Mopar Muscle Association UK

After talking to our very own Dave Mc & the lovely Paula at the Ace last week I got talking to another photog who was taking up all the room with his tripod.
Just making conversation cos I was looking at the car he was snapping, I asked if he was doing it for himself or was he a pro (hope that doesnt sound rude?). He said he was a pro and works mainly for the classic mags like Octane, Classic Cars etc.
He left me his card to check out his website

Look here for his Ace pics, and they are pretty ace too (sorry)

http://www.photograph-er.co.uk/shows_an ... /index.htm

His website's not as good as yours tho Dave!

He was at the Krispy Kreme meet too

I had camera envy at his collection of white lenses

Certainly puts them to good use looking at his other pics.
Not being that techy in the camera dept, would that be the BIG white telephoto jobbies?
He wasnt using one of them when I spoke to him, think he said it was a 12mm lens he was using for the pics of the blue fender-less Beetle.
V...E...R...Y .....................W...I...D...E..................... A...N...G...L...E

Jolly nice chap though. But all photogs are arent they?

Nor his prices Rob.....and you all thought I was expensive!
In this pic you can see my flash going off as i shot one of him about to fall off the roof with the weight of that huge tripod And I hate super wide angles used on cars.....!

bet that miffed him !!

hmmm, copywrite is an odd thing, i reckon if he can copywrite an image of hundreds of people in a photo, then all of those contibuting to the photo, ie everyone in it, aswell as the photographer, should be able to get royalties !

i mean, if daveMc were to sell a naked pic of daveR and jeff (no, not again), i'm sure they'd want a cut of the 45p that zoo might pay for it

Don't you mean "Ripley's believe it or not"?

Though the copyright (copywrite? I dunno) always belongs to the person who took the photo, at least initially.

Ah, photographic copyright is a very complex thing Hugh....unlike musical copyright. But every photographer who puts up images of people on the web leaves them selves wide open for law suits should the people in the image be offended and should really get permission by way of a signed model release....but in a photograph of a packed Wembley Stadium that is near impossible!

"Copyright law gives the creator of an image or work the right to control the way in which the image is used. It also gives the creator the right to license others to use the image in return for a fee."

"No copyright photograph may be copied without the permission of the copyright owner.
Photographers hold copyright in their own work unless agreed otherwise.
The situation is different for employed photographers who create work in the course of their employment, here the copyright belongs to the employer.
Photographers have the right to assert their moral right to be credited as the author of a photograph.
Photographers have the right to object to treatment of their photograph which distorts, mutilates or is otherwise damaging to their reputation.
Copyright duration is usually 70 years from the end of the year in which the author dies.
It is the responsibility of the user / publisher to check that they have permission, are within the terms of any licence, or are acting within the fair practice or other permissions granted by law.
Unauthorised copying of a copyright image or photograph or failure to give credit are infringements of law and as such can be subject to criminal sanctions such as a fine or imprisonment or civil sanctions such as claims for damages, accounts, delivery up or injunctions precluding one's use of the images. "


Formula One photographers go overboard protecting their images.....fair enough, its big bucks....but take a look on here and see how far you get before you notice the word "copyright"

http://www.andylees.com/pitlane_photos/ ... hotos.html

them selves wide open for law suits should the people in the image be offended

Hmmm!

Aha!

As I understand it if the photo is newsworthy you don't need a release from anyone in the photo. This is how paparazzi get away with it. I would see these photos as reporting a newsworthy event that took place. It also depends on use though, if they were used to advertise something then the context would change.

I start my photography course NEXT week though so I might be wrong

Hugh,

nice post, a piece of tomato went down the wrong pipe when I read that. One of the secretaries had to perform the Heinlich manouvre on me to free it.

Very funny old bean.

Zoo indeed

Just out of interest, as Dave R is the only one of us to go publicly nude....how was the permissions granted for the use of that Dave....did everyone have to sign a model release on the day?
Nick you will find that there are different rules for papers and the web I think. Papparazzi get away with murder though.