Help needed asap!

[Kimberly Dow]

I have a photo shoot this coming Saturday with 8 models, $600 worth of costumes and a hired professional photographer.

I hired this particular fella because at a charity event I discussed the trouble I have had with copyrights with another photographer who had photographed one of my paintings and then held the copyright of that photo and was looking to sell photo-prints of my painting. I made it clear I needed a professional who would be for hire, but I needed to own the copyrights of the photos. At least I thought I did.

All has been planned well, then in a casual email he mentions that he will be keeping copies of the photos on CD in case he wants to use any in his photo-art he sells. Now - how could he not get that that is exactly what I did not want??

If I chose to paint from a particular photo and then he sells the same exact scene locally - well let's just say the market in this small town cannot stand that.

How do I word a contract with him that states this as precisely as possible? Is it possible or do all photographers always own what they snap?

It may be moot now since I emailed him back and he may not want to do it, but I consider it either completely stupid of him to not get it - or evil of him to wait this long to spring that on me.

Any timely suggestions would be helpful - the options here are limited along with my budget...

[Mike McCarty]

It sounds like you keep drawing from that Texas Photographers Correctional Penal Colony located just outside Uvalde.

I sometimes advise painters to hire professional photographers but it's usually for purely portrait type work. This sounds like very figurative stuff and therefore more subject to canibalization.

My advise would be to lose the hired photo dude and photograph it yourself. Hire / procure a gofer (not golfer, those guys are worthless) assistant. Direct the gofer to do all the costume adjustments that you see through the lens. You obviously have this vision of what you want in your mind so just think through your camera settings beforehand and do the deed. Your needs will probably be more compositionally specific than camera specific. This is better seen through the lens.

PS: I'm becoming completely exhausted trying to keep up with your schedule. I'm going to have to nap the rest of the morning.

[Kimberly Dow]

Mike,

I just laughed so hard I started crying! Whew - that laugh was almost better than a good night's sleep, I think.

I realized (at 4 am when I could not sleep) - that I have two underage girls posing also for this. I have very specific model releases with the parents concerning using the photos for references for paintings and never to be sold in other ways such as photos - so the subject is closed as far as I am concerned.

You're right - I have to photograph them myself - I have this cheap little 2 mp camera with virtually no zoom. I dont think I can get the info I need from it. So, save the $200 bucks I was going to pay the photographer and put it towards a new camera (and have the husband not speak to me for a few days) - and somehow learn to use it before Saturday or cancel the shoot and pray against all odds and experiences that I can get these same 8 people together on a saturday again....? The hardest part for these things has been getting people free at the same times. And now I hear it may rain on saturday - at the very least cloudy.

I need a sedative.

[Jeff Fuchs]

I agree with Mike's advice, and I'm glad you decided to take it.

In the next few days, gather some stand-ins, and have them pose for you. Work out all the lighting problems, and camera isues before your moldels get there, so you'll be ready to go, and look like a professional when they arrive.

If a photographer costs $200, your camera will pay for itself VERY quickly. I'm guessing you're looking at spending between $500 - $800 for a better camera.

This was inevitable. It doesn't seem feasible to always hire a photographer. Might as well take the plunge now.

[Janel Maples]

Kimberly,

For what it is worth last October I couldn't get a good resource photo with my digital camera that costed $300.00. Not to say someone else who knew what they were doing couldn't, but with my limited knowledge about photography my refrences were not nearly the quality I was looking for. Last November I purchased a Canon Digital Rebel.

I am a new woman.

I do not work for Canon, I am just a very happy customer. It is so user friendly, you will be able to take good photos by Saturday. If you get one of these babies you will not regret it for a second. As far as your husband goes, if he still wants to have lunch with you after 15? years..........don't worry, he will talk to you. In fact, I bet he is extremely proud of you and how hard you are working toward a successful career. A good camera will pay for itself, if not in dollars then in a good nights sleep because you will no longer be kept awake from photographers trying to keep their rights protected as well.

Good luck. But it is a no brainer from my (very newbie) point of view. Be your own photographer.

Janel

[Terri Ficenec]

Hi Kim! Go for the camera! Ditch the photographers! You've done such a nice job on the photos of your daughter. I also got a Canon Digital Rebel for myself at Christmas time (based on recommendations from here) and can second Janel's opinion that it is very easy to learn. I also got the camera under pressure of an upcoming photo shoot since I had a commission for an older couple and I knew my little Digital Elph wouldn't capture the texture of their skin well. I'd recommend getting a remote trigger with whatever camera you get (and a tripod if you don't have one) so you don't have to worry about camera shake.

I can't get over how busy you've been!! I've got two little paintings I've been working on since early February, and they're both only halfway done... I'd blame the kids and their schedules --- but you're working around kids too! Do you ever sleep???! I'm feeling like a slackard!

[Kimberly Dow]

Thank you Jeff - you are all right - I SHALL spend money!

I was looking at the Nikon Coolpix8700 that Mike mentioned in another thread - 8 megapixels! I was working off 2! It's around $1,000 and seems like a good buy. I need a zoom as well since I do some landscapes too. But now Im going to go check out this one you are both recommending.


Janel - your right - the spouse will get over it. He already gave me that look that says "no" but out of his mouth he said "Whatever you think is best." Well, honey I think it's best that I buy this then a new wardrobe and a trip to Jamaica!

Terri - dont feel like a slacker. I am a schziphronic (not for real-don't be scared) as a painter. When I get excited about ideas I go and go and sleep very little. I am about due to crash soon for a few days where I sleep a lot. Just this morning my oldest accused me of eating the last of the danish he was going to have for breakfast. I forgot he called it last night and I got all these dirty looks from the kids - so that is my proof I am starting on my downward slope. When the kids start glaring I know it's time to slow down. Besides, these paintings are just that - paintings, not commissions. If your two are commissions then you have me beat right now! I am working hard, but some days I just want to scream: "Show me the money!"

[Garth Herrick]

Hi Kim, I am new here today, so this is my first response. I say go for the best camera you can get. You can be so much mre creative and productive with the higher quality pixel output. I know nothing about the new Nikon Coolpix 8700, but at 8 MP from a very small dimension capture chip, please check to see if there are any reviews that indicate the digital noise levels at higher ISO speeds like 800 or 1600. As I said I have not read a review yet, but in general when a consumer level camera has a chip subdivided to as much as 8 mp, each pixel is so small that compromises in image quality will result.

A year and a half ago I went for the best digital camera I could buy, which was the Nikon D100. This is an interchangeable lens SLR with the then maximum 6 MP. Yes it was expensive (camera and lens were $2,850.00), and my wife really did not speak with me for two months, but oh what a satisfying and productive tool! So far I have shot over 45,000 pictures and added two more hard drives to my G4 to hold them.

The capture chip is quite large in this camera, resulting in excellent low noise digital captures even at ISO 1600! Maybe you don't anticipate a need for low noise in less than adequate lighting, but I think this is a factor worth considering.

Take your time shopping and read up on all the specification fine print that you can. Good luck!

Garth

[Kimberly Dow]

Garth,

Thank you for the information and welcome to the forum!

I have no idea what noise is, what ISO is, or any of the other details you mentioned, but I intend to find out...tonight.

I want to have the camera really clear, easy to use, I want to have a substantial zoom so I can be away from people and still get details - or same for landscapes. I want it to be easy to set for low-light and other lighting situations because I have no clue.

The thing is - I believe $1000 is what I can do at this point. So yes, I want to find the best I can for that price.