Category Archives: Commentary

Commentary, Ideas

Another Photography Contest, er, Intellectual Property Rights Grab

2 Comments

Some months ago I became aware of the terms of many of the photo contests on the web and in magazines – and since that time I haven’t seen more than a couple that I would even consider entering given their effect on the value of my work. (The Photo Attorney writes about one today and has written about others in the past.)

If you enter a contest it seems reasonable to assume that the company running the contest would acquire some limited licensing rights to use the winning photograph in ways logically connected to the contest and to their company in return for selecting the photograph and providing the winner some valuable prizes and publicity. For example, if a magazine has a photography contest it seems reasonable to expect that they should be able to publish the photograph in the magazine in an article announcing the winners, or perhaps even use it as a cover illustration with full credit to the photographer and with a clear connection to the contest. There should be time limits and the license should not extend much beyond those circumstances, though the terms may well spell out the ways in which the company might negotiate additional uses in the future.

However, that is not how most of these contests work. When you read the contest terms you will almost always discover some very serious issues:

  • Rather than limiting their license as to time and to types of usage logically related to the contest, most terms that I have seen acquire extensive, virtually unlimited rights to the photographer’s work. Most are written so broadly as to acquire the right to do essentially anything with the photograph, for any period of time, in any medium – and completely without compensation to the photographer and in most cases without credit to the phtographer.
  • In most cases the license extends not only to the entity conducting the contest but to a host of business partners and others that appears to be virtually unlimited. For example, the way many contest terms are written it would be entirely legal for the printing company that prints the magazine to use the entrant’s photograph in unrelated publications with entirely different clients – again without any compensation or even credit to the photographer.
  • Most onerous of all, in virtually even contest I’ve seen these terms are not limited to the contest winners. Instead, the conditions apply to every contest entry! That’s right – if you enter the contest but do not win you still will have provided a free, eternal, unlimited license to the company running the contest and to a wide range of others who might do business with those running the contest. Consider that those operating the contests acquire unlimited usage rights to  hundreds or thousands of photographs submitted for consideration. This is why the term intellectual property rights grab is often used to describe the contests.

When I’ve contacted entities running contest with such terms I have gotten a variety of responses. The response that I consider to be most disingenuous – and downright dangerous – goes something like this: “Yes, that’s what the legal department made us do, but we would never treat a contest entrant that way. You can trust us.” At this point the red flag should go up and alarm bells should ring. If they really don’t intend to grab these rights, why write contest terms that allow them to do so? Why not write the contest rules in such a way that they reflect their actual intent?

Read the contest terms very carefully before you enter any photography contest. While the lure of a prize and a bit of recognition may entice you, keep in mind that few actually win, that the judging can be quite arbitrary, and whether or not you win you will have given away rights to your work.

Commentary, Technique

Some Thoughts on Black and White Conversion in Photoshop

2 Comments

Every so often you run across an article that offers some unfortunate advice on an important subject – perhaps it offers outdated advice or suggests a less effective technique. I saw such an article today on methods for converting color digital images to black and white in Photoshop. Sometimes seeing such an article encourages me to write something about the same topic as a counterpoint – and that is what led to this post.

I cannot claim to be the master of this conversion process, and I recognize that there are several ways to do it that are both effective and different that what I’ll describe. In addition, this will be more or less an overview rather than a detailed tuturial. IN any case, I want to offer some ideas that might be a bit more contemporary, flexible, and powerful than those I read about in that article. Continue reading Some Thoughts on Black and White Conversion in Photoshop →

Commentary, Community

What are YOU shooting this weekend?

2 Comments

Just saw a twitter (ahem, a tweet..) from Jim Goldstein asking what folks are shooting on this spring weekend. My immediate plan is to get out and photograph some of the “impossibly green” California grassland and some spring wildflowers this weekend – but also to prepare for an upcoming visit to Death Valley.

What are you shooting this weekend and beyond?

Commentary, Equipment, Photographs: Nature

Canon EOS 5D II: Notes on Today’s Photograph

3 Comments

Since today’s photograph (“Redwood Forest, Morning“) was one of the first landscape photographs I shot with my new Canon EOS 5D II, I was interested to see how the camera would perform and what print quality might look like.

This photograph was a bit trickier than may be apparent. It was overcast and early in the morning, I was in the bottom of a deep valley, the wind was blowing, and the light was constantly changing. In addition I used a 85mm lens (the excellent EF 85mm f/1.8) on a full frame DSLR, so I had to shoot at a rather small aperture for DOF reasons, necessitating a very slow shutter speed in order to work at my preferred ISO 100.

With all of those challenges, when I made the first small test print of this photograph last night I was very impressed with the level of detail in the photograph and I’m certain that it will work as a very good sized print – in fact, this particular image almost needs to displayed large.

When a new camera body is introduced there always seems to be a string of reports of poor performance. Sometimes there is some truth to the reports, but it is my opinion that many of the reports are the result of poor technique, unrealistic expectations,  obsession with “issues” that are irrelevant in actual photographs, and general mistrust of any Big Company that sells expensive camera equipment. I read these reports and think about them a bit, but I don’t assume that they are correct until I see evidence – preferably evidence that I produce myself. The first direct evidence comes from looking closely at photographs on the monitor as I work on them in ACR and then in Photoshop, but the real evidence comes when I make a print. After doing both of the above – and contrary to some rumors you may hear – there are no issues with noise in the shadows and the overall image – even with the increased number of photosites – seems excellent in every way to me.

Does my Canon EOS 5D II produce excellent image quality? Yes. Am I seeing unusual or troubling amounts of noise? No. Are banding problems in the shadows impairing my photographs? No. Do carefully made photographs using this equipment have the potential to produce excellent prints? Yes.

Am I pleased with the results from my 5DII at this point? Yes.