Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
2097 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 509


  Reply # 850167 6-Jul-2013 17:04
Send private message

Copyright is automatic in NZ, but is granted automatically to the commissioner of the works, rather than the creator.  This is different to most other western countries.

BDFL - Memuneh
61307 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12044

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 850226 6-Jul-2013 18:43
Send private message

macuser: Copyright is automatic in NZ, but is granted automatically to the commissioner of the works, rather than the creator.  This is different to most other western countries.


And that would be the wedding couple, not the photographer. At some point this right is being handed over - most likely as a clause in the contract.





14138 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2545

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 850227 6-Jul-2013 18:45
Send private message

A friend of mine used dream life 5 years ago. The photographer didn't speak any English, wore jeans, got lost between the ceremony and photo location, and stood right beside them during ring exchange. The album was cheap. I hope they've picked their game up.

Imho it takes around 5 years and at least 100 weddings to become really competent at weeding photography. I've hired photographers with degrees, and students, in general they were awful with no clue about composition, lighting, or light, but they could write you a good essay about photography. In a studio with a tutor and unlimited time, sure they're ok, but weddings move at an incredible pace and there's no second chances. Experience is key if you want quality.

I'm getting married next year. The photographer we've booked is significantly more than $3k for all day, an assistant, images on DVD,, no album. I'm also paying more than $1k to get them from Auckland to Wellington. I want the best, and I'm happy to pay for it.




AWS Certified Solution Architect Professional, Sysop Administrator Associate, and Developer Associate
TOGAF certified enterprise architect
Professional photographer


6721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 587

Trusted

  Reply # 850230 6-Jul-2013 18:53
Send private message

timmmay: I'm getting married next year.

Congrats man.



147 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 22


  Reply # 850253 6-Jul-2013 19:48
Send private message

Wow, when I posted the question I didn't realise it was such a controversial issue!

2785 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 153

Trusted

  Reply # 850704 8-Jul-2013 10:45
Send private message

When my wife and I got married in March we picked our photographer Mel Waite because her previous work was amazing. Our photos turned out to be pretty incredible and I cannot stress enough how important a good photographer is.

You can check out some of the photos here: http://melwaitephotography.queensberryworkspace.com/galleryslide/68944513ee58d91667/list

She also gave us a set of ~700 high resolution images and the same in low res for Facebook. While Mel retains the copyright we are free to use/print the photos however we like as long as it is not for commercial purposes. I don't have any problem with this arrangement and Mel keeps a backup copy of all of the photos for something like 10 years for us also. 







Lead Consultant @Intergen
All comments are my own opinion, and not that of my employer unless explicitly stated.


3770 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1222


  Reply # 850708 8-Jul-2013 10:48
Send private message

The photographer down the road did a deal with the real estate agent who gave us a '$300' free photography session. 

Went and checked it out....the $300 included '1' free 6x4 photo and we'd pay a ton of money for any additional photos. 

The deal wasn't worth the paper it was written on. 

355 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 12


  Reply # 850779 8-Jul-2013 12:35
Send private message

Why would the couple need copyright anyway? If they're given a disc then they can print pics to their heart's content. They can't use them for commercial purposes is really the only restriction, which seems natural to me. Similarly the photographer can't sell them to someone for an advertising campaign without their permission, so what do they lose?

All is as it should be.

2785 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 153

Trusted

  Reply # 850789 8-Jul-2013 12:44
Send private message

Chainsaw: Why would the couple need copyright anyway? If they're given a disc then they can print pics to their heart's content. They can't use them for commercial purposes is really the only restriction, which seems natural to me. Similarly the photographer can't sell them to someone for an advertising campaign without their permission, so what do they lose?

All is as it should be.


QFT




Lead Consultant @Intergen
All comments are my own opinion, and not that of my employer unless explicitly stated.


xpd

Chief Trash Bandit
8977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1380

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 850806 8-Jul-2013 13:02
Send private message

We paid $300 (and fed/watered him) for our wedding photographer - he was a professional photographer, just didnt do weddings as mainstream .... he was with us from 9am - 9pm, took photos of everyone there, burnt the images to DVDs at the end of the night and said he'd hold onto a copy for a year and use some of the pics as samples if we were ok with that (which we were) and that was it.

He didnt touch the images at all as he knew I'm in IT and happy to do touch ups etc myself with P/shop . No mention of copyrights etc.

Weve taken our kids to that photography lot that run out of the Warehouse in Albany (name eludes me), and we only take the basic pack which is a single image - "no copying/scanning/altering etc allowed" - whatever. Theyre our kids, we've paid for the image, do what we want with it thanks.




XPD / Gavin / DemiseNZ

 

For Free Games, Geekiness and Reviews, visit :

 

Home Of The Overrated Raccoons

 

Battlenet : XPD#11535    Origin/Steam/Epic/Uplay : xpdnz


954 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 222

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 850829 8-Jul-2013 13:29
Send private message

Just about everybody can take a photo, only the skilled can create art.  How many of the people complaining about the quality of their photos actually took the time to look through their previous work or get recommendations from friends or family.

In the days of film the photographer retained the negatives and the copyright.  If you wanted more reprints or albums you had to go back to the photographer.  I stamped the back of all my prints with my name and a copyright reserved message - this would prevent my customers from going to the local copy shop and getting copies.

I made just enough on the session or wedding but it was supplemented by the extras - I was never going to get rich, but I was doing something which I enjoyed.

If I took a great photo which I wanted to use in my portfolio then I would get a model release form signed, usually sweetened with a couple of extra prints for the customer.  This allowed me commercial use also but only for the advertising of my services.

So back OT.  Does the fact that they retain copyright affect you in any way for the intended use of the material?  If they are providing a disc with all the JPEGs and they are allowing you to print your own also then probably not.  If you are still not happy with this arrangement ask the photographer if they are willing to assign copyright to you - there will likely be a fee.

At the end of the day, they don't want you making money from their work - that's their job and I don't think it is unfair.

Slightly back off topic, I'm a programmer who works for a consulting agency providing services to end customers - imagine that contract; copyright, IP, re-use, re-delivery.




Procrastination eventually pays off.


BDFL - Memuneh
61307 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12044

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 850835 8-Jul-2013 13:38
Send private message

Chainsaw: Why would the couple need copyright anyway? If they're given a disc then they can print pics to their heart's content. They can't use them for commercial purposes is really the only restriction, which seems natural to me. Similarly the photographer can't sell them to someone for an advertising campaign without their permission, so what do they lose?

All is as it should be.


The biggest problem is not "copyright" itself. It's photographers not giving material in quality good enough for printing. They claim only them can provide print because it's their copyright - that's what I was told by a series of photographers.

If you don't have the material in a good enough quality you have to go back to the photographers for those prints. You can't "print pics to their heart's content".

Basically holding you hostage to that.





14347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1866


  Reply # 850840 8-Jul-2013 13:48
Send private message

I think the problem is getting the raw photos from the photographer. It seems to me, that some are subsidizing the event price, with the hope that they will make money by selling prints, when people can get digital photos printed relatively cheaply at a big box retailer. With copyright, if the photographer owns that, then they can charge a large fee to give you the photos on a disk. This fee possibly covers the loss they would make by not selling prints. In my case it was over 1k to get the disk. SO if I was hiring one, I would make sure I own the copyright.
Otherwise the copyright owner could potentially sell the photos to stock photo websites, and you may find your photo being used in advertising. It is all about checking your contract carefully.

3708 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2242

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 850857 8-Jul-2013 14:08
Send private message

xpd: We paid $300 (and fed/watered him) for our wedding photographer - he was a professional photographer, just didnt do weddings as mainstream .... he was with us from 9am - 9pm, took photos of everyone there, burnt the images to DVDs at the end of the night and said he'd hold onto a copy for a year and use some of the pics as samples if we were ok with that (which we were) and that was it.

He didnt touch the images at all as he knew I'm in IT and happy to do touch ups etc myself with P/shop . No mention of copyrights etc.

Weve taken our kids to that photography lot that run out of the Warehouse in Albany (name eludes me), and we only take the basic pack which is a single image - "no copying/scanning/altering etc allowed" - whatever. Theyre our kids, we've paid for the image, do what we want with it thanks.


So you paid $25/hour for his time... From that he has tax, equipment, software etc, insurance and profit as well as many others.

At $300 he was doing you a favour because he was certainly losing money.

Unless someone wants to claim that he did it as a weekend cash job, and that therefore tax, equipment depreciation etc don't count - and if that's the case, again, it's a favour and under what would need to be charged to keep anyone in business.

Cheers - N


151 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 43

Trusted

  Reply # 850859 8-Jul-2013 14:11
Send private message

Best advice is to get all that fine print sorted before signing the contract (and most definitely before the event). We paid our wedding photographer to shoot the day, touch up some of the better shots, and provide us with full digital copies of all the material she took on the day (she threw in some prints as well). Good deal, photographer knew what she was getting paid up front (without hoping we'd order a certain amount of prints just to break even). And we got the full versions of all the images...which to be fair, we printed a few to give to family, but we just view them on our iPads/TV...the digital world:-) 




Matt East

 

 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.