View Full Version : ACMP v AIPP - why 2? why join?
We have two professional photography bodies in Australia. ACMP (http://www.acmp.com.au/Joomla/index.php) and AIPP (http://www.aipp.com.au/)
I am not a member of either. I am interested in the pro/con of each (without getting into a slanging match).
Are you a member of one or both?
What benefits does membership lead to?
Why don't they merge?
Surely a single professional voice would be better for lobbying the Govt etc.
(If this is too much of a can of worms - then don't air dirty laundy on AP :rolleyes: )
I've often thought of joining AIPP. I think it does good work. But, my problem with it is that it's imho there to really support professionals rather than amatuers that do a bit of pro work.
But, it's only my opinion.
ACMP I thought was mainly for news/commercial photographers.
Clubmanmc
14-12-2009, 4:02pm
why is there a choice between Nikon and Canon...
cos there is a choice...
M
oh, don't forget APS...
www.a-p-s.org.au (http://www.a-p-s.org.au)
oh, don't forget APS...
www.a-p-s.org.au (http://www.a-p-s.org.au)
I am aware of APS but was focused on the 'professional' organisations.
Yes, but didn't you want one united lobbyist, and therefore wouldn't it make sense to include the mass market of photographic enthusiasts ? A lot more mum & dad voters there.
ricktas
14-12-2009, 6:45pm
I have not attended any ACMP events, so have no opinion there.
AIPP, I have attended several events over the years and have learnt from the experience. The most informative event I attended was a morning course on how to do the role of a judge at an AIPP event. The morning consisted of a talk, some discussion, then presentation of a series of photos and explanation of how the judges come to a final score. We then got to have a go at a 'mock' judging.
Then in the afternoon, members were selected to take on the role of Judge (in a panel of 5), to determine Photographer of the Year, at a State level.
I got a lot from that day!
However, maybe it is because Tasmania is small, behind the scenes the petty remarks between photographers about other professionals was concerning for me. I tend to say what I think, and I do not really care if you are the most respected photographer in Aus, I will have my opinion and I am willing to state it, directly to you. I found the back-stabbing and snide remarks quite off-putting, where they would then be all 'happy to see you' when the actual person walked up. I do not know if that happens in each State. I still attend AIPP events here occasionally, but avoid any discussion about other photographers. Preferring to walk off and grab a cuppa, than get involved in that type of discussion.
Now that the 'personal' side of my experience is out of the way, the professional side of the AIPP is very much worth it. You can tap into a wealth of knowledge, experience and learn a great deal. It can be a very rewarding organisation to join.
Longshots
15-12-2009, 6:51am
My second attempt - almost finished my first response and I had a power cut :( !
OK I'm a member of both. I'm also a member of Royal Photographic Society, British Institute of Professional Photography, SWPP, and BPPA.
So, clearly, I'm "into" being involved and seeing the benefits of being a member of photographic associations.
In all honesty, the benefits listed on the AIPP website, give a fairly clear indication that on those alone, its money well spent.
And thats before you consider the networking and friendly support from one member to another. Tassie has a good record of producing super efficient AIPP National Presidents. And at the moment a very bright Alice Bennett, from Tassie, is the the current AIPP National President. I'm very confident she's already moving the AIPP up to a whole new level of support. AIPP have just employed a full time Executive Officer in a very positive step towards increasing benefits and the reach of AIPP.
Its not only what you get from organisations such as AIPP, but also its a classic case of you get more back if you get involved. Getting involved means you get more back. Very simple really.
Why isnt there one organisation ? Yeah well ideal world there would be. But it would seem that there is a hardcore minority of both organisations that prefer to have their own camps. Doesnt mean that they dont work together - sometimes. As it happens ACMP was formerly known as FACE, and was "born" from AIPP as a funded and approved separate group.
As it happens I've been State President or Representative for both AIPP and ACMP, and have also been National Vice President and Board Member for both AIPP, and ACMP. I remain a working (ie I put my hand up for voluntary roles) member for both organisations.
Its definitely worth noting that there is a considerable difference between the numbers of membership - AIPP has I believe in the region of 2,500 members with some considerable growth over the past few years (and there is a very good reason for that which I'll come to later - and will address Kiwi's point/opinion), and that membership is very evenly spread across Australia. ACMP on the other hand has a much smaller membership ranging from 300-400 members - their membership base is more concentrated and the majority of its members are primarily Melbourne based.
As Rick has found, AIPP meetings, seminars etc, tend to be very friendly and always informative. As I've been fortunate enough to attend AIPP events in many other states, including Tasmania as a guest speaker, I can assure you that similar experiences can be had all around the country. Its not just a Tassie thing :) I'd urge people to go to one if they know its on (check AIPP event calendar or AIPP divisions calendar to see whats on) - you can often go to these events even if you're not a member, it just costs a little more - which you'll always find will be cheaper than a straight commercial style seminar/event.
Kiwi to address your feeling/opinion. I'd have to disagree with you. IMHO, AIPP have over the past few years, addressed the issue of part time photographers, or people who have multi careers, and its now possible to join AIPP on many levels - even if you're not a working photographer , but just enjoy taking pictures. That wasnt the case ten years ago. As I've said to you several times, the small annual investment would be money well spent even if you're "an amateur that does a bit of pro work". And without wanting to start another very in depth discussion I totally disagree with that, as that statement is a complete contradiction. You cant be an amateur if you're doing pro work in my book :) So keeping this brief, if you want to sell your work, aspire to even a weekend work which you want to sell, or go into it full time, then join.
ACMP is not just for commercial photographers. Equally AIPP is not just for wedding and portrait. In all honesty AIPP have the numbers that demonstrate that it not only truly represents a wide gamut of professionals, semi professionals, and yes non professionals. So if you need to select either one or the other - despite my history with both, and despite my choice to support both, then join AIPP.
The networking, the education possibilities, the sharing of knowledge, the support, these are all things that are sometimes forgotten when people are listing the material benefits. There is also the possibility of standing up, taking part and making a difference. So when you see something that irks you, something that you think is unfair, unjust or simply wrong; you can take part and make a difference, and make the effort to make a change. And thats not just for yourself, but for the mutual benefit of all in the photographic community - and that importantly is not just for members of your chosen photographic association.
So yes join :) You're not just helping yourself, but supporting others.
Yes, quite true, me saying im an amateur that does pro work I agree is a bit like saying im only an alcoholic in the weekends
I will join AIPP, I just haven't internally justified the investment (not just money but I believe you have to put in time to receive benefit, and time is the killer for me at the momenbt). I like the AIPP ideals, benefits and networking opportunities.
There's the emerging member type that would interest me, but, I might be emerging for a lot longer than 2 years, lol
As you can see here on AP, there are hundreds on AP probably charging a little, some a lot for their work and there are very few members of AIPP. That's the opportunity.
Longshots
15-12-2009, 8:59am
Oh I agree. But its an opportunity for AP members as well as an opportunity for the organisations:) AIPP have already made changes to recognise and open their doors to part timers. So now the opportunity is there for the taking :)
William - Thanks for you post - very informative.
There are a few AP members who might get benefit from the AIPP, so the information is helpful.
Longshots
15-12-2009, 9:20am
I meant to add - which was on my original lost post - I would be happy to answer any questions and assist anyone interested in joining AIPP - either contact me here, or via my contact details on my website - www.longshots.com.au
Or you can always phone the helpful staff at AIPP National Office:
Telephone 03 9329 0044
Email admin@aipp.com.au
William, re the emerging member, is the two year restriction on that membership likely to stay ? The alternative categories seem quite a big jump if you are only ever really a weekend warrior at best
I know we've talked about this before but it might be useful to get your views on this here too
Longshots
15-12-2009, 2:55pm
re the emerging member, there is definitely a two year limit and thats it.
What its designed for (and something I lobbied for for some time) is to give those who joined as students, and gave them a transition to full members.
OK I see your point about the big jump, but then again there are already a lot of semi pros or part timers as full members who will quite happily support the issue of the worth of AIPP full membership. Quite simply its one of those things that as you will see in the real listed benefits, the full member easily gets their subs back. Now if you look at the savings on Insurance alone, that will help you justify the full membership costs.
I see it as the same as owning a decent car - ie its the same cost to everyone, doesnt matter how much or how little you use it. At the end of the day, it gives the same pleasure and the same benefits.
Or perhaps a better analogy - Canon didnt sell you their lovely 400mm lense on the basis that you paid less for it then a full time sports shooter did they ? :)
On the reduced Emerging members - each member joining as an Emerging Member does actually cost the AIPP - ie they end up supplying more than they gain in income. So in fairness, and I think to appease people like me who pleaded for a stepping stone approach from the student members, you're either a member or not.
So at the end of the day I see your point, but I also need you and others to understand that the membership fees are a really good investment, no matter your level of interest in photography.
oh, i use nikon, but, nice analogy and all very sensible
So can you join as an Emerging, and become a Registered Subscriber after 2 years?
This gives a try before you buy option! (sort of)
Longshots
15-12-2009, 4:58pm
Well I think you can. I cant see why not. I would definitely check with National Office for a definitive answer though.
And Kiwi - you use what ???? !!!!! :) Just kidding :) You bit though :)
Hook line and sinker
I think the class of membership "lacking" would be "semi pro", or "part time", or "income earning enthusiast", "weekend warrior", uyou get the point I just cant define the right title, where only say <20% of your income is derived from photography
You obviously would be positioned somewhere similar to emerging member, perhaps not receive benefits like insurance, but can still use AIPP resources and networks
There has to be huge potential in engaging those who will never be FT or even half-time pro's but still want to act ethically and in harmony with others in the industry
Maybe around the $200 pa mark
I know I'd bite, again
Longshots
16-12-2009, 6:40am
Excellent response.
I would ask AP members to suggest what they would like AIPP to provide.
I'm not sure they could go as low as $200 Darren. But thats not up to me.
Its worth saying that the insurance discount is from the Insurer or Broker and not something that is a cost to AIPP.
However it would be helpful for them to read AP members suggestions. So I'd urge others to say what would encourage them to join an association.
ricktas
16-12-2009, 6:53am
AIPP stands for Australian Institute of Professional Photography Does AIPP want to water down the Professional part of that title?
I agree that some who's photography makes them very little income would be worthwhile members, however, once you drop your requirements, the flood-gates might open and it could create more issues than it is worth. I also wonder if those new members getting a 'cheap' membership, would not end up being the very ones who use your resources more than the fully paid up Pro member.
I reckon serious consideration should be given to the idea by the AIPP, but it also needs serious evaluation as it may ultimately be the most expensive 'per member' to maintain.
I find this interesting that we (subjective) often have a moan about those undercutting the industry by doing weddings etc for $200.00 (example only), are then wanting the professional body to discount its membership fees. Seems we want it both ways at times.
My view is that when I am undertaking professional work I want to be as professional in all parts of my business as any that do it fulltime, and if aipp can help support that then good
If you read my proposal I was not suggesting undercutting at all. My proposal was that another membership tier was created where the benefits of being a full member was reduced to create a different value proposition, there should still be a clear value in being a full member in proportion to being a "lite" member to use NPS's terminilogy
Longshots
16-12-2009, 3:11pm
One thing thats seriously giving me the "craps" - let me be honest here, but NPS has no real relationship to this at all. Nikon Professional Service was finally brought in by Nikon - the very reason I stopped using Nikon because the support in Australia in comparison to the UK was simply woeful - to compete with Canon's existing support for professionals (CPS) who own a crap load of their gear to support their products. It has almost bugger all comparison with a Photographic Organisation or Association. AIPP is primarily run by volunteers! Its not a commercial venture like NPS! AIPP is a not-for-profit organisation run voluntarily for and by professional photographers and industry representatives who seek to set a standard of excellence within the photographic industry. Its the I've already fielded a few pms where people are talking about using the NPS membership as a form of marketing accreditation - are they serious !
So when you're talking about copyright, lobbying the government so we have freedom to hold and use our cameras, lobbying the authorities so they dont stop the public taking pictures in areas that are public areas, being the watch dog to stop the scammers (large commercial businesses, gov bodies, etc) coming up with yet more interesting ways of enticing you into giving them your beautiful images under the thinly disguised camouflage of "photographic competitions". Who does all of this? Who organises people into a strong voice ? Its generally the members of associations like AIPP and ACMP who do this. They contribute their own time and their own energy. And other than the very very rare honour of being given a life membership - we all pay our annual fee of $395, year in and year out, to help support all of these great causes. And who benefits ?
Everyone who has an interest in photography.
Its a not for profit organisation. I believe out of an organisation that represent and have more than 2500 members, there are 3 or 4 full time staff. So I can assure you that its an economically well run organisation.
Anyway, it has nothing to do with watering down or undercutting the industry Rick. I can see your concern, but the issue really is that the Australian Professional Photography has a chance to represent, lobby and support for all photographers; those that have a direct interest in professional photography, those that are working pros, and those who aspire to working pros. There are plenty of working pros earning less than the min wage in Australia. And there are a number who do very well out of it. The times of those who can depend on one career are perhaps behind us. The reality is that many have other interests and make some money from photography. Personally I would rather be a total realist and make the support and assistance of AIPP available to all who are interested. There has never been any strict interpretations of the rules regarding a min earning or a min taxabale income or a min turnover. If there were, I can assure you that there would be a very small minority of AIPP or ACMP membership.
Making it accessible to everyone - with different member categories - is something I think is worthwhile for AIPP to consider. But please dont dam them with your suggestion that AIPP want to water the entry requirements down.
Its a good time to ask AIPP to consider a different tier structure. Maybe they will. Personally I dont think they should, as all members get the same type of support, and to be honest new emerging members need the greatest level of admin support. Which is why I say this has nothing to attempt to relate it to NPS - its completely different.
The point that I was trying to make re NPS was not to compare the two organisations from a delivery or structural point of view. But only to compare that they introduced a new membership tier called "lite" a couple of years ago to bring the part time Nikon shooters into their "organisation" and did so by inferring some benefits but not nearly as many as being a NPS "full" member. It feels good to be part of the NPS scheme, even though to me it's really just a membership card and a couple of free sensor cleans a year. It's a very common business practice. It's far harder to get a new client than retain or upgrade an existing one.
It's really up to AIPP obviously whether they want to broaden their base by introducing such a scheme, but, I'll be so bold to say that once a new member is attracted into AIPP at an easier to justify level that once they understand AIPP and the benefits of being a full member it would be far easier to convert them into a full member than it is now by attracting them on that basis to begin with. I'm only using me as an example. Call it a bait and switch tactic if you like, but done ethically of course.
Anyhow, I've made a suggestion, it might float or sink, but it's been interesting to discuss.
Longshots
16-12-2009, 4:43pm
Look I think theres nothing wrong with making suggestions. In fact now is probably a very good time to make them. AIPP have always been good listeners, even if its an issue of the nature of the beast that putting a change into practice, can actually take some time.
I was I admit ranting over NPS - because I think its unnecessary distraction. I dont see much point in referrring the apple to the orange myself.
Stick to what you want and why, and I'm confident that it will be read and heard. And I can assure you that its being read already :)
AIPP have always evolved and adapted, they will I'm sure listen with interest.
I think the term professional should perhaps e defined. I believe that the AIPP's definition is something along the lines: that to be considered a pro, you are working full time or at least making 90% of your income from photographic work.
if you are undertaking pro work on the weekends that's Great! but it doesn't not mean however that you are working as a pro photographer. It has nothing to do with skill or talent, just the fact it is or isn't what you do for a living.
yes. What the AIPP does benefits all photographers. members or not. So why complain, about whether you can be an accredited member?!
If you are looking for a bodies or an association that is cheaper because that's what the membership means to you then , perhaps don't join one. You should join a group because of the ideals and the support you have for them as it has for you. At the end of the day, its all like a collective. The Organisation can only give what its members get. If its isn't pro members then it can't supply professionals with the experience and advice they need.
However, Check out NAVA ( national association for visual artists0 they support photographers as well, and aren't caught up on your "professional" status last time i checked. They are cheaper and offer public liability insurance with their membership they have great publications and books that list what they believe should be the award rates for photographer, jewelers, retouchers etc. They can help you on how to price work for exhibitions and have this great book, that lists all the art and photographic prizes and competitions for the year in Australia. I haven't checked it out for a couple of years, also they are the ones responsible for getting artists the right to claim certain "expenses" on tax even whist holding other normal jobs and have pushed for royalty laws to be changed in Australia.
Check it.
http://www.visualarts.net.au/
Longshots
17-12-2009, 3:05pm
I would disagree with you Ziggy. First of all AIPP do not have the definition you state. Their current definition available on their website is:
"Full Accredited Membership is open to individuals who are currently employed as professional photographers who have worked in the industry for a minimum of two years or who have successfully completed a minimum two years full time professional photography course."
Working in the industry can simply mean shooting at the weekends.
They are apparently discussing this same subject at the moment, so I trust someone up top is taking this topic in :)
I would also disagree on the issue of differentiating between what you do at the weekends and what you do during the week. I can assure you that makes no difference to the ATO, they want a cut of anything you earn, its that simple.
In this climate, many people tend to have multiple careers and variety of income streams derived from totally different areas of working.
I would completely agree with you on the AIPP benefitting all photographers - and your entire following well written paragraph.
In my simplistic view world - if you sell your images, then you are a professional and if you dont then you are an amateur. Plenty of forum space is taken up with the old chestnut of "what is a professional ?" The issue of whether someone produces a limited amount of turnover - which was my suggestion for Canon's photo competitions some years ago and has been adopted by many, of an annual income - gross income of a max of $25,000, was introduced to guide people into the difference between professional and amateurs.
oh, and based on the current AP member survey, admittedly only 54 responses, 64% of those here are charging for their work
It may be true (in a general sense) that:
Amateur photographers make money from photography, Professional photographers struggle make a living from photography :confused013
If you look at the Micro stock image sites, redbubble and the like; the income sports togs get from magazines compared with 10 years ago, etc. I think the above has some merit.
Other than wedding's and some commercial work it is a difficult profession; compared with other professions.
Dan Cripps
17-12-2009, 7:17pm
However, maybe it is because Tasmania is small, behind the scenes the petty remarks between photographers about other professionals was concerning for me. I tend to say what I think, and I do not really care if you are the most respected photographer in Aus, I will have my opinion and I am willing to state it, directly to you. I found the back-stabbing and snide remarks quite off-putting, where they would then be all 'happy to see you' when the actual person walked up. I do not know if that happens in each State. I still attend AIPP events here occasionally, but avoid any discussion about other photographers. Preferring to walk off and grab a cuppa, than get involved in that type of discussion.
It's universal. Happens all around the globe. Creatives are insecure by nature and tall poppy cutting is rampant.
I'm a full accredited AIPP member, but to be honest, I'm not sure I can measure the value very highly for myself.
ricktas
17-12-2009, 7:46pm
It's universal. Happens all around the globe. Creatives are insecure by nature and tall poppy cutting is rampant.
I'm a full accredited AIPP member, but to be honest, I'm not sure I can measure the value very highly for myself.
Agree it happens everywhere, but get a group of 200-300 together you can chose to move from the negative group to a positive and enlightening group. But when you get a place as small as Tasmania and less than 20 AIPP members at an event, it gets harder to separate from the negativity, cause their are way less 'other' groups to go to. (hope that makes sense). And I am not having a go at the Tas AIPP Branch at all. I have got a lot out of the times I have attended their events. Just sometimes the pettiness was a bit much from some members.
Redgum
17-12-2009, 11:03pm
I couldn't agree more and personally I think most professional bodies are a "sham" and in reality provide very few tangible benefits.
Longshots
18-12-2009, 6:32am
I couldn't agree more and personally I think most professional bodies are a "sham" and in reality provide very few tangible benefits.
Rick, I think its fair to say that no matter what organisation, company, association or group you belong to, there is always going to be some negative people who seemingly enjoy being negative with back biting comments about others. Seems thats a consistent, no matter what you refer to. It all matters only if you allow yourself to be part of or drawn into that style pf pettiness.
Redgum, we can all share our own personal opinions, but after nearly two decades of serious involvement and voluntary contributions with ACMP and AIPP, I take your description of a sham to be offensive. I have my own personal opinion on describing the thousands of people who support and contribute to the overall improvement of the photographic community, as a sham. That IMHO is disrespecting the efforts of all those people,and is disgracefully ill informed. Disgraceful; as the information is easily accessible, proving that both associations clearly have produced some significant changes to laws for the benefit of ALL photographers - members or NOT.
Sure hold an opinion that for you its not worth it, because as its clear you would only want "tangible benefits". But please dont use words generally reserved for a criminal act. The many thousand who like me have given their time and energy to do everything from producing a serious change for better in the Copyright Act, to the - most relevant in your case - cause to keep restrictions to a min for commercial photography in National Park, would certainly feel aggrieved for an individual to be describing those efforts as a sham.
I have been thinking of joining the AIPP as an emerging member for about 6 mths and probably will in the New Year. I am reticent a little due to the fact that i live in regional NSW and therefore the benefits of networking and courses maybe less due to the expense and in time involved as everything seems to be very Sydney centric as far as NSW is concerned.
However i will probably join for the 2 years and then i can make a judgement as to worth.
Longshots
18-12-2009, 7:38am
Continuing with my response to being described as part of a "sham", and responding further to the statement of "few tangible benefits" regarding the original question of "Why join"
A demonstration of the benefits of Full membership - and the associated REAL benefits:
$395 for full membership annual from 1st Jan to 31st Dec
Ok lets do some sums here.
First of all the magazines:
* Four issues of Better Photography value $43.80
* Four issues of Better Digital value $59.80
* Ten issues of The Working Pro value $150
* Fortnightly issues of National Enewsletter
* 30% Discount on AdNews, Australian Creative and Capture Magazines
* 30% discount on Photo Review Print Edition & free access to online Interactive Edition
* AIPP Member discounts with Flight Centre - click HERE to find out
So already the first 3 lines total $ 253.60 - not including the discounts available on the last 3 line.
Including the value of the Enewsletter - which BTW I have just received a job from after following an advert in that newsletter.
Where's the "sham"?
Without any argument thats a true $253.60 cost if you were to purchase those magazines.
And further
Contracts - ALL Members
* Free access to contracts, releases and guidelines:
* Commercial Contract
* Portrait Contract
* Wedding Contract
* Variation to Quote
* Model Release
* Negative Release
* Pocket Release
* Property Release
* Talent Release
* Terms & conditions of submission and reproduction of pictures
* Suggested Guidelines for Negotiating Additional Usage
* Reproduction Indemnity Agreement
* Glamour & Boudoir Guidelines
* Suggested Terms of Trade for Wedding Assignments
* Keeping Your Client Happy
* About Non-Industry Competitions
Value on that ? Well some similar contracts are available in Australia from commercial organisations and each contract, or information paper can cost more than $50. As these contracts and information papers have been produced with proper legal advice, the small cost of anyone of these when used as a basis for your business is immeasurable.
So how are any of these contracts are a "Sham". Considering that many of the topics covered are also part of the most asked questions on internet forums, I would be quite happy to say that this is an important tangible benefit.
Continuing with the benefits:
AIPP APPA Awards Photographic Book
* One copy of the AIPP Annual Awards book value $99 (Full Accredited / Trade Affiliate / Registered Subscriber*)
Definitely a huge, beautifully produced book. If produced and sold commercially be this I'm sure would valued at a great deal more.
But lets stick to the value of $99, as I wouldnt want to be seen as a "sham"
ok real dollar value annual benefit not including the contracts and information area now totals $352.60
Continuing with more tangible benefits:
Merchant Service Deals - ALL members
* 1.028% Merchant service Fee on credit card transactions
* 0.17% Merchant service fee on EFTPOS transactions
These should be checked, as I know that the merchant services deals have recently been improved. I used to have a merchant facility which I didnt have through AIPP, because at the time they did not have this deal available, and my fees were a great deal higher than the ones made possible with the deal through AIPP
So I'm not going to list this. But I can assure you that I would have saved thousands if I'd had the AIPP facility instead of the NAB one I had some time ago.
Again I'll continue to alleviate my annoyance by giving AP members some facts, to dispel the unjustified comment of it being a "sham"
Insurance - ALL Members
* Special Photographer’s Insurance policies (equipment & public liability) with AON and AIS insurance - ALL Members
I recently moved insurers and I paid my insurance bill, and the following year received the annual quote. I realised that I'd failed to tell them of my AIPP membership, and that year received a 10% reduction, and was sent a new quote.
Thats real tangible benefit and to me that saving was $278.
However I dont feel the need to add that to the total as it will be obviously different to all. It will mean a very real benefit though.
I make no apology in continuing on with the lengthy benefits to respond to the claim thar there are no tangible benefits. Have you the reader made your own conclusion already ?
ok real dollar value annual benefit not including the contracts and information or the merchant facility, the insurance savings still totals $352.60
Ah the thorny one - another benefit which is hard to place a value on:
Legal - ALL Members
* Specialised business & copyright legal advice
So I wont - to me its obvious considering how many times this topic comes up on forums. But again with the legal world, ulimately advice is one thing, and it comes down to what your own paid legal will say. So another reason not to include it.
On to another big one.
Promotion
* Listing in the Find A Photographer section of the AIPP website - Full & Emerging only
* Online gallery as part of your Find A Photographer listing on the AIPP website, where you can showcase nine of your images and write a short bio - Full only
* Access to the upload seven of your images as part of Adobe’s website - Full only
* Use of AIPP logo to promote individual work - Full & Trade Affiliate only
* Use of AIPP Accredited Photographer logo - Full only
* AIPP Membership certificate - Full & Trade only
* Official AIPP ID card & lanyard – very useful when photographing at public gatherings - ALL members
* APPA Gold-award winners images part of AIPP Canon APPA Travelling Exhibition (travels around Australia for 12 months)
* APPA Silver-award winners and above published in prestigious AIPP Canon APPA Awards Book
Well I've received and still receive plenty of enquiries from prospective clients searching for a photographer via AIPP's, and ACMP's database. Again its immeasurable.
So I suppose that could certainly agree that this could be seen as one of the intangible benefits.
But if you want to see more of those; there are a lot more of those:
Awards
* AIPP Canon Australia Professional Photography Awards (APPA’s) with prizes of over $56,000
* APPA Gold-award winners in AIPP Canon APPA Travelling Exhibition (travels around Australia for 12 months)
* APPA Silver-award winners and above published in prestigious AIPP Canon APPA Awards Book
* AIPP State Professional Photographer of the Year Awards (Victoria has prizes of over $14,000) to be won.
* Opportunity to earn State and National Print Awards, which can be a valuable tool for advertising your skills and successes
Networking & Community - ALL Members
* State meetings where you can learn new and improve current skills
* Opportunity to network with other photographers
* Gaining knowledge through workshops and sharing
* Opportunity to have work critiqued by acclaimed professionals
* Business and emotional support
Professional Development / Events
* Notification via email of AIPP and Industry seminars, workshops, conventions and competitions
* Discounted entry into these events
* Ability to vote; serve on AIPP committees and accrue award points towards an Associate or Master Honours qualification - Full only
* Friendship, friendship, friendship.
So to summarise, and to respond to the claim of " most professional bodies are a "sham" and in reality provide very few tangible benefits " -and noting that the original question was "Why join AIPP or ACMP, so I am specifically choosing to list AIPP benefits and respond to the IMHO, offensive use of the word "sham"
The real dollar value annual benefit not including:
the contracts and information,
the merchant facility,
the insurance savings,
the legal advice,
the promotion and marketing,
the awards,
the networking,
the professional development opportunities,
and a point not mentioned,
but the price saved on individual tickets to AIPP produced seminars and workshops by being an AIPP member (events are generally open to all, but cost more if you're not an AIPP member) still totals $352.60
And if you do nothing other than being a member, or do what many do and take part, get involved, lead topics to lobbying federal and state governments into recognising the rights of the photographer, and grow immeasurably by being involved with your peers a colleagues, then all of this is going to cost you $395 less the real benefits of $352.60 which is in theory leaving you with a real balance of $42.40 to put towards all of those intangible benefits.
IMHO thats not just good value, but good business sense. Because if you are charging for your work, and you are declaring the income, I'm reasonably confident (as I'm not a trained accountant) that the cost of membership of a trade association is a 100% taxable deduction.
Thats sweet to me - and thats why I pay membership to 5 professional associations totalling over $2000 annually, and I get back everything.
Clearly everyone has their own opinion. Mine is IMHO frankly, based on logic, fact and a keen sense of good business choices.
Well said
I think I'm with Jeff re giving the emerging member thing a go in the new year
dowden photography
23-12-2009, 2:35pm
Joining AIPP when I get paid from my last job, I'm a student who gets paid work so its only like $75 a year for me, well worth it because I'm sure picking up extra work through the site would be easier.
Shane.R
23-12-2009, 2:46pm
It's the general public who buy photo's, and "what" appeals to them. Who needs a lobby.
It's the general public who buy photo's, and "what" appeals to them. Who needs a lobby.
:umm: Gee we don't need anyone to lobby about... well lets see...
Copyright?
Photographers rights?
Unethical practices in the industry?
:confused013
Could also lobby ap for NZ rights
(jk)
Could also lobby ap for NZ rights (jk)
:rolleyes: :D There is a solution - become the 8th state of Australia! :p
We'll give the white paint to fix the flags as well!! ;)
Bill (Longshots), I make no apology for my remarks but clarify they are in no way personal or directed at individuals. To provoke such a response, this issue has no doubt been raised many times before and explains Rick's remark in that the organisations attract relatively few members compared with the size of the industry, particularly in Tasmania. The AFI, APA, QFC, all of which I have served at board level, experience similar rejection.
The benefits are of little significance to the majority of members who rescind their membership after a short duration and one needs to be reasonably skilled in politics to access any substantial benefit. Of course the networking in itself can be of good value but that essential only applies to members in Sydney and Melbourne.
In a professional sense photographers would be better off subscribing to business networking organisations which they can clearly identify as providing work opportunities and not having to compete with a raft of organisational members trying to access the same work.
Shane.R
04-01-2010, 10:36pm
:umm: Gee we don't need anyone to lobby about... well lets see...
Copyright?
Photographers rights?
Unethical practices in the industry?
:confused013
..you sound paranoid of a big brother state. A small % of photographers belong to the groups mentioned. The rest of us have a voice. If photography in public should become sanitized, don't you think the BIG BRAND manufactures will have a fit! I'm sure they can afford lawyers that the union/lobby cannot.
..each to their own. It's your money.
..you sound paranoid of a big brother state. A small % of photographers belong to the groups mentioned. The rest of us have a voice. If photography in public should become sanitized, don't you think the BIG BRAND manufactures will have a fit! I'm sure they can afford lawyers that the union/lobby cannot.
..each to their own. It's your money.
Lol, Nikon wouldn't care a rats, why should they ? What % of their sales do you think are for street photographers in Australia, 0.001% ?
Now, if big brother was to ban family birthday pictures then they'd be trouble
Kiwi, I think that's what Shane was saying. Reread his post.
In respect to your stats though the street photographer (if you mean consumer) is by far their largest market. Just go to any "attraction" and look for a Canon shooter. 99 out of 100 will be consumers and that's the same worldwide. :)
Shane's right, if consumers stop buying Canon and Nikon they can pack up and go home. The professional market won't drive them. just look at Sony, Panasonic, JVC etc.
The power of persuasion is in numbers (consumers) not organisations.
Kiwi, I think that's what Shane was saying. Reread his post.
In respect to your stats though the street photographer (if you mean consumer) is by far their largest market. Just go to any "attraction" and look for a Canon shooter. 99 out of 100 will be consumers and that's the same worldwide. :)
Shane's right, if consumers stop buying Canon and Nikon they can pack up and go home. The professional market won't drive them. just look at Sony, Panasonic, JVC etc.
The power of persuasion is in numbers (consumers) not organisations.
No, I have reread and think I got it the right way around
And no, I dont mean street = consumer
I mean street = taking pictures in public of say strangers, railway stations etc where all the privacy concerns are raised over and over (and over) again
Id say the vast majority of consumers take pictures of their family, holiday snaps, pets etc
dowden photography
05-01-2010, 9:36am
Agree it happens everywhere, but get a group of 200-300 together you can chose to move from the negative group to a positive and enlightening group. But when you get a place as small as Tasmania and less than 20 AIPP members at an event, it gets harder to separate from the negativity, cause their are way less 'other' groups to go to. (hope that makes sense). And I am not having a go at the Tas AIPP Branch at all. I have got a lot out of the times I have attended their events. Just sometimes the pettiness was a bit much from some members.
Since I started photography my biggest disappointment has been the cattiness of other pro photographers. Its like being in high school sometimes.
Some are never wiling to lend a hand, teach others help with ideas and will talk behind your back like a old housewife.
Longshots
11-01-2010, 8:24am
Since I started photography my biggest disappointment has been the cattiness of other pro photographers. Its like being in high school sometimes.
Some are never wiling to lend a hand, teach others help with ideas and will talk behind your back like a old housewife.
Odd that you think that. After 34 years in the industry, I'd have to say that I find the total opposite. The time I've witnessed the experiences you describe have always been in the camera club/amateur area.
Business is business, its not always going to be a group of huggers :)
I've been working now professionally for over 40 years, with a wide variety of careers, and what you describe, I've seen and witnessed by others from all of those experiences. My own personal view is that as the majority of photographers are self employed individuals, they share a common ground of survival, and the sharing of knowledge is far greater that any other career I've experienced.
Although I'd agree that in any area, it doesnt matter what trade, profession or sport you want to select, and it doesnt matter if you include professionals or amateurs, there are some who want to help and some who dont. Its that simple, its down to personal attitudes of the individuals.
As a Ex National Vice President of both AIPP and ACMP, both organisations actual reason for being is to assist each other, (ie for example read the AIPP codes of ethics).
I think it also boils down to the approach one takes when asking for advice. Simply asking a pro to divulge everything they know/do in exchange for nothing is likely to result in the pro saying no. I guess when asking, one should consider what mutual benefit could be gained by both parties in the exchange?
I'm big on sharing but at the same time, if I was to have someone constantly asking me questions and showing little initiative to go out and learn for themselves, I think there would come a time where I would be reluctant to keep divulging...
dowden photography
11-01-2010, 9:21am
Sometimes its just little things like camera gear they get catty over. I've seen a pro photographer move anothers gear because that was his seat last time, I've met one who won't talk to Nikon users because he think they are up-themselves.
As for never lending a hand, yes don't give all the tips away but sometimes just a little help like with a setting in a shot.
Redgum
11-01-2010, 11:18am
Sometimes its just little things like camera gear they get catty over. I've seen a pro photographer move anothers gear because that was his seat last time, I've met one who won't talk to Nikon users because he think they are up-themselves.
As for never lending a hand, yes don't give all the tips away but sometimes just a little help like with a setting in a shot.
You know I've never struck this in 26 years in the industry. Although, I must admit it's common at just about every club meeting I've been to over 40 years.
Longshots
11-01-2010, 7:26pm
so the original question was :) ??
so the original question was :) ??
What benefits does membership lead to? Pretty much covered. ;)
What benefits does membership lead to? Pretty much covered. ;)
Covered very well. A professional association should not just be a toothless tiger or boys & girls club though. It should have ethical standards by which members are judged & lose accreditation if not complying to the agreed set of standards . In my profession I cannot obtain public liability insurance unless I am a member of the professional association & have to continuously update skills to maintain workplace standards. This to me is professionalism & not just fee earning & part of the definition of being a pro. Fees & benefits are similar to those for AIPP membership.
TeddyTan
20-01-2010, 11:42pm
wow thanks for the informative post longshots. That just made me wanna join AIPP. Peter Myers had been pestering me to join and I now see the value.
Longshots
25-01-2010, 7:30am
Bill (Longshots), I make no apology for my remarks but clarify they are in no way personal or directed at individuals. To provoke such a response, this issue has no doubt been raised many times before and explains Rick's remark in that the organisations attract relatively few members compared with the size of the industry, particularly in Tasmania. The AFI, APA, QFC, all of which I have served at board level, experience similar rejection.
The benefits are of little significance to the majority of members who rescind their membership after a short duration and one needs to be reasonably skilled in politics to access any substantial benefit. Of course the networking in itself can be of good value but that essential only applies to members in Sydney and Melbourne.
In a professional sense photographers would be better off subscribing to business networking organisations which they can clearly identify as providing work opportunities and not having to compete with a raft of organisational members trying to access the same work.
Sorry Redgum, I missed this post, and I feel its really worth answering. And its a small point but I loathe being called Bill :) William is fine :)
Each to their own opinion, and I respect that certainly some people would agree with you. I'd just like to answer this post as I feel there are a few issues, where an opposing and alternative view point is really necessary. What I, and other members get out of joining a professional representative body is actually quite considerable, and not just the listed benefits. Those are tangible, the most important ones, are slightly harder to specify. On the first note, its not what I get out, but what I put into the collective organisation, that appeals to me. And for what its worth, everything I've ever put into the organisation, from a volunteer to AIPP board member, I can certainly ascertain its been "refunded" in droves.
Being a lone voice gains little these days. Representing an organisation on a particular pet subject, and mine has been lobbying for change to the copyright laws in the past, and now its persuading companies and organisations to produce fair and honest photographic competitions. I'm not blowing my own trumpet here, but highlighting that its not always what members can gain from being a member of an organisation, but what they can contribute as a collective to bring about changes for the better. I'm quite proud to say that on behalf of AIPP, I have made a considerable difference in how certain photographic manafacturers, and retaillers are producing photographic competitions that are fairer for all parties.
And on the second and more important note, membership of AIPP, ACMP and in the UK, BIPP and RPS, has really helped me develop my work. Without the honest, and helpful advice from other members, I wouldnt really be the photographer I am today. So the personal development assistance is again, considerable and proven.
And yes the networking can be considerable. Just on photographic assignments alone, and as an example I've recommended other AIPP members from other states, including Tasmania, who I've met and seen their work at AIPP events. And in reverse, I've been reccommended to clients by AIPP members resident in other states, and I'm quite confident that my AIPP subscriptions have been "recovered" by way of additional income from work, that I would not have normally gained.
Regarding your comment "not having to compete with a raft of organisational members trying to access the same work" - well I meet and speak with not just AIPP and ACMP members, but also plenty of those who are not members, all still work in the same area of photography as myself; and although I'm well aware that some of my colleagues and I are potentially seeking work from similar clients, the benefits of communicating - amicably - with so many other people in the same industry as myself, and helping each other with snippets of recent news is absolutely immeasurable. Chatting with other photographers, members of AIPP or not have certainly helped me with knowing who is a dodgy payer, who is a nightmare client, and who I should avoid a job from.
Oh and I'd absolutely agree with your great advice to joining other business networking to source work etc. Valuable advice indeed. But the two subjects are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
I have thought about joining AIPP for a number of years now, tossed that question around (is it worth it) have been to a couple of the HOTD's which were brilliant. After that in depth run down William, you have swayed me over, I will get myself joined up in the next few weeks. Thank you.
Longshots
25-01-2010, 7:16pm
happy to help - so if you have any questions at all regarding joining call me.
Its worth noting that if you are intending to got to the HOTD event, the entry fee for a member is much cheaper than a non member - so I'd put in your application to join ASAP so it goes though before the event.
Oh and I'd absolutely agree with your great advice to joining other business networking to source work etc. Valuable advice indeed. But the two subjects are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
Thanks William, so what you are saying is that there are no business opportunities with AIPP and ACMP, just fellowship!
Longshots
26-01-2010, 7:06pm
Thanks William, so what you are saying is that there are no business opportunities with AIPP and ACMP, just fellowship!
Redgum :) You're winding me up eh :) ? Didnt I say this in that last post - a description of the additional work I've received by way of references from other AIPP members :
And yes the networking can be considerable. Just on photographic assignments alone, and as an example I've recommended other AIPP members from other states, including Tasmania, who I've met and seen their work at AIPP events. And in reverse, I've been reccommended to clients by AIPP members resident in other states, and I'm quite confident that my AIPP subscriptions have been "recovered" by way of additional income from work, that I would not have normally gained.
.
SteveB
02-02-2010, 11:59am
All registered up for the HOTD William, really looking forward to it. Doing all three days except 1/2 day on the Saturday as I have a wedding to shoot.
Interesting thread.
I think it's time I joined AIPP :)
Longshots
14-02-2010, 7:01am
All registered up for the HOTD William, really looking forward to it. Doing all three days except 1/2 day on the Saturday as I have a wedding to shoot.
On the question of why join AIPP:
Just to highlight one of those benefits to AIPP members. In Brisbane AIPP Qld has the most amazing 3 day seminar (26th to 28th Feb 2010). With a host of over a dozen amazing speakers:
http://www.hotd.qaipp.com.au/index.php
This 3 day event costs just $350 for a full member or $395 for non members
Here's a diary for the 3 days:
http://www.hotd.qaipp.com.au/index.php?slug=day-schedules
choptop
09-06-2010, 12:15pm
No, I have reread and think I got it the right way around
And no, I dont mean street = consumer
I mean street = taking pictures in public of say strangers, railway stations etc where all the privacy concerns are raised over and over (and over) again
Id say the vast majority of consumers take pictures of their family, holiday snaps, pets etc
>>
I hope people are aware that there IS no legal right to privacy in Australia. (not sure about NZ). you can take photos of whomever you want, wherever you want (in public) and can sell the prints as art, cards, t-shirts, whatever. You don't need permission.
The problem arises if you want to use the image in advertising... because you are implying that that person is endorsing whatever product/service is being advertised. That can be challenged in court (under defamation laws, i think ?) .which is why image libraries need model releases for all people in photos.
>>
I hope people are aware that there IS no legal right to privacy in Australia. (not sure about NZ). you can take photos of whomever you want, wherever you want (in public) and can sell the prints as art, cards, t-shirts, whatever. You don't need permission.
The problem arises if you want to use the image in advertising... because you are implying that that person is endorsing whatever product/service is being advertised. That can be challenged in court (under defamation laws, i think ?) .which is why image libraries need model releases for all people in photos.
Errr... We do know this. ;) Refer:
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=20673
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=24730
I think the point Darren is getting is that it has been done to death.
The privacy on railway infrastructure is that it is not considered public and has specific rules
re: photography implemented by the various rail authorities.
(and I know as I work in the rail industry)
Redgum
09-06-2010, 12:26pm
(and I know as I work in the rail industry)
Ah! then, we must be on track. :D
Longshots
09-06-2010, 12:44pm
>>
I hope people are aware that there IS no legal right to privacy in Australia. (not sure about NZ). you can take photos of whomever you want, wherever you want (in public) and can sell the prints as art, cards, t-shirts, whatever. You don't need permission.
The problem arises if you want to use the image in advertising... because you are implying that that person is endorsing whatever product/service is being advertised. That can be challenged in court (under defamation laws, i think ?) .which is why image libraries need model releases for all people in photos.
Kyms already pointing out this has been covered. And although this is off topic, there is two points to Choptops statement:
1) you're correct - there is no legal right to privacy in Australia
2) you're wrong - good luck if you want to take pictures of strangers and sell the (using them commercially) "prints as art, cards, t-shirts, whatever". There is nothing correct in the statement that it relies on implying endorsing a product or service, you would be using there likeness in a commercial situation, simply by selling it as a card - which you cannot without a release.
maccaroneski
11-06-2010, 6:57am
There is nothing correct in the statement that it relies on implying endorsing a product or service, you would be using there likeness in a commercial situation, simply by selling it as a card - which you cannot without a release.
William,
Where is this written (as they say)? My understanding was that Mr Chop was on the right track, but for a slightly incorrect assertion regarding "defamation laws" - it's actually "passing off" (which essentially falls into the same category, I'm just nit picking). And even then as far as the law has gone is to say that you are in danger if the subject is in essence a celebrity or other well known endorser of products.
The above however is based on 12 year old memories of law school and a little more than passing interest in relevant cases if they come to my attention.
maccaroneski
11-06-2010, 7:07am
There are certainly thoughts on where the law might go (as I've said before "you don't want to be the test case") and proccedings that have commenced and resolved prior to hearing based on where the law might go (such as an action brought by Ricky Ponting against an unauthorised biographer using Ricky's image in the cover), however as far as I was aware my first paragraph contains the extent of what is "settled" law.
However outside of my particular specialty, I am sure that much passes me by these days.
Longshots
11-06-2010, 7:55am
William,
Where is this written (as they say)? My understanding was that Mr Chop was on the right track, but for a slightly incorrect assertion regarding "defamation laws" - it's actually "passing off" (which essentially falls into the same category, I'm just nit picking). And even then as far as the law has gone is to say that you are in danger if the subject is in essence a celebrity or other well known endorser of products.
The above however is based on 12 year old memories of law school and a little more than passing interest in relevant cases if they come to my attention.
OK I'm not a lawyer, but a professional photographer of many years, with a passing interest in the details of life :) So I cant point you to a specific law. However I can quote from ArtsLaw website in Australia:
Taking photographs in a public place
It is generally possible to take photographs in a public place without asking permission. This extends to taking photographs of buildings, sites and people. There are, however, some limitations.
Photographing people
There are no publicity or personality rights in Australia, and there is no right to privacy that protects a person’s image. Existing privacy laws are more concerned with storage and management of personal information and are of limited relevance to the present issue.
There is also currently no tort of invasion of privacy in Australia, but in ABC v Lenah Game Meats (2001) the High Court did not exclude the possibility that a tort of unjustified invasion of privacy may be established in the future. Based on this view, the Queensland District Court found in Grosse v Purvis (2003) that a tort of invasion of privacy had been made out on the facts and awarded the plaintiff damages. However, this case concerned a long history of harassment over many years and has limited application. As a result, taking photographs of people in public places is generally permitted.
Photographing people for a commercial purpose
If you are using your shots for a commercial purpose, such as for an advertising campaign, you should obtain a model release form signed by the subjects you are photographing to ensure you have authorisation to use their image to sell a product. See the Arts Law information sheet “Unauthorised Use of Your Image” for further information on defamation, passing off and trade practices law. A sample photographer’s model release form is also available on the Arts Law Centre of Australia website.
Photographing people on private property
There is no restriction on taking photographs of people on private property from public property. According to Victoria Park Racing and Recreation Grounds Co Ltd v Taylor (1937) there is no freedom from view, so people who are photographed on their property from a public location have no legal claim against you if what is captured in the photograph can be seen from the street. The same applies to photographs taken from private land when you have permission to take photographs. You should be careful that you are not being a nuisance and interfering with someone’s right to use and enjoy the land (see the case of Bathurst City Council v Saban (1985)).
Photographing people for commercial purposes section should not be taken at face value, as the definition of commercial purposes is certainly open to much wider interpretation to just the "advertising purposes". It certainly in my opinion would cover commercially available (ie just being sold) post cards.
Here's the Arts Law Link :
http://www.artslaw.com.au/legalinformation/StreetPhotographersRights.asp
As every single photographic competition's terms and conditions include the stated requirement that all people in all images should be model released; its pretty clear, that to be on the safe side a model release should be obtained for any future use, in any slightly commercial use.
As you're clearly an exlawyer student, or pro - not sure so dont take offence if I have that wrong; you would clearly understand that law isnt always about something being written in black and white. But its more about a case going to court, and then an outcome from that case, causing a precedent, or ruling (check the arts law quote for exactly that observation).
So maybe someone could find a specific law, or ruling. But for now, industry practice is what I can pass on, which is that you should get a model release for anyone being featured in your imagery.
One very specific guidance is from the Australian Copyright Council:
A person’s image is not protected by copyright. However, in some cases, using a person’s image without permission may be prevented under other laws, such as the law of passing off, the Trade Practices Act 1974 and State and Territory fair trading laws. These areas of law concern conduct which may mislead or deceive the public and may particularly come into play if the photograph you are taking is of a well-known person, and is to be used, for example, as a poster or as a postcard or in advertising. In some cases, uses of photographs may be defamatory of people in them.
If you are commissioned to take photographs, it should not generally be your job to check these issues. However, it may be a good idea to alert clients to the fact that they may need to seek advice from a solicitor with the relevant expertise (note that the Copyright Council does not advise on these other areas of law).
Generally, if you have asked somebody to sit for you, it’s a good idea to get a “model release” from that person so you won’t have to worry later about whether or not your use of resulting photos will raise issues under areas of law such as passing off or the Trade Practices Act. (For a sample photographer's model release, with explanatory notes, see the Arts Law Centre of Australia website.
In other cases, photographers may take more casual shots—for example, photographs of people in the street or at markets, or playing sports. If you know that you might later be using such a photograph commercially, it’s generally a good idea to get a model release from the people you have photographed. If it’s impractical to get the people in your shots to sign model releases, or if they refuse to do so, your ability to use or license the use of the photograph in certain ways might be limited because of the laws discussed above.
Privacy
It is generally not an invasion of privacy to take another person’s photograph. However, in some circumstances, you may be required to comply with the National Privacy Principles in the Privacy Act 1992 (Cth).
And here is the source for that quote :
http://www.copyright.org.au/information/cit001/cit069/wp0136/
And finally:
http://www.privacy.gov.au/
Where there is a multitude of papers (pdfs) on the subject of restrictions, and future restrictions of people publishing photographs of people without the individuals consent.
HTH
reaction
11-06-2010, 8:20am
There was a buy in the mall with a video, taking a movie of the morning rush. Do they have to get releases to use that video? Cuz they didn't.
The biggest confusing area to me is really the definition of what is "commercial use"
Thsi is the resource that I think explains this the best in Australia, well, what I have found so far anyhow. I think it's pretty clear.
http://www.4020.net/words/photorights.php#commuse
There was a buy in the mall with a video, taking a movie of the morning rush. Do they have to get releases to use that video? Cuz they didn't.
Totally depends on what they do with it. The other issue here is that the Mall is private property probably.
maccaroneski
11-06-2010, 10:01am
The biggest confusing area to me is really the definition of what is "commercial use"
Thsi is the resource that I think explains this the best in Australia, well, what I have found so far anyhow. I think it's pretty clear.
http://www.4020.net/words/photorights.php#commuse
Kiwi, if I get some time I will have a crack at it.
William I am a pro BTW, and no offence taken, although I practice in IP law as it relates to software.
There is nothing inconsistent in what William, kiwi or I have said above. If you go behind the first PDF to the next one Unauthorised Use of Your Image (http://www.artslaw.com.au/LegalInformation/UnauthorisedUseImage.asp), you'll see that there are three "actionable" areas.
Defamation
The publication of a person’s photograph without their consent is not in itself proof of defamation. The unauthorised use of the image would need to either lower the public’s estimation of the person, expose the person to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or cause the person to be shunned or avoided.
The Trade Practices Act
The mere use of a person’s image is unlikely to be found to mislead or deceive under this area of law unless that person is a celebrity or well known endorser of products.
Passing Off
To succeed in an action for passing off the complainant must have a reputation and there must be a misrepresentation by the defendant in relation to the business which causes damage or the likelihood of damage to the business.
So, under the current state of the law, if you took a photograph of me, and it ended up on a billboard advertising "Sydney Tourism" (or something such) there is not a single thing I could do about it. But that is because I know my own circumstances HOWEVER...
There is I think one distinction that I am trying to make, and that is between "conduct that means you are less likely to offend the law" and "conduct that actually breaks the law". I am writing all of this because I think that an understanding of the underlying principles is just as, if not more, important than repeating to yourself 100 times "Must get model release".
In my opinion, obtaining model releases is a matter of prudence rather than a matter of requirement, as far as complying with the law goes - however it is a matter of risk mitigation / management. In my example above, how does Sydney Tourism, to whom you have sold the shot you have taken of me, know that I don't have a business wherein I am the fact of Melbourne Tourism? Or that in Perth I appear on local television extensively endorsing local car yards as a result of my 16 straight local go-karting championships?
Thus is it prudent for an advertiser to ensure that you hand over a model release with any shots you are selling to an advertiser, but the absence of a model release, and subsequent publishing of a photo in an advertising campaign, is not in an of itself illegal - it just eliminates the risk that they might be breaking the law - or at least secures an indemnity from the photographer.
Now if you want to sell your images to someone for advertising purposes, sure, they will insist on a model release, and prudently so, however if you want to take some snaps of people in a park (whether known to them or not) and they are not shooting drugs, hitting a dog with a stick or something else which might damage their reputation, and then sell those shots at a local market, then go for your life.
Consequently it is also prudent for someone running a comp to ensure that entries are submitted with model releases.
Kiwi I know you've had specific advice in this regard, and would be interested to know how, or if, this conflicts (but I also understand why you would be reluctant to share any of that), but as I say i think we are all actually in agreement.
Disclaimer: this is all meant to represent a general discussion and should not be taken as specific advice for your situation, for which you should get professional advice.
Note: I find this sort of discussion really interesting - particularly around rights to privacy and image rights (or lack thereof in Australia, anyway).
Something else for consideration:
There are also laws that override the standard public/private rules as this thread has been discussing.
Two examples of rather prevalent ones are to do with things like child protection & witness protection etc. I photographed a wedding where the clients were more then happy for me to use most images for advertising etc but not all due to the fact that some of the children were associated with child protection/restraining orders for their own protection.
If I'm going to put pictures of people up on my website (family/friends included), I ALWAYS ask permission and also get them to sign a release form prior to me displaying them.
OK, yes, Im ok with the above
My personal circumstances, and Id expect this is very similar to a lot of sport and event photographers, is that it's not often possible to get model releases for every player in a match, or carnival, or at the Olympic games (I wish)
But, my understanding is neither me selling or publishing in my context I believe is considered commercial use. I have had this discussion with William previously when I disagreed with AIPP's reaction to a compliant by a parent. and with the Police, and also the guy behind 2020, and I think that I am OK selling these photos from my website, or onsite "gallery" style, and having these photos used in the local newspaper etc as editorial content. Everything I have seen and read from here and overseas supports this view. I can not locate any case law on the matter at all.
There is a grey area if I were selling large volumes (eg 2000 postcards of a player maybe).
To mitigate risk I also only use my sons in brochures and promotions of my photography as I do not have model releases. I also say on my website based on advice that William helped me with that to further diminish any claim that photos are for commercial use that only players and their families can purchase photos and that they must be purchased for personal and non-commercial use only. As a new member of AIPP I do intend to discuss and get clarification with them again on this topic.
I TOTALLY agree that if possible get a model release. It's the prudent way to protect for future claims.
maccaroneski
11-06-2010, 10:23am
Incidentally here's an article you might be interested in referring to the Ricky Ponting matter I mentioned above:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/sportsfactor/stories/2007/2011128.htm
I was asked to shoot at a sporting event and I pointed out these issues. Before the event, the organisers added a term to the entry forms for players saying 'you may be photographed and your photos used...' etc which I considered adequate for the purpose of me taking a few pictures and handing them over to the event organiser.
Yes, I do that too with "my" club and their carnivals.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.