3 ms·
This is insanity to anyone but a photographer. I wonder how often it is that a photographer loses out on the proverbial jackpot when a customer resells their im
by sachingulaya 13y ago
This is insanity to anyone but a photographer. I wonder how often it is that a photographer loses out on the proverbial jackpot when a customer resells their images.
- pan69 13y agoI guess this is the problem that photographers (and Hollywood) has, thinking to much about what they "could" have had. Just charge for your time and maybe a reasonable amount for digital copies and be done with it.
- atgm 13y agoNine times out of ten in my experience, it's not a worry about money, but representation. If you give a customer digital copies and they "retouch" them or crop them and present it as YOUR work, that's a huge frustration.
- darkarmani 13y agoIt's easy to prevent attribution in the sub-license. But I've never heard of this as a fear for consumer level photography. Who wants to share photos of their kids with a big attribution to the photographer?
- atgm 13y agoErr, not things like that. Say you shoot portraits of a family and give them the originals. They do a lousy crop of the kids, chopping off the parents' heads and send that out to their friends/family saying that they got the pictures done at Smith & Sons and look at the kids! Some people will look at that picture and say "Wow, Smith & Sons did an absolutely terrible job, why would they cut off the parents' heads?" That kind of mis-representation.