Local horse show

Messages
5,909
Name
Dominic
Edit My Images
Yes
I was at a small local horse show the other week, where the wife (and her horse) were competing. Not great big cross country jumps, but little jumps, which for her is really a big achievement (she's 54 and has always been very scared of jumping).
I took my camera (50d, with a Tamron 70-300) hoping to get a few shots of her. She also wanted me to video some of the course (with my mobile as my camera doesn't do video).
Now to the point of this post. I was standing in the field waiting for her to start and the official photographer and assistant were walking past, I heard the assistant say "are you going to photo this next one" (my wife), to which he replied "no, there's no point". At the same time giving me 'the look of disapproval'. Now I understand he is there to make a living, but there is nowhere that says no camera's on the registration page or at the venue. If there was, I would not take my camera. There were others there using camera phones, ipads etc. None of them seemed to get the same comment.
I'm going back there this weekend and will now feel a lot more uncomfortable with a camera.
I've only really written this, to get it off of my chest.
 
Ignore them, not worth wasting your energy.
I have only ridden a horse once, loved it, don't fancy making one jump though, good effort by your wife, enjoy your time together and doing what you both love.
Matt
 
Just ignore it.
I was at a 1940's re-enactment event and a lady with lots of pro gear made a few sarcy comments as I walk past. Just ignore is the best tactic.
They must feel insecure in their occupation.
 
There's nothing wrong with going to your local event and taking a pic or two of your wife!
Just ignore
 
I was at a small local horse show the other week, where the wife (and her horse) were competing. Not great big cross country jumps, but little jumps, which for her is really a big achievement (she's 54 and has always been very scared of jumping).
I took my camera (50d, with a Tamron 70-300) hoping to get a few shots of her. She also wanted me to video some of the course (with my mobile as my camera doesn't do video).
Now to the point of this post. I was standing in the field waiting for her to start and the official photographer and assistant were walking past, I heard the assistant say "are you going to photo this next one" (my wife), to which he replied "no, there's no point". At the same time giving me 'the look of disapproval'. Now I understand he is there to make a living, but there is nowhere that says no camera's on the registration page or at the venue. If there was, I would not take my camera. There were others there using camera phones, ipads etc. None of them seemed to get the same comment.
I'm going back there this weekend and will now feel a lot more uncomfortable with a camera.
I've only really written this, to get it off of my chest.

I wouldn't worry, I photograph the other half at these events all the time. Not had the same experience as you but it's more than common place to have the other half taking pics.
 
I went to an equestrian event a couple of years back with a photographer friend of mine. Both armed with our 5D cameras and 70-200s, to take photos of a friend of ours. There was an 'official' photographer there with two 1DX bodies and a booth to sell prints. We walked past him and made some small talk. He clearly disapproved of us being there, and he made a couple of snide comments about how he 'used to have a 5D but it didn't cut it so he upgraded'. Ok mate. Whatever.

The funny thing was, his photos were shockingly bad. Snap shots at best. This guy was clearly worried that his tiny pocket of territory was being invaded and that he wasn't good enough to compete with the competition - even though we weren't there to threaten his business in any way.

We just laughed it off. It happens.
 
I agree with all the above posts.. just taking pics of your missus no problem


The funny thing was, his photos were shockingly bad. Snap shots at best. This guy was clearly worried that his tiny pocket of territory was being invaded and that he wasn't good enough to compete with the competition - even though we weren't there to threaten his business in any way.

We just laughed it off. It happens.


what a horrible snidey post :(
 
The funny thing was, his photos were shockingly bad. Snap shots at best. This guy was clearly worried that his tiny pocket of territory was being invaded and that he wasn't good enough to compete with the competition - even though we weren't there to threaten his business in any way.

We just laughed it off. It happens.


The problem with the second half of your post id that it shows complete ignorance of the equestrian market. So whilst you may think that your comments have made you look cool, in fact you now look like a dick.

For your future enlightenment:

That 'tiny pocket of territory' is probably a couple of days worth of decent commercial fees if it's managed properly.

Most equestrian images look fairly pants on first display. That's because they're displayed (like most sports event images) straight out of camera. In most cases they'll need cropping. straightening and possibly some levels balancing.

Whilst you might deride his attitude, I can completely understand it. The current problem in equestrian event photography isn't the bloke (or blokes or blokesses) shooting a couple of frames for their friend. It's the amateur that
turns up, shoots everything and everybody, then gets home and posts the images on Facebook complete with tagging the riders. No matter how good you are, it's incredibly difficult to compete with free.
 
Sorry if my post came across as snidey. That wasn't my intention. And DemiLion, calm yourself or go for a walk outside.

Anyway...

I guess the guy peed me off because we were simply taking a couple of shots of our friend, not interfering with him, and he still made it clear he didn't like us being there. I found that unjust, considering we were being friendly towards him. If he was worried, then he could have simply asked us not to share the general event photos outside of the event as it's an income stream for him. I would have reassured him we wouldn't.

In fact, my photographer friend who was with me that day photographs non-league football, often paid based on the images he gets, and is usually surrounded by other photographers of all levels and gear, shooting the same thing as him. Even if he thinks they might take better pictures than him, or risk losing him his fee, he wouldn't make demeaning comments to them. They can shoot what they want.

If I had a booth at up at an event, I still wouldn't be threatened by the other photographers there. Yes, if they pitched up a booth right next to me I would have an issue.

I still say it relates to the quality of his images. He clearly wasn't confident in his own work. If you're worried about customers choosing free phone photos or point-and-shoot images, rather than purchasing your pro shots, then either the pricing is too high or the images aren't making a point.
 
Last edited:
If you're worried about customers choosing free phone photos or point-and-shoot images, rather than purchasing your pro shots, then either the pricing is too high or the images aren't making a point.

You still don't get it. The freebie merchants aren't using P&S or iPhones, they're using full set-ups some of them with 1Dx.D5 bodies and 400/2.8s.
 
You still don't get it. The freebie merchants aren't using P&S or iPhones, they're using full set-ups some of them with 1Dx.D5 bodies and 400/2.8s.


Surely you should be blaming modern life rather than husbands with cameras?

Sounds like your beef is with Facebook rather than anything else.

If I went to an event where my other half was competing I'd be taking photos too, but I wouldn't ignore nasty comments from pros, they'd get it back double.
 
Husbands (or just as frequently wives) with cameras really aren't the problem.

It's people who deliberately set out to take event style images at equestrian meetings and then either give their work away for nothing or sell for a daftly low price (ie £1.00 for a 6x4).
 
Surely you should be blaming modern life rather than husbands with cameras?

Sounds like your beef is with Facebook rather than anything else.

If I went to an event where my other half was competing I'd be taking photos too, but I wouldn't ignore nasty comments from pros, they'd get it back double.

:clap:
 
I would just like to add (even though it has not been suggested), I would never take photos of other competitors to plaster over Facebook or try to sell :)
I purely take photos for myself and wife.
I admire the pro photographers that go out in all weather's, invest in kit and try to make a living. It's not something I would want to do (too much responsibility for getting it right) :)
 
I can't see any problem with anyone taking photos of anything at any events unless stated in event advertising . If a pro photographer doesn't like it then they should get another job. Photographing children is the only exception
As the saying goes "if they don't like the heat get out of the fire"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JJ!
The funny thing was, his photos were shockingly bad.
We just laughed it off. It happens.

Must admit I tried this market only a couple of times 8+ years ago and really disliked it. The reason primarily was the equine community (I ride incidentally) are incredibly conservative in terms of their taste with regard to what makes a "good" photograph. Generally they like what many in an artistic sense would perceive as flat and undynamic, but crucially because the horses legs are in a certain position are automatically "good".
 
Last edited:
Back in the day of film I used to photograph my wife and her friends riding in show jumping and dressage events. In those days the official photographer, if there was one there at all, did not feel threatened and di not worry that much about us "amateurs" having a go. There was always a good market for well taken sharp pictures that the professional could get.

In the end my technique improved and I actually ended up myself as the official photographer, even at a couple of national events. In the meantime my wife progressed from local shows to registered BSJA and Dressage events. I still took pictures of her at these events, and the official photographers were nothing but helpful - in fact we used to help each other where we could. They did not feel threatened even by good amateurs. Its 10 years since we stopped participating and I don't know if things have changed, but it strikes me that the more professional the show the less likely you are to come across unpleasant remarks. In general, at that level competitors and their grooms (and horse box drivers, for those are the roles I fulfilled) don't really have sufficient time to get really top quality pictures, I know I never did, even with a lot of relevant photography experience. This was generally down to the fact that the official photographer was allowed to get the best position, I had to rush to get where I could and then be back to help when horse and rider left the ring. Local shows are likely to be different, with all photographers more or less jockeying (sorry about the awful pun) for position. There is often less space for those aiming to make money from their pictures to get a better position.

Even since the early days of digital photography things remained pretty much the same, especially at the official shows run by BSJA and British Dressage, and I guess it was the same in the eventing world, though we did not ever participate in it. The work of the official photographer is pretty much protected, more so than it is likely to be at a more local show. I would imagine that this still applies, as, at the local show, all the competitors are likely to have someone with them who has a digital camera of some sort. Its does not give those who are attempting to earn money the right to be rude or unpleasant to the keen amateurs supporting their friends and family in the riding competition. The reality is, having worked slightly on both sides of the fence (yet another awful pun) you are more likely to sell your pictures if you are pleasant to everyone, as even those taking pictures of loved ones might also be tempted by a well taken image by someone with superior skills.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the second half of your post id that it shows complete ignorance of the equestrian market. So whilst you may think that your comments have made you look cool, in fact you now look like a dick.

For your future enlightenment:

That 'tiny pocket of territory' is probably a couple of days worth of decent commercial fees if it's managed properly.

Most equestrian images look fairly pants on first display. That's because they're displayed (like most sports event images) straight out of camera. In most cases they'll need cropping. straightening and possibly some levels balancing.

Whilst you might deride his attitude, I can completely understand it. The current problem in equestrian event photography isn't the bloke (or blokes or blokesses) shooting a couple of frames for their friend. It's the amateur that
turns up, shoots everything and everybody, then gets home and posts the images on Facebook complete with tagging the riders. No matter how good you are, it's incredibly difficult to compete with free.

That guy tagging riders on Facebook is sometimes me.

Why? I enjoy taking equestrian photos at events and I like to share my work, which I am free to do so where there are no rules (such as some of the events at Hickstead).

I'm not taking any business away as these companies sell on site and no tom dick or harry knows I will be uploading photos.

Also the amount of s*** that is taken at these local shows is a joke. Some of them are great, but some are just there to make money. Which is great, good on them. Business is business. But what makes them a pro over an amateur? Is it because they are there charging? I have been attending these events for 15+ years and the quality of photography has gone way down hill. That's not all of the so called 'pro' people as some are excellent.

And if people see my pics after and decide to buy mine instead, so be it, it's their choice and a bit of healthy competition should make people better, plus I'm usually catching more than just the usual jumping photos and these have been by far my most popular.

That's my rant over!!

And just to add I would never name and shame or slag off anyone at these events and I'm always interested in talking to other photographers at the shows. I have been both on the paid side and no paid side so I know how it works, and it can be a little pressured.
 
Last edited:
... a bit of healthy competition should make people better, plus I'm usually catching more than just the usual jumping photos and these have been by far my most popular.

If that's what you want, then apply for accreditation and pay the £200 odd per day stand fee which allows for retail sale of images.

After all, you wouldn't want to compete unfairly, would you?
 
Must admit I tried this market only a couple of times 8+ years ago and really disliked it. The reason primarily was the equine community (I ride incidentally) are incredibly conservative in terms of their taste with regard to what makes a "good" photograph. Generally they like what many in an artistic sense would perceive as flat and undynamic, but crucially because the horses legs are in a certain position are automatically "good".
The racing side of the industry is even worse for this. The pictures that John Gosden likes and has displayed are horrendous, but he loves them. My mum runs his office and asked if I wanted to take some photos for them at his stables and I told her no because I didn't think John would look twice at anything I took. They're just as bad with the way they like the working stables portrayed, it's like they want to prove it's not glamorous.
 
If that's what you want, then apply for accreditation and pay the £200 odd per day stand fee which allows for retail sale of images.

After all, you wouldn't want to compete unfairly, would you?

I'm free to take pics where and when I like? What is exactly your problem with that? Am I breaking the law? No.

If there are rules about taking photos I follow them.

If they only pay £200 per day that's a bargain TBH! And I'm not competing?! I don't advertise, I'm not a business. I just like taking and sharing photos.
 
Last edited:
I can't see any problem with anyone taking photos of anything at any events unless stated in event advertising . If a pro photographer doesn't like it then they should get another job. Photographing children is the only exception
As the saying goes "if they don't like the heat get out of the fire"

I do agree, if it states no photography I don't take photos!!
 
I'm free to take pics where and when I like? What is exactly your problem with that? Am I breaking the law? No.

If there are rules about taking photos I follow them.

If they only pay £200 per day that's a bargain TBH! And I'm not competing?! I don't advertise, I'm not a business. I just like taking and sharing photos.
If you are giving away photos as in sharing then fair enough, if you are selling them then you are running a business albeit a small one.
 
The question that all this throws up for me. is , how does a professional establish a niche market, in an environment saturated in free images.?

In most instances a professional photographer has no absolute image rights to an event. even if they hold commercial rights. Even when he has. how would he police it?
In general, amateurs will have have conflicting rights, and compact and phone users are unstoppable in their overwhelming profusion.

Today, it is only the scale of the problem that has changed... There are more photographers of every kind. Images of every thing are produced by competing professionals, semi professionals and amateurs.
All using high quality cameras and lenses, often with very similar photographic and specialist knowledge. the cost of producing digital images in material terms is negligible.

Of course the Event Photographer has a massive advantage

Specialist Event photographers, may be technically no better than any one else.
However they are generally far more organised in "Selling" their images. they Display their images in real time. they offer prints on demand. they take special commissions. they have direct contact with the specialist. national and local media. they have direct contact with local media in the home regions of their subjects. They have all the skills necessary to to run a successful enterprise... and they can probably take decent photographs as well !

A chap wandering around taking shots is not a competitor how ever good a photographer he is. By the time that chap has got round to displaying his shots on line. The real sales have been made, and the event done and dusted.

The recognised event photographer also has all the advantages when it comes to follow up and historic sales. He is the first port of call, he is the known and official supplier, he is the one that publishers and subjects turn to.

He may also have the image rights to the whole event. But that is the least of his worries and rarely if ever worth enforcing... but it does keep equally business like competitors from setting up on patches that he "Owns"

Primarily a successful event photographer is "First and last" a businessman.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top