Another Rip-Off Competition

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Colin D, Apr 25, 2006.

  1. Colin D

    Colin D Guest

    I see IntrepidTravel.com are running a photographic competition with
    total rip-off rules:

    Quote: - "While we endeavor to publish as many photo competition entries
    as possible in our brochures, we cannot guarantee that all will make the
    pages."
    Interpretation: "We will use your images as much as we can for our own
    ends, and you as an amateur will be ecstatic to see your image in print"

    Quote: "While the photographer retains the copyright of all images
    submitted as competition entries, Intrepid Travel and our photocomp
    partners reserve the right to unlimited use of the photos for company
    brochures, promotion and advertising."
    Interpretation: "you can keep your copyright, it doesn't matter a damn
    coz we and our friends can use your image when and how and as much as we
    want for as long as we want"
    Such use by them will reduce the value of your image to other potential
    buyers/users as well.

    Quote: "The winning images for each category will be entered into the
    Lonely Planet Image Library. The images will then be subject to Lonely
    Planet Images Terms & Conditions."
    Interpretation: more free use of your images.

    And to add insult to injury, the prizes are nothing special.

    Colin D.
     
    Colin D, Apr 25, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Colin D

    Pete D Guest

    For an "amateur" I don't think that this is that much of a problem. For
    anyone that intends to make money from photography it may be a worry.
     
    Pete D, Apr 25, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Colin D

    Scott Howard Guest

    This "competition" has been going on for more years than I could bother
    counting (it was certainly around in 1999 when I first travelled with
    Intrepid), and I certainly don't see any problem with it.

    It's all about context - this is a competition for people who have
    travelled on an Intrepid Travel trip, and want to share their photos
    further than their Blog. I know people who have had their photos
    published in their brochures, and were ecstatic about the fact. These
    are people who have taken photos with a digicam worth a few hundred,
    and never expected to see their photos/names in print.

    The conditions are clearly advertised, the prize is not insignificant,
    but the real "prize" in a competition is bragging rights!

    Scott.
     
    Scott Howard, Apr 25, 2006
    #3
  4. Colin D

    Planeguy Guest

    Hmm, an amateur I know won an overseas travel package through Intrepid
    valued at $15,000 by entering a photo comp. Similar conditions, but I
    don;t think that they were too bad for her ;-)
     
    Planeguy, Apr 25, 2006
    #4
  5. Hey at least you get to keep copyright. There was one recently (getaway
    i think) where you lost copyright. That IMO is a rip-off. This comp
    seems more aimed at amateurs, for whom bragging rights are usually worth
    much more than a few quid made off a print.
     
    Graham Fountain, Apr 25, 2006
    #5
  6. Colin D

    POTD.com.au Guest

    That's fine for the amateurs, but it does nothing for the professional who
    would otherwise be generating income from the images used. Food on table
    and all that....
     
    POTD.com.au, Apr 25, 2006
    #6
  7. Colin D

    Pete D Guest

    Not aimed at them is it so all is well!
     
    Pete D, Apr 25, 2006
    #7
  8. Colin D

    POTD.com.au Guest

    Don't think so..... the competitions are designed for no other reason but to
    avoid paying for professional work.

    Do this to any other industry and there would be rioting in the streets and
    calls of "scab labour"
     
    POTD.com.au, Apr 25, 2006
    #8
  9. Colin D

    Pete D Guest

    And as far as I can see they are not getting "professional work", if you
    don't like they way they run the comp them don't send in your "snaps".
    Sure!
     
    Pete D, Apr 25, 2006
    #9
  10. Colin D

    Scott Howard Guest

    Oh puleese... not that old chestnut again...
    If an amateur with a $300 digicam can produce a photo well enough to use
    in their brochure, why do they need professionals?

    Personally I love the fact that most/all of the photos in their brochure
    were taken by Intrepid travellers or leaders. It gives it a much more
    realistic feel - far more than you'd get using stock photos.
    If I turn to page 9 of their current brochure I see a photo of two Laos
    hill-tribe girls that I have met (and have a photo off myself!). In last
    years was a photo of the local guide who I climbed Mt Kinabalu in Boreno
    with, and on page 48 of this years is a photo taken at the top of that
    hill by one of the people I climbed it with. Page 59 has a photo the
    Yurt I spent a night in a few years back.

    You just don't get that with a professional photographer, and especially
    not with stock.

    Scott.
     
    Scott Howard, Apr 25, 2006
    #10
  11. Pete,
    what do you earn your living doing?

    How would you react if suddenly there was a source of 'free'
    goods/services in that field?

    But it would be OK, because it'd be aimed at the amateur in your field,
    not the professional. You'd still sell plenty of your goods/services
    wouldn't you? Despite the availability of 'free' products/services?

    I think not.

    These competitions are designed to source free or cheap images for the
    host organisation, to avoid paying commercial fees for them. It erodes
    the market place and does nothing to further the field of photography.

    Sadly, the government agency I work for is about to launch just such a
    competition, for exactly those reasons. It will maintain moral copyright
    but the photographer gives up their commercial rights. I've made my
    objections quite clear, but the comp will still proceed. [sigh]

    It just means one fewer potential clients for my (or any other
    photographer's) rural/landscape photography. And as there are fewer and
    fewer clients in the market due to such competitions, it may be that
    there is no market left to support me going full-time as a photographer,
    and I'll be stuck in a cubicle 8-4 for a while yet. Which actually
    isn't too bad - the lighting sucks during those hours! ;)
     
    Andrew Hennell, Apr 25, 2006
    #11
  12. <snip> I agree. I like that aspect of it too. What I would like more
    is if they paid their 'amateur' photographers a reasonable fee for each
    image used. That might be as little as $100 per use, but it would
    establish that there is an intrinsic value to the image and the creator.
    It would provide the company with an opportunity cost should it not be
    available free of charge. I imagine it would make their 'amateur'
    photographers rather happy too.
    no arguement about that - stock photography is the 'no frills' option.
    Commissioning a photographer for a shoot is the expensive option.
    Paying their travellers for the use of their images is a good compromise.
     
    Andrew Hennell, Apr 25, 2006
    #12
  13. Colin D

    POTD.com.au Guest

    I am not familiar with Intrepid and have no problem with that, if as you
    say, that is the nature/style of the image they are after, as these can only
    come from "within".

    I guess my comment was more generally aimed at the comps that are designed
    to simply gather bulk images for the smallest possible outlay. These images
    are then used to build a library and their use continues way past the
    competition needs. These often end up being repeatedly on-sold as
    "professional" images with no remuneration awarded to the photographer.
     
    POTD.com.au, Apr 25, 2006
    #13
  14. Colin D

    Pete D Guest

    Actually the field I am in there are lots of "amatuers" getting paid for
    what they do, it in no way makes any difference to me earning my living.
    Very true.
    The few photographers that this may affect will only be in a small way and
    if it does stop them making a living then they should never have been there
    in the first place.
     
    Pete D, Apr 25, 2006
    #14
  15. Colin D

    POTD.com.au Guest

    One competition in isolation may not seem much, but multiply this by the
    total amount of comps and then factor in the perpetual reuse of the images,
    and you have something that severely effects our industry.
     
    POTD.com.au, Apr 25, 2006
    #15
  16. Having spent most of my work in the computer sales/repair and
    photographic sales, I have always had to compete against low-cost
    competitors. When in business with a shopfront, you have to charge at
    least $60/hour or add 15% markup to goods to pay the staff, rent and
    bills, before you put bread on your own table. Actual figures vary
    depending on location etc, but these are good averages. There always
    have been, and always will be backyarders, part-timers, websites etc
    with practically no overheads, selling goods with 5% margin or doing
    repairs for $20/hour. There always have been and always will be "friends
    who are computer experts" who will do the job for free, so yes, I have
    been in competition with people who do my job, but aren't relying on it
    to put food on the table.
    Competing on price alone is a recipe for bankruptcy - just as a
    professional photographer working at amateur rates would starve. The
    trick is to convince people you provide value-for-money, not cheapest
    service.
    Laws of the market place will always apply though. If the only people
    who enter these comps are the people who don't want to get paid, then
    they will only be attracting images from a small field, and at a quality
    level worth what they are paying.
    I was recently personally invited to enter a staff competition at my
    work. On offer were some very good prizes. I declined because I had to
    sign over copyright - being for work I wouldn't mind giving them
    non-exclusive use for free on the chance of winning the prizes (I really
    wanted the prizes on offer), but I wasn't prepared to give them
    exclusive use, so I declined. Not wanting to sound conceited, but the
    images I would have submitted were far superior to what they got. My
    point is, had the terms of the competition been more
    photographer-friendly, they would have got better images - not just from
    myself, but probably also from other staff who didn't enter for the same
    reason.
    I wouldn't be too concerned - these types of clients generally wouldn't
    be prepared to pay the price anyway. In the past they've normally used a
    senior person with a point and shooter to take very average shots, or
    stock photography (which is the fast-food of photography).
     
    Graham Fountain, Apr 25, 2006
    #16
  17. Colin D

    Phred Guest

    These competitions are designed to source free or cheap images for the
    host organisation, to avoid paying commercial fees for them. It erodes
    the market place and does nothing to further the field of photography.

    Sadly, the government agency I work for is about to launch just such a
    competition, for exactly those reasons. It will maintain moral copyright
    but the photographer gives up their commercial rights. I've made my
    objections quite clear, but the comp will still proceed. [sigh]

    It just means one fewer potential clients for my (or any other
    photographer's) rural/landscape photography. And as there are fewer and
    fewer clients in the market due to such competitions, it may be that
    there is no market left to support me going full-time as a photographer,
    and I'll be stuck in a cubicle 8-4 for a while yet. Which actually
    isn't too bad - the lighting sucks during those hours! ;)[/QUOTE]

    ROTFLOL! You're earning a bloody salary as a friggin' public servant
    and you don't think you're somehow competing with the poor bastards
    who are actually trying to live off what they earn from photography?

    Cheers, Phred.
     
    Phred, Apr 26, 2006
    #17
  18. I'm not sure how my place of employment affects this. With the
    exception of the last four weeks of my life, I've worked in the private
    sector, mostly self employed.

    That aside, I do compete with professional photographers. I quote and
    charge realistic commercial rates for my work, and often lose jobs to
    others who don't factor in the real costs of running a business, having
    pro kit, paying insurance, etc. [shrug] it's a nice sideline for me,
    but I don't undercut the industry I'd often prefer to be working in full
    time.
     
    Andrew Hennell, Apr 26, 2006
    #18
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.