Hi all,
I'm looking for advice on how to handle a situation. I was the official photography for a recent national dog sport event. Another photographer apparently shot images from the sidelines and is now advertising his images on some of this sports forums. He is in no way acknowledged by the event organizers. He is selling is images through Printroom. What would you suggest as the best way to handle this?


Thank you,

Beth Bradshaw
Active Dog Photography


Oops, sorry I meant to post this in the Pro Forum, can and administrator move this?

Edited by searchnk9 on Dec 10, 2007 at 01:59 PM GMT

Maybe have the event coordinators contact him? I assume they have a stake in this too right? They get a cut of your photo sales?

I sent an email to the event coordinators a little while ago. I'm waiting to here back from her. Thanks!

If he was shooting from the sidelines then I would imagine either the sidelines were accessible in which case it is a free for all, or he was given a media pass to access the sidelines by the organisers. If the latter is true then highlighting this to the organisers is the best option if you are official photographer. Either way, I don't think you can stop him selling his images since he has every right to be there. At least this is the way it would work in Europe.

I shoot dog events as well, and this is one of my nightmare scenarios. Fortunately it hasn't happened to me, yet.

When I commit to an event, or when I first make contact with a particular club, I make sure they know that I want to be the *exclusive* photographer at the event. We have a discussion about what that means - and it does not disallow the attendees from shooting their own dogs, etc. If I saw what appeared to be another person shooting the whole event, I would approach the officials right then and there, and request that the person be told to stop shooting. Most the events are held on private property, and they officials should have the right to do this.

But like I say, this hasn't happened to me, so I can't tell you how well it would work.

Dave

It happened to me last week. First she was shooting only one dog. Then she was shooting all of them. Apparently her friends asked her. The organizer asked her to put her camera away and not to try and sell anything to anyone.
A couple of the friends complained but were told we have an exclusive and the show can't afford to lose us for the other services. It turns out she wasn't selling them she was giving them away. I have a problem with selling against FREE. I can't seem to meet that price point.
I have an exclusive with the clubs and protect it. Our sales for this show were 30% higher than last year and the club loves our customer service and the great feedback they get about us so they protect us.

You can't compete with Free in terms of pricing because you will LOSE. What you can compete and should do well is professionalism, customer service and consistent quality images. This is what sets you and working photogs apart from Joe Public.

You have every right to enforce a No Professional Photography "zone".

Getting "Media" badges will help in keeping everyone off the sidelines.

FWIW, I shot pix of the Purina Top Dog Challenge several years ago just for fun. We actually stumbled on it by accident. Both my wife and I were shooting SLRs. No huge attention-getting L lenses, though. No one hassled us even though we shot the entire event. Maybe because I chatted up some of the more official looking photographers. Everyone was really friendly.

tracknut has good advice.

You need to be really up-front about your expectations in the beginning. And if they are getting a percentage of your profits, you should have a contract between you stating you are the exclusive shooter. Then, if this happens you need to get the club/officials involved, right then, and have them take care of it, while you continue shooting the event. Also, the mention of press badges is a good idea.

This happened to me at the Miss Cali pageant last year and it was a fiasco, to say the least. Officials lacking in backbone suck!

Just thought I'd post some thoughts from the other point of view ........

I had a similar experience a few years ago at the PONY Nationals fastpitch softball tourney, but I was NOT the "official photogrpher". I was the "other photographer".

I was one of the Dads watching my daughter play and was shooting her teams games from the sidelines, as I always do. Half way thru their first game, the tourney director approaches me and asked who gave me permission to shoot the game. Well, I said "nobody, I'm here to watch my daughter's team play". He told me I had to stop shooting because they had paid for photographer to be at the tourney.

Long story short...... After a long and heated discussion with the tourney director, I was escorted out of the complex because the photographer said I was impacting his sales. Total BS. After further discussion and negoiation with the tourney director, I agreed to leave my gear in my truck and sit in the stands to watch my daughter's team play. Needless to say, I was watched like a hawk the rest of the week.

Anyway, my biggest gripe about this was the fact that I paid my entry fee to get in, was NEVER on the field, and their was NO signage that warned or prohibited anyone from shooting pictures or video.

I honestly feel like I was targeted by the photographer because of the gear I had, and they felt threatened. There were plenty of other parents there taking pictures of their kids, but no one else was told to stop.

Even though the photographer said they had a contract naming them "the exclusive provider of photographic services" (that was the terminology used by the photographer), that contract does not pertain to me. The contract is between the tourney and the photographer, not me. I paid my entry fee as a spectator, I was in the spectator area, was not selling my images, and there was no paperwork or signage stating I was not allowed to shoot. Like it or not, I was not doing anything illegal. I cooporated with the tourney director because I didn't want to cause any trouble or make a scene. I was there to watch my daughter compete in a national event, so that's what I did.

I guess the reason I'm posting this is just to remind everyone that although you may be the "official photographer" and have a contract, everyone at the event has certain rights, and you need to respect those rights, like it or not, just as we "the other photographers" need to respect your rights.

Rocketball wrote:
I guess the reason I'm posting this is just to remind everyone that although you may be the "official photographer" and have a contract, everyone at the event has certain rights, and you need to respect those rights, like it or not, just as we "the other photographers" need to respect your rights.

That's actually not true. As a private event (which it obviously is, as you paid a fee to attend) the event's organizers can certainly force a no-photography rule, selectively or otherwise, without having to post it anywhere. And they can ask you to leave just as easily. It's no different than enforcing the same rule at a concert, in a retail store, in a museum. Having the rule posted at the entrances is certainly a smart move that can aid the enforcement of it, but it's not a necessity. Private property, private event, they can make whatever rules they like as long as those rules don't violate the law.

For the OP, I actually think that asking the organizers to post "no photography" signs at entrances would be a smart move. It's not going to dissuade everyone who would have otherwise pulled out a camera, but it does establish the situation earlier in order to make enforcing it later a little easier.

The AKC restricts who has access to the rings. Even the official photographers cannot enter the ring while judging is in progress or without the permission of the judge.

Do you use the familiar show identification sign with your name (in addition to the club, date, and win)? If the photographer outside the ring included your sign and copyright notice, you might have a case against him or her.

As I understand the law:

If the subject is in or can be viewed from a public location (park, sidewalk, road, etc) you have absolutely every right in the world to photograph it, with the exception of situations where the subject has sequestered themselves for reasons of privacy. (public restrooms are "public" but it is reasonable to expect privacy. Dressing rooms are "public" but it is reasonable to expect privacy.)

So ultimately, if the baseball diamond was part of a public facility then you had the right to shoot there.

So an event that takes place in a public space CAN have an official photographer but the organizer CANNOT limit the freedoms of others to shoot photos themselves. I am certain in the case outlined by "Rocketball" there were many people shooting photos but because "Rocketball" happened to have a professional level DSLR the "official photographer" took offense.

One detail of importance I left out was that this tournament was at a gated sports complex that is owned and operated by the local county government.

I understand and agree with the "private property" issue (it's my sandbox and you have to play by my rules). But that particular day, that's not what I was faced with.

It just burns my bunns when I get singled out like that because I have nice equipment and know what I'm doing.

In another instance the following season I ran across the same photography company at another event. I got things straight with them before any trouble started. I told the guy in a joking sort of way that if he felt so threatened by me stealing work from him, maybe he should hire me instead of fight me.

Not to say that Rocketball would, but the problem with some of the fathers watching their kids play and shooting the game is after, when another father sees the OP's product thinks it is too expensive and seeks out the free stuff. There have been lots of posts on forums from people saying that they are so happy that other parents want their stuff, whether for free or paid. And they are proud to supply it.

Question to Rocketball. If another parent sitting beside you asked you to shoot his daughter and he would pay you for the prints, what would you do?

Someone with gear as good as mine and sometimes better brings only that gear to the game. I bring gear, proper workflow, expertise, marketing, proper insurance, business licenses, everything to present a professional product to the organizers. I am at a dog show because of my proper business practices and to provide the value that the show needs to put on a good show. If an interloper comes in and takes some of that business away from me then sooner or later I cannot provide the service economically to the show. Rocketball was probably okay but some other father who looks like him might not be, so yes we are protective. Please try and understand where we are coming from. You have a dayjob that pays the bills. My day job is photographing shows. You might be a heavy duty mechanic. You will not see my trying to undercut your business by fixing someone's truck because it is a hobby of mine and I want to pay for my tools.

I don't mind owners taking pictures at my shows. I strike up a conversation with them and will even help if they want. BUT with last week she went from shooting one dog to shooting all the dogs. She was trying to take my business away from me. So bye bye.

Cheers
Chris
Prince George BC
www.photos-now.ca

I cover dozens of events each year with about 50,000 competitors - which means up to 100,000 parents - alot of them with cameras - some of them with good cameras.

When I see them...I do nothing.

Sometimes, I'll approach them and ask if they need help with their settings.

Bottom line is that I KNOW that I'm doing it better than any parent can do it. My gear is at least as good as theirs (nobody yet has had gear as good as us) and I have multiple sets of it that get far better coverage - so I am never threatened by that. Too many times, I'll see a parent at our cashier, paying for their order, with a DSLR on their shoulder.

If I see an obvious scab - somebody intentionally taking pictures of alot of teams... then I'll approach the organizer and have them deal with it as they see fit - reminding them, that they get no commission from that guy!

It's easy to see - that if you make a fuss with a parent, or hired gun, then you're going to create a bad rep for yourself. Instead, turn it around, be friends and you'll be amazed at how many of them will talk you up and respect you.

I know for certain, that when I cover my own daughter's competitions, I will have better gear than the hired shooter, I will shoot, and I'll make sure that the 'official' photographer is comfortable with me - I'll even act like I'm representing them and point out their booth.

Anyway, know that you're doing it better than an outsider can do and don't worry about it.

Hammy.

Hi All,

Rocketball wrote:I guess the reason I'm posting this is just to remind everyone that although you may be the "official photographer" and have a contract, everyone at the event has certain rights, and you need to respect those rights, like it or not, just as we "the other photographers" need to respect your rights.

As a non-professional photographer ... Hear, Hear!! Well said.

Just because you may earn your living from photography and have an "exclusive contract", this does not give you the right to stop others taking photos for personal use.

If the venue organisers decide to stop you taking photographs it would be preferable for them to let you know beforehand so you don't have to waste your entrance money.

Regards
Nigel

nanscombe wrote:
Rocketball wrote:I guess the reason I'm posting this is just to remind everyone that although you may be the "official photographer" and have a contract, everyone at the event has certain rights, and you need to respect those rights, like it or not, just as we "the other photographers" need to respect your rights.
As a non-professional photographer ... Hear, Hear!! Well said.
Just because you may earn your living from photography and have an "exclusive contract", this does not give you the right to stop others taking photos for personal use.
I think word "rights" unfortunately doesn't apply in most cases. But the respect certainly does. On one hand we all hear of the photographers that share and help their fellow shooters (like here on FM), then we get posts like this where honestly I'm with Hammy - if your trade is built on such a flimsy framework that some GWC causes you stress then you need to look at how you do business.
I've been in the same boat when all I wanted to do was try something new. To have some nitwit get his panties in a wad just because I'm shooting is just stoopid and frankly pisses me off. Come over and talk to me. I guarantee we'll talk shop, talk toys and generally part on good terms after you find out I'm just noodling around. I always feel pretty darned good after somebody fills me in on little details of their "business" and generally fosters a sense of camaraderie. Am I out for their business? Probably not.
I'll tell you straight how I see it. The guys who really know what they're doing don't worry about little crap like this.
My 2 centavos - worth as usual less than 2 cents...
Jon

Rocketball wrote:
I guess the reason I'm posting this is just to remind everyone that although you may be the "official photographer" and have a contract, everyone at the event has certain rights, and you need to respect those rights, like it or not, just as we "the other photographers" need to respect your rights.

The tournament may have the right to limit photography by other people...signs are not needed. In an case where they need to enforce it they can verbally request you to stop...as they did. My contracts often have such verbiage stating that I will be the only photographer and 'professional' equipment may not be used by others. Do I enforce it....no. Mom's with a 70-200 are not a threat to me. Someone with a 400 2.8 may get asked to put it away.

You're rights are to get entry when you pay for entry...no more, no less. Can you bring in dozens of hot dogs and give them away for free? Probably not. The event is a commercial venture and the organizers make rules and need to enforce them in the best interest of their vendors if there is to be another event like it.

Personally contract or not I'm not sure that I'd want to put the organizer in a position to have to enforce our contract and thereby possibly alienate a spectator, participant or relative of. In my mind they have so much more to be concerned about than preventing spectators from taking photos. I think I'd almost feel like a small child running to my parent to tell on "little Johnny" for sticking his tongue out at me. Don't misunderstand, I also make money from my photographs and services but I tend to agree that as professionals we shouldn't necessarily be so territorial. Like Hammy, I welcome conversation with parents, family or friends who have cameras at events. I've had many parents ask me about the equipment because a 400mm f2.8 lens can attract a lot of attention at certain events. They are genuinely impressed and fascinated by it. Burn off an 8 frame sequence and watch their eyes light up as they drool uncontrollably (that's my favorite). If they are a hobbyist they love to talk shop or ask questions of the "expert". I regularly get emails from several parents I've met this way, and maintaining that rapport has only served to get me more business from them and the league. They have become my staunchest supporters when it comes to submitting proposals because they appreciate the quality of the work.

Yes, people will give their images away but I don't really see this as a threat. People who fawn over snapshots given to them by an amateur parent photographer are usually not the same people who buy my prints anyway. I've regularly worked alongside of parent photographers and they are simply people who are enjoying the wonders of photography. I've never had anyone tell me that their equipment and images were better. As I move up and down the sideline, they readily move out of my way. If I set up alongside of them, they will always move a way a bit to give me room although I never ask them to. The only incident I can recall was a woman who told me that no one would buy any of my prints, they were too expensive. Turns out she had been shooting the teams in previous years and then selling them for $.12 for a 4x6. I told her that may be true but that she had to keep in mind everything that was involved with me getting those images, from acquisition to post processing, including the $12,000 worth of equipment I was toting around. I also went on to explain that if they were going to take the time to take and sell photographs themselves why would they sell them at cost? Since they were a non-profit organization, they should at least be making something that can be put back into the organization. Anyway, she was wrong as people bought up prints left and right including her!

Moral of the story is: build relationships not walls. Instead of being threatened look for ways to make your images so compelling people won't care what they can get for free. When it comes to dogs and pets in general, it's amazing what people are willing to do and spend. I can almost guarantee that a $150-$200 studio portrait of their champion pooch is going to be a lot more desirable to them than a free snapshot.

On the other side of the coin, I also feel that if you are a parent or spectator who simply enjoys taking pictures of your children, don't be so arrogant as to declare your inherent "right to take whatever damn pictures you please where ever you choose to take them." As photographers you should be a little more sensitive to the fact that someone else is there probably trying to scratch out a living doing this. I'm sure you'd feel just a bit threatened should they choose to walk into your place of employment and declare that they can do you job just as well and willingly do it for free. As already posted, whenever I just want to go out and shoot some new events for the fun and challenge, I will always look for an "official" photographer just so I can let them know that I'm there and have no intention of selling or giving any images away. Showing them a little respect goes a long way to preventing issues on either side of the fence.

Well said for both sides of the fence Steve!
Kudos!
Jon

There is a big difference between taking pictures of an event and selling pictures of an event. When my contract grants me exclusive authority to offer pictures of the event for sale (I always try for this), it also requires that the organizer "take reasonable steps to ensure that exclusivity".

I have no problems notifying the organizer when my rights are being violated and I fully expect them to make some effort to make it right. The reality is that I don't expect them to go to court over it in most cases. I do expect them to ask the offending party to stop sellig the images. Usually this works.

This is much easier when the event has specifically prohibited image taking or sales without permission. A lot of smaller events don't do this and then you can do no more than ask the other party to stop.

nathanlake wrote:
There is a big difference between taking pictures of an event and selling pictures of an event.
But one is being equated with the other if someone is asked to stop taking pictures just because they have pro quality gear. I'm a firm believer that a little conversation can go a long way...

I might as well just be honest...

1. When I'm the event photographer, I almost ALWAYS feel threatened by other people with cameras shooting the same event I'm shooting.

2. Whether they have D3s or cellphones doesn't matter, I still feel threatened.

3. I almost NEVER assume that my images will be "better" than the parents.

I noticed that most other event photographers assume the exact opposite. For example, Hammy says above that he KNOWS that his images will be better than the parents. However, Hammy also says that he himself is a parent, and shoots his own kids at events. If I were the "official photographer" at one of his kid's events, would my images be better than his simply because I was shooting in a professional capacity? I don't think so.

I assume that the parents shooting events I'm photographing are just like Hammy... great photographers. They might be AP photographers or commercial photographers traveling light with a simple point and shoot. They might amateur or hobbyists with an amazing artistic eye. Judging the equipment they happened to have is not a reliable means of assessing the usefulness of the images they produce with it.

Not only that, but parents have the added advantage of personal familiarity, knowing exactly what their athlete's routine is, or habits are, while I am only seeing it for the first time on that event.

So yes, I feel threatened. They probably determined that my photography sucks, so that's why they are taking their own pictures instead of relaxing and enjoying the event knowing that they can be satisfied buying mine. Yet my financial risks and costs to shoot the event remain the same, so it hurts not only the ego, but the pocketbook when they shoot their own pictures and don't buy mine.

So what am I doing as the official photographer shooting the event, you might ask? Well, it could be that no one else stepped to the plate to cover that event. No one else invested in the means to view and sell images to everyone else who didn't bring their own cameras, or are not able to take good pictures. No one else commited to being there for the ENTIRE event, to shoot EVERY athlete, to the several days of preparation before hand and several weeks of post processing afterward, to the 18 hour workdays, to the transportation and lodging costs, to the booth and staffing expenses, etc..

So when that parent, who I can only assume is a better photographer than I am, can cruise in when they feel like for little to no cost because they are going to be there for their kid anyway, and snaps off some more pics of their kid's teammates and friends while they are at it, and of course makes them available when they get home, as they are free to do, I'll be honest and admit to feeling threatened.

And there really isn't anything I can do about it. It's just a feeling I have to deal with.

"Getting better" isn't the panacea to making the feeling go away. As a matter of course, I'm always striving to "get better", so that already goes without saying. But the fact is, no matter how good a person gets, there is always someone out there who will be better. And that someone could just as likely be the parent shooting over my shoulder. Why would I assume that it couldn't be?

Focus Locus,

You missed one key aspect that I always count on. I am there to take pictures...most parents are not. They are there to watch the game. Therefore, they tend to miss the most exciting stuff because they are too busy watching. The pictures they do take might be as good as mine, but they don't take the same pictures.