# Random (but Legal) Use of your Photos



## mackguyver (Nov 25, 2013)

Sometimes we enter photo contests or sign the rights to do a lot with our photos over to others. So far, no harm has come to my photos - if anything, it's been a great and sometimes amusing experience. For starters, I entered the Florida State Parks photo contest twice - the first time with no luck and the second time I won the monthly contest. Out of the total entry of 4 photos, one was used (as the main photo) on the cover of their 18-month calendar, one was exhibited in a local museum (forgive the crappy photo), my photo is the little alligator in the bottom center, and I just found that they used my (winning) photo for the cover of some water quality publication. They gave my photo a HDR look and (re)-captioned my photo screwing up everything but my name and the location...but still kind of funny and cool that they used the photo.

My commercial clients have used my photos for magazine ads, billboards, lobby art, and other stuff. Has anyone else had their work spread around like this after giving away or licensing the rights? If so, any funny or interesting examples?


----------



## WPJ (Nov 25, 2013)

Congrats nice to see your work, I think some places run the contests just to get a library of photos to use, but hey that's what you signed up for.


----------



## Skulker (Nov 25, 2013)

A lot of photo "competitions" seem to just be ways of getting free use of images.

Many people are very happy with that and please to see their images in print and used.

Some good advice I heard was "I only enter competitions if there is a worth while cash prize"

I entered one competition, and one a Nikon camera. I sold it for cash and have retired from the competition scene with a 100% record, first prize in every competition I have entered. ;D


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 25, 2013)

Nothing like what you are doing, I won no contests or anything, but when I shoot for a Big Ten school, 1. there's not photo credit on their site and 2. they get distributed everywhere, including the Big Ten website, etc. and no credit caption. The only credit captions they do are from USATSI or the AP. It's ok though, you get paid, so in the end you're just doing your job.


----------



## rmt3rd (Nov 25, 2013)

Skulker said:


> A lot of photo "competitions" seem to just be ways of getting free use of images.



Ain't this the truth. My mom entered a Jekyll Island photo contest, and to her surprise, she was picked for publication in the "best of" Jekyll Island book, plus they enlarged the photos and made them into canvases to put up on the walls of the new convention center at Jekyll. My Mom told me she felt honored, however, to the rest of us photographers, we already know the real scam here. The competitions prey on people that just want their published somewhere to feel "honored". In return, the competition gets tons of free photos, and in this case, photos for a best of Jekyll book, in which they are selling for $25-$30 a pop. What's in honor in that?


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Nov 25, 2013)

rmt3rd said:


> Skulker said:
> 
> 
> > A lot of photo "competitions" seem to just be ways of getting free use of images.
> ...



Attribution? Recognition and dissemination of artistic expression? External validation?

I've never participated in a photo contests, but I imagine that for some - this is enough to warrant participation. Particularly for hobbyists/enthusiasts.


----------



## mackguyver (Nov 25, 2013)

Mitch.Conner said:


> rmt3rd said:
> 
> 
> > Skulker said:
> ...


All the more reason to read the fine print on photo contests. Some contests force you to waive all rights, even your copyright, while others limit the future use, and most will at least give you attribution. For me, my nature work isn't generally what I get paid for, but what I'm most interested in, so I'm willing to give up some rights to share my work. In the case of Florida's State Park System, they can use it any way they see fit, and given that many of my photos are taken there, I don't mind. If my work was being sold for a hefty profit, I'm sure I would feel differently. Finally, I'm careful not to enter my best work in any contests where I would be signing away my rights.

Also, as a follow up, here are two photos that one of my clients used for full page ads in a Florida business magazine. The original campaign was a large brochure highlighting local landmarks and I was pretty happy with the results. They chose the photos that they wanted to use, which aren't my best work by far, but I gave them full commercial rights, and was paid handsomely, so I have no complaints. I won't be posting them as tearsheets, but as long as my client is happy, all is good


----------



## mackguyver (Nov 25, 2013)

Skulker said:


> I entered one competition, and one a Nikon camera. I sold it for cash and have retired from the competition scene with a 100% record, first prize in every competition I have entered. ;D


Congrats and LOL a Nikon!


----------



## Halfrack (Nov 25, 2013)

Photo contests are a place where legally, it would be nice if there were a set of consistent licenses that could be referred to. Such as:

license a) We take all rights just for submitting the photo and can do anything include selling the photo to others
license b) You grant us an unlimited license to do anything we want, but you retain the rights
license c) You grant us limited license for the contest, if you win you grant us additional rights, etc

I personally believe that by entering a contest you shouldn't give any rights up, but others do, so have at it. I just don't want to read all the fine print 5x over to make sure I don't enter something I don't like. I see these photo collection contests on craigslist and such, so to each their own.

I wonder when two of these 'contests' ends up in a lawsuit wit because a 'tog submitted the photo to multiple contests, each one taking full rights...


----------



## dryanparker (Nov 25, 2013)

My passion is photography, and I'm fortunate to be able to weave that into my job as Creative Director in sports marketing.

A large amount of design work leaves my desk in preparation for the events we manage, and every so often we'll see the work other agencies are creating in support of the same event.

Funny thing happened recently. An agency sent me some artwork that needed some "retouching". (I suppose they were told I do a lot of that.)

What did I find? MY PHOTO.
Their request? "Can you remove the green glob in the lower left part of the image? That's where our logo goes."
My answer? "No. For several reasons. First: this is my image. How did YOU get it? Second: The lens flare is an artful element of the image that I included for a reason. I have no intention of removing it. I'll send you another image to use."

Oddly enough, I sent them another image of mine that was more suitable for the application. In the end, I still like the idea of having my imagery out there in support of the event. At least I know it'll be one that I find favorable!


----------



## anthonyd (Nov 26, 2013)

I saw a signature in flickr once (I don't remember whose it was) saying something along the lines of: "Go ahead and copy my picture, I make more money by suing people than by selling pictures." I found that hysterical.


----------



## emag (Nov 26, 2013)

mackguyver said:


> In the case of Florida's State Park System, they can use it any way they see fit, and given that many of my photos are taken there, I don't mind.



Looks like you're not far from me. I do some daytime and a WHOLE LOT of astrophotography from Big Lagoon State Park here in Pensacola. The really dark (and relatively close) parks are in the north ends of Escambia, Santa Rosa and Okaloosa counties but part of the Forest Service, so my annual pass isn't any good in those.


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 26, 2013)

I frequently waive financial rights. I'm a hobbyist and I do that when I feel the "cause" worthy. It is some kind of charity. From me to them, not the other way around. And I make that felt by the counterpart by being an ass (when necessary) on the artistic use of the picture.
Photog shouldn't be exploited for sure but the other extreme is, IMHO, just as bad.

(this might not be valid for US or random country but generally true for continental europe, disclaimer /off)
Something that too few people know is that you can wave financial rights, you can give the rights for a truckload of medias but you always keep the right of artistic integrity of your work. 
i.e. : you can't oppose they use it in a book but you can oppose the instagram filter and horrenduous comic sans text on your picture. In the OP we see some examples of things that can (should have? ) been opposed.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 26, 2013)

I do quite a lot of photo and video for my company (photography is not part of my job profile, it is my personal hobby) ... many of my photos get published in company brochures, calendars, newsletters, presentations, advertisements etc ... I don't get paid for it and nor is my name mentioned in any of the photos ... I don't mind though coz I'm happy with my regular job which pays me well to afford the luxury of some decent camera gear ... our CEO & COO usually give credit for the work I do in Board meetings, town hall meetings etc ... so I do get recognition for it ... but I do make sure to add my name at the end of every one of my videos.


----------

