"They publish your pictures", a prize or a con

[On the Huh]

I suppose it's the sign of the times, and you need to live with it and find other ways to maintain your income/business if this type of thing is affecting you. Easier said than done though, i'm sure.

 

[Phil V]

I suppose it's the sign of the times, and you need to live with it and find other ways to maintain your income/business if this type of thing is affecting you. Easier said than done though, i'm sure.

Not at all, this has nothing to do with the photography industry, whereas rights grab competitions (which some have mistaken this for) have all but killed the stock industry.

This competition is aimed at polishing the vanity of amateur photograpers, by promising them a published work (which is nothing to be proud of in the world of the internet, social media and the citizen journalist). It makes money just by helping these photographers to fund their own book publishing co-op.

 

[On the Huh]

Hi Phil, yeah I agree, but my reply was referring to this from Peter

I suspect many who replied haven't spent the last 35 years earning a living from this business, and haven't seen it undermined by these 'rights grabbing' companies using whatever legal means available to get photos cheap.

 

[mid_gen]

A lot of people deal with endless market-this and industry-that in their day jobs and don't give a flying **** if someone is going to make a few quid off their photo. Having a photo published is just a minor treat that may put a smile on their face for a few minutes.

I can understand being a bitter pro photographer wailing that cheap images are killing the industry, because there are legions of well-armed amateurs who don't need to make money off their work....but well...that's the way it is. It's not necessary to insult people who can afford to give away images for nothing.

Maybe you should start a photo competition and offer amateurs the chance of being published and supplement your income through some ingenuity/entrepreneurship...

 

[Phil V]

A lot of people deal with endless market-this and industry-that in their day jobs and don't give a flying **** if someone is going to make a few quid off their photo. Having a photo published is just a minor treat that may put a smile on their face for a few minutes.

I can understand being a bitter pro photographer wailing that cheap images are killing the industry, because there are legions of well-armed amateurs who don't need to make money off their work....but well...that's the way it is. It's not necessary to insult people who can afford to give away images for nothing.

Of course there's also the view that we live in a free state and if you don't like something you're entitled to an opinion.

For every photographer willing to give their work away for nothing, there's another one hoping that one day they'll be able to make some money from all the time and effort they've invested in learning how to do something well. Is it OK that one of those guys gets to have his 'moment in the sun' at the expense of the other?

In the context of this thread, I actually care less about this 'book' than about the rights grab competitions and organisations like the BBC who steal images from amateur photographers on a daily basis.

Theft might be an exaggeration, but if I were to convince you that your camera had no value and that I'd take it off your hands for free, then made money from it either by using it as part of my business or just selling it on - would you call me a con man? If I managed to do this to others would your opinion be 'it's OK because those people could afford to give their cameras away'? 'Look I gave my camera to that businessman and now I'm so proud he uses it on those big billboards I drive past every day'

No-one here would happily spend a few hours every Saturday working at the checkout of their local supermarket for free so that the supermarket owners could get rid of their paid staff. But many believe it's OK to give away photographs to corporations who'll make money from them: Its the same thing - just because you enjoyed the taking of the photograph, it doesn't mean it has no further value.

Do you think there are garage bands all over the world who'd happily let EMI sell their recordings on without earning from them? Why can't photographers see the stupidity here?

Maybe you should start a photo competition and offer amateurs the chance of being published and supplement your income through some ingenuity/entrepreneurship...

Oh I see, you actually believe that if our industry is being ruined by con men then the obvious thing for us to do it just become con men ourselves. Of course you do understand what a spiral into that world would look like

 

[Dave Dunnett]

Not a con just because they do not offer a prize of monetary value, just getting published and recognition is reward enough to some. Getting work published can also give individuals the self esteem required to make the next step.

I would love a free book....

 

[mid_gen]

For every photographer willing to give their work away for nothing, there's another one hoping that one day they'll be able to make some money from all the time and effort they've invested in learning how to do something well. Is it OK that one of those guys gets to have his 'moment in the sun' at the expense of the other?
:

Yes, it is OK. Why should it be OK to deny a hobbyist the simple pleasure of seeing their work in print?

 

[Phil V]

Yes, it is OK. Why should it be OK to deny a hobbyist the simple pleasure of seeing their work in print?

So all the other points around that you can chose to ignore.

Of course people are free to give things away, no-one says they shouldn't, but they should be aware of the consequences and they should be aware that they are victims of a scam.

And it's clear where your moral view of this is 'if you can't beat the scammers - join them'

 

[mid_gen]

I think you need to look up what a 'scam' is instead of labelling legitimate business men con-artists and photography hobbyists mugs.

 

[Phil V]

I think you need to look up what a 'scam' is instead of labelling legitimate business men con-artists and photography hobbyists mugs.

You read my reasoning and ignored it because you couldn't argue with the logic.

I'll try again:
if I completely legally convinced you that one of your possessions had no material value, and you then gave it to me, and I used it to make money, how would you describe that?

Most people would describe it as a scam.

If I used flattery in order to suck you into the deal, most people would describe you as a mug.

Just because most amateur photographers cannot see beyond the flattery it doesn't alter the facts.

Publishers use competitions and vanity deals in order to gather images they would otherwise have had to pay for. You believe that's OK because the photographers are happy with the result. I don't, because i can see the victims Just because no laws have been broken it doesn't alter my moral stance on this.

If I asked you to give me your camera because it has no value, you'd refuse because there's evidence all around that the camera has value.

If I asked you to give me a picture because it has no value.

Well there are plenty of people out there working to ensure there's evidence to back up my claim.

The obvious truth is that if someone wants one of your pictures it clearly has a value. If it had no value, why would they want it?

 

[DemiLion]

I think you need to look up what a 'scam' is instead of labelling legitimate business men con-artists and photography hobbyists mugs.

Nope you're absolutely right. It isn't a scam, it's a con.

Selling someone's photograph back to them in the form of a photobook populated by other submissions - how else would you describe it? There's no other reason for the publication, unless I'm mistaken.

 

[mid_gen]

Value is subjective. Because one person values a photo, doesn't mean someone else does. I might take a really nice photo. It has no monetary value to me, none of my photos do. If someone wants to use it and can make some value from it, good for them.

For this to be morally wrong implies there is deceit, or fraud involved. Please explain what is fraudulent about this competition.

 

[DemiLion]

Value is subjective. Because one person values a photo, doesn't mean someone else does. I might take a really nice photo. It has no monetary value to me, none of my photos do. If someone wants to use it and can make some value from it, good for them.

For this to be morally wrong implies there is deceit, or fraud involved. Please explain what is fraudulent about this competition.

I don't believe that I mentioned fraud at all.

Consider this:

You have a car.

You don't particularly value your car.

You give me your car.

I lease your car back to you for $100 pcm.

You use your car.

Capice?

 

[Phil V]

I don't believe that I mentioned fraud at all.

Consider this:

You have a car.

You don't particularly value your car.

You give me your car.

I lease your car back to you for $100 pcm.

You use your car.

Capice?

It's pointless, he can't deal with the realities of the situation and is hung up on the abstract idea that photographers are free to give away their images if they wish.:bang:

 

[Phil V]

Value is subjective. Because one person values a photo, doesn't mean someone else does. I might take a really nice photo. It has no monetary value to me, none of my photos do. If someone wants to use it and can make some value from it, good for them.

For this to be morally wrong implies there is deceit, or fraud involved. Please explain what is fraudulent about this competition.

No-one other than you mentioned fraud. A scam, con, or deceit is not automatically illegal. There is nothing illegal in their activities - however you can see there are many people here who see it as immoral. It appears that you don't hold the same moral values as these con-artists - that is for you to reconcile with yourself.

In this particular scenario:

The deceit is in the fact that this is being promoted as a competition and an opportunity to be published - the reality of the situation is that the publishers are simply collecting a list of photographers who they know will buy a book containing their own photograph.

Deceitful enough - I believe so - You; no doubt believe it's a straightforward commercial venture - morals. There is definitely a difference between those 2 scenarios, and how many people would send in photo's if the publishers were honest about their motives.

It has the same level of honesty as all those 'model agencies' who sell you a portfolio of pictures that 'will probably' earn you lots of money in advertising.

Or the ambulance chasing lawyers who'll 'represent' you to get you compensation. Just because something is legal doesn't make it good, honest, or the right thing to do.

 

[DerekL]

Would you prefer it if Nikon and Canon sold their high end cameras and lenses to professional photographers only. After all can't have amatuers getting in the way can you.

 

[Mitch38]

Don't get angry with the competition organisers. Get creative, and submit a "protest image" - here are some ideas.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=do...f.,cf.osb&fp=ab07465adddd0bbd&biw=757&bih=767

 

[Phil V]

Would you prefer it if Nikon and Canon sold their high end cameras and lenses to professional photographers only. After all can't have amatuers getting in the way can you.

Why can't people understand. There's no amateur vs professional photographers, we are all Photographers. This isn't about the damage to the industry - it's simply pointing out to people who might want to get involved in any kind of rights grab or marketing scam, what they're actually taking part in. If they still want to take part - fair play to them, but let's not deny what's happening, or tell pro's that it's just tough if they're losing work:shake: - they should just join in the scamming if they want to survive:shake: - that's just small minded madness.

I've never said photography is only for professionals - I'm a WW, I shoot half a dozen weddings a year, I also shoot family and friends, holidays and trips out and a bit of motorsport - all for fun.

I wouldn't dream of stopping someone taking up photography as a hobby - pop along to the talk basics section and look at the advice I give to newbies.

If you want a similar outcome as is being proposed in this competition - start a thread here asking for 100 contributions on any subject you like, and you can order a set of Blurb books for £12 each - or charge £20 and make a decent donation to a charity - isn't that a better deal than giving away copyright to your images and buying an overpriced book just to feel good about being 'published'.

 

[ding76uk]

I never get this kind of thread. It is always supposedly Pros vs. Ams. People entering this kind of comp are no threat to my business, I am not even a full time pro. I just don't like to see people being taken advantage of. In the same way that I warn my elderly neighbours of the phone scam involving windows viruses, I simply do not like to see people getting ripped off.

 

[gramps]

I just don't like to see people being taken advantage of. In the same way that I warn my elderly neighbours of the phone scam involving windows viruses, I simply do not like to see people getting ripped off.

Nobody is getting taken advantage of, they freely enter into the comp knowing what they are doing purely for the 'joy' of seeing their photo in a book.
As for putting it on the same level as windows viruus phone scams, that is just ridiculous ... this is not a scam!
You may not want to get involved with this type of thing but it is clear that thousands of people want to see their pics in feature ... books, newspapers, on the telly ... whatever ... nobody is being scammed here!

 

[Phil V]

Nobody is getting taken advantage of, they freely enter into the comp knowing what they are doing purely for the 'joy' of seeing their photo in a book.
As for putting it on the same level as windows viruus phone scams, that is just ridiculous ... this is not a scam!
You may not want to get involved with this type of thing but it is clear that thousands of people want to see their pics in feature ... books, newspapers, on the telly ... whatever ... nobody is being scammed here!

Have you actually read this thread -

This is a scam, if youre happy to give away your stuff and then buy it back, knock yourself out. But please dont put your fingers in your ears and shout la la la whilst people are warning you about the fact. Its not a very smart response.

 

[gramps]

Have you actually read this thread -

This is a scam, if youre happy to give away your stuff and then buy it back, knock yourself out. But please dont put your fingers in your ears and shout la la la whilst people are warning you about the fact. Its not a very smart response.

Sorry but it's you with your fingers in your ears and yes I have read the thread ... this is not a scam, it's a personal informed choice made by those who get involved.

 

[jakeblu]

............ There's no other reason for the publication, unless I'm mistaken.

.......the book in question is published purely to sell copies to its contributors.
...........the whole business model here is that a publisher creates a limited run book full of photos, and then sells it to the photographers who contributed.

Is there no market for books with photos then? Why would there be no other customers for a book of amateur photographs? It might not sell like a Joe Cornish or Andy Rouse but if it has photos of merit I fancy those other than contributors would buy.


Steve

 

[Phil V]

So - if I can convince you to give me something for free - that I can then make money from, you have not been scammed.

Whats more - if you give me it purely on the basis that I'll be selling it back to you - thats a sensible choice for you to take.

I fully understand freedom of choice and no-one is forcing anyone to take part - but like I said - DIY and help a charity of your choice rather than letting some con artist make money from you.

 

[gramps]

So - if I can convince you to give me something for free - that I can then make money from, you have not been scammed.

No! Not in this instance, you give a photo and get a book which contains your photo ... many people will like that and eagerly pay for the service.

Whats more - if you give me it purely on the basis that I'll be selling it back to you - thats a sensible choice for you to take.

If the participants want to buy a book with their photo in, who are you to say that they are not making a sensible choice?

 

[Phil V]

Is there no market for books with photos then? Why would there be no other customers for a book of amateur photographs? It might not sell like a Joe Cornish or Andy Rouse but if it has photos of merit I fancy those other than contributors would buy.


Steve

Because it won't have a marketing budget, it'll probably only be for sale from this book company, so you'd only buy it if you knew it existed and hunted it out. There are thousands of quality books of photos produced every year so why would you go looking for this one, unless you have a personal interest?

BTW Im happy to be proved wrong if this book makes it into WH Smiths top 10.

 

[ding76uk]

Is there no market for books with photos then? Why would there be no other customers for a book of amateur photographs? It might not sell like a Joe Cornish or Andy Rouse but if it has photos of merit I fancy those other than contributors would buy.

Steve

I also bet that those you mention get paid for their photos being in a book not the other way round.

 

[ding76uk]

I sometimes wish I had no morals, the exploitation money available by stroking peoples egos is unreal

 

[Phil V]

No! Not in this instance, you give a photo and get a book which contains your photo ... many people will like that and eagerly pay for the service.

If the participants want to buy a book with their photo in, who are you to say that they are not making a sensible choice?

They can fill a book with lots of their own photo's for much less money?

And many people are happy when 'Joe from Windows Support' sorts out their computer problems for only $80. But you believe that is a scam

 

[gramps]

If people want this service, how is that a problem?
People the world over are giving away the rights to their photos for nothing more than recognition and they are doing so willingly ... even queueing up to get the opportunity.
What makes you two think that you are going to change people doing what they want to do?

 

[Phil V]

I sometimes wish I had no morals, the exploitation money available by stroking peoples egos is unreal

I feel the same - we could sell dictionaries containing the only true definition of Gullible to the really smart guys round here that would truly appreciate it.

 

[gramps]

And many people are happy when 'Joe from Windows Support' sorts out their computer problems for only $80. But you believe that is a scam

There is no comparison ... the one is selling a genuine service, the other is lying to extract money i.e. fraud.

 

[Splog]

Would a photography forum selling calendars with photos submitted by their members for free also be carrying out a scam? .... :shrug:

 

[Phil V]

There is no comparison ... the one is selling a genuine service, the other is lying to extract money i.e. fraud.

(Windows Support)
What they actually sell is anti-malware software (which everyone actually has a use for) - they convince you that you need it by exploiting your own paranoia and ignorance. You could have used free products - but why should they tell you that, they're running a business.

(Bespoke Book Publisher)
They sell you a luxury product you dont need by massaging your ego to make you feel special because they chose you. You could buy a book of the same quality full of your own pictures - but why should they tell you that, they're running a business.

One of thosse looks like a worse scam than the other to me too But neither are illegal - or morally sound.

 

[Phil V]

Would a photography forum selling calendars with photos submitted by their members for free also be carrying out a scam? .... :shrug:

I don't know - are thay honest about their motives?

 

[Splog]

I don't know - are thay honest about their motives?

Dunno! ..... But it's no different really!

 

[Phil V]

It's different if they're honest - making money to keep the site going, or making a donation to charity.

Everyone works for free sometimes - who 'profits' out of it is a deciding factor for most of us. I'll happily work for free for the Scout movement, Macmillan Nurses, some close friends and my daughters drama group. I will not work for free for just about anyone else.

 

[DemiLion]

Would a photography forum selling calendars with photos submitted by their members for free also be carrying out a scam? .... :shrug:

It's a valid point, but has one major flaw...

The TP calendar costs less than a self produced 'vanity' version would, whereas (if Phil's figures are correct) the book that we are talking about here costs more.

 

[Splog]

It's a valid point, but has one major flaw...

The TP calendar costs less than a self produced 'vanity' version would, whereas (if Phil's figures are correct) the book that we are talking about here costs more.

Fair enough! but I can't see how the cost is relevant?

 

[On the Huh]

Whilst I agree with Phil and get what he means I doubt very much in this day and age what ever we do nothing is going to stop this kind of thing. Comparing it to the TP calender will be valid to some, but to me as a TP member and contributer (good or bad), I feel it has a difference. TP is a photography forum which I am part of and although I have never contributed to or bought a TP calender I would buy one if my circumstances were different. Probably because I like TP , I know the content will be good and if I was to buy any calender, which a lot of people do each year, then this will be, (as a member), better than one from WH Smith or whoever.