, so I offered my services. I shot the game for the paper and recieved the cred in return. I shot it to get port material of college level play and they got a couple pics. I did it to build book. This in turn landed me other colleges in my local area.

My second cred came from the Army. I shot the FedEx cup with behind the ropes creds. The golf match held a clinic for disabled vets, so I traded photo services for creds to cover this clinic. The cred also allowed me behind the ropes shooting for all practice and the 1st day of open play. The military was stationed around the course so I shoot that. Once again this was to build book and to help out the Army.

Some may see this as giving away pics for free. I, as a lot of others do, think this is needed to build book. You have to have a good book to get paying gigs. These two events have helped me tremendously.

The big flaw in this method is your portfolio is eventually going to be useless. EVERYBODY wants to shoot the big games and be on the sidelines. You see more and more people talking like this. "I'll give away my photos to the team because I want to build my portfolio". Sure you build a nice portfolio but by the time you're done and want to start earning money to pay off that 20 grand in gear they will be onto the next free shooter looking to build his portfolio. There are papers right now getting rid of their shooters and using interns who work for free for school credit. Well were are they going to work when they get out of school once all the papers use interns? There they are wanting to get a job taking photos for media organizations and they are contributing to the demise of their own future. Do you understand what I'm trying to say?

I shoot high school varsity stuff and I'm making little money but I love working at this level and have no real interest in shooting college or pro stuff. I work for myself and cover what I want when I want. I wouldn't mind shooting some football during the day once and not have to deal with the Friday night lights in dungeons, but that's really the only reason I would want to shoot higher levels. But I wouldn't do it for free. I can see a slight difference in that if you can get in to shoot without having to give up anything to the event holder then I don't believe that is hurting the industry. Once the organizations start getting a whiff of the free stuff it will get harder and harder to get money for doing it. The other way is like the old saying people use (not just in photography mind you). How do you make a million in photography. Start with 10 million.

I don't see this as making my book worthless just because everyone wants to make the big shots. Of course you have to still make the shots that make you stand out.

I also do not see this as shooting for free. Sure, no money was exchanged, but that doesn't make this shooting for free. Working on your brand and building book often times requires you to work on your own time for no money. For those of us that don't have jobs at a paper, but do want to some day, still have to build book.

Now, most pro's say shoot at the pop warner level or the high school level to build book, and I do that to. They often don't have issues with you doing that level of work with out pay if you are trying to build book. Of course this is only if no other pro is there trying to make a living off that market. So I personally don't see the difference if the opportunity comes up to shoot a college football game or a pro golf match. In both cases that I outlined I was not taking away from anyone that was going to make any money. I shot the one because of connections, and the other for charity. Along the way I made excellent book photos. Win win for me at no cost to the value of the market.

Those pics in my book opened the doors to several opportunites that I am now taking advantage of.

I am currently seeking local papers etc to shoot for so I can experience other events to shoot and in turn build better book. It has always been my goal to work in some sort of media position. We just have to remember that we all had to take advantage of some opportunity to get there.

Jon

Mar 19, 2010 at 01:33 PM

Jon Uhler
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #13 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
OK, time to come back to Kansas Dorothy. For those who say credentials should be only for working media - I get it. In the world of Oz that's how things would work. In today's world, however, there is value to those credentials. And, to the people who control said credentials there is often more benefit in 'gifting' them to other people than in reserving them solely for working media. You don't have to like it. But your dislike of that won't change it. It's like rock bands giving back stage passes to groupies. Groupies have no professional reason for being back stage but they're given special privilege because the band gets benefit. Credentials have value and cost very little to the issuing agency - unlike seats in the stands. So, in this wonderful world of back scratching we live in, credentials will continue to be given out as currency for favors past or future.

And why? Because while the working pros would prefer the issuing agency and rest of world think of credentials as being solely for the working media the truth is the rest of the world (including many issuing agencies, SIDS, ADs, etc) doesn't necessarily share your opinion. Someone mentioned recruits being on the sidelines - a perfect example. They have no professional reason to be there. But the college is using a credential in a way beneficial to them. They do not care that it causes media discomfort.

So yes, I get the idea of why it upsets you. And I don't disagree with you - but your not going to change that practice. Simply because the people that issue them get benefit by giving them to others. They already have plenty of media coverage and giving credentials to others does not reduce the amount of coverage they get. So from their perspective there simply is no downside. Yep, it makes your job more difficult but what do they care? They work for the organization (school, team, whatever) not for your media outlet. And the credentials are THEIR property, not media property. So they are free to do as they please with them. Just my opinion.

Yup. Sort of what I said in the "other" thread. Well said.

Mar 19, 2010 at 01:35 PM

Rags Hef
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #14 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
OK, time to come back to Kansas Dorothy. For those who say credentials should be only for working media - I get it. In the world of Oz that's how things would work. In today's world, however, there is value to those credentials. And, to the people who control said credentials there is often more benefit in 'gifting' them to other people than in reserving them solely for working media. You don't have to like it. But your dislike of that won't change it. It's like rock bands giving back stage passes to groupies. Groupies have no professional reason for being back stage but they're given special privilege because the band gets benefit. Credentials have value and cost very little to the issuing agency - unlike seats in the stands. So, in this wonderful world of back scratching we live in, credentials will continue to be given out as currency for favors past or future.

And why? Because while the working pros would prefer the issuing agency and rest of world think of credentials as being solely for the working media the truth is the rest of the world (including many issuing agencies, SIDS, ADs, etc) doesn't necessarily share your opinion. Someone mentioned recruits being on the sidelines - a perfect example. They have no professional reason to be there. But the college is using a credential in a way beneficial to them. They do not care that it causes media discomfort.

So yes, I get the idea of why it upsets you. And I don't disagree with you - but your not going to change that practice. Simply because the people that issue them get benefit by giving them to others. They already have plenty of media coverage and giving credentials to others does not reduce the amount of coverage they get. So from their perspective there simply is no downside. Yep, it makes your job more difficult but what do they care? They work for the organization (school, team, whatever) not for your media outlet. And the credentials are THEIR property, not media property. So they are free to do as they please with them. Just my opinion.

Well that is the most intelligent assessment of reality that I have read. Good on you John

Rags

Mar 19, 2010 at 01:55 PM

butchM
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
Someone mentioned recruits being on the sidelines - a perfect example. They have no professional reason to be there. But the college is using a credential in a way beneficial to them. They do not care that it causes media discomfort.

I fully understand why this is done. I have no problem with an event host/school issuing sideline access to whomever they wish ... it's their event/venue, they can do whatever they deem proper ... I'll work within the limitations they set forth ....

I was referring to the sense of entitlement some seem to have when it comes to media credentials .... it's like any other requirement set for any other job ... if you don't meet the requirements ... you usually don't get to do the job ...

It boils down to this ... when I'm on the sideline ... I'm the eyes for the thousands of readers that buy the papers I am representing ... Although it is gratifying to work such events ... I'm not there to satisfy a personal accomplishment ... it's how I pay the bills, raised my kids and make it through this world ...

hleidich wrote:
I have enough skill to be competent and use the proper etiquitte so I do think there are legitiment reasons someone besides the "working media" might want access.

I understand your situation ... but my question is ... where was your local paper? Did they not cover the event for your school? ... and if not ... why did you not negotiate with them to represent them at the state tournament ... they could have acquired the credential for you ... then YOU would have been "working media" ...... keep in mind that the hosts of events like this set the requirements for credentials they issue, not those of us receiving the credentials ....

Edited on Mar 19, 2010 at 02:16 PM · View previous versions

Mar 19, 2010 at 02:11 PM

butchM
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve Ickes wrote:

By the way, I see on your web site that you were in Hershey for PIAA wrestling. Wish I had know would've looked you up. Let me know next time you're in the Harrisburg area, we'll meet up.

Yeah, I was down again Saturday for the PIAA AAA Individual tournament ... very long day ... semi-finals at 8 a.m. and championship finals at 8 p.m. ... chilled out at a friends house in Mechanicsburg and watched the AA finals on tv during the break ... had I known that was your neighborhood ... I would have given you a call ....

Mar 19, 2010 at 02:15 PM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #17 · Photo Credentials. Why?

RCGuy wrote:
Steve Ickes wrote:
Although there's no one best answer to this question I'm a bit dismayed by the lack of responses that show a true desire to gain credentials beyond some self-fulfilling need.

Are you also dismayed when the pro-photographer gains credentials for his/her own "self-fulfilling" need? (that being the self fulfilling need to make a buck)

No I'm not dismayed that a pro-photographer gains credentials to do a job they are paid to do. Beyond hopefully enjoying their job, pro photographers are actually WORKING on behalf of someone else. Are you seriously comparing a pro photographer with a credential working for a client with a hobbyists who is shooting pictures purely for fun?

There is a difference between a self-fulfilling need to do your job vs. a self-fulfilling need to stroke ones own ego. You REALLY don't get it do you?

This is the second time I've read this comment by you and honestly and respectfully it makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

Mar 19, 2010 at 03:02 PM

john_a_g
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Steve Ickes wrote:
No I'm not dismayed that a pro-photographer gains credentials to do a job they are paid to do. Beyond hopefully enjoying their job, pro photographers are actually WORKING on behalf of someone else. Are you seriously comparing a pro photographer with a credential working for a client with a hobbyists who is shooting pictures purely for fun?

There is a difference between a self-fulfilling need to do your job vs. a self-fulfilling need to stroke ones own ego.

Interesting point. Let me ask you this Steve? Do you know of any instance where a sports shooter from another area was 'in town' and a friend arranged for a credential too shoot a local sports team? They're not on assignment on that particular night. Does that ever happen in your neck of the woods? Is such a thing OK because they're professionals but not on that particular day/night?

Or has any shooter here lobbied their editor for an assignment simply because they wanted to shoot it? A couple years back I sold my editor on doing a story on a local teacher in an MMA event simply because I wanted to shoot the event. Is that crossing the line? Or is it OK because my work was published in a newspaper?

Just trying to get an idea of where the 'line' is? And whether or not a media shooter can cross such a line or if they cannot cross it because they are media.

I think this is an interesting subject, and I appreciate your thread and your posts. But I'd be curious what your interpretation is of these 2 scenarios.

Mar 19, 2010 at 03:14 PM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #19 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Jon Uhler wrote:

I am currently seeking local papers etc to shoot for so I can experience other events to shoot and in turn build better book. It has always been my goal to work in some sort of media position. We just have to remember that we all had to take advantage of some opportunity to get there.

Jon

I guess this is more along the lines of what I expected to see from photographers wanting credentials. Your goal is to "work in some sort of media position". I'm surprised at the number of people stating that they simply want access for fun.

Honestly, this isn't a who deserves what kind of debate although I see it descending into that. I probably even got sucked into that debate myself. I really didn't pose the original question in order to judge or hang anyone out to dry.

Personally, I realize that credentials are distributed at the discretion of the organizer. I also know that sideline passes are often used as gifts and rewards. I had a friend who won a radio contest that provided him and a guest with sideline access to an NFL game.

I do tend to forget that just because we're "sports photographers" here in the FM forums that everyone's motivation is not necessarily the same and as such really cannot fault an amateur photographer for WANTING the experience of sideline shooting.

I also have to applaud those individuals who unselfishly shoot for the respective high schools and colleges. We may not like you trading files for access but let's be truthful: the vast majority of high schools and smaller colleges are not deemed newsworthy and therefore never typically get photo coverage. Many of you are putting in a lot of your own time in order to provide a service to the schools. Granted, we as professionals believe that any photographer should be getting compensated for their time, that's just not always going to be the case. I do have to wonder though whatever happened to the student photographers that used to shoot all the yearbook stuff?

Mar 19, 2010 at 03:25 PM

butchM
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
Or has any shooter here lobbied their editor for an assignment simply because they wanted to shoot it? A couple years back I sold my editor on doing a story on a local teacher in an MMA event simply because I wanted to shoot the event. Is that crossing the line? Or is it OK because my work was published in a newspaper?

Sure ... happens everyday in every newsroom in the country ... writers and photographers lobby with their editors and publishers for the best assignments all the time ... however ... I think you may be confusing the issue ... it is the DUTY of a journalist to cover events and issues that are important to their readers/viewers ... if in the course of your duties you get to work an assignment you appreciate or enjoy, should not be construed as "crossing a line."

There is nothing wrong with enjoying your job ... but your personal enjoyment of the assignment at hand should not be the foremost reason for working the assignment ... or the prime reason you should be granted access to an event ....

Mar 19, 2010 at 03:35 PM

john_a_g
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #21 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Thanks Butch. What about my other scenario? Can you offer your opinion on that one as well?

Mar 19, 2010 at 03:38 PM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #22 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
Steve Ickes wrote:
No I'm not dismayed that a pro-photographer gains credentials to do a job they are paid to do. Beyond hopefully enjoying their job, pro photographers are actually WORKING on behalf of someone else. Are you seriously comparing a pro photographer with a credential working for a client with a hobbyists who is shooting pictures purely for fun?

There is a difference between a self-fulfilling need to do your job vs. a self-fulfilling need to stroke ones own ego.

Interesting point. Let me ask you this Steve? Do you know of any instance where a sports shooter from another area was 'in town' and a friend arranged for a credential too shoot a local sports team? They're not on assignment on that particular night. Does that ever happen in your neck of the woods? Is such a thing OK because they're professionals but not on that particular day/night?

Honestly, I don't know if this happens in my "neck of the woods" or not. Although it may happen I've never done it so I really can't speak to that specific example. I have had non-photographers ask me if I can get them on the sidelines. I simply tell them that my credentials are requested by the media organization I'm working for so have no control over it.

Or has any shooter here lobbied their editor for an assignment simply because they wanted to shoot it? A couple years back I sold my editor on doing a story on a local teacher in an MMA event simply because I wanted to shoot the event. Is that crossing the line? Or is it OK because my work was published in a newspaper?

You might be pitching the assignment for selfish reasons but inevitably you're still working for your employer. You wanted to shoot it but ultimately they decided it was a good piece for the paper. Have you ever just approached your editor and said "Hey I know you're not running a story on it but Ineed you to get me a credential for this event because I've never shot it before and I think it might be fun."?

Just trying to get an idea of where the 'line' is? And whether or not a media shooter can cross such a line or if they cannot cross it because they are media.

I think this is an interesting subject, and I appreciate your thread and your posts. But I'd be curious what your interpretation is of these 2 scenarios.

It can be a fine line for media, no doubt. Do media ever cross the line? Does a working photographer ever take advantage of their position for self-fulfilling reasons? Probably but I think anyone in any job seeks to use their position from time to time for their own personal gain.

Mar 19, 2010 at 03:43 PM

john_a_g
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #23 · Photo Credentials. Why?

Another scenario to Butch and others:

In addition to the question about getting credentials for a visiting sports photographer (who is not on assignment) I would ask what is your opinion of the Sportsshooter Academy? The people accepted are shooting NCAA Div I sports. Those normally require credentials to shoot. Participants are shooting for their own benefit not on assignment. So, should that practice be abolished? Or is it OK for the Academy to take participants to these events and use credentials this way? Again, I'm still trying to find where the "line" is for a valid use of a credential and an invalid use.

Mar 19, 2010 at 04:47 PM

butchM
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #24 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
Do you know of any instance where a sports shooter from another area was 'in town' and a friend arranged for a credential too shoot a local sports team? They're not on assignment on that particular night. Does that ever happen in your neck of the woods? Is such a thing OK because they're professionals but not on that particular day/night?

If your question is ... do working pros ever receive a credential they don't need or particularly deserve for a specific event .. sure do ... there are abuses in every line of work .... is this evidence that anyone requesting a credential should automatically receive one ... or that a double standard equates to proof the system is flawed ... nope ....

Mar 19, 2010 at 04:51 PM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #25 · Photo Credentials. Why?

john_a_g wrote:
Another scenario to Butch and others:

In addition to the question about getting credentials for a visiting sports photographer (who is not on assignment) I would ask what is your opinion of the Sportsshooter Academy? The people accepted are shooting NCAA Div I sports. Those normally require credentials to shoot. Participants are shooting for their own benefit not on assignment. So, should that practice be abolished? Or is it OK for the Academy to take participants to these events and use credentials this way? Again, I'm still trying to find where the "line" is for a valid use of a credential and an invalid use.

I really don't see this as a valid comparison. Sportsshooter Academy is a workshop held for professional photographers by professional photographers. It's professional development for existing and aspiring photojournalists and sports photographers. There is an application and acceptance process. This is in contrast to handing out a credential to someone who just wants to have fun and show some pictures to their friends.

Edited on Mar 19, 2010 at 04:59 PM · View previous versions

Mar 19, 2010 at 04:57 PM


FM Forums \| Sports Corner \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 … 8 9 end