Printing from a photo cd - is it illegal?

Richie-from-the-Boro

rrf494g wrote: »

I think a photographer is good value if

1. The charge for their time and use of equipment is £300 for a full day (skilled rate, for time and a half on Saturday)
2. All rights to all photographs pass to the customer, and all photos given (full res) on CD/DVD.
3. There is a choice of photographs/albums (optional) at whatever price the photgrapher wants to try to get.
4. The photographs themslves are well taken in a style agreed before hand.

These are similar to the conditions that all other (well paid) skilled craftsmen provide in my area of Yorkshire. Because of the history of photgraphy, the law still places the taking of photographs alongside writing music or poetry. Many photographers try to take advantage of that unususal legal position. If I pay for a skilled man or woman to come to an event I have organised and work for a day. I can reasonably expect that all the fruits of that days labour belong to me. It can dissappoint many people to find out that despite having paid for the day, all that has happened is that the photographer now owns more photos! When photographers are paid employees (eg medical photographers) they can not claim this special legal provision, because the contract of employment makes it clear. But self employed individuals (sometimes) hide behind the legalities to disadvantage the customer.

If the terms and conditions are fulled explained and understood before a photographer is engaged, then everyone can make up their own mind as to what value for money is.

Yes Yes Yes, I too fully expect that all the fruits of that days labour belong to you.

You originated the event, invested huge amounts of money, organised and took a huge amount of financial and emotional risk only to have someone sneak in behind badly drafted legislation, and charge you a fortune for giving you "" images .. .. .. sufficently low-res that anything more than a postcard print will be largely unusable- and additionally useless because they are watermarked ""

The originator of the above [ """" ] quote [ at this time ] has stopped posting so I will continue with the quote itself but will not give the hash number or posting nym.

lucylucky

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Make your own guesstimate up, its just that a guesstimate. I thought carefully about my guess and deliberately underestimated it to be fair to people. To help your thread input this calculator may help you decide

Kind Regards, lucylucky

I do like the irony of "to be fair to people"

As you are just making up numbers, including a meaningless list of costs which have nothing to do with this thread I know that everyone can safely ignore them.

No idea why you linked to a site about trolls as it it is clear from your posts that you are one without the aid of a guide unless it was a pointer to those who haven't already sussed you out. In which case I am sure if will be of benefit to those who think you are a genuine poster with sensible views on the subject matter.

No need for your faux gratitude either.

darich

lucylucky wrote: »

I do like the irony of "to be fair to people"

As you are just making up numbers, including a meaningless list of costs which have nothing to do with this thread I know that everyone can safely ignore them.

No idea why you linked to a site about trolls as it it is clear from your posts that you are one without the aid of a guide unless it was a pointer to those who haven't already sussed you out. In which case I am sure if will be of benefit to those who think you are a genuine poster with sensible views on the subject matter.

No need for your faux gratitude either.

Lucy
it's quite clear that he has no arguements to back up any point he makes - he never debates any points he doesn't like and simply dismisses them with a sarcastic "thanks".

he's quite obviously a troll and not worth the effort of a reply.;)

tronator

fitshase wrote: »

Yes, and most people store those backups at home...

You can assume by the text I quoted from your previous post that I was talking about a "proper" backup.

Richie-from-the-Boro

lucylucky wrote: »

I do like the irony of "to be fair to people"

As you are just making up numbers, including a meaningless list of costs which have nothing to do with this thread I know that everyone can safely ignore them.

No idea why you linked to a site about trolls as it it is clear from your posts that you are one without the aid of a guide unless it was a pointer to those who haven't already sussed you out. In which case I am sure if will be of benefit to those who think you are a genuine poster with sensible views on the subject matter.

No need for your faux gratitude either.

Thanks lucylucky, for your continuing post [304,500], your input is much appreciated.

The numbers are not made up as well you know, and though the costs may be meaningless to someone like you who makes no emotional or financial contribution whatsoever, I assure you they are a very very significant worry to those who must fund a wedding event.

The costings were intended to show the real world cost in the UK of providing for a wedding. The figures are real, ask any about~to~be~married couple, their parents and their friends and they will tell you they are real.

The issue for me remains having invested huge amounts of money, organisation, time and emotion why does a wedding photographer sneak in behind badly drafted legislation, and charge you a fortune for giving you "" images .. .. .. sufficently low-res that anything more than a postcard print will be largely unusable- and additionally useless because they are watermarked ""

At the end of the day you may manage to extract a £100 or so more from the event in the way of reprints, because of copyright legislation, but at a cost to the bride / groom / family / friends. After a year or so you will dump or sell to a third party the good quality images because they are of no further economic value to you.

Thus denying the happy couple the good quality images that they paid for for the rest of their life. A photograph is a forever thing, providing you get the original images from the grasping hands of the photographer.

Richie-from-the-Boro

darich wrote: »

Lucy
it's quite clear that he has no arguements to back up any point he makes - he never debates any points he doesn't like and simply dismisses them with a sarcastic "thanks".

he's quite obviously a troll and not worth the effort of a reply.;)

Thanks darich, for your continuing post [304,500 +], your input is much appreciated

darich

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Thanks darich, for your continuing post [304,500 +], your input is much appreciated

Richie
My post was quite clearly not aimed at you so please refrain from butting where you are not required or wanted

Thanks for your input, however, poor it is

Richie-from-the-Boro

darich wrote: »

Richie
My post was quite clearly not aimed at you so please refrain from butting where you are not required or wanted

Thanks for your input, however, poor it is

Thanks darich, for your continuing post [304,500 ++], your input is much appreciated.

BTW Andrea, did you ever sell your Z4 3.0SE and did you take your private plate off before the sale ?

Best Wishes, Richie

lucylucky

darich wrote: »

Lucy
it's quite clear that he has no arguements to back up any point he makes - he never debates any points he doesn't like and simply dismisses them with a sarcastic "thanks".

he's quite obviously a troll and not worth the effort of a reply.;)

Indeed.

Methinks you have hit the nail well and truly on the head.