# Paid gig offer: $1,100 CASH, Youth Soccer leagues



## Dylan777 (Jan 3, 2014)

Last Nov I posted this: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,18158.0.html

Today, I received an email from the same Coach offered me $1,100 CASH to shoot 3 games of Youth Soccer Leagues.

I spoke with him on the phone and he clearly wanted:

1. Me to be at the field for no more than 3hrs to cover each game -Total of 9hrs for 3 games.
2. He is fine with JPEG files, since he only wants action shots - boys running, kicking ball etcs...
3. He wants all photos to transfer to his PC right-after-each game and all photos must be delete from camera(s).

I told him, I'm not interested. But willing to deliver a message to CR.

Shoot me an email if you interested @ [email protected]  * Edit: The gig has been taken by one of our CR member.* 

*MUST BE IN California, zip code 92708*


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 3, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> 3. He wants all photos to transfer to his PC right-after-each game and all photos must be delete from camera(s).


That's an odd request - is that why you turned it down? Or was it the 9 hours of work at a much smaller rate or something else? 

Congrats on getting another request for your work, sorry it's not going to work out this time.


----------



## Eldar (Jan 3, 2014)

I love shooting soccer, but I am on the wrong side of the globe for this one


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 3, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > 3. He wants all photos to transfer to his PC right-after-each game and all photos must be delete from camera(s).
> ...



I would take the offer if i get to keep the photos. Or even do it free. 

$1100 is 10% of my next lens...600mm. But I'm not that desperate for cash


----------



## purry (Jan 3, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > 3. He wants all photos to transfer to his PC right-after-each game and all photos must be delete from camera(s).
> ...



Probably doesn't want you to keep photos of children


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2014)

Introduce him to the merits of a professional photographers contract and give a few references, maybe he'll see it differently.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 3, 2014)

slclick said:


> Introduce him to the merits of a professional photographers contract and give a few references, maybe he'll see it differently.



Nonsense, capture fees are a very common way for professional photographers to work. All the second shooters I have ever used have been capture fee only employed, I have been capture fee employed on many occasions. You can choose to not do it, that is fine, but many pros do work like that.

Think of it like this, I get a job, I employ a second shooter, I am in charge of everything, lighting, posing etc etc, why should the second shooter have any rights over those images? It is not an example of their work, it is an illustration of mine. 

Or another, many many pros have "assistants" often shooting with remote cameras, they do not (very rarely) get the image credit, it is the primary photographer.

Or another, an event organizer, they have the rights to the event, they can employ stills and video teams that have no rights to the images they capture, it is a very common scenario.

Or another, many agency employed photographers contract image making, that is they tell a photographer to go and take a specific image. The agency has all rights to those images and the photographer has none, they were contracted on a no rights basis. 

See all the Getty Image/AFP credits on images? Many of those are owned by the agency not just managed by it, often you will see ©Fred Blogs/Getty Images, these normally have shared copyright but are licensed through the agency.

People talk a lot of rubbish about copyrights, a contract can, and often does, override any rights you have as the capturing agent to use those images, and that is not, necessarily, a bad thing.


----------



## slclick (Jan 3, 2014)

I am well aware of capture contracts however the OP alluded to not wanting to do it for image rights sake.As you stated many pro's won't do that type of work. I may be wrong. I often am daily. You gave many examples, thank you but the only one I saw that came close to this scenario was the event organizer scenario. Still not the same. 
Not arguing with my reply,just wanted to explain I offered a possible option for the coach who may or may not be schooled in digital rights contracts. Then again it might just be about protecting the kids. Have a good day Sir.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jan 3, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Introduce him to the merits of a professional photographers contract and give a few references, maybe he'll see it differently.
> ...



Of course a contract can have you assign the complete copyright to who you are working for, although I think that's considered Work for Hire where you don't end up owning the copyright. However, OP is not being hired under what I see (could easily be wrong) as a traditional Work for Hire type job, IMO. There's also a big difference between "you can't commercialize any of this, but portfolio is fine" vs "you can't have these photos around, anywhere!"

Of course, it's all up to the person being hired if they are willing, and plainly OP is not. 

@Dylan777: If it weren't going to be such a PITA driving down there, I'd seriously consider it. However, the extra drive (and needing to rent a lens for that long!), plus not having any at all for any kind of portfolio images makes me say no thanks.

BTW, you're in LA? Cool! Where do you usually shoot at?


----------



## cayenne (Jan 3, 2014)

purry said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Why?


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 3, 2014)

Drizzt321 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



Hey Drizzt321,
I'm located in Orange County, city of Foutain Valley.

I don't really have any special places in mind. About you?


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jan 3, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> Hey Drizzt321,
> I'm located in Orange County, city of Foutain Valley.
> 
> I don't really have any special places in mind. About you?



Cool. I'm up in Santa Monica. Don't usually have that much in the way of special spots, although I of course enjoy shooting at the beach and up in the mountains.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 4, 2014)

I would take that gig every day of the week and 3 times on Sunday. No post processing? No sorting? No arguing with soccer Moms about where their pics are? Please.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jan 4, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> I would take that gig every day of the week and 3 times on Sunday. No post processing? No sorting? No arguing with soccer Moms about where their pics are? Please.



Obviously some of us are in different places than others  Especially seeing as I don't do photography for a living, so it makes it a lot easier for me to turn down jobs.


----------



## jdramirez (Jan 4, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



I don't like giving up my work either. And it is nice to be able to do this as more of a hobby rather than a profession... being able to say no to a gig keeps me a happy man.


----------



## tianxiaozhang (Jan 4, 2014)

I'll probably do it precisely because I can avoid spending time photoshopping..... 

Although I wouldn't mind keeping a copy.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 4, 2014)

Drizzt321 said:


> TexPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I would take that gig every day of the week and 3 times on Sunday. No post processing? No sorting? No arguing with soccer Moms about where their pics are? Please.
> ...



If you are in a place where you enjoy post processing and complaints from parents about why their kid who only played for 2 minutes is in just one photo, more power to you.


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 4, 2014)

I really do not see the problem.

Worrying about your copyright, it is a property itself that can be bought and sold. Barter it off for what it is worth, in the case of a Youth Soccer League sports event it is unlikely it will be worth much. Unless of course 20 years from now one of the kids is a superstar.

A person can get on a high horse and say they wouldn't do the work unless they retain their rights.
In that situation they do retain their rights, on nothing and no images as they did not get the job.

Or, take the job and get the rights to 11 pictures of Ben Franklin.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 4, 2014)

takesome1 said:


> I really do not see the problem.
> 
> Worrying about your copyright, it is a property itself that can be bought and sold. Barter it off for what it is worth, in the case of a Youth Soccer League sports event it is unlikely it will be worth much. Unless of course 20 years from now one of the kids is a superstar.
> 
> ...



After long shooting, some people enjoy reviewing bad & good photos with bottle red wine


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 4, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> takesome1 said:
> 
> 
> > I really do not see the problem.
> ...



I see nothing wrong with that either.

I am not a pro either and I would turn it down as well if I get no personal satisfaction.

I could think seriously about being a pro if I could get $1100 for 9 hours of work on a regular basis. Not bad wages.


----------



## Arctic Photo (Jan 4, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> I would take that gig every day of the week and 3 times on Sunday. No post processing? No sorting? No arguing with soccer Moms about where their pics are? Please.


I very much agree with you. It sounds perfect, I've done a few gigs like this (for small pay and have looked at it as practice), turning in the JPGs with no strings attached is good enough for me.

About deleting the photos, I once shot a my children's international school and actually myself asked for a contract to sign where I agreed on deleting all the photos with other people's kids in them. Peace of mind for me when parents at school asked what the photography was all about.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jan 4, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Is there a reason you'd want to keep the pictures? Is your son playing? Just curious because I'm failing to see how you would lose out on such a request as the chance that a youth soccer league would make such a large gain from your work is low (not discrediting your work - I'm sure you take awesome action shots or you would not be asked in the first place). I imagine they are going to use your work for flyers/brochures/websites to encourage additional interest in the league. They probably are just looking to pay once for the next few years. 

Either way, your choice is the right one for you - just trying to understand the hang up - probably 'cause I would have jumped at the chance to recoup some equipment money. 

edit - oh, one last thing. I never had to think about this before, but this year we were asked by my children's elementary school to seek permission prior to shooting at any school events. This included plays that your kid would be in, etc. The reason - they have a witness protection plan child attending the school. The staff won't say who it is, but they will tell you if you are clear to take pictures or not. Perhaps this could be something similar so that the coaches could filter out the pictures and you would not have a copy to post on facebook where the child is accidentally shown. Just a thought.


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 4, 2014)

wsmith96 said:


> Either way, your choice is the right one for you - just trying to understand the hang up - probably 'cause I would have jumped at the chance to recoup some equipment money.



I wouldn't claim to know why the OP turned the job down.
I could see reasons that a non-pro would turn the work down.
He expressed one in a previous post, the enjoyment of reviewing his own work.
Some do not pursue photography as work and if you turn it in to work it may not be enjoyable any more.
Depending on a persons financial condition the money may not be as appealing. While $122 would seem like very good wages to many, to some it may not be.

As for a pro turning it down, I could see far fewer reasons. The majority of pro photographers are not going to average $122 an hour and it would be a very good paycheck for them. I am sure there are those who are in the point and position with their business that they can will turn the work down.


----------



## danski0224 (Jan 4, 2014)

I would have done it- seems pretty low risk from my end.

The only thing I would suggest to the person making the offer is they provide the memory cards if they want the images. "Deleted" images can be recovered.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jan 4, 2014)

takesome1 said:


> wsmith96 said:
> 
> 
> > Either way, your choice is the right one for you - just trying to understand the hang up - probably 'cause I would have jumped at the chance to recoup some equipment money.
> ...



Respectfully, I didn't claim to know why he turned it down - just stating that what ever he decided to do is the right choice for him, not what we recommend here. I'm sure there are reasons that I don't know.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 4, 2014)

wsmith96 said:


> takesome1 said:
> 
> 
> > wsmith96 said:
> ...



Thanks takesome1 for making that clear.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jan 4, 2014)

@ Dylan777 - Understood.

I guess I misunderstood your previous post where you were excited to get paid for taking soccer pictures.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18158.0

Cheers!


----------



## cayenne (Jan 6, 2014)

Here's an idea. 

If you have a dual card camera, shoot one with RAW (for you) and one with jpeg and give that card to him to verify pics and show him it is erased.

Likely as not, he'll not notice or know about the 2nd card in the camera.


----------



## jdramirez (Jan 6, 2014)

cayenne said:


> Here's an idea.
> 
> If you have a dual card camera, shoot one with RAW (for you) and one with jpeg and give that card to him to verify pics and show him it is erased.
> 
> Likely as not, he'll not notice or know about the 2nd card in the camera.



I thought that too, but in our psuedo profession, the last thing we want is for our character to be stained. 

If I say I'm going to do something... it's as good as done. There are no extenuating circumstances when it comes to following through on a promise.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 6, 2014)

cayenne said:


> Here's an idea.
> 
> If you have a dual card camera, shoot one with RAW (for you) and one with jpeg and give that card to him to verify pics and show him it is erased.
> 
> Likely as not, he'll not notice or know about the 2nd card in the camera.



To me, politely said "No, thank you" and walked away from that gig was a better option. Besides, there are photographers out there are looking for gigs. It was a Win-Win for everyone


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 7, 2014)

If you want to go the dishonest route, you could just recover the photos from the deleted card. But I agree with jdramirez, why not just be honest about it.

I am wondering what the big deal is here. Is there some chance the coach will find a gem in the photos that will become the next Coke Ad and he will make millions from you? Is the perfect compliment to your portfolio a 12 year old kicking a soccer ball at a youth soccer field? What does everyone plan to do with these pics?

Is it an honor thing? You can take my life, but you'll never take my copyright!


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 7, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> If you want to go the dishonest route, you could just recover the photos from the deleted card. But I agree with jdramirez, why not just be honest about it.
> 
> I am wondering what the big deal is here. Is there some chance the coach will find a gem in the photos that will become the next Coke Ad and he will make millions from you? Is the perfect compliment to your portfolio a 12 year old kicking a soccer ball at a youth soccer field? What does everyone plan to do with these pics?
> 
> Is it an honor thing? You can take my life, but you'll never take my copyright!


I can't speak for Dylan, but unless you are a well-established pro with a massive portfolio, you like to hold onto your photos for self-promotion at the very least. I have a good deal of commercial clients who I have *licensed* my work to for exclusive commercial use, but I always retain the copyright, the file, and give myself self-promotion rights (after some period of time, at the very least). The idea of handing someone my photos and then deleting them goes against why I take photographs, and I would only consider it if I was (A) paid extremely well (B) given credit in a very prominent publication, location, etc. or (C) shooting for law enforcement or the military.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 7, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> If you want to go the dishonest route, you could just recover the photos from the deleted card. But I agree with jdramirez, why not just be honest about it.
> 
> I am wondering what the big deal is here. Is there some chance the coach will find a gem in the photos that will become the next Coke Ad and he will make millions from you? Is the perfect compliment to your portfolio a 12 year old kicking a soccer ball at a youth soccer field? What does everyone plan to do with these pics?
> 
> Is it an honor thing? You can take my life, but you'll never take my copyright!



As many CR members here, I'm one of those treating photography as a hobby. I'm lucky that I have decent job. The income is good enough to support my family and little hobby on the side 

I DO NOT know the reason(s) why the coach requested to have all photos deleted, once transfered. He didn't ask me to delete the photos I took the 1st time - only asked if I can keep those photos to myself and try not to share in public.

I simply respect the coach wishes. Besides, I made a new friend here on CR by giving him the coach contact info


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 7, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> TexPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > If you want to go the dishonest route, you could just recover the photos from the deleted card. But I agree with jdramirez, why not just be honest about it.
> ...



Maybe he is in witness protection. If you post his photo's publicly the guy would have to load up and move again.


----------



## jdramirez (Jan 7, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> TexPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > If you want to go the dishonest route, you could just recover the photos from the deleted card. But I agree with jdramirez, why not just be honest about it.
> ...


----------



## jdramirez (Jan 7, 2014)

takesome1 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > TexPhoto said:
> ...


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 7, 2014)

I make a decent living as well, and photography is a hobby first, and small (but growing) 2nd income 2nd. But $1,100 (Cash) for 9 hours of work is $122/hr for something most people here would do for free. That does seem like pretty good compensation for me. 

I do photograph my child's soccer team as well as coach, and I find the dealing with the parents part extremely frustrating. I was once confronted by Dad who was pissed because I had given the Mom a CD full of photos. They were not married and he wanted to know where his CD was. This was a man I had never seen at a game, and was not a polite "Hey, sorry for the bother, but me and the Mrs don't get along, could I...". To me that was the best part of this job, avoiding all that.


----------



## Eldar (Jan 8, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> I make a decent living as well, and photography is a hobby first, and small (but growing) 2nd income 2nd. But $1,100 (Cash) for 9 hours of work is $122/hr for something most people here would do for free. That does seem like pretty good compensation for me.
> 
> I do photograph my child's soccer team as well as coach, and I find the dealing with the parents part extremely frustrating. I was once confronted by Dad who was pissed because I had given the Mom a CD full of photos. They were not married and he wanted to know where his CD was. This was a man I had never seen at a game, and was not a polite "Hey, sorry for the bother, but me and the Mrs don't get along, could I...". To me that was the best part of this job, avoiding all that.


He he, had similar experience. I had one dad complaining that his son was on fewer images than the others, after a 3-day tournament. And a mom complaining that her son was in the second row of the team image, on the side, next to a larger boy, which made him look small and insignificant :


----------



## Sporgon (Jan 8, 2014)

Strange conversations going on here. If I was paid to shoot something as inauspicious as a kids soccer match and then give up the images I'd be quite happy. I wouldn't want them anyway. 

However I _would_ be careful to delete bad ( incompetent ;D ) shots as I went along because I wouldn't want to give a third party unlimited access to those !


----------



## jdramirez (Jan 8, 2014)

Eldar said:


> TexPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I make a decent living as well, and photography is a hobby first, and small (but growing) 2nd income 2nd. But $1,100 (Cash) for 9 hours of work is $122/hr for something most people here would do for free. That does seem like pretty good compensation for me.
> ...



I shoot basketball for my daughter's school. My daughter plays forward and she rarely touches the ball. 
Partly because she isn't a ball handler and mostly because she's not that good.

It is a fact of life that things aren't equitable. Point guards are going to have all the images of cross over dribbles and rushing the lane.

Goalies will have images where they are stretched out diving to stop the ball.

I don't know where people got the idea that life is fair. The kids sitting the bench is sitting the bench for a reason.

Anyway, you should have said that you are willing to be hired solely for his kid and here are your rates. 

I could see if as a group the parents all pitched in for the fee and someone felt short changed, but you can't help that his kid picked hood nose during the game rather than run after the ball.


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 8, 2014)

This thread has really evolved, with lots of opinions, but in the end, I think it can be summarized in two ways:

1. Dylan (like many of us here) is fortunate enough to be able to turn down paid work, for his own reasons.

2. Dylan was nice enough to pass along a paid assignment to others who might be interested.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 9, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> This thread has really evolved, with lots of opinions, but in the end, I think it can be summarized in two ways:
> 
> 1. Dylan (like many of us here) is fortunate enough to be able to turn down paid work, for his own reasons.
> 
> 2. Dylan was nice enough to pass along a paid assignment to others who might be interested.



Agreed. Though I would have like to have seen a #3 that at least mentioned the nose picking. 

I was in no way criticizing Dylan for turning the work down, and I do appreciate him passing it on. I am 4,200 miles away, or I would have tossed my name in the hat. I was just surprised at the number of people upset by the request to delete the photos. I am very conscious of my copyright, but very happy to sell it when generously compensated.


----------

