MusicPhotographers.net

Getty Cuts Editorial Photographers' Rates to Flat 35%

walter rowe — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 18:56:32 +0000

Category:

Business

Licensing

Photo Business

Stock Agencies

Photo District News is reporting that Getty Images is cutting editorial photographers' rates to a flat 35%.

Photo Shoot Fury UK

stratovana — Sun, 15 May 2011 20:05:50 +0000

Last weekend i was in Belgium at Cafe Metro. A good friend invited me to see Fury UK a rock band from the UK. A week before i asked their manager if it was ok for a short photo shoot with the guys before the show started. Because i wanted the shoot out side the bar when it was light enough. It was oke by their manager and we arrived at 7 pm and around 7.30 pm we had the photo shoot. There was not so much time, but i think i am pretty satisfied about the result and the guys from Fury UK too! Check www.furyuk.com (their blog) ;)

punk photography in Los Angeles in the early days

edwardcolver — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 21:03:17 +0000

I was very active in the Los Angeles punk scene during the birth of the movement in the late 70's and early 80's. Although I have done many types of photography from portraits, street photography and assemblage art photographs, to architectural photography, I am probably best known for my punk photography. My work was featured extensively in the film "AMERICAN HARDCORE" and one of my photographs was used for the cover of the book by the same name.

It was often a challenge capturing these shots from the mosh pit, but I was very determined and just worked really hard at it and went to LOTS of shows.

DPReview | New Sigma SD1 with Foveon X3 4800x3200 Full-Color Sensor

walter rowe — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:49:23 +0000

Category:

Cameras & Accessories

DPReview.com has excerpts from an interview where Foveon and Sigma leads discuss the new 15MP x 3 sensor that was announced at Photikina 2010. This new sensor will be featured in the forthcoming Sigma SD1 that Sigma plans to release in the spring of 2011. The new sensor is 4800 x 3200 pixels times 3, one layer for each of the three RGB color channels.

All other camera sensors only capture a single color channel at each pixel location by applying a Bayer filter over the sensor. To get a full RGB triplet, they have to interpolate the two missing color channel values for each pixel by using the values from their neighboring pixels of different color channels. This is called demosaicing. This interpolation produces jagged edges and other artifacts. In order to compensate for this, these sensors then have to perform anti-aliasing which ends up softening the image. We then have to sharpen these images during post processing to bring back the crisp edges that provide that apparent level of detail. This is a point where noise in the image can be exaggerated, particularly in music photography where we shoot under low light with lots of dark areas in the background.

Foveon sensors employ an architecture of three layers of sensors (like film layers). This permits the Foveon sensor to capture all three RGB color channel values at every pixel location. In turn, Foveon sensors produce sharper, more color accurate images that have smoother transitions and more detail because they do not have to perform the same demosaicing and anti-aliasing that softens the image, and we do not have to apply the same level of sharpening that exaggerates noise.

There are sensors that produce "sharper" images with more detail. However, this is more of a factor of the number of megapixels they capture than the design of the sensor (like the 24MP Nikon D3x or the 21MP Canon 5D Mark II).

The Foveon X3 technology has a lot of potential. With this latest sensor, Sigma and Foveon will be right in the middle of the competition in the megapixel race with the other major camera makers. This is great news. Whether you consider testing and switching to the Sigma technology, or you wait for your own camera maker to develop similar full color technology, this announcement should up the game on the quality of digital imagery coming from all camera makers.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10100504Sigmainterview.asp

Click here for a good illustration of the difference between Bayer sensors and the Foveon layered sensor architecture.

Fstoppers | Behind The Scenes | David Bergman Photographs Bon Jovi

walter rowe — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:04:45 +0000

Category:

Photographers

This is what every music photographer aspires to achieve. Follow along as Fstoppers goes behind the scenes with professional sports and concert photographer David Bergman as he takes us backstage at the New Meadowlands Stadium with one of the biggest bands in the world. David shares his equipment setup, talks about gaining tour access to produce compelling concert photographs, and meets with the band. Check out more of David's work at http://www.davidbergman.net and http://prints.Tourphotographer.com, See more Behind the Scenes videos at www.Fstoppers.com.

http://vimeo.com/14913941

10 Ways to Fight for Your Digital Rights as a Photographer

walter rowe — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 17:50:49 +0000

Category:

Legal

Contracts

Licensing

I received a link to this from Cradoc Software, the makers of fotoBiz and fotoQuote. The article is written by Paul Melchner and makes some excellent points. We see more and more publications moving from print to electronic distribution. We need adapt how we license our work to insure we are paid fairly for web usage.

http://www.cradocfotosoftware.com/tips/10-ways-to-fight-for-your-digital-rights-as-a-photographer.html

A lot of traditional print publications first made their electronic editions free. They are now learning that free doesn't pay the bills, especially as print circulation plumets. Well, free doesn't pay your bills either. In order to assess proper license fees for electronic editions, you need to know how many people will see your work just like you need circulation information from printed editions.

All publications maintain visitor statistics for their site. They use this information to set advertising rates for their web advertisers. This is just like circulation numbers were used to set advertising rates for printed editions.

Don't let publications convince you that web site usage should be only a simple add-on to their print publication fee. They charge advertisers a separate fee for their print and electronic editions. Both fees are based on how many people will see the ads. You should set your license fees separately for web and print usage, and you should be paid fairly for both.

Canon Develops World's Largest CMOS Sensor

walter rowe — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:01:32 +0000

With a 202 x 205 mm (8 x 8 inch) sensor that can capture 60 fps with a mere 0.3 lux of light, could concert videography produce individual still frames so clean and large that there would be no need for traditional concert photography?

TOKYO, August 31, 2010 — Canon Inc. announced today that it has successfully developed the world's largest^*1 CMOS image sensor, with a chip size measuring 202 x 205 mm. Because its expanded size enables greater light-gathering capability, the sensor is capable of capturing images in one one-hundredth the amount of light required by a professional-model digital SLR camera.

At 202 x 205 mm, the newly developed CMOS sensor is among the largest chips that can be produced from a 12-inch (300 mm) wafer, and is approximately 40 times the size of Canon's largest commercial CMOS sensor.^*2

In the past, enlarging the size of the sensor resulted in an increase in the amount of time required between the receiving and transmission of data signals, which posed a challenge to achieving high-speed readout. Canon, however, solved this problem through an innovative circuit design, making possible the realization of a massive video-compatible CMOS sensor. Additionally, by ensuring the cleanest of cleanroom environments during the production process, the sensor minimizes image imperfections and dust.

Because the increased size of the new CMOS sensor allows more light to be gathered, it enables shooting in low-light environments. The sensor makes possible the image capture in one one-hundredth the amount of light required by a 35 mm full-frame CMOS sensor, facilitating the shooting of 60 frame-per-second video with a mere 0.3 lux of illumination.^*3

Potential applications for the new high-sensitivity CMOS sensor include the video recording of stars in the night sky and nocturnal animal behavior.

Through the further development of distinctive CMOS image sensors, Canon will break new ground in the world of new image expression, in the area of still images as well as video.

*1 As of August 27, 2010. Based on a Canon study.
*2 The approximately 21.1 megapixel 35 mm full-frame CMOS sensor employed in the company's EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS 5D Mark II digital SLR cameras.
*3 Approximately one-half the brightness of a moonlit night.

Source: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10083101canonlargestsensor.asp

Reviews:

Cameras & Accessories

Guides & Tutorials:

Capture

Bob Marley and the Golden Age of Reggae

walter rowe — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 01:47:16 +0000

Category:

Artists & Musicians

Photographers

During 1975 and 1976, renowned underground photo-journalist Kim Gottlieb, and her husband, Island publicity head Jeff Walker, documented what is now widely recognized as the Golden Age of Reggae. Over two years of historic trips to Jamaica and exclusive meetings in Los Angeles, Kim took iconic photographs of the artists who would go on to define the genre and captivate a generation.

Bob Marley and the Golden Age of Reggae features candid and intimate photographs of all of the musicians, artists and producers who brought the reggae sound to the international stage, including Peter Tosh, Bunny Wailer, Toots Hibbert, Burning Spear, Jacob Miller, Third World, Lee “Scratch” Perry and, of course, Bob Marley. Kim’s photographs include never-before-seen performance shots, candid behind-the-scenes footage of Bob’s home in Jamaica, and exclusive records of key moments in reggae history, such as Bob’s first US television appearance, the historical Dream Concert with Stevie Wonder in Jamaica, and Bob meeting George Harrison backstage at the Roxy in 1975.

Acclaimed rock journalist and director Cameron Crowe (Almost Famous) introduces this volume with a rousing foreword describing the time he accompanied Jeff and Kim to Jamaica to witness the burgeoning music scene there. Reggae historian Roger Steffens writes lucidly about the significance of those early years in reggae, and describes the pivotal moments documented in Kim’s photographs, many of which have not been seen in over 30 years, and many more of which have never been released to the public. Intimate and revealing, Bob Marley and the Golden Age of Reggae is a rare and beautiful record of one of the most exciting moments in music history, told through the photographs of a true artist.

Source: http://titanbooks.com/blog/coming-soon-bob-marley-and-golden-age-reggae/

Passing on Bad Photo Pass Agreements

walter rowe — Fri, 14 May 2010 17:01:23 +0000

Category:

On on the Yahoo! MusicPhotography group, there has been a long running discussion for years about the legitimacy of photo pass agreements. Some argue they are unenforceable because contract law requires both sides have an opportunity to negotiate. A member of the Yahoo group, Bob Leafe, recently raised a good point about these photo pass agreements. These agreements have been in practice for over two decades. In a court of law, this length of time might make them "acceptable practice" whether or not we like them.

I'll add that my attorney Carolyn E. Wright has reviewed a number of these photo pass agreements for me personally. She thinks they would stick in court because you have the option of walking. If you sign, you agree. I see them like the terms and conditions on concert tickets. If you purchase the ticket, you abide by the terms or you don't go to the concert. There is no negotiation. One might argue that photo pass agreements are not a "contract" and therefore contract law does not apply. They could be viewed as simple terms and conditions like concert ticket or photo contest terms. Thus negotiation is not part of the process and has no legal merit.

As music photographers, walking away and leaving the artist without publication promotion is the only power we have that will force a change. If photographers continue to sign these agreements, and performers continue to get images published from their concerts, artist lawyers will continue to use the agreements. That they have worked for over two decades establishes the precedent of "acceptable practice". Talking about our objections to these agreements amongst ourselves without any real action on our part costs the artists and record labels absolutely nothing. We shoot ourselves in the foot because we now look at these agreements in terms of what is acceptable versus what is just egregious. They effectively have worn us down. The only way to impose a cost to the artists and record labels is to walk away and not cover the artists. No promotion in publications is the only form of power we have to effect change.

We need to tell labels why their artists will not be covered for a given tour. We need to work with labels to develop agreements that are fair. There should be no restriction on editorial use of images. If an image can be published once, there is no reason to restrict it being published again. It is out there. People have seen it. And on the web, they live forever.

You would think publications would be more supportive of the photographers, but they too are bowing to the record industry lawyers. And with everything moving to the internet, the publications care less and less. If they get permission to use the image on their web site, they are happy because that lasts forever unless the license agreement from the photographer limits the usage period. And they should! If you don't, you are leaving money on the table. Go read "Licensing Photography" by Richard Weisgrau and Victor Perlman.

I've thought about this considerably. It really does seem like the days of full-time concert photography as a profession are coming to an end. We can still practice the profession, but we won't be able to do it full time. And we will never effect change with the labels without action that has teeth and impacts the record labels monetarily. Imagine Kanye, Black Eyed Peas, Beyoncé or some other big artist suddenly not showing up in the press anymore because writers and photographers told the labels ahead of time they would not be covered unless they worked out an amicable agreement. Artists would fire their labels. Labels would lose money and control.

Free press still has power. We simply have to exercise it.

Rights Grabbing Taylor Guitars Photo Contest

walter rowe — Fri, 14 May 2010 12:37:15 +0000

DO NOT SUBMIT PICTURES TO THIS PHOTO CONTEST!

The following rights grabbing language appears in the official rules of the "Me & My Taylor Photo Contest" at the Taylor Guitars website. To see the full contest rules, click the "Official Rules" link on that page. The text below appears about half way down.

BY ENTERING THIS CONTEST AND UPLOADING YOUR SUBMISSION, YOU IRREVOCABLY GRANT TO SPONSOR AND ITS AGENTS THE UNCONDITIONAL AND PERPETUAL RIGHT TO POST, DISPLAY, PUBLISH, USE, ADAPT, EDIT AND/OR MODIFY SUCH SUBMISSION IN ANY WAY, IN ANY AND ALL MEDIA, FOR ANY PURPOSE, WITHOUT LIMITATION, AND WITHOUT CONSIDERATION TO YOU. FINALISTS AGREE TO IRREVOCABLY ASSIGN AND TRANSFER TO THE SPONSOR ANY AND ALL RIGHTS, TITLE AND INTEREST IN SUBMISSION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ALL COPYRIGHTS AND WAIVE ALL MORAL RIGHTS IN SUBMISSION. ALL CONTEST ENTRANTS FURTHER AGREE TO RELEASE AND INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS SPONSOR FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS THAT ANY COMMERCIAL, ADVERTISING, PRESENTATION, WEB CONTENT OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL SUBSEQUENTLY PRODUCED, PRESENTED, AND/OR PREPARED BY OR ON BEHALF OF SPONSOR INFRINGES ON THE RIGHTS OF ENTRANT'S WORK AS CONTAINED IN ANY SUBMISSION.

This language transfers complete ownership and copyright of your submitted picture to the contest sponsor forever, and it permits them to do anything they wish with the picture. This includes using it for commercial purposes like printed advertisement collateral, posters and other display material in retail outlets, signage, merchandise, and any other use they dream up.

This is only one contest. I encourage you to always read the fine print for any photo contest. This kind of language is becoming more and more prevalent.

Please share a link to this article with every site you know, repost this link on Facebook, and spread the word as far and wide as possible.

Guides & Tutorials:

Contracts

Rights Grabbing Photography Contracts

walter rowe — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:29:13 +0000

Category:

Photographers are asked to sign increasingly restrictive agreements when they pick up their photo passes. Some restrict the use your photos to the specific edition of the specific publication for which you are shooting. Many go as far as transferring all rights in your photographs to the artist or management company leaving you with nothing. Any agreement that limits your use of the photographs you take is "predatory" because it contains "rights grabbing" language. In this article, I describe what red flags to look for and provide you with several examples extracted from real artist agreements. These really do exist and are getting worse every day.

Release forms for the following artists are known to have rights grabbing or restrictive language: Avril Lavigne, Beastie Boys, Cheap Trick, Coldplay, Foo Fighters, Janes Addiction, Jimmy Eat World, Jonas Brothers, Lenny Kravitz, Matchbox 20, Mike Ness, My Chemical Romance, Paula Abdul, Queens of the Stone Age, Steven Seagall, Stevie Wonder, Taylor Swift, The Mars Volta, The White Stripes. You can see these rights grabbing contracts as attachments to another article on our site that has restricted access.

As photographers, we use license agreements as our means to make a living. We create intellectual property in the form of visual art and we license specific limited rights for others to use it. This is the basis for copyright. When you create an original work of art, you own the right to copy it (copyright). Lawyers representing artists and recording industry entities use predatory language to grab as many of your intellectual property rights as possible (usually all) without compensation. The common term applied to this practice is "rights grabbing". We see "rights grabbing" language in photography contest entry rules, concert photo pass release forms, editorial client contracts and stock photography license agreements. Some instances are worse than others.

Pro-imaging, an international web-based group of independent photographers, has constructed a Bill of Rights for Photographers that outline what they consider acceptable and unacceptable terms and conditions in photography contest rules. Some professional photographer organizations retain attorneys to review contracts from well-known publications and provide feedback to their members. One of our missions with MusicPhotographers.net is to advocate sound business practices and educate you about predatory practice

Each of the following bullets are excerpts from actual contracts and photo release forms that photographers were asked to sign before receiving their photo credentials. These examples are provided to educate you about predatory contract language. Review contracts and photo pass release forms carefully prior to signing them. This is not acceptable language unless you are being paid a large amount of money for a complete buyout by the party presenting such a contract to you.

For good and valuable consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, upon full execution hereof, I <your name> hereby grant, transfer, convey and assign to <ARTIST> [...] all right, title and interest, throughout the universe in perpetuity, in and to the photographs to be taken by me [...] including, without limitation, the worldwide copyrights therein and thereto, and all renewals and extensions thereof.

I hereby acknowledge that you shall own all rights in the Photos, including the copyrights therein and thereto, and accordingly, I hereby grant, transfer, convey and assign to you all right, title and interest throughout the universe in perpetuity, including, without limitation, the worldwide copyrights therein and thereto (and all renewals and extensions thereof), in and to the Photos.

Photographer hereby agrees and understands that the photographs (including the negatives and all derivatives thereof) constitute 'works made for hire' [...] created for artist and that Photographer is rendering his services as an 'employee for hire' [...] and that the Artist shall be the author of the Photographs and shall own all rights [...] in and to the results and proceeds of all such services rendered [...].

This letter serves to conﬁrm that you <your name> may photograph <ARTIST> on the condition that any material arising from the photos/footage taken on <date> at <venue> is OWNED BY <ARTIST's PRODUCTION COMPANY>.

I hereby acknowledge that you shall own all rights in the Photos, including the copyrights therein and thereto, and accordingly, I hereby grant, transfer, convey and assign to you all right, title and interest throughout the universe in perpetuity, including, without limitation, the copyright (and all renewals and extensions thereof), in and to the Photos.

In consideration of the sum of One United States Dollars (U.S. $1.00) [...] you hereby sell, assign and transfer to Company all of your right, title and interest in and to all still photographs that you will take of Artist while Artist is performing music live on stage [...] including, without limitation, all of your right, title and interest in and to the worldwide copyright relating thereto, together with all rights to secure copyright, renewals, reissues, extensions of the copyright, [...].

This is only a handful of examples of predatory language used to steal your intellectual property. There also are examples where the artist does not assert ownership of the images but demands approval prior to any use other than the assignment for which the images were originally created. Some may contain language that imposes significant fines on the photographer if they violate the agreement. While this language may seem more palatable, it is equally restrictive and in my opinion equally objectionable. If an artist permits you to publish the images once, they are published. Why then demand prior approval before publishing again? In addition to assignment fees, we count on earning revenue from licensing our stock portfolio of images we have taken over the years. Demanding prior approval for all uses makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to market these images for what are otherwise legally permissible editorial, documentary and artistic purposes.

Read all photo pass release forms, license agreements, and assignment contracts carefully. Look for any language that unreasonably restricts how you may use the photographs you create or that transfers your rights to another party. Also look for language that grants anyone the right to continue using your photographs in unrestricted ways and does not compensate you fairly for those rights. This is unfair, predatory language.

Actual Rights Grabbing Contracts

walter rowe — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:09:35 +0000

Category:

These are actual photo release forms photographers were asked to sign in exchange for receiving their photo pass at the venue or prior to arriving. They are provided here to educate all concert photographers about the egregious, rights grabbing language that management and promoters and artists are taking away from photographers. If you are presented any release form at a concert that asks you to turn over any rights to your photographs, or to turn over copies of your images, or restricts use of your photographs, you are encouraged to corral all of the photographers there and ask all of them to decline (do not sign) the form.

These forms take rights away from you that you are granted by law as soon as you trip the shutter button. Do not allow your rights to be diminished. Please take the time to read this article on rights grabbing contracts to learn more.

Attachment	Size
Aaron Neville	62.33 KB
Aerosmith	105.73 KB
Avril Lavigne Release	54.06 KB
Beastie Boys Release	210.07 KB
BenHarper and Relentless7 (added Sep 2010)	96.88 KB
Cheap Trick Release (add Mar 2010)	55.18 KB
Coldplay Release	21.53 KB
Foo Fighters Release	23.39 KB
George Strait Reba McEntire Lee Ann Womack	54.27 KB
Gogol Bordello	91.78 KB
Janes Addiction Release	48.42 KB
Jimmy Eat World Release	148.48 KB
Jimmy Eat World Release 2011	49.38 KB
Jonas Brothers Release (added 2009)	372.57 KB
Jonny Lang Release 2011	191.22 KB
Jordan Sparks	56.5 KB
Katy Perry Release 2011	1.06 MB
Ke$ha 2011 OnAssignment Agreement	16.41 KB
KISS Release 2010	21 KB
Lady Gaga Electronic Publication Release 2011	15.67 KB
Lady Gaga Print Publication 2011	44.28 KB
Lenny Kravitz Release 2011	572.81 KB
Lenny Kravitz Release Pre-2011	35.3 KB
Leonard Cohen	144.52 KB
Linkin Park	77.21 KB
Matchbox 20 Release	15.55 KB
Melissa Ethridge	81.53 KB
MGMT	118.98 KB
Mike Ness Release	43.69 KB
My Chemical Romance Release	493.17 KB
Paula Abdul Release	219.8 KB
Queens of the Stone Age Release	31.27 KB
Rod Stewart Media Photo Rules 2011	33.79 KB
Rod Stewart Media Photo Release 2011	29.17 KB
Steven Seagall Release	27.94 KB
Stevie Wonder Release	110.03 KB
Stone Temple Pilots Release (added Sep 2010)	42.75 KB
Taylor Swift Release 2009 (added Mar 2010)	350.85 KB
The Mars Volta Release	31.21 KB
Tom Petty	65.22 KB
White Stripes Release	45.16 KB

Tom Petty and the Heatbreakers at Bonnaro Music Festival

Concert Photos Magazine — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 21:08:08 +0000

Tom Petty and the Heatbreakers were one of the headliners for Bonnaroo Music Festival in 2006.

Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers are now goin back on tour.

Concert photos of Tom Petty and the Heatbreakers at Bonnaroo Music Festival

Interviews:

Artists & Musicians

www.annabelverephotography.com

annabelvere — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:50:54 +0000

OK Go's Open Letter on the music business

walter rowe — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:58:08 +0000

The band OK Go has posted an open letter to the world on their message board regarding the current state of the music business, but more specifically the current state of their record label EMI and how they and their label get paid. Here is one quote from the article.

Fifteen years ago, when the terms of contracts like ours were dreamt up, a major label could record two cats fighting in a bag and three months later they'd have a hit. No more. People of the world, there has been a revolution. You no longer give a shit what major labels want you to listen to (good job, world!), and you no longer spend money actually buying the music you listen to (perhaps not so good job, world). So the money that used to flow through the music business has slowed to a trickle, and every label, large or small, is scrambling to catch every last drop. You can't blame them; they need new shoes, just like everybody else. And musicians need them to survive so we can use them as banks. Even bands like us who do most of our own promotion still need them to write checks every once in a while.

The crux of the letter comes at the end where fans are encouraged to embed OK Go's new video on their blogs and websites as a means of promoting the OK Go's new album. It is worth reading the entire message, however, as it does provide an overview of how the money flows in the music business and why bands still the major labels to survive. Labels front all of the production, distribution and promotion costs of a band's record. The band then has to repay the label through record sales and appearances.

As revenue into the major labels has dwindled with the advent of the Internet, the music labels are getting desparate to squeeze every penny out of every crevice they can. In any company, including record labels, that often means cutting expenses. For us that means cutting the cost paid to all the contributing partners such as photographers, producers, graphic artists, promoters, etc. Music labels have traditionally been a great source of income for music photographers once a solid reputation and working relationship has been established. Unfortunately, the labels are paying less and less for our work, often resorting to free fan imagery as a means of limiting the expenses of producing a record and promoting an artist. After all, it is the music business, meaning the business of music rather than music itself.