When someone uses photos of your boat for their commercial gain

[CLB]

What is interesting about this thread is that I could take a pic of the OPs boat and give it to the sailing school, and they could use it in exactly the same way but the OP could not do anything about it. It would still give the wrong 'impression' that it was his boat that was being used, but no copyright laws would have been broken.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I'll start doing your profession for free, devalue your product, and put you out of business...and I'll be 'flattered' in the process.

If you can't do better than an amateur who is happy to make pictures available for free, you probably shouldn't be in business ... where I guess you are probably undercutting Beken and devaluing their product,

It's tough, but I'm afraid that just because someone wants to make a living doing something doesn't give them any right to do so.

 

[thesaintlyone]

If you can't do better than an amateur who is happy to make pictures available for free, you probably shouldn't be in business ... where I guess you are probably undercutting Beken and devaluing their product,

It's tough, but I'm afraid that just because someone wants to make a living doing something doesn't give them any right to do so.

The problem is that amateur photographers are so eager to see there photo used (ego thing) that the requirement for paid for images is getting less. Plus amateur is not a statement of quality its a statement of not getting paid for your images.

To put it in context its the equivalent of car mechanics coming along and fixing your car for free may still get a quality job done but if everyone starts doing the same sooner or later there will be no reason to pay a professional mechanic to do the job.

Would you then make that same statement to all the Professional mechanics that struggle to make ends meet

As far as the site is concerned unless that page changef dramatically and the OP's boat is called winsom then they never led anyone astray as the page clearly states that the boat is called winsom.

The real lesson here is check what licence you have on your flickr or other photo sharing sites

 

[Seajet]

If you can't do better than an amateur who is happy to make pictures available for free, you probably shouldn't be in business ... where I guess you are probably undercutting Beken and devaluing their product,

It's tough, but I'm afraid that just because someone wants to make a living doing something doesn't give them any right to do so.

Agreed, but the problem for the pro photographer has been - since the 1980's anyway and certainly since digital - that the pro will do a better job every time, for a start considering angle of of sun before a shoot, especially important with aerial photography - but the average punter would rather have a mediocre pic of their house / boat / car etc for free, rather than paying for a pro one by someone with years of training and experience !

Personally as an ex-pro photographer of aeroplanes and happy amateur sailor, I've never thought much of Beken's very pedestrian shots, Rick Tomlinson is the guy for proper sailing pics.

 

[Otter]

Personally as an ex-pro photographer of aeroplanes and happy amateur sailor, I've never thought much of Beken's very pedestrian shots, Rick Tomlinson is the guy for proper sailing pics.

And a terrifically nice chap, went to the same crap school as me but gave me my first sailing lesson.

 

[JumbleDuck]

The problem is that amateur photographers are so eager to see there photo used (ego thing) that the requirement for paid for images is getting less. Plus amateur is not a statement of quality its a statement of not getting paid for your images.

Sure. But so what? Should amateurs not put on plays because there are professional actors? Should yacht crews not fish because there is a fishing industry? Is it fair for clubs to take money from the professionals by maintaining their own moorings?

To put it in context its the equivalent of car mechanics coming along and fixing your car for free may still get a quality job done but if everyone starts doing the same sooner or later there will be no reason to pay a professional mechanic to do the job.

Again, so what? If something becomes easy for the amateur, why should we worry unduly about the now redundant professionals? Washing machines have made the job of laundress almost vanish. Big deal.

Would you then make that same statement to all the Professional mechanics that struggle to make ends meet

Yup. Why should I pay anyone do do anything if someone is willing to do a good job for free? A friend and I share accommodation for our classic cars and help each other out with jobs on them, and I'm afraid I really don't feel any huge guilt about barefoot mechanics' children, looking in dustbins for crusts to eat.

By the way, when I needed headshots done for professional purposes, I paid a photographer to do them, and my showreel was professionally edited. Worth every penny (quite a lot of them) in both cases.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Agreed, but the problem for the pro photographer has been - since the 1980's anyway and certainly since digital - that the pro will do a better job every time ...

I agree. But the professional has only himself/herself to blame if the punter isn't persuaded to pay the extra.

I can think of one Yachting Magazine which saves money by employing a freelance photographer to write articles for them. I wonder how trained and experienced professional journalists and writers feel about that ... ?

 

[Seajet]

Jumbleduck,

I'm not sure who you mean, but my boat has been subject to magazine reviews twice.

David harding of PBO turned up alone with a camera, notepad and tape measure; he asked me to organise club member Nathan Rowsel in the club rescue boat as a photo-ship which David transferred to and from.

He got some good pics, as a pro photographer myself I think he did well, especially as PBO seemed to be giving him breadline pay !

When Sailing Today reviewed the boat it was very different; Duncan Kent met me in Chchester Harbour on the - chartered - biggest RIB I've ever seen, with pro photographer Rick Buettner and about 10 hangers on from the office on a jolly !

Rick got better pictures, but I think that was down to two factors; it was a sunnier day, and Rick & Duncan seemed to have a practised routine giving good looking shots, like crash-tacking the boat creating a lot of white water - but if one looks closely at the telltales, she's completely stalled !

This sort of licence goes on all the time of course; in the P & O cruise adverts with Rob...can't remember his name right now, Welsh comedian / actor - he's shown on a pointy secluded bit of the ship on his own; as cruise ships have huge transoms full of sunbeds, it seems he was on the bow and they were going astern for the picture...

Stalled but looks good ! -

 

[thesaintlyone]

"Sure. But so what? Should amateurs not put on plays because there are professional actors? Should yacht crews not fish because there is a fishing industry? Is it fair for clubs to take money from the professionals by maintaining their own moorings?

I don't know an amateur photographer or actor for that matter out there who wouldn't like to get paid for what they do for free
Alot of photographers still have the belief that if you want to get paid for photography you have to get noticed as a quality photographer first, hence they give their photos to news agencies for free in the vain hope that they will eventually get offered a position. which in reality is not the case. What you have to do is take images that will sell and then put those images in the hands of the right people. Nobody cares anymore if you have a name in photography only if your pictures are right. so in essence the people doing it for free are helping to kill a market that was once very lucrative that they would love to work in but cant cause its dying and they won't make ends meet.

"Again, so what? If something becomes easy for the amateur, why should we worry unduly about the now redundant professionals? Washing machines have made the job of laundress almost vanish. Big deal."

"Yup. Why should I pay anyone do do anything if someone is willing to do a good job for free? A friend and I share accommodation for our classic cars and help each other out with jobs on them, and I'm afraid I really don't feel any huge guilt about barefoot mechanics' children, looking in dustbins for crusts to eat."

All I can say to that is I hope your profession never goes this way, but its Dog eat Dog for some I guess.

 

[JumbleDuck]

All I can say to that is I hope your profession never goes this way, but its Dog eat Dog for some I guess.

It's not dog eat dog, it's just how the world goes. There is no point demanding the right to make a living from something which plenty of people are willing to do for free. Did professional photographers have any thought for unemployment rates in the chemical and processing industries when they went digital?

 

[Seajet]

Actually I as a pro and my uncle as a keen amateur wanted to stay with wet film and chemicals - self because I think digital looks artificial and lacks feel, and uncle because he's bloody stubborn and hates the word ' computer ' !

There's a niche market for wet film, but I'm not enough of a super-confident BS type to push it - and my uncle pays through the nose for his hobby transparency shots of flowers and ( feathered ) birds.

You are completely right though, the world has moved on; though the idea of mobile phones taking decent pics - despite brainless operators - still seems rather optimistic to me, I always have a proper ( digital ) camera handy wherever I go.

 

[RichardS]

It's not dog eat dog, it's just how the world goes. There is no point demanding the right to make a living from something which plenty of people are willing to do for free. Did professional photographers have any thought for unemployment rates in the chemical and processing industries when they went digital?

As I said many posts again, this is the very essence of free-market capitalism ........ before I was told by several posters that I don't know what I'm talking about.

Richard

 

[JumbleDuck]

Actually I as a pro and my uncle as a keen amateur wanted to stay with wet film and chemicals - self because I think digital looks artificial and lacks feel, and uncle because he's bloody stubborn and hates the word ' computer ' !

There's a niche market for wet film, but I'm not enough of a super-confident BS type to push it - and my uncle pays through the nose for his hobby transparency shots of flowers and ( feathered ) birds.

You are completely right though, the world has moved on; though the idea of mobile phones taking decent pics - despite brainless operators - still seems rather optimistic to me, I always have a proper ( digital ) camera handy wherever I go.

I recently inherited a Leica R6.2. It's about 800 times better than I am, but what a joy to use. It's funny going back to a world with a week at least between pressing the shutter and seeing the results.

 

[Blue Sunray]

"Sure. But so what? Should amateurs not put on plays because there are professional actors? Should yacht crews not fish because there is a fishing industry? Is it fair for clubs to take money from the professionals by maintaining their own moorings?

I don't know an amateur photographer or actor for that matter out there who wouldn't like to get paid for what they do for free
Alot of photographers still have the belief that if you want to get paid for photography you have to get noticed as a quality photographer first, hence they give their photos to news agencies for free in the vain hope that they will eventually get offered a position. which in reality is not the case. What you have to do is take images that will sell and then put those images in the hands of the right people. Nobody cares anymore if you have a name in photography only if your pictures are right. so in essence the people doing it for free are helping to kill a market that was once very lucrative that they would love to work in but cant cause its dying and they won't make ends meet.

"Again, so what? If something becomes easy for the amateur, why should we worry unduly about the now redundant professionals? Washing machines have made the job of laundress almost vanish. Big deal."

"Yup. Why should I pay anyone do do anything if someone is willing to do a good job for free? A friend and I share accommodation for our classic cars and help each other out with jobs on them, and I'm afraid I really don't feel any huge guilt about barefoot mechanics' children, looking in dustbins for crusts to eat."

All I can say to that is I hope your profession never goes this way, but its Dog eat Dog for some I guess.

Indeed it is. To take one, perhaps more surprising example, if you fly on some of the 'budget operators' you may find yourself in a passenger jet flown by someone who is either not being paid or indeed is paying for the privilege.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel...ots-pay-on-some-low-cost-flights-9028635.html

 

[thesaintlyone]

Ahhh there we go why should anyone pay airline pilots when so many will do if for free lol

 

[snooks]

If you can't do better than an amateur who is happy to make pictures available for free, you probably shouldn't be in business ... where I guess you are probably undercutting Beken and devaluing their product,

It's tough, but I'm afraid that just because someone wants to make a living doing something doesn't give them any right to do so.

As with much in life, you get what you pay for (and I'm not cheap). I don't undercut anyone, I charge what my images are worth. If clients can't afford that, it is their problem, not mine. I can't afford an Aston Martin, but is that Aston's problem that it produces a quality product I can't afford? No, it's my problem.

All images have a value to someone.

I may be a freelance photographer, writing articles for, and editing, the technical section of Yachting Monthly, but there are far more journos that have been given a camera by their boss and told to take photos – to save the cost of a photographer – than the other way around. It soon becomes obvious that no matter how good someone is with words it doesn't directly correlate to the quality of their images ;0)

A photographer should always come back with good images, words describing Bora bora can be rewritten from an office, out of focus images can't be reshot :0)

The difference is I'm competing on a level playing field, I'm paid the same as it costs it would cost for words and for images. After all that is what my clients get, however being one person I save on the cost of one set of expenses, one flight, one hotel, etc rather than the publication having to pay for two.

However the pro/am discussion takes the focus away from the fact the even the Am deserves to be paid for their work, if the client is gaining value from it.

 

[JumbleDuck]

As with much in life, you get what you pay for (and I'm not cheap). I don't undercut anyone, I charge what my images are worth. If clients can't afford that, it is their problem, not mine.

If you starve in a gutter because potential clients don't agree about the value - that's all a generic "you" and not personal - then you (and Aston-Martin) do have a problem. There are lots of threads here saying "I'm trying to sell my boat, but no-one will pay what she's worth. What should I do?" and the answer is always the same.

However the pro/am discussion takes the focus away from the fact the even the Am deserves to be paid for their work, if the client is gaining value from it.

Perhaps, but only if the amateur wants to be paid, and if there are plenty of free suppliers around the market sets the going rate very low indeed.

 

[Seajet]

I recently inherited a Leica R6.2. It's about 800 times better than I am, but what a joy to use. It's funny going back to a world with a week at least between pressing the shutter and seeing the results.

Years ago when I temped at a chandlery we set up a stand flogging Tasco binoculars - good enough but lacking the compass we'd expect nowadays.

A chav with hat wrong way round asked ' aintcha got any quality, Leica ? '

" Sir if you wish to use Leica binoculars offshore that is your choice; are you by any chance familiar with sailing offshore ? "

 

[benjenbav]

As with much in life, you get what you pay for (and I'm not cheap). I don't undercut anyone, I charge what my images are worth. If clients can't afford that, it is their problem, not mine. I can't afford an Aston Martin, but is that Aston's problem that it produces a quality product I can't afford? No, it's my problem.

All images have a value to someone.

I may be a freelance photographer, writing articles for, and editing, the technical section of Yachting Monthly, but there are far more journos that have been given a camera by their boss and told to take photos – to save the cost of a photographer – than the other way around. It soon becomes obvious that no matter how good someone is with words it doesn't directly correlate to the quality of their images ;0)

A photographer should always come back with good images, words describing Bora bora can be rewritten from an office, out of focus images can't be reshot :0)

The difference is I'm competing on a level playing field, I'm paid the same as it costs it would cost for words and for images. After all that is what my clients get, however being one person I save on the cost of one set of expenses, one flight, one hotel, etc rather than the publication having to pay for two.

However the pro/am discussion takes the focus away from the fact the even the Am deserves to be paid for their work, if the client is gaining value from it.

I have a photograph taken by Lester McCarthy which is of a fairly mundane subject (me, steering a boat at night) but which I know I couldn't have taken in a hundred years with an unlimited budget and the best equipment money could buy. I actually didn't pay for it, it was given to me in return for facilitating the shoot. But I would definitely have paid for it because of the photographer's skill in framing and realising the subject. Also, he managed to catch my best side (the back of my head) which is a plus.

 

[Hoolie]

Having looked at the blue sailing website I think it's quite likely they don't own or have access to ANY of the boats they feature. They are all very different and I imagine it's just a marketing exercise to decide what type of boat they should buy. They have no images now so I would think the OP's rights are safe.