Forums >Running 101>race photos
sincerely silly
That water station etiquette got me thinking about other etiquette...those expensive race photos. I usually have no qualms nabbing screenshots or getting them otherwise with the giant "PROOF" over it and whatnot. Is there anything really wrong with that?
shin splints are my nemesis
Good Bad & The Monkey
Yes.
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
The proof screen shots are usually so small and low resolution I don't know what you could be doing with them useful. If you are saving that so you can see what you looked like in 20 years, or so you can show friends etc I wouldn't have a problem with it. It is not like the proofs are good enough you can get them developed, or make you Christmas card out of them. I have a hard time envisioning a use of the internet race proof that would be unethical IMO.
Whatever my lot, thou hast taught me to say, It is well, it is well with my soul.
rectumdamnnearkilledem
You're only hurting the photographer, their families and their businesses. Besides, everyone else is doing it...
I love digital for so many reasons. I don't love what it's done to the industry in terms of making intellectual property theft so easy.
Getting the wind knocked out of you is the only way to
remind your lungs how much they like the taste of air.
~ Sarah Kay
Haven't most companies figured out how to disable the "easy" ability to right-click and save copies of the proofs? Its' been a while since I've had a race photo, but the last few times saving a local-copy was not readily easy to do. As others have said, the resolution is very poor anyhow. I don't think it's right to nab them.
I only swipe them from races I bandited wearing headphones.
I love the fact that a volunteer takes pictures at our local races and posts them on-line for free. Very cool. And they’re often as good or better quality than the expensive big-race photos. Given the declining cost of decent cameras, free online posting options, etc, I don’t understand why this isn’t done more often. It's another form of volunteering.
I know that’s not practical for a big race, but why are photos an extra cost? Couldn’t the race directly pay the photo company a flat fee (keeping photographers employed) and--for an extra couple of bucks- include “free” photos in the cost of an entry?
Be safe. Be kind.
Those are the obvious technical reasons, I guess.
Like others have said, I'm not doing much with them...just saving them for myself, which I guess I could do just by visiting the website. I guess I was judging from the other friends that post pics of themselves from these sites (without paying) that it's what people do. But maybe they're on the far end of the moral spectrum and you guys are more the norm?
I actually work in IP, so I know what is right and wrong in that sense. But because of that I know in the real world the lines are more blurred. And I'm really bad at figuring out social norms. :-(
oof I re-read my original post. It wasn't meant to just say "is there anything really wrong with that?" at the end. I don't remember exactly what since I tend to overedit my posts piecemeal leading to them making less sense than before...
Yeah I take pics at local races sometimes and usually they have a flickr page you can just contribute to. I think it's fun. :-) In fact I think there was a race series where that was encouraged and then they used some of the pictures from earlier races and displayed them at the final race afterparty event.
http://www.ellyfosterphotography.com/
In the past 5 years I've noticed a LOT of established photographers go-under. And in my own short-lived pro experience I found that people almost never ordered enlargements, even of wedding photos...why would they when they could scan proofs and make shitty quality enlargements at home. Then they could tell people that I was their photographer, even though the end product was almost certainly not of a level of quality to which I would want my name and reputation attached.
A lot of photographers are being forced to forgo creating quality print enlargements and having much control over their finished product altogether, instead selling only digital copies and copyright for little more than cost. It's an uncomfortable place to be for a lot of pros, having no guarantee that the final product will accurately depict their training and skills and having their work reduced to the lowest common denominator, since people would rather have quantity than quality.
Huh, I am surprised I came down on the opposite side of public opinion on this one, I tend to be pretty conservative about this type of thing. I guess my opinion is a result of two things. First I consider the proofs pretty much worthless except for deciding if you want to buy the picture or not. Second, I never really considered that anyone would put anything they expected to be paid for out in public on a webpage. Like someone said it is not that hard to prevent the "right-click, save as". I guess I figured if you didn't consider the proof public domain you wouldn't make it so. I freely admit apparently I was naively wrong.
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.
Asked differently: what are you willing to pay for good race shots, and for what exact products?