Yea!!! David !!!!

FYI, this was an excellent topic. I'm in a similar position, but from the other angle, and this immediately stuck out to me. (I'm the official sports photographer at a high school, full contract, etc. and I'm now concerned that a rival photog may try to undercut me JUST because her son plays football and baseball this year.) So, this definitely got my attention.

etnb wrote:
FYI, this was an excellent topic. I'm in a similar position, but from the other angle, and this immediately stuck out to me. (I'm the official sports photographer at a high school, full contract, etc. and I'm now concerned that a rival photog may try to undercut me JUST because her son plays football and baseball this year.) So, this definitely got my attention.

If you have the full photo contract for a high school, stand your ground. It wasn't awarded to you without consideration for your talent, abilty and professionalism.

How can you be undercut?

I have one full photo contract with a high school that prevents other photographers...except media or opposing school's photographer...from getting field access or attempting to upload and sell. This wasn't my call but it came from the school board.

Is this other photographer just attempting to shoot and sell football photos or trying to get the entire school contract from you?

I've personally seen 4 photographers with children on sports teams attempt this very thing and all failed because they did so without the blessing of the school board or athletic office and went behind their backs or obtained field access by underhanded means.

If the school board has an open policy for photography then it's up to you...as the current contract holder...to produce a higher quality product with better customer service than your potential competition.

If the school has a exclusive contract with you, just make a couple of calls to school officials and see what your options are. It's your responsibilty to keep everyone so happy with what you provide, that they wouldn't even consider making a change.

Much success,

Lee Woolery
Speedshot Photo

Lee,

Oh, I WILL be standing my ground. I know it was signed based on my ability and professionalism. But you never really know with some parents, and this one COULD be a potential threat. (If it comes to it, I WILL restrict access on our sidelines/courts, etc.)

This other person may look to sell football and/or baseball photos during their respective seasons.

etnb wrote:
Lee,

Oh, I WILL be standing my ground. I know it was signed based on my ability and professionalism. But you never really know with some parents, and this one COULD be a potential threat. (If it comes to it, I WILL restrict access on our sidelines/courts, etc.)

This other person may look to sell football and/or baseball photos during their respective seasons.



Hang in there!

Be agressive with your marketing.

Meet with the parents/booster clubs and tell them what you're going to do for them.

Use all of your influence with the school board and athletic office to push your company.

Protect your marketshare.

Much success,

Lee Woolery
Speedshot Photo

I think we've established the parents' right to take photos of their children in the course of an athletic event, even if there is a pro on site. At least in most cases people seem to agree.

My daughters don't play ball anymore, but I still coach specific skills in a sport (pitching). Do I have the right to take photos of those athletes? What about the rest of their team?

Where do we cross a line in the sand?

I believe if there is a pro on site, that's great. Unless there's a "no photography" sign, I can take all the photos I want in a public venue. I can understand not selling against the "pro", if the tournament is getting a residual. But if I'm shooting for pleasure (or training) and take some other photos and want to give them away... isn't that my choice?

Do we ever have a choice to be "pro" or be "for fun"?

Vince Muehe wrote:
I think we've established the parents' right to take photos of their children in the course of an athletic event, even if there is a pro on site. At least in most cases people seem to agree.

My daughters don't play ball anymore, but I still coach specific skills in a sport (pitching). Do I have the right to take photos of those athletes? What about the rest of their team?

Where do we cross a line in the sand?

I believe if there is a pro on site, that's great. Unless there's a "no photography" sign, I can take all the photos I want in a public venue. I can understand not selling against the "pro", if the tournament is getting a residual. But if I'm shooting for pleasure (or training) and take some other photos and want to give them away... isn't that my choice?

Do we ever have a choice to be "pro" or be "for fun"?

No one ever said parents couldn't take pictures of their own children and do whatever they want with them.

The original poster said he wanted to start shooting, posting and selling images of kids other than his own and at 40% under the professional and that can be an issue.

Lee Woolery
Speedshot Photo