Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 31, 2011, 2:55 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
I guess I have mixed feelings. As a hobbyist photographer, I agree that it stinks. There are plenty of concerts I'd love to have my DSLR at, taking photos but it's rarely allowed. But, I also understand people trying to protect their business interests as well.

Let's take Greg's example - the racetrack. Now, I know zero about how photos are utilized for horse racing. But, assume for the sake of discussion that there are 2 main uses:
1) media - newspaper/trade publications etc
2) smaller sales to owner/jockey

Now, let's assume there are 3 people shooting the sport as hobbyist. Assume one or more agents that account for the sales in 1 & 2 above start contacting those 3 people. 1 or 2 of those people are so thrilled they will have their images desired they give them away for free or for access. The photographers that spend their time, effort, money trying to build a business now lose out. Why shouldn't they WANT to protect their business interests? Now, I am in no way insinuating Greg is doing anything to undermine business. Not my point at all. I am merely latching on to Greg's thought that the contracted pro(s) might be behind the tightened security.
I have no idea myself what the commercial use of the photos are beyond the ones you named above, either. I also failed to consider Bob's earlier mention of new owneship of the track by a casino conglomerate.

That could very well, to some extent, also explain the change, but I am sure from what I was told when they approached me a couple of weeks ago they were definitely concerned I might be there to shoot to sell, which would be an infringement on the contract they have with the official track photographers, who honestly have access to prime shooting areas on the track no one like myself can get near, so assuming they do their job competently, no one like myself should have any negative impact on the business of selling prime racing shots.


I guess I should just be happy I had almost three full seasons of virtually free access to do what I wanted, short of going over the fence and planting myself down next to the inside rails....
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2011, 3:06 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Greg, are there other racetracks near to but not in the Dallas/FW metro area, that are (to borrow a baseball analogy) class AA or AAA rather than the Show? You might not enjoy the betting as much, but they might still let you do photos. I have to assume that there are a lot of folks raising thoroughbred horses around there, that need to train them somewhere. Or, maybe some private owners would let you shoot at their personal tracks in return for some photos. (They would likely be suspicious of your motive so that might not work, but what the heck...)

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2011, 3:08 PM   #13
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
the official track photographers, who honestly have access to prime shooting areas on the track no one like myself can get near, so assuming they do their job competently, no one like myself should have any negative impact on the business of selling prime racing shots....
Greg, I think you grossly underestimate how much "good enough and FREE" can undercut "better but $500". You are correct that they have the advantage if you (or any other shooter) were trying to be business competition. But "free and good enough" can do a lot of damage to a professional.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2011, 5:12 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

so the hunt is on for the longest FL 3" lens one can acquire...
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2011, 6:14 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

Nah! Thoroughbred season only runs from April-July, and not going there will save me, conservatively, probably $200 a month considering both the gas it costs to get over there and back and the money I either bet or spend on this or that while I'm there.

Trying to make the Pen work was an exercise itself. The little 40-150 micro Zuiko, without the hood, comes pretty darn close. Extended out to 150mm it's no longer than, maybe, 5 inches or so. The images can be sharp, but the ability to accurately frame any type action beyond image #1 with the lagging electronic finder is just an impossibility. You just have to get the panning speed down, press the release and hope for the best..





Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2011, 12:44 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Greg, I think you grossly underestimate how much "good enough and FREE" can undercut "better but $500". You are correct that they have the advantage if you (or any other shooter) were trying to be business competition. But "free and good enough" can do a lot of damage to a professional.
Maybe I should protect the images from free downloading, offer only 4x5's and price them at $1,500 each , send the folder links to the track office and ask if I can keep bringing my DSLR if I promised to keep myself priced out of the market so they'd have nothing to ever worry about. It's just a fun hobby for me...could care less if I never sold one at any price.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2011, 7:51 AM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
It's just a fun hobby for me...could care less if I never sold one at any price.
Greg, no one doubts you love it as a hobby. But, for some people, photography is what puts food on the table and pays the mortgage. I find it interesting that people are so dismissive of them wanting to protect their livelihood. Do you think photographers that have a contract should not try to protect their livelihood? I get that them trying to protect their pay check causes discomfort to your hobby (just like it causes discomfort to my hobby). But are you suggesting they are wrong for wanting to do so?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2011, 7:58 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

Nope, that's why I made the suggestion you clipped off in quoting me. Making my "price" totally unreasonable.

Last edited by Greg Chappell; Jun 1, 2011 at 8:02 AM.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2011, 8:05 AM   #19
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Greg, I assumed based upon the emoticon you were saying that tongue-in-cheek. The reality though is: why should anyone with a financial interest in the official photos risk taking your word or the word of the several other shooters you say share your hobby? It's simply easier and less risky to implement restrictions?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2011, 9:04 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

I dunno.... Maybe they just should just go all the way and make it REALLY easy and try convincing companies like Canon, Nikon, Pentax or anyone else to not sell anything white, extendable beyond 3 inches or remotely capable of certain levels of photography to anyone other than verifiable, accredited, professional photographers?

In ANY event, my folders are taken care of. They needn't worry about ever seeing or anyone having access to them again.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:05 PM.