race photos (Read 1789 times)


Needs more cowbell!

    On a only partly related note, I do wish they were not so expensive.  I generally only buy a picture 1 in 10 times....it they were 1/3 to 1/2 as much it would probably be more like 2/3 thirds of the time.  I do, however, expect that the big companies have done a very thorough financial analysis and the price point is at the perfect spot.

     

    They'd probably be cheaper if everyone who wanted to display a photo actually bought a print or digital copy, instead of nabbing screen grabs.  The honest purchasers are paying for the thieves.  This is how retail works, in part, for just about everything.  We all pay for theft.

     

    A friend of mine sometimes shoots at bike races, then puts full resolution images up on Flickr for anyone to download.  I grabbed a couple that I liked, then asked him if I could send him money via Paypal.  I felt guilty just taking his work, since I know he has at least $5k worth of equipment and isn't a wealthy guy.  He does a lot for the cycling and pedestrian transportation communities in our area, too, so it's just right to support someone like that.

    I shoot pretty things! ~

    '14 Goals:

    • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

    • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

    xor


      They'd probably be cheaper if everyone who wanted to display a photo actually bought a print or digital copy, instead of nabbing screen grabs.  The honest purchasers are paying for the thieves.  This is how retail works, in part, for just about everything.  We all pay for theft.

       

       

       

      I don't know that it is direct as all that.  We're not talking sweaters or candy bars.  Digital photography is a weird mix of tangible product, slightly less tangible product that can be reproduced repeatedly (both legally and not), and the service of setting up and getting the shots... which is a very different thing than the sweater supply chain.  Meanwhile, it's very easy to calculate "loss" for sweaters and candy bars, and waaaay harder for electronic pictures.  They can track that you hit their image site very simply.  Tracking that you actually copied an image? Almost impossible.  So the model for loss is different and the cost implications way different.

       

      Anyway.  It is a work-in-progress business.  There is a company in the PNW that takes shots early in the race and has printed 5x7s ready for you at the finish. For 10 bucks. Take it home with you right there.  Way different model than brightroom.

       


      Needs more cowbell!

        I don't know that it is direct as all that.  We're not talking sweaters or candy bars.  Digital photography is a weird mix of tangible product, slightly less tangible product that can be reproduced repeatedly (both legally and not), and the service of setting up and getting the shots... which is a very different thing than the sweater supply chain.  Meanwhile, it's very easy to calculate "loss" for sweaters and candy bars, and waaaay harder for electronic pictures.  They can track that you hit their image site very simply.  Tracking that you actually copied an image? Almost impossible.  So the model for loss is different and the cost implications way different.

         

        Anyway.  It is a work-in-progress business.  There is a company in the PNW that takes shots early in the race and has printed 5x7s ready for you at the finish. For 10 bucks. Take it home with you right there.  Way different model than brightroom.

         

        Agreed that it's different...but maybe not so much if we simply talk in terms of cost of overhead + tangible prints + human doing the work.  Digital has removed the tangible parts from the buying public's awareness in a way, but it's still there.  The intellectual property is still there.  Copyright law still works the same way.

         

        Yeah, that prints before anyone has ordered thing is an interesting business model.  It works on guilt.  People feel obligated to buy, since someone already went to the trouble of making prints.  We've seen that with children's school portraiture around here, particularly at the pre-primary level.

        I shoot pretty things! ~

        '14 Goals:

        • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

        • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

          Look at the music industry prior to transition to digital - they wanted to you to pay $15+ for a CD so people began copying and downloading music.  Now that their sales model is more appropriate to today's marketplace they are making more $ than ever.  

           

          Same with professional  race photo's.  I have no interest in paying high costs for a single printed photo, in fact, never have.  Have not even printed a photo in years.  But would be more than interested in paying $1-$2 for an electronic copy


          A Dance with Monkeys

            I'd pay $10 for a digital copy, full res.  I might even pay more.  I'd love to pay, say $30-40 for all the images from a given race, digital only.  To this day, that is still an uncommon option.


            Needs more cowbell!

              Same with professional  race photo's.  I have no interest in paying high costs for a single printed photo, in fact, never have.  Have not even printed a photo in years.  But would be more than interested in paying $1-$2 for an electronic copy

               

              Why should an electronic copy cost less than a printed copy would when the human being's skills and education and equipment cost as much, if not more than pre-digital--AND the digital copy of an image can be duplicated to the purchaser's heart's content?

              I shoot pretty things! ~

              '14 Goals:

              • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

              • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)


              Needs more cowbell!

                Full disclosure: I finished college with a degree in Photography and $26k of debt.  Why should someone like me have to give away my work because people are cheap?  Want good race photos for cheap, go out and buy a minimum of $3k of equipment and pay for a friend or family member to learn how to take photos for you.  Oh, wait...that's not cheap.  Funny how that works...

                I shoot pretty things! ~

                '14 Goals:

                • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

                • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)


                A Dance with Monkeys

                  Why should an electronic copy cost less than a printed copy would when the human being's skills and education and equipment cost as much, if not more than pre-digital--AND the digital copy of an image can be duplicated to the purchaser's heart's content?

                   

                  Simple.  You are not paying the cost of paper, chemicals and postage. Smile


                  Needs more cowbell!

                    Simple.  You are not paying the cost of paper, chemicals and postage. Smile

                     

                    But digital copies purchased from race events generally include full copyrights...which are worth FAR more than the aforementioned things.

                    I shoot pretty things! ~

                    '14 Goals:

                    • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

                    • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                    Elly.


                      But digital copies purchased from race events generally include full copyrights...which are worth FAR more than the aforementioned things.

                       

                      Yes, but to be pragmatic about this ....I'ts sell the digital or sell the print, with all it's costs, nobody else is gonna want that digital except the person in that digital. I have captured world class athletes, but nobody called for those pictures. it's only worth what is in the eye of the beholder...and that means the runner.

                      http://www.ellyfosterphotography.com/


                      A Dance with Monkeys

                        I agree Elly.  Copyright has almost no value in this setting.


                        Needs more cowbell!

                          Yes, but to be pragmatic about this ....I'ts sell the digital or sell the print, with all it's costs, nobody else is gonna want that digital except the person in that digital. I have captured world class athletes, but nobody called for those pictures. it's only worth what is in the eye of the beholder...and that means the runner.

                           

                          Right.  I guess what I was getting at is that a single high-res digital file is worth more than a single print, since the print is just the print and the holder of the print cannot *legally* duplicate it (without a release).  The holder of the digital file from a race photographer can generally make as many copies as his/her heart sees fit, including holiday cards or various sizes, print and online, etc.

                           

                          With music the rules are different.  Purchasing a song off of iTunes is more like purchasing a single print.  The buyer does not have rights to make multiple duplications, which is why comparing a digital image file from a race to a digital file from iTunes is not an = comparison.  That iTunes file comes with no copyright.  I don't think most people have a very clear understanding of this.

                          I shoot pretty things! ~

                          '14 Goals:

                          • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

                          • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)


                          Needs more cowbell!

                            Back to the $1-2/image premise.  Take the average smaller Midwest marathon.  You might have 3000 runners.  Maybe 6 photographers on the course.  Say each runner purchases that 1 good shot that a typical race would yield at $2.  That's $6k.  $1k/photographer...sounds like a good haul, right?  But that doesn't take into account equipment costs, training, insurance, post-processing, webspace, customer service, etc.  At $2/image I doubt any photographers/photography services would even break even.

                            I shoot pretty things! ~

                            '14 Goals:

                            • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

                            • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                              That iTunes file comes with no copyright.  I don't think most people have a very clear understanding of this.

                              You might get a license to do stuff with the iTunes files you download, but the copyright is always there.

                               

                              The very reason that a large copyright symbol or the "PROOF" watermark is emblazoned across the proofs is that the image business is trying to prevent you from downloading that image instead of buying a cleaner (and larger, and better-resolution, and properly centered and cropped) version.  I think everyone knows it's copyrighted.  The balancing act is to provide a proof that's good enough to make the subject want to buy prints, but bad enough that he doesn't want or can't use the proof itself for anything useful.

                              “Everything you need is already inside.” -- Bill Bowerman

                                Marathonfoto wants 59.95 for a single image download.