a race photography rant
Oct. 21st, 2011 03:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ilanaramaThe photos from The Other Half are out! Here's a Flickr "guest pass" link to one I particularly like: http://flickr.com/gp/svwindom/1BsoM5
I'm linking this way, rather than making it public so I can link it inline, because I don't actually own this photo, and sharing it is a copyright violation. I don't want anyone to randomly or through searches come across my copy of this photo (which I obtained through screen capture and cropping). I'm not locking this journal entry, though, because I want to vent publicly. If the photographer wants me to take down the image, I will. But only if he reads this first.
I would actually like to support race photographers. You might notice that the background on this race photo looks a lot like the one in my user icon; they are both from the same race in different years. I bought a print of the photo in my icon, and had my husband frame it as a gift for my parents - I figured that after paying what came to more than $25 with shipping for a single picture, I could grab a usericon.
The thing is, race photos are stupidly expensive. The smallest single print is $13 (from this particular outfit, Action Sports, but it's inline with the other outfits I've seen such as Marathonfoto and Elevation Imaging); if you want more than one shot, the cheapest print package of 4 different images is $35. And that's without shipping. I think most people would rather have their digital images - but that's $65 to download! Of course, that's maybe 6-10 high-resolution images. On the other hand, chances are all but one or two (if you're lucky!) make you look dorky, fat, like you're walking, or like you're about to throw up.
(By comparison, when we went "blackwater rafting" in NZ, we were offered a CD of photos from our trip for $10. We bought it. $10 is reasonable; $65 is not.)
Fortunately, Action Sports offers a "web resolution" single image download which is approximately the size of the one I've linked. For $15. And this is why all over running forums and Facebook and blog sites, people are putting race pictures up which say PROOF across them, or are otherwise watermarked, which are essentially illegal downloads of the pictures. Because who is going to pay $15 for a usericon?
I haven't run the numbers, and maybe the photographers have. But I can't help thinking there is a lesson to be learned from the music and video industry. Make low-resolution digital images cheap and easy to download - like, $1 for a single or $10 for the whole set of them - and a lot fewer people will steal them. Sure, some people will still refuse to pay anything. And some people will still pay $60 for a framed photo, or $40 for a poster. But right now, I will bet that very few people are buying the digital images. I can't imagine they would lose money by making the low-resolution ones cheap, and I bet they would make money.
I'm linking this way, rather than making it public so I can link it inline, because I don't actually own this photo, and sharing it is a copyright violation. I don't want anyone to randomly or through searches come across my copy of this photo (which I obtained through screen capture and cropping). I'm not locking this journal entry, though, because I want to vent publicly. If the photographer wants me to take down the image, I will. But only if he reads this first.
I would actually like to support race photographers. You might notice that the background on this race photo looks a lot like the one in my user icon; they are both from the same race in different years. I bought a print of the photo in my icon, and had my husband frame it as a gift for my parents - I figured that after paying what came to more than $25 with shipping for a single picture, I could grab a usericon.
The thing is, race photos are stupidly expensive. The smallest single print is $13 (from this particular outfit, Action Sports, but it's inline with the other outfits I've seen such as Marathonfoto and Elevation Imaging); if you want more than one shot, the cheapest print package of 4 different images is $35. And that's without shipping. I think most people would rather have their digital images - but that's $65 to download! Of course, that's maybe 6-10 high-resolution images. On the other hand, chances are all but one or two (if you're lucky!) make you look dorky, fat, like you're walking, or like you're about to throw up.
(By comparison, when we went "blackwater rafting" in NZ, we were offered a CD of photos from our trip for $10. We bought it. $10 is reasonable; $65 is not.)
Fortunately, Action Sports offers a "web resolution" single image download which is approximately the size of the one I've linked. For $15. And this is why all over running forums and Facebook and blog sites, people are putting race pictures up which say PROOF across them, or are otherwise watermarked, which are essentially illegal downloads of the pictures. Because who is going to pay $15 for a usericon?
I haven't run the numbers, and maybe the photographers have. But I can't help thinking there is a lesson to be learned from the music and video industry. Make low-resolution digital images cheap and easy to download - like, $1 for a single or $10 for the whole set of them - and a lot fewer people will steal them. Sure, some people will still refuse to pay anything. And some people will still pay $60 for a framed photo, or $40 for a poster. But right now, I will bet that very few people are buying the digital images. I can't imagine they would lose money by making the low-resolution ones cheap, and I bet they would make money.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-21 10:27 pm (UTC)2. SO with you on this. See also school pictures for kids, which are run on the same ridiculous system (you can get a small number of prints for around $25 or you can get pics + digital copies for $50-ish and it's all packages where you can't pick the sizes you want). ARGH.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-21 10:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-21 11:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-22 01:45 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-22 01:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-22 01:47 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-22 02:59 am (UTC)I also bought my NZ rafting/abseiling/caving photos, though!
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 04:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-22 08:01 am (UTC)Agreed about race photos - silly strategy on their part!
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 04:47 pm (UTC)They are hard-earned! I am proud of them!
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-22 10:39 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 04:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 12:41 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 04:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 04:01 am (UTC)I have been guilty of this photo swiping thing. Maybe someday I will shell out the big bucks for race pics.
One business, The LongRun Picture Company, says right on their page that it's OK to copy their photos for FB, blogs, etc...as long as you leave their logo on it- which is nice, since it's in the corner and gives them PR when others see it. I was happy to swipe the pics since it was a 1 mile race I already paid too much just to race a mile. :)
I wonder if the races have to pay some sort of photo fee for them to shoot..?
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 04:53 pm (UTC)Interesting about LongRun. I actually cropped off the Action Sports logo at the bottom, to at least make it not blatantly clear it was theirs, but it didn't occur to me that they might be okay with reposting with the logo. (I just checked their terms and they don't say anything about it.)
(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 09:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-23 09:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-24 04:37 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-25 03:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-24 05:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-24 06:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-10-25 03:24 pm (UTC)