Steve, I am one of those non-professionals that you were hoping to hear from. I don't seek the credentials for fun. I know enough High School coaches and AD's that I can get access to any HS games if all I want to do is build my portfolio.
What I seek credentials for is to some of the bigger events not just to get into but to actually work/get paid to shoot them. So I find an event that I would like to shoot or think that there might be a need for a photographer and then I start contacting people to see if they are in need of a photographer. I share my portfolio with them and sometimes I get hired and sometimes I don't. I want to shoot the big games but I know I am not ready for SuperBowl type events as I have a lot to learn still.
I spend a fair amount of time contacting people and organizations just trying to get my name out there. Sometimes I get assignments from it. It never hurts to ask. Most of the bigger organizations already work with someone like Getty, not to many hire their own photographers it seems. I have also learned that location is the biggest limitation on my goal to get paid to shoot events. Not to many big events in Idaho. Also limiting is that I can't afford to give up my day job, it pays to well.
I should also say that when I do get hired I try and and take into consideration many of the points that Rick had put in his post. I have seen people shooting a game stop and ask the local AP guy to take their picture with their camera to show their friends that they were on the field. Those are the people I think professionals have problems with.
john_a_g wrote:
So, is it the application/acceptance process that makes it OK?
Or is it the fact that they're aspiring photojournalists?
If it's OK that it's aspiring photojournalists who (according to the academy website) "... want to expand their experiences, add to their portfolios...." why isn't it OK for aspiring photojournalists to get credentials another way who also want to "...expand their experiences, add to their portfolios..."?
What is it that makes it OK for one person who is not doing the shooting in a professional capacity to get a credential but it's not OK in another. If the motives of the shooter are the same (gain experience, expand portfolio) is it OK then?
Or, is it valid for any learning based photography program to gain credentials for students in their class?
The 'line' is getting fuzzy for me again.
Skyvan posted some quotes from credentials arguing that credentials should only be used for people on assignment:
So are we now saying credentials should be for:
those on assignment
those who are working pros not on assignment but want to expand their experience
students who want to learn
or just students who want to learn and are accepted into the sportsshoter academy
or students who want to learn and are accepted into some other program being held by a professional?
Again, an interesting discussion and I look forward to seeing how we define who a credential can be given to and for what purpose it can be used.
...Show more →
Well, as a Sports Shooter Member yourself, rather than asking all the questions why not offer up some of your answers? So far you're pretty good at picking apart what others have offered but don't seem to offer much in the way of opinion or answers yourself. But that is always the road most traveled now isn't it.
Basically credentials are for whomever the organization wants to give them to. I, you, nor anyone outside of that circle defines what a credential is. Doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. Clear enough?
john_a_g wrote:
Good to know. if you're a student are you being paid by the Big 10 for the usage of the images? Or are you turning over rights to the images in exchange for the credential?
John, you're a member of SS, take it up with them or start another thread. Seriously, this was a simple question and not really a pro vs the world debate.
As a member of Sportshooters, I would think what a credential is and isn't should be pretty clear for you. I'd say post some of these questions over in that membership forum and see what kind of answers you might get.
john_a_g wrote:
Good to know. if you're a student are you being paid by the Big 10 for the usage of the images? Or are you turning over rights to the images in exchange for the credential?
You're not alone there John, non scholarship student athletes who play for these teams get nothing but exposure for pro teams, while the schools & coaches rake in big bucks; gov't allowed exploitation.
You could say you're a non paid intern which is conventionally acceptable (in general)
jasteiner wrote:
Steve, I am one of those non-professionals that you were hoping to hear from. I don't seek the credentials for fun. I know enough High School coaches and AD's that I can get access to any HS games if all I want to do is build my portfolio.
What I seek credentials for is to some of the bigger events not just to get into but to actually work/get paid to shoot them. So I find an event that I would like to shoot or think that there might be a need for a photographer and then I start contacting people to see if they are in need of a photographer. I share my portfolio with them and sometimes I get hired and sometimes I don't. I want to shoot the big games but I know I am not ready for SuperBowl type events as I have a lot to learn still.
I spend a fair amount of time contacting people and organizations just trying to get my name out there. Sometimes I get assignments from it. It never hurts to ask. Most of the bigger organizations already work with someone like Getty, not to many hire their own photographers it seems. I have also learned that location is the biggest limitation on my goal to get paid to shoot events. Not to many big events in Idaho. Also limiting is that I can't afford to give up my day job, it pays to well.
I should also say that when I do get hired I try and and take into consideration many of the points that Rick had put in his post. I have seen people shooting a game stop and ask the local AP guy to take their picture with their camera to show their friends that they were on the field. Those are the people I think professionals have problems with.
Rags Hef wrote:
You're not alone there John, non scholarship student athletes who play for these teams get nothing but exposure for pro teams, while the schools & coaches rake in big bucks; gov't allowed exploitation.
You could say you're a non paid intern which is conventionally acceptable (in general)
Rags
Okay, again OT but I'll bite.....so is your recommendation that non-scholarship student athletes get paid to play?? Well you know, high school sports coaches and principals get paid too. What about those athletes
Let me clear up a few things. First, in my post there - if you read it again - i was NOT the person who got the access. My intent was to get a feeling for whether pros felt basketball sidelines were getting clogged up like football sidelines.
Second I have no axe to grind per se. I am not secretly resentful of access people have that I do not. I have a career outside photography. Photography is a side business for me - both as a freelancer and event photographer. I'm not jealous of the people who shoot the big events. Nor do I need them to build a portfolio I don't have the free time to make use of.
My only axe is with some elitist opinions by members of media. And if they are going to post publicly about who should get credentials and who shouldn't, then in a public forum I can respectfully challenge their opinions. I'm sorry if you don't appreciate contrary opinions. And yes, this is your thread. But if you're going to make statements about who deserves credentials and who doesn't or 'allow' others to make such postings when you agree with them but tell anyone with a contrary opinion to go elsewhere that's not very democratic is it?
I'm sorry if I happen to point out potential holes in arguments you agree with. But i do try and stick to the argument/post and not make things personal.
For the record I believe credentials can be given to whoever the issuing agency wishes. Period. No caveats.
Rick Denham wrote:
why does everyone keep coming back to the elitist BS.
show me where people are being elitist......
I guess having an opposing viewpoint which is contrary to the popular belief that everyone is entitled to everything is considered elitist.
I do find it ironic that we are constantly labeled "elitist" but whenever we speak of an over-inflated sense of entitlement all hell breaks loose.
John: I do stand corrected on the question I referenced from a Sports Shooter thread. You obviously did not notice that I did edit it shortly after posting.
Ok here is my bump to get you to nine pages (or more)
I would like to get credentials to be that working photographer, to up my game as it were, I have been shooting youth sports for quite a while now. I make money at it and also love that I make some small contribution to memorys saved for perhaps a lifetime, some of the kids that I have photographed I am sure will grow up to be a pro.
The thought of maybe one day that pro guy/girl has one of my pictures stashed in his photo album or a poster on his wall is what I like the most.
I have a demanding full time job that keeps a roof over my head, feeds my family and buys all the equipment that I currently own, but some day I would like to leave that job to do photography full time, I see obtaining credentials as the way to start teh networking process that will one day get me there, should my abilitys be able to match my desire. Not being a part of what happens in sports I have no clue as to how to get credentials that is why, personally, I ask the question. How do I go about gaining access to the events that will get me where I want to be?
So here I am reading through all these posts trying to figure out whom it is that I need to send/show my work to so I can get the work I want.
john_a_g wrote:
For the record I believe credentials can be given to whoever the issuing agency wishes. Period. No caveats.
I don't think there is anyone here who disagrees with you ... on principle ... that is the practice at most venues ... big time or small time ....
However, most of the entities issuing credentials can and do place caveats upon who may and may not be issued a credential ... in fact as you quoted skyvan. many credentials have those same caveats printed on them or a form you sign when you receive the credential (they choose to ignore some or all caveats in some cases) ... otherwise EVERYONE would have a credential and there would be no need for this discussion ... quite often it is those issuing the credentials establishing the double standard you wish to point out ... not those receiving the access.
If someone is refused access, It isn't because of my opinion (or any other media member with access) on the matter .... it's usually because of one of those pesky caveats that the issuer created ....
posing viewpoint which is contrary to the popular belief that everyone is entitled to everything is considered elitist.
I do find it ironic that we are constantly labeled "elitist" but whenever we speak of an over-inflated sense of entitlement all hell breaks loose.
Actually, I have no issue with the anti-entitlement argument. None whatsoever. What I do consider an elitist attitude is when a given group argues that a credential which is wholely owned and controlled not by them should be used only in a way that benefits that group. In other words any use of credentials that doesn't directly benefit media is a poor use.
It's the hypocrisy that members of the media are entitled to that access but those same media members should decide who is 'worthy' of such access.
For the record I also agree with the notion that shooting lower level sports can make you a better shooter. If you can make great, storytelling sports images of 10 year olds I agree you should be able to make great images at a higher level.
Maybe just to help jog your memory I'll find that post from a member of the media talking about the band on the field. That might give you an idea of why there is an impression of elitism.
My point is - a newspaper photographer is no more entitled to a sideline pass than a recruit.
And I don't believe that a person trying to build their portfolio by working directly with the university is any less worthy than someone going through sportsshooter academy.
jetmutant wrote:
Ok here is my bump to get you to nine pages (or more)
I would like to get credentials to be that working photographer, to up my game as it were, I have been shooting youth sports for quite a while now. I make money at it and also love that I make some small contribution to memorys saved for perhaps a lifetime, some of the kids that I have photographed I am sure will grow up to be a pro.
The thought of maybe one day that pro guy/girl has one of my pictures stashed in his photo album or a poster on his wall is what I like the most.
I have a demanding full time job that keeps a roof over my head, feeds my family and buys all the equipment that I currently own, but some day I would like to leave that job to do photography full time, I see obtaining credentials as the way to start teh networking process that will one day get me there, should my abilitys be able to match my desire. Not being a part of what happens in sports I have no clue as to how to get credentials that is why, personally, I ask the question. How do I go about gaining access to the events that will get me where I want to be?
So here I am reading through all these posts trying to figure out whom it is that I need to send/show my work to so I can get the work I want....Show more →
And that takes us back to my favourite answer of all time.....
.....if you have to ask, you probably shouldn't be credentialed.
It seems like a lot of people have things backwards these days, they want desert before they have their meat and potatoes.
You don't get credentials to start networking, you need to start networking to get credentials. The easiest way to get them is to be part of the working media or involved in shooting said event. Yes there are some other underhanded and improper ways to get them as some have mentioned, but I will leave that up to your own thoughts on ethics to determine if you should go down that avenue.
Now, if the question you really want to ask is, how do I get involved with an agency or media outlet? well the simple answer is to apply just like you would any other job.
The Internet is a great thing Try Google'n it , it being stock photo agencies. There are a million and one of them out there, get off your but and start cold calling/emailing. If you have a strong enough portfolio and resume then they may contact you, if you don't, well buck up and try again or stick to shooting what you already are.
On a side note own, but some day I would like to leave that job to do photography full time - why the hell on gods green earth would you want to do that?
Let me clear up a few things. First, in my post there - if you read it again - i was NOT the person who got the access. My intent was to get a feeling for whether pros felt basketball sidelines were getting clogged up like football sidelines.
Second I have no axe to grind per se. I am not secretly resentful of access people have that I do not. I have a career outside photography. Photography is a side business for me - both as a freelancer and event photographer. I'm not jealous of the people who shoot the big events. Nor do I need them to build a portfolio I don't have the free time to make use of.
My only axe is with some elitist opinions by members of media. And if they are going to post publicly about who should get credentials and who shouldn't, then in a public forum I can respectfully challenge their opinions. I'm sorry if you don't appreciate contrary opinions. And yes, this is your thread. But if you're going to make statements about who deserves credentials and who doesn't or 'allow' others to make such postings when you agree with them but tell anyone with a contrary opinion to go elsewhere that's not very democratic is it?
I'm sorry if I happen to point out potential holes in arguments you agree with. But i do try and stick to the argument/post and not make things personal.
For the record I believe credentials can be given to whoever the issuing agency wishes. Period. No caveats. ...Show more →
Again, its not who an organization chooses to issue credentials to. I've stated many times over, that's their choice. Its the larger sense among the photographic community that "I deserve one too..." that is a bit puzzling. We have become a society inundated with short cuts, and entitlement all in the name of self gratification.
So I take it from your previous questions you believe that the Sports Shooter Academy is an elitist event run by elitists, designed to exploit the participants and abuse credentials? I'm just guessing since you really don't provide any opinions of your own. As an organization started by professional photographers and for professional photographers you obviously have no issues being a member of Sports Shooters whose opinions on these matters are much more direct. Since a photographer has to go through an application process and subsequent portfolio review in order to become a member, I'm surprised you don't find that a touch bit elitist. I mean they do actually reject applications from time to time.
Steve - no I think sports shooter academy is a good thing. I think sportsshooter itself is good. But I do believe there are a lot of people with elitist opinions that are members. I think a number of members like to hide behind the wall of sportshooter where they can voice an opinion and non members cannot. I believe there are a number of people that, based on their publicly stated opinions believe sportsshooter.com is really i-work-for-a-newspaper.com and can be very condescending and elitist towards people who dont.
Fortunately, most members are not that way. And I've received a lot of help from members there behind the scenes. And, I don't always agree with their opinions. But the concepts are great. I think the academy is great - they're trying to help people get better. But, I would have an issue if someone representing the academy were to say it's OK for their students to have access but not OK for students from another outfit to have access.
John, I think one of the problems here is the word media. By media, I think we need to broaden the accepted forms of photographers to more than just media.
There are league & team photographers, photographers doing work for advertising companies, a whole crap load of different shooters for different things.
Again, yes it is up to the AD/SID/Med Relations to administer the credentials. All we are trying to do is prevent individuals from getting credentials who honestly shouldn't be there. If we start letting in anyone who wants to build there portfolio it's going to in turn make things worse.
As for the sportsshooter battle, well I find that to be a whole different entity. You are paying to learn, much like an education at school. So technically your points on SSA would also work on a student at school who is paying for an education and gets access to events because he is in the PJ program. Paid education is not the same as "mr I want a better angle" can I have a cred.
And Steve, to answer your question about membership to sportsshooter. I have no problems because it is based solely on your ability as a sports photographer. I.E. based on skill assessment. Not based on whether you are employed by a newspaper. In other words, a full time employed staff photographer is no better than a father with a camera with the skill to make great images of his kids playing sports. And no different than a part timer like me. That's what I like about the concept of sportsshooter.
I also appreciate those members who actually try to help others as several members there have helped me.
Steve Ickes wrote:
I guess having an opposing viewpoint which is contrary to the popular belief that everyone is entitled to everything is considered elitist.
I do find it ironic that we are constantly labeled "elitist" but whenever we speak of an over-inflated sense of entitlement all hell breaks loose.
John: I do stand corrected on the question I referenced from a Sports Shooter thread. You obviously did not notice that I did edit it shortly after posting.
Dismissing someone's opinion off hand because it differs from yours is elitist. Go back and read my post. You'll see I do not feel I am entitled to a credenital.
I am simply against people like yourself standing in judgment of those who want one or recieve one.
Rick Denham wrote:
John, I think one of the problems here is the word media. By media, I think we need to broaden the accepted forms of photographers to more than just media.
There are league & team photographers, photographers doing work for advertising companies, a whole crap load of different shooters for different things.
Again, yes it is up to the AD/SID/Med Relations to administer the credentials. All we are trying to do is prevent individuals from getting credentials who honestly shouldn't be there. If we start letting in anyone who wants to build there portfolio it's going to in turn make things worse.
As for the sportsshooter battle, well I find that to be a whole different entity. You are paying to learn, much like an education at school. So technically your points on SSA would also work on a student at school who is paying for an education and gets access to events because he is in the PJ program. Paid education is not the same as "mr I want a better angle" can I have a cred....Show more →
There is only one event per year where I actively seek credentials. There are other events where I might want better access, but do not seek credentials.
This one event is a small car race where my primary duties include crewing for one of the cars. My photography is both for the crew and for the drivers in promoting the car and themselves.
I already have crew access and can take pictures in some of the most disruptive places without getting a credential (in the pits). I cannot get access to the best photographic locations without credentials. This is primarily due to liability as some of the spots photographers end up are not the safest places on the track. By enforcing credentials, they can easily be covered by insurance, and force all photographers to endure safety talks (both for themselves and for the drivers).
My photographs have been published from this event, but even with that I do not "deserve" to have credentials. I am not a pro and would never take my credentials for granted. I am one of the most curtious photographers out there (some photogs actually flash the driver's face, even the primary photog who gives the safety talk pushes that limit).
So bottom line, I love taking photos and would love unlimited access to all events, but I can understand why it is limited and respect it.
?? Well you know, high school sports coaches and principals get paid too. What about those athletes