Originally posted by luftfluss Love the 2 images you posted.
Thanks! I've been told that I see (photograph) things different than most wildlife photographers. I'm big on isolating subjects.
Originally posted by johnyates They only receive full proceeds if you agree--after all it's your image--you created it. So they have a choice. They can be partners with you in this venture and both parties benefit, or the project does not proceed and they get nothing.
and that's not something I'd agree on. My time is worth money and it did take time to drive to location, photograph bird, edit photo. It's taken time to call print shops for quotes, drive to sample shirts and will take more time to pick up shirts when ready. That's a lot of time for an organization not wanting me to have any cut in it.
Originally posted by Ontarian50 they can easily turn to one of the other photographers who were there that day with their "pro" gear, and get them to donate an image.
and they probably have ALOT of photographers who'd love to do exclusive work with them. While I'd like to, I'm also easily put off when greed presents itself.
Originally posted by BrianR Seems a little late to deny where it was taken if the OP has already contacted them saying it was taken at their facility. And posted here saying it was taken at a facility in BC. Never leave a contradictory paper trail (digital or otherwise) if you plan to lie
.
I'm fine with the paper trail. From my perspective, (someone point me out if I'm wrong) I took a photo and offered to spend my time and money to produce apparel, giving them a cut of the proceeds. They didn't have to do anything, not even allow me to use their logo. They said no to free money. It only makes them look foolish.
Originally posted by Quartermaster James First: great photos!
Second: (very, very general information here) I have noticed many non-profit/public gardens happily entertain casual (non-commercial) photography but require permitting/fees for any commercial photography.
At these open houses, you get everyone from "I can't figure out my point and shoot" to really well known pro photogs. They've never told anyone that they can't take photo's, commercial or otherwise.
Sholtzma - I'm acquaintances with some people on the board. I was speaking with one of them about my idea. How I would donate a percentage to them. Our talk only covered the first image in this thread and most of the board is well aware of the photographic industry (wildlife specific) and how tough it is to get into it. We covered almost everything in our conversation, I just had to get board approval. They didn't say no, they just said "ok but only if we get all the money". They gave no room for negotiation.
Originally posted by Sliver-Surfer "A property release is a legal release signed by the owner of property used in a photograph or video granting permission to use or publish the photograph or video in one form or another.
Authors do not need one for public property, such as government buildings (although you may run into problems just from photographing/videoing them, for security reasons!). For images of private property — and particularly of objects that are closely identified with specific people — photographers are urged to get a release.
Most animals in zoos are the property of the zoo and usually cannot be used for commercial purposes without the consent of the zoo."
Im afraid you are outta luck.
I was just speaking with a friend who use to work at the zoo, all their animals are property of the Provincial Government. They only possess the permits to house and care for them.
They should really put a cap on how many times you can quote someone in one response.