>I'm not sure if we are on the same wavelength. I'm talking mainly about
>commissioned product type shots. A photo of a model X type widget. A photo
>that would never be of any use to me at all that I'm being paid to make. I
>know Art Directors dont get useage rights on their work nor do graphic
>artists or writers. They produce it and then the client owns it. On a product
>type shot the Art Director and stylist do most of the work, we just light it
>and operate the camera. I don't mean to downgrade our work but really, we
>don't do a whole lot when a Art Director and stylist are there do we, no
>final is made till the art director is happy with the lighting and if they
>are not happy they will get the lights changed until they are happy.
>I would like to know if the cameramen for a motion picture gets useage
>rights, even if the Dir of photography gets useage rights.?
>I just think if photographers stick to this they are going to miss out on a
>lot of work because the facts are that some? many? most? Art Directors will
>not hire if the issue of useage fees comes up.
>Are photographers getting mixed up with stock photo's which most certainly
>entail the issue of useage rights.
>The meeting of ASMP I attended left a bitter feeling in my mouth of an
>attempt at price fixing. We are in a free market and may the best man or
>woman win (get the job) I ask for and get $900 a day for shooting. I don't
>mention useage fees and at that rate I don't believe I'm selling the
>profession down the drain. but I do lose jobs to people who underbid me by
>300 to 500 dollars. Thats life, if it happens enough I'll have to drop my
>prices. I don't like it, but attempts at photographers getting together to
>price fix will always fail because its wrong and there will always be people
>around that will do it at a cheaper rate. Maybe there are just too many
>photographers in the world?
>Regards, Mark.
>
Hi-- Methinks you are slanting the situation to justify your position - and you
succeeded. In the above circumstances, with little value to to photograph
except to the client, and the high daily rate, and in consideration of the
contributions of the client, I probably would also hand over all rights.
But the original form of the question was far from the above... Also, please
do not put down the efforts of photographers to band together to get a living
income from their work (though price fixing is illegal, pricing guides and
area going rates are not) - doctors, masons, lawyers, plumbers, etc. all do it too. People who drop their prices well below going rates (unless they are just beginning [MAYBE!]), are foolish - they are killing their future market along with others' current market (a good reason for having meetings like the one you went to is to educate the uninformed, and maybe try to convince those who have not yet taken a long view of their work).
David Ruether