Ethics Violation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Browncoat

Senior Member
Perhaps ethics is a poor choice of words, but I don't know how else to pose the situation. Here are the details...

My son is part of a youth soccer league. This Saturday, a local pro will be doing the "official" team shoot. Photo packages have already been sent home, and naturally, I won't be buying anything. I've seen what is offered, and can do it all as good or better myself at a fraction of the cost. Of course the whole team will be there for the shoot. I can take a photo of my son anytime, but I'm also interested in having one of the whole team together. Would I be in the wrong by lining up next to the pro and basically taking pictures alongside him for the group shot?

This will all be done outdoors, so I don't see anything wrong with it. What do you guys think?
 

KennethHamlett

New member
Anthony, I don't think it's a matter of ethics. I think it's a matter of consideration. If the local pro has taken the time to arrange the team and set up the shot to his liking, it would be inconsiderate to "invade" his shot by shooting at the same time, especially standing next to him. Also, it can be a distraction to the team when some of the members inadvertently look your way instead of where the photographer directs them to look. Maybe you can sneak one in after he's done but before the team disperses.
 

Carolina Photo Guy

Senior Member
Perhaps ethics is a poor choice of words, but I don't know how else to pose the situation. Here are the details...

My son is part of a youth soccer league. This Saturday, a local pro will be doing the "official" team shoot. Photo packages have already been sent home, and naturally, I won't be buying anything. I've seen what is offered, and can do it all as good or better myself at a fraction of the cost. Of course the whole team will be there for the shoot. I can take a photo of my son anytime, but I'm also interested in having one of the whole team together. Would I be in the wrong by lining up next to the pro and basically taking pictures alongside him for the group shot?

This will all be done outdoors, so I don't see anything wrong with it. What do you guys think?


Why not consider it from the local "pro's" standpoint.
He or she has probably invested a lot of money in camera equipment, software and printer equipment. This person has possibly trained, either at the college level or perhaps local school.
How would you like it if some guy that just bought a camera with a kit lens wanted to take advantage of the shots that YOU have just set up and give the impression that he is a professional also?
When you can answer that question HONESTLY, then you will know what to do.

Hope this helps.

Pete

And Yes. It IS a matter of ethics. Your own personal ethics.
 

KennethHamlett

New member
Why not consider it from the local "pro's" standpoint.
He or she has probably invested a lot of money in camera equipment, software and printer equipment. This person has possibly trained, either at the college level or perhaps local school.
How would you like it if some guy that just bought a camera with a kit lens wanted to take advantage of the shots that YOU have just set up and give the impression that he is a professional also?
When you can answer that question HONESTLY, then you will know what to do.

Hope this helps.

Pete

And Yes. It IS a matter of ethics. Your own personal ethics.

Carolina is right...it is a matter of personal ethics as well.
 
You're also potentially "stealing" business from him. In this economy, what happens when you take the team photo, and the parents of the children come to you asking for a copy of that photo?
I would HIGHLY recommend that if you choose this course of action, that you approach the photographer BEFORE the photo session starts, and ask him if it's alright that you take "a couple" of photos of the team for personal use. Showing that level of consideration, and realizing that the food on his table might depend on selling packages to the parents, agreeing NOT to share your photos - that might get you permission.

-Gregory Smith
 

KennethHamlett

New member
Totally agree with Gregory!! Plus technically a court could see it as IP infringement if the photographer wanted to protect his turf. One test of intellectual property infringement is the test of "substantial similarity". A person can sue for copyright infringement if "substantial similarity" exist between his image and another image. In certain states like New York and Georgia there's a thing called "total concept and feel". When a photographer has copied the overall concept and feel of another photographer's image an infringement could occur. So, you might open a can of worms that you don't really want to open should the photographer dislike your approach.

***I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on television. So please consider this information just that, information and NOT legal advice!***
 

Fotojo

Senior Member
Anthony
Having been the Photographer that has been put into the position you are inquiring about. I would recomend let the man do his job and you make other arrangements. Ask the team to stay back and you set-up your own pose or do something before a game. But depending on how many shooters and kids there are he may deal with upwards of 200 plus kids in a day and the necessary paper trail to match photo's to child. So if you do not think the chance of his stress being high and patience for a parent taking potencial sales are low you might want to think that over a little more. I would do everything I could with taping off area to keep there distance to shooting tried not to make it easy for them to snap shots.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
I didn't want this topic to trend this direction, because I strongly disagree about how a "pro" photographer is defined. Gear and education are not prerequisites in my book. If parents approach me about my pictures vs. his, then what does that say about the lines between pro and amateur? His photos should be better, isn't that kind of the point?

My biggest ethics question was the setup and time factor. The team is there to pose for him, for shots that some people are going to pay for. I wouldn't infringe or interrupt that process, and fully plan on asking him before taking a team photo myself. I doubt there will be any issue with it, as long as I'm not in the way or a distraction. I've been a 2nd shooter at weddings before, so I know the drill. My guess is, we'll end up talking shop for a bit and there won't a problem at all. If there is an issue, then I understand completely.
 

KennethHamlett

New member
I didn't want this topic to trend this direction, because I strongly disagree about how a "pro" photographer is defined. Gear and education are not prerequisites in my book. If parents approach me about my pictures vs. his, then what does that say about the lines between pro and amateur? His photos should be better, isn't that kind of the point?

My biggest ethics question was the setup and time factor. The team is there to pose for him, for shots that some people are going to pay for. I wouldn't infringe or interrupt that process, and fully plan on asking him before taking a team photo myself. I doubt there will be any issue with it, as long as I'm not in the way or a distraction. I've been a 2nd shooter at weddings before, so I know the drill. My guess is, we'll end up talking shop for a bit and there won't a problem at all. If there is an issue, then I understand completely.

Well it sounds like you have thought this through. Here's a question. How do you define "professional photographer"?
 
I define professional as - was the person HIRED/PAID to be there to shoot the people/event/etc. or is this person just someone with a nice set of camera gear? If they're being paid to be there, then they're the "professional" shooter.
Perhaps if you have a nice fisheye or at least 11-16mm you might try to do a team "huddle" image with a remote release.

huddle.jpg


That would be something creative that isn't the typical "posed" shot - and I'm certain you could do it before or after the photographer gets his images.
 

Ruidoso Bill

Senior Member
I think it's just a matter of consideration, you don't have to be a paid pro to show professional courtesy. Folks can get very sensitive about putting bread on the table. It probably has little to do with image quality, however I think a pro should be more consistent with his images.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
EoI - I like the way you think! The huddle image is pretty cool. If it were me, I would do some non-traditional posing as well. I think the shoulder to shoulder team photo approach is outdated and boring.

I know for a fact there will be other parents present with their point-and-shoots during this deal, as there have been in the past. It's never been a problem to get in there and take some shots for personal use. Right or wrong, that's not my dilemma. I understand the business aspect of all of this, and that's what is bothering me. Stepping outside of the box and viewing this from a consumer's point of view: They are purchasing pictures, that's it. The end result. They are not considering time/equipment depreciation/setup/etc. all being factored in to the price. From the outside looking in, I'm just another parent with a camera. But I'm really not...I'm a photographer too.

The basic glamor shot includes a team photo and individual photo on a nifty little soccer background. It's $12. Last year's photo was just fine, no complaints. This year, I want to do it myself just because I can. It's not about the cost or being unhappy with this guy's work...I just want to do it myself. I have the means, so why not?
 
To be quite honest, I'm placing myself in the position of being the photographer. I've had to spend time and resources to get this job. I'm probably not making much money on the sitting fee, just enough to cover my hard expenses (overhead, transportation, etc.), and my only hope of making money to support myself is to sell packages of photos to the parents of the subjects I'm photographing. I don't know the parents, I'm not friends with them, don't have any relationship or anything in common, simply this thin thread of a business contract.

Here comes John Q. Camera, and he wants to stand next to me and "shadow shoot" whatever I'm shooting. There's a big difference between Suzy Soccer mom with her point-n-shoot camera and John Q. Camera. She's most likely got enough knowledge to push a button to download, and push another button to upload to Facebook, while John Q. Camera has his CF tripod and DSLR out there, and the perception is that he knows what Photoshop is, knows how to use it, AND has the benefit (perceived or real) of knowing all the parents, having a common relationship based on kids, interests, etc. AND doesn't have my overhead, or need to profit.

Personally, unless he (or she) asks my permission, and understands where I'm coming from, I'm going to get a bit upset about John Q. Camera "shadow shooting" my work.

On another note, the vast majority of non-photographers don't really know quality that well. I've seen pictures that someone shows me (after finding out I'm a photographer), and they say, "Don't these look great?" It takes tact not to point out that the kid had his eyes closed, but that hardly matters because of the strong shadow on his face giving him raccoon eyes in the mid-day direct sunlight. It's in the details. Most people wouldn't notice if people had their eyes closed in a posed group shot - that's why I take 3 of each formal portrait while doing weddings. It almost guarantees that I can at least clone the open eyes to make sure everyone is looking at the camera and smiling.
 

Carolina Photo Guy

Senior Member
EoI - I like the way you think! The huddle image is pretty cool. If it were me, I would do some non-traditional posing as well. I think the shoulder to shoulder team photo approach is outdated and boring.

I know for a fact there will be other parents present with their point-and-shoots during this deal, as there have been in the past. It's never been a problem to get in there and take some shots for personal use. Right or wrong, that's not my dilemma. I understand the business aspect of all of this, and that's what is bothering me. Stepping outside of the box and viewing this from a consumer's point of view: They are purchasing pictures, that's it. The end result. They are not considering time/equipment depreciation/setup/etc. all being factored in to the price. From the outside looking in, I'm just another parent with a camera. But I'm really not...I'm a photographer too.

The basic glamor shot includes a team photo and individual photo on a nifty little soccer background. It's $12. Last year's photo was just fine, no complaints. This year, I want to do it myself just because I can. It's not about the cost or being unhappy with this guy's work...I just want to do it myself. I have the means, so why not?

I was amazed that this topic has gone as far as it has. To me, the answer is obvious and I think I have made myself well understood.
How-ever, to be completely fair, I have to accept that personal ethics have changed over the years. I am OTD (Older Than Dirt) and so my values may be out of touch with reality.
So I offer an alternative. Why not ask your son what HE would do in the same circumstances. That way you have the advantage of another generation's values to consider.
You also have the advantage of seeing first hand how well you are teaching values to your son.

Pete
 

KennethHamlett

New member
To be quite honest, I'm placing myself in the position of being the photographer. I've had to spend time and resources to get this job. I'm probably not making much money on the sitting fee, just enough to cover my hard expenses (overhead, transportation, etc.), and my only hope of making money to support myself is to sell packages of photos to the parents of the subjects I'm photographing. I don't know the parents, I'm not friends with them, don't have any relationship or anything in common, simply this thin thread of a business contract.

Here comes John Q. Camera, and he wants to stand next to me and "shadow shoot" whatever I'm shooting. There's a big difference between Suzy Soccer mom with her point-n-shoot camera and John Q. Camera. She's most likely got enough knowledge to push a button to download, and push another button to upload to Facebook, while John Q. Camera has his CF tripod and DSLR out there, and the perception is that he knows what Photoshop is, knows how to use it, AND has the benefit (perceived or real) of knowing all the parents, having a common relationship based on kids, interests, etc. AND doesn't have my overhead, or need to profit.

Personally, unless he (or she) asks my permission, and understands where I'm coming from, I'm going to get a bit upset about John Q. Camera "shadow shooting" my work.

On another note, the vast majority of non-photographers don't really know quality that well. I've seen pictures that someone shows me (after finding out I'm a photographer), and they say, "Don't these look great?" It takes tact not to point out that the kid had his eyes closed, but that hardly matters because of the strong shadow on his face giving him raccoon eyes in the mid-day direct sunlight. It's in the details. Most people wouldn't notice if people had their eyes closed in a posed group shot - that's why I take 3 of each formal portrait while doing weddings. It almost guarantees that I can at least clone the open eyes to make sure everyone is looking at the camera and smiling.

This post puts the light where it needs to shine. Excellent summation.
 

ohkphoto

Snow White
I actually did have this happen to me. I shot a wedding a couple of months ago. As I was shooting the "getting ready" scenes, the mother of the bride asked if it would be alright if her brother-in-law walked "behind me" and took pics. She said HE insisted for permission from me before he did. So what do you do? I appreciated the fact that he asked first. I stated to her that I was using a remote trigger for the flash and if his camera wouldn't interfere with that, it would be alright. So there I was, posing all the pre and post ceremony group shots (the bride had a list of about 100) --trying to do it creatively, and there was this "Canon" shooter literally shooting from behind me.

To have said no would only have made me look like a villain as a person and insecure as a photographer --I just didn't see a graceful way of saying no.

I like EoI's suggestion of doing the creative group shots. Is this the only time the team is going to be together? Why not suggest to everyone to set up a "candid shoot party" of the team on a different day --let other parents with their point and shoot cameras get involved -- and you might get some incredible shots of the team as a group in a more relaxed mode than on the "official photo day". Hope this makes sense.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
I have pretty high standards when it comes to business ethics. I like to think I'm more old fashioned than most, a benefit of having grown up in a small town where life is lived just a little bit slower. That said, I'm also a staunch believer in free enterprise and capitalism. I don't believe in being owed a living, handouts, bailouts, or other such nonsense. A man makes his own way in the world, sink or swim. I fully understand that in the situation I described in this thread, I am asking to impede on someone else's time, and is completely separate from what is detailed below.

I have seen several comments on this and other photography-related forums that more or less put pro photographers in a bad light...at least in my opinion. Topics very much like this one are often hot debates where it's pros vs. joes. Statements similar to these are constantly at the forefront of this battle on the side of the pros:

  • I have invested $______ in time/gear over the years.
  • I have a family to feed.
  • This is my business/only means of making money.
  • The competition's prices are too low.
  • I own the rights to this/that/everything else. Pay me.
  • I can't make money in this economy.
There are dozens of others. Point blank, I have to say...so what? ABC Widget Co. has been around for 20 years. They make a decent product and charge a fair price. XYZ Gadget Co. comes along, makes a better product, and charges less. ABC Widget Co. has a choice: either adapt or go out of business, it's really that simple. So can someone explain to me why pro photographers (by and large) believe they are exempt from the rules of business?

Taking on photography as a business isn't like being a cashier. You don't just walk in and apply for the job. At some point, everyone started with friends, family and their inner circle. They built up a reputation, expanded that circle, and started a small business. Studies have shown that we all know 200 people well. That's where it begins. At some point, the people that I know and the people that you know are going to overlap...and that's where the trouble starts. Suddenly I'm stealing your business or offering services at prices you can't compete with. Or heaven forbid, working for free with a mid-level camera and some budget lighting. This is a lot like selling Avon. The clients you have now may be loyal, but if your best customer's sister-in-law starts selling Avon too...guess what?

There's so much more to say, but I'll let this sink in before posting anything else.
 

Carolina Photo Guy

Senior Member
I have pretty high standards when it comes to business ethics. I like to think I'm more old fashioned than most, a benefit of having grown up in a small town where life is lived just a little bit slower.


AHHH! I see the difference. You have personal ethics AND business ethics.
To me, there is no difference. I am a very simple person. I can only afford ONE set of ethics.
I try to follow the Golden Rule. The real one, not the joke one.
It as worked for me for the past many decades and will work until I bite the big one again.

This has been a spirited debate. A lot of differing opinions and viewpoints.
As for me, this is the last you will hear from me on this subject.
Thank you for letting me be a part of it.

Pete
 

ohkphoto

Snow White
ABC Widget Co. has been around for 20 years. They make a decent product and charge a fair price. XYZ Gadget Co. comes along, makes a better product, and charges less. ABC Widget Co. has a choice: either adapt or go out of business, it's really that simple. So can someone explain to me why pro photographers (by and large) believe they are exempt from the rules of business?

I guess what it comes down to is what defines a "pro photographer"? According to some photo competitions, if you earn at least half of your income from photography, you're considered a professional. That's as close as I've seen anyone define a pro. I don't believe it has anything to do with quality or equipment. Unless you're a "papparazzo" or a "shoot and burn" wedding/event photographer (and those, too, have a place), you develop an "eye" and vision for the images you make. This is why I believe photographers should be considered artists first.

I consider myself a pro photographer. Not because I earn 50% of my income from photography, and not because I'm superior in any way in terms of quality or equipment. But because I deliver what the client wants. And if I can't, I don't take the assignment. When a client seeks out a pro, it's because they want a specific result and expect it ("I want to be a beautiful bride", "I'm not photogenic", I want soft, fuzzy lighting, etc.) And a pro has to deliver (or eat the consequences) because they are being compensated for the service in some way. In art and photography, you're being hired for your vision, and how it translates into photos or whatever your medium is.

So pro photographers are not necessarily "exempting themselves from the rules of business". They have a product that needs to be delivered to that client. It's as simple as that. And getting that vision in print includes posing the subjects, arranging the group, setting up the lighting and props --it is all part of it, whether you're a pro or non-pro.

I would hope that this group, with as many friendly and competent photographers here, can be a cohesive and supportive group for all photographers, pro or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top