Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Photographer


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,094 posts

Posted 24 May 2014 - 12:05 PM

Wilkinsons are official RFL photographers and have 3 guys at the big games with one of them specifically looking for "arty" type photos for use by the RFL in future ad campaigns, even i had taken that photo no one would ever have bought it so whats the point.

 

Wilkinsons thmselves are partly responsible for other guys struggling to make a living, a few years ago during the 4 nations over here with Aus and Nz wilkinsons got the blessing of RFL themselves to gve away every image they took free of charge, Wilkinsons were happy, the RFL paid them, the papers were happy, they got every single image they printed free, guess who were the only ones to lose out

 

It wasn't as an example of the business but an example of the different angle to the photography that being in a privileged spot can help you get.

 

Publishing, both music and written have had to cope with the technological onslaught, photography is no different. Trying to protect yourself from the digital world with ideas of protectionism from the 1950's is futile.

 

I showed you on here the pointlessness of a digital watermark.



Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#42 Gary Coyle

Gary Coyle
  • Coach
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 24 May 2014 - 12:52 PM

It wasn't as an example of the business but an example of the different angle to the photography that being in a privileged spot can help you get.

 

Publishing, both music and written have had to cope with the technological onslaught, photography is no different. Trying to protect yourself from the digital world with ideas of protectionism from the 1950's is futile.

 

I showed you on here the pointlessness of a digital watermark.

Seriuosly, WTF are you babbling on about with the 1950's ######

 

All you did with regard to you showing me the pointlessness of watermarking an image was to show everyone you were a pratt, i dont make the rules and regulations regarding watermarking, all im asked to do is abide by them, if i gave a ###### about my images being hijacked by someone on face book would i have put some high res images in the photography thread.

 

We all get it, youre a rebel and dont live by the rules, a big hurrah to you, just because you can do something doesn't make it right or mean you have to do it, unless of course youre thinking of jumping off the Humber Bridge.


Edited by Gary Coyle, 24 May 2014 - 12:54 PM.


#43 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,094 posts

Posted 24 May 2014 - 01:41 PM

Seriuosly, WTF are you babbling on about with the 1950's ######

 

All you did with regard to you showing me the pointlessness of watermarking an image was to show everyone you were a pratt, i dont make the rules and regulations regarding watermarking, all im asked to do is abide by them, if i gave a ###### about my images being hijacked by someone on face book would i have put some high res images in the photography thread.

 

We all get it, youre a rebel and dont live by the rules, a big hurrah to you, just because you can do something doesn't make it right or mean you have to do it, unless of course youre thinking of jumping off the Humber Bridge.

 

Get over yourself.



Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#44 Gary Coyle

Gary Coyle
  • Coach
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 24 May 2014 - 03:31 PM

Aye OK, no worries.


Edited by Gary Coyle, 24 May 2014 - 04:08 PM.


#45 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,867 posts

Posted 27 May 2014 - 07:06 AM

I know these daft regulations exist.

 

So why don't they enforce the rules, I see loads of people all the time taking photos with mobiles and never see a jobsworth asking them to stop. 

 

Its like having a regulation that says do not boo the opposition.

Never mind enforce the rules, how many clubs actively encourage people to break them!  Twitter and Instagram of full of requests from clubs for fans to send in photos with specific hash tags!


Edited by shrek, 30 May 2014 - 04:42 PM.


#46 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,077 posts

Posted 27 May 2014 - 07:25 AM

Seriuosly, WTF are you babbling on about with the 1950's ######

 

All you did with regard to you showing me the pointlessness of watermarking an image was to show everyone you were a pratt, i dont make the rules and regulations regarding watermarking, all im asked to do is abide by them, if i gave a ###### about my images being hijacked by someone on face book would i have put some high res images in the photography thread.

 

We all get it, youre a rebel and dont live by the rules, a big hurrah to you, just because you can do something doesn't make it right or mean you have to do it, unless of course youre thinking of jumping off the Humber Bridge.

 

 

jumping off the Humber Bridge.

 

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Don't do it! Think of the traffic congestion as they'll have  to close the bridge!!   :O............................ :biggrin:



#47 Errol Stock

Errol Stock
  • Coach
  • 486 posts

Posted 27 May 2014 - 08:31 AM

I thought this thread would have been short and quiet - how wrong could I be!

 

Here is what happened to me - A simple quest to buy a present;

 

My sons girlfriend is mad keen on Tom Brisco, so I thought I would buy a high quality image of him, get him to sign it and frame it for a Christmas present.

 

I already knew about Gary's web site and profession so I contacted him first - just wanted to buy a photo from him - not allowed!!

 

Looked at Rhinos shop - no good.

Looked on Hull website - no good.

 

Google images - quite a few and some good - but always traced back to Getty Images - and here you hit the wall.

 

Getty assume anyone wanting an image is a business, and you cannot buy it - you "rent" it for a daily fortune!!

 

After a few days searching I stumbled on the Hull Daily Mail website - they sell hi-res pics and at last I found what I wanted - a mere £16 for a corker of a shot.

Getting Tom to sign was the easy bit.

 

But what a load of pratting around for something so simple - and did he get any royalty from that sale to me?

No idea - and neither did he!

 

I can see both sides of this, totally understand why the RFL brought rules in - and for Gary not to be able to sell his own images seems wrong to me.

 

I have equipment capable of producing shots to a professional standard - but the best ones will always be the unobstructed view - as those of Tommy Makinson's tries prove.

 

I have "got away with" taking my gear into championship clubs and grabbing some shots - but don't do it often. It's not worth the hassle.

 

What is beyond doubt - the whole issue needs looking at, camera manufacturers are rapidly packing more and more quality into smaller discreet bodies, the rules need to change and enforcement needs to be possible (phones) and consistent...

 

But I won't be holding my breath!


Edited by Errol Stock, 27 May 2014 - 08:32 AM.


#48 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,867 posts

Posted 27 May 2014 - 09:43 AM

What is beyond doubt - the whole issue needs looking at, camera manufacturers are rapidly packing more and more quality into smaller discreet bodies, the rules need to change and enforcement needs to be possible (phones) and consistent...

 

But I won't be holding my breath!

Google glasses spring to mind, especailly if as I presume they will be tailored towards people who actually wear perscription glasses, can hardly expect people to take them off and leave them at the turnstyles! 

 

My good lady bought a football picture from Getty, had to do a bit of leg work by phone and e-mail, but with the clubs consent sent to getty by e-mail she was able to buy it, I guess its pot luck on who you end up dealing with. 



#49 Manx RL

Manx RL
  • Coach
  • 1,284 posts

Posted 27 May 2014 - 12:26 PM

http://www.gettyimag...m/about-us.aspx


- Adepto Successu Per Tributum Fuga -

#50 Gary Coyle

Gary Coyle
  • Coach
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 01:48 PM

Getty are the biggest crooks going, thay are NOT allowed by the RFL to sell prints just like anyone else but they just dont care, they see themselves as untouchable and flout every single regulation going.



#51 Havenwarrior

Havenwarrior
  • Coach
  • 607 posts

Posted 30 May 2014 - 03:04 PM

Well I got a positive reply from the RFL, and hopefully can get sorted.

Even got an email from John Ledger who mailed me after reading this thread.

So the RFL do read what us fans think and say.


HW

#52 ChrisGS

ChrisGS
  • Coach
  • 359 posts

Posted 01 June 2014 - 12:51 PM

Wilkinsons are official RFL photographers and have 3 guys at the big games with one of them specifically looking for "arty" type photos for use by the RFL in future ad campaigns, even i had taken that photo no one would ever have bought it so whats the point.

 

Wilkinsons thmselves are partly responsible for other guys struggling to make a living, a few years ago during the 4 nations over here with Aus and Nz wilkinsons got the blessing of RFL themselves to gve away every image they took free of charge, Wilkinsons were happy, the RFL paid them, the papers were happy, they got every single image they printed free, guess who were the only ones to lose out

 

So the RFL pay Wilkinsons to take photos and distribute them free of charge to the media, in turn giving the game and the competition more and better exposure than you would imagine it would otherwise get, and that's a bad thing because it affected your ability to make money.

 

I can appreciate that perspective, and maybe that whatever the RFL thought they'd get from it didn't work out as well as they'd hoped, but I don't understand why you fault Wilkinsons for the situation and not the RFL - the organisation that agreed to it. Were the RFL blackmailed by Wilkinsons? No. The RFL agreed to it of their own free will. How is anyone but the RFL responsible.

 

Why slam Wilkinsons and not the RFL?



#53 Gary Coyle

Gary Coyle
  • Coach
  • 7,138 posts

Posted 01 June 2014 - 03:30 PM

Read it again, i said Wilkinsons were only "partly responsible" and did even mention the RFL in my post as well, nothing like being one eyed i suppose, the very first thing any budding or even established photographer has drilled into his head when he takes up covering RL is to never give anything away for free as it devalues yours and everyone elses work, theres little enough money in the game as it, how the hell do you think the trade papers have been able to drastically reduce what they pay for photographs, theyve dropped down from £30 an image to a measly £12. they wont even pay for stuff from Championship or Amateur games because johnny on the sidelines gives it away for free, thats the same Johnny who in a few years time will be wondering why theres no money in the game.

 

One thing the Wilkinsons deal didnt do was to give the game and the competition more and better exposure than you would imagine it would otherwise get, it did exactly the opposite, every newspaper ran with exactly the same images, theres nothing like sifting through the papers on a Monday morning to see everyone is exactly the same, to be fair, i dont think it's something that will be done again, even the big agencies were up in arms over it as they had to pay some guys who work on commission for covering a game without the agencies standing even the smallest chance of trying to make a few quid

 

Cest la vie






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users