Re: Approaching "street people"

hasselblad Tue, 10 Jul 2001 Volume 1 : Number 1283 In this issue: Kiev prism quality Re: professional camera repair in NYC going out of business Re: Approaching "street people" Re: Approaching "street people" OT: Approaching "street people" A-12 framing Re: A-12 framing Re: Approaching "street people" Re: Approaching "street people" Re: Approaching "street people" Re: Approaching "street people" Re: Approaching "street people" Re: Approaching "street people" RE: Approaching "street people" RE: Approaching "street people" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:28:05 -0400 From: "Peter Klosky" To: Cc: Subject: Kiev prism quality Message-ID: <008301c1087a$fc839a40$230a210a@dulles> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C10859.75133870 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear List Members, Recently I purchased a second Kiev meter prism from a fellow advertising = on this list, Gordon Cole. While some others have said they find the = quality control at Kiev spotty, my finding was that the second prism was = fine, and that the meter read exactly the same as my original Kiev. = Both are within a half stop of readings from my handheld meter, a Gossen = Luna Star F. While I don't use the meter, anyway, I did want to comment = on the quality. Peter ------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C10859.75133870 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear List Members,

Recently I purchased a second Kiev = meter prism from=20 a fellow advertising on this list, Gordon Cole. While some others = have=20 said they find the quality control at Kiev spotty, my finding was that = the=20 second prism was fine, and that the meter read exactly the same as my = original=20 Kiev. Both are within a half stop of readings from my handheld = meter, a=20 Gossen Luna Star F. While I don't use the meter, anyway, I did = want to=20 comment on the quality.

Peter

------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C10859.75133870-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:23:46 -0400 From: Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video To: Subject: Re: professional camera repair in NYC going out of business Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010709102328.04f33f00@bnhpop1.bhphotovideo.com> At 03:49 AM 07/07/2001, you wrote: >he told me my camera was ready and that i should pick it up soon, because >they were going out of business!! i can hardly believe it... after all >these years, after all that great service. Regrettably, it is true. -- regards, Henry Posner Director of Sales and Training B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc. http://www.bhphotovideo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:29:00 -0400 From: Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video To: Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010709102821.04f38810@bnhpop1.bhphotovideo.com> At 03:51 AM 07/08/2001, you wrote: >First, be aware of copyright problems. Get a release from ANYONE whose >picture you will sell. Copyright is not the issue. A model release is. If the individual in the photo is a minor child, it must be signed by the parent or legal guardian. -- regards, Henry Posner Director of Sales and Training B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc. http://www.bhphotovideo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:59:47 -0400 From: "Peter Klosky" To: Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <001401c10887$cc582360$230a210a@dulles> I think there is more to the story than this. I've had hundreds of news photographs published, and never once requested a model release from the folks. My best understanding is that if the person is on public property, or even at an event open to the public, one is welcome to photograph them, produce hundreds of thousands of copies, and sell them on the corner. Peter > >First, be aware of copyright problems. Get a release from ANYONE whose > >picture you will sell. > > Copyright is not the issue. A model release is. > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 11:02:07 -0400 From: "Shane W. Davis" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: OT: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <2539082394.994676527@[141.211.86.209]> What if the child is in a public place, doing something newsworthy (e.g. throwing a beer bottle at the President)? People with questions about rights of photographers and subjects in public and other places may find the remarks and links on this page useful. The author is either a lawyer or playing one on the Internet. http://lawyers.about.com/careers/lawyers/library/weekly/aa032601a.htm > Copyright is not the issue. A model release is. If the individual in the > photo is a minor child, it must be signed by the parent or legal guardian. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:37:23 EDT From: DvanAckere@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: A-12 framing Message-ID: <91.d126f8b.287b37c3@aol.com> Anyone out there with any experience with an older A-12 putting too much space between frames? Thanks in advance for any advice. Daniel J. van Ackere ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:41:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Maquiling To: Subject: Re: A-12 framing Message-ID: Today, The Esteemed DvanAckere@aol.com gathered electrons and wrote: > Anyone out there with any experience with an older A-12 putting too much > space between frames? Thanks in advance for any advice. This is just recently discussed on this list not too long ago. The consensus was to take it to get CLA. I had mine CLA and noticed that the spacing was almost perfect like the time when I got it. I sent mine to Hasselblad USA in NY. Costs me something like $80 bucks. -- Eric "emaq" Maquiling Written in 100% pure recycled, very expensive Californian electrons. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 13:55:13 EDT From: JCurcio@aol.com To: Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: It is an oversimplification to say that if someone is on the street, there is an absolute right to make commercial use of his/her image. Subject to a lot of exceptions and nuances, the general rules are these: (1) if an event is independently "newsworthy", street pictures may be taken and used for commercial gain. (2) if an event is not independently "newsworthy", non-public figures have proprietary interests in their own likenesses. While there is no legal impediment to taking all of the street pictures you want to take, it's the commercial use of non-released, non-newsworthy individual likenesses that is not permitted. That's the reason for getting a model release in the first place. Specifically, in exchange for "consideration", a person gives the photographer the right (which he/she does not otherwise have) to make commercial use of the releasing person's individual likeness. I hope this helps. In a message dated Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:56:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Peter Klosky" writes: << I think there is more to the story than this. I've had hundreds of news photographs published, and never once requested a model release from the folks. My best understanding is that if the person is on public property, or even at an event open to the public, one is welcome to photograph them, produce hundreds of thousands of copies, and sell them on the corner. Peter > >First, be aware of copyright problems. Get a release from ANYONE whose > >picture you will sell. > > Copyright is not the issue. A model release is. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html >> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 16:56:38 -0400 From: "Eugene A. Pallat" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <3B4A1A86.F9FBF0E8@apk.net> Peter Klosky wrote: > I think there is more to the story than this. I've had hundreds of news > photographs published, and never once requested a model release from the > folks. My best understanding is that if the person is on public property, > or even at an event open to the public, one is welcome to photograph them, > produce hundreds of thousands of copies, and sell them on the corner. I've always heard that if the peoplare part of a newsworthy event or are incidental to the event (bystanders at an explosion) then no model release is needed. Otherwise, you better get one for your own protection. Gene Pallat ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:10:52 -0400 From: "Peter Klosky" To: Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <005c01c108bb$a2c831a0$230a210a@dulles> > I've always heard that if the peoplare part of a newsworthy event or are incidental to the event (bystanders at an explosion) then no model release is needed. In my experience, if the editors call for a photo of someone crossing a street to support a story on the general topic of street crossing, no release is required. In some cases, we would just publish a photo of someone walking down the street or playing in a park, and let the picture tell the entire story. Btw, one of my favorite ways of street shooting to use a long air bulb style release, focus on a sidewalk spot, then trigger the camera remotely. The subjects look more candid than if you are behind the camera. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 17:31:03 -0400 From: "Shane W. Davis" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <2562418204.994699863@[141.211.86.209]> I suggest that anyone taking pictures to which these legal notions are relevant beware generalizations and hearsay. The legal types always say to get a release if possible because there is no blanket generalization licensing every release-free photo as long as it's in a public place, AND of something newsworthy, AND not showing up anyone's skirt, AND.... I.e., there is no finite way to complete that list such that if your picture checks against the list, you don't need a model release to do whatever with the picture. This doesn't mean you always need a release, just that the area in which you don't need one is too vague to be specified with a simple description, partly because it gets defined further each time a photographer gets taken to court. This, anyway, has been my understanding as gleaned from asking for free legal advice. If you go to the link I posted earlier, you will find another link to state-by-state citations of the basic structure of privacy/publicity law in each state, along with some citations of court cases in each. You can see what happened when someone in your state took a picture of type X of person A and got taken to court and charged with Y. Looking at these gives some sense of the complexity and variety involved. Shane ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:50:11 EDT From: COHIBA7@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: <89.9226092.287bd573@aol.com> --part1_89.9226092.287bd573_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What about an image of a professional ballplayer taken at a major league park? Can it be sold by the photographer? It would be most difficult to secure a model release under these circumstances. Are they protected under a major league "copyright" of some sort? --part1_89.9226092.287bd573_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What about an image of a professional ballplayer taken at a major league
park? Can it be sold by the photographer? It would be most difficult to
secure a model release under these circumstances. Are they protected under a
major league "copyright" of some sort? --part1_89.9226092.287bd573_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 23:57:32 -0400 From: David Parmet To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --Boundary_(ID_FsI1BGlpkNDaYdOoFcrz2w) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT on 7/9/01 11:50 PM, COHIBA7@aol.com at COHIBA7@aol.com wrote: What about an image of a professional ballplayer taken at a major league park? Can it be sold by the photographer? It would be most difficult to secure a model release under these circumstances. Are they protected under a major league "copyright" of some sort? The ballplayer has no presumption of privacy. And neither do you at the ballpark. Read your ticket - once you enter the stadium you've given your consent to have your image on TV. On the other hand, if we're walking down the street and someone takes our picture and sells it to a magazine, I'd say we're entitled to sue the bejesus out of him. --Boundary_(ID_FsI1BGlpkNDaYdOoFcrz2w) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Re: Approaching "street people" on 7/9/01 11:50 PM, COHIBA7@aol.com at COHIBA7@aol.com wrote:

What about an image of a professional ballplayer taken at a major league
park? Can it be sold by the photographer? It would be most difficult to
secure a model release under these circumstances. Are they protected under a
major league "copyright" of some sort?

The ballplayer has no presumption of privacy. And neither do you at the ballpark. Read your ticket - once you enter the stadium you've given your consent to have your image on TV.

On the other hand, if we're walking down the street and someone takes our picture and sells it to a magazine, I'd say we're entitled to sue the bejesus out of him.

--Boundary_(ID_FsI1BGlpkNDaYdOoFcrz2w)-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:15:20 -0500 From: "Mark Greenberg" To: Cc: Subject: RE: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: Actually, the line is traditionally drawn on this issue by what the end use of the photograph is going to be. The basic rule of thumb is if the photo is going to be used strictly for editorial purposes, i.e. published in a newspaper, magazine, etc as a part of the editorial content, then protection under the first amendment holds true and you don't need a release. The rub comes when you want to use the photo for commercial or advertising purposes. In these instances you will absolutely need a release. As to the question of approaching people on the street to take their picture? Use your best judgment but generally "Shoot first and ask questions later". Hope that helps, -Mark ************************* Mark Greenberg Photographer San Antonio Current ************************* ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:49:18 -0500 From: "Mark Greenberg" To: Subject: RE: Approaching "street people" Message-ID: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C108D1.C4D0F460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This was actually a huge issue earlier this year when Major League Baseball (MLB) tried to change it's use policies regarding photos taken at MLB games. Many newspapers and major media organizations were threatening a boycott of MLB games because of the rediculously lopsided policy which basicaly would have forced photographers and news organizations to completely hand over rights to the images to the MLB in exchange for thier day pass credentials and one-time use rights. Essentialy, this would have forced photographers, if requested, to turn over their images to the MLB for unlimited reproduction with no further compensation. I guess those poor poor owners felt they needed the extra income to pay all those multi-gazillion dollar player salaries. If I remember correctly, I think, due to all the pressure from the media, that the MLB decided to delay the contract changes pending further review. Go figure..... Cheers, Mark ************************* Mark Greenberg Photographer San Antonio Current ************************* -----Original Message----- From: COHIBA7@aol.com [mailto:COHIBA7@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 10:50 PM To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Approaching "street people" What about an image of a professional ballplayer taken at a major league park? Can it be sold by the photographer? It would be most difficult to secure a model release under these circumstances. Are they protected under a major league "copyright" of some sort? ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C108D1.C4D0F460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This=20 was actually a huge issue earlier this year when Major League Baseball = (MLB)=20 tried to change it's use policies regarding photos taken at MLB = games. =20 Many newspapers and major media organizations were threatening a boycott = of MLB=20 games because of the rediculously lopsided policy which basicaly would = have=20 forced photographers and news organizations to completely hand over = rights=20 to the images to the MLB in exchange for thier day pass credentials = and=20 one-time use rights. Essentialy, this would have forced=20 photographers, if requested, to turn over their images to the=20 MLB

for=20 unlimited reproduction with no further compensation. I guess = those=20 poor poor owners felt they needed the extra income to pay all = those=20 multi-gazillion dollar player salaries. If I remember = correctly, I=20 think, due to all the pressure from the media, that the MLB decided to = delay the=20 contract changes pending further review. Go=20 figure.....

Cheers,

Mark

*************************

Mark Greenberg

Photographer

San Antonio Current

*************************

-----Original Message-----
From: COHIBA7@aol.com=20 [mailto:COHIBA7@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 10:50=20 PM
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: = Approaching=20 "street people"

What about an image of a professional ballplayer taken at a = major=20 league
park? Can it be sold by the photographer? It = would be=20 most difficult to
secure a model release under these = circumstances.=20 Are they protected under a
major league "copyright" of some=20 sort?

------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C108D1.C4D0F460-- ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1283 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html