Ethical sports photography question

[Bitter Jeweler]

Another thing is, no offense to the parents with their d40's trying to emulate me and my photography...

I found the OP's post rather arrogant.
After seeing the images on his schools website, the arrogance was confirmed. Certainly the parents with their D40's are trying to emulate his blurry, noisy, often underexposed "work". The images are little more than snapshots taken from a P&S.

By all means, keep shootin', learning and having fun with what you are doing. Just drop the "I'm all that" attitude.

:er:

 

[Plato]

Another thing is, no offense to the parents with their d40's trying to emulate me and my photography...

I found the OP's post rather arrogant.
After seeing the images on his schools website, the arrogance was confirmed. Certainly the parents with their D40's are trying to emulate his blurry, noisy, often underexposed "work". The images are little more than snapshots taken from a P&S.

By all means, keep shootin', learning and having fun with what you are doing. Just drop the "I'm all that" attitude.

:er:

Either I'm doing something incredibly stupid (which is entirely possible) or his pics have been removed but, in either case, I can't find them. However, without seeing the pics, I understand your point. I had kinda headed in the same direction when I suggested that he calm down.

 

[Dantheman4334]

Another thing is, no offense to the parents with their d40's trying to emulate me and my photography...

I found the OP's post rather arrogant.
After seeing the images on his schools website, the arrogance was confirmed. Certainly the parents with their D40's are trying to emulate his blurry, noisy, often underexposed "work". The images are little more than snapshots taken from a P&S.

By all means, keep shootin', learning and having fun with what you are doing. Just drop the "I'm all that" attitude.

:er:

THAT WORK IS OLD. MY new stuff is better, plain and simple. Like the work or not, I know one thing, I can't stop getting complemented on it.

Look, Im sorry for the attitude.

Tell me if you like these any better:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30963368@N03/page1/

 

[Felix0890]

Not really.

Doesn't mean you still have a point, though.

 

[Dantheman4334]

Not really.

Doesn't mean you still have a point, though.

Why? what is it about them that isn't good?

 

[Felix0890]

Not really.

Doesn't mean you still have a point, though.

Why? what is it about them that isn't good?

With the exception of a couple of good ones, they look like snapshots taken with a P&S, as previously mentioned. The lighting is not that great in most of them. A lot of them are also underexposed. I don't know much about sports photography but I would think that they should convey either a frozen action or an action in motion. Yours don't do either. For a frozen action to look good, you have to get the player(s) in great positions that bring interest to your picture. The still images you have on there are boring and not interesting at all. The ones that try to convey motion need to be captured correctly so that you can really capture movement (in this example, the guy is blurred but the position he's in makes it look more like he's stretching than running).

Now, for the ones that are interesting, the exposure is off. example

This one is awesome . . . just get the guys in the orange out of the shot. Don't be embarrassed to tell them they don't go well in the shot.

 

[Dantheman4334]

Not really.

Doesn't mean you still have a point, though.

Why? what is it about them that isn't good?

With the exception of a couple of good ones, they look like snapshots taken with a P&S, as previously mentioned. The lighting is not that great in most of them. A lot of them are also underexposed. I don't know much about sports photography but I would think that they should convey either a frozen action or an action in motion. Yours don't do either. For a frozen action to look good, you have to get the player(s) in great positions that bring interest to your picture. The still images you have on there are boring and not interesting at all. The ones that try to convey motion need to be captured correctly so that you can really capture movement (in this example, the guy is blurred but the position he's in makes it look more like he's stretching than running).

Now, for the ones that are interesting, the exposure is off. example

This one is awesome . . . just get the guys in the orange out of the shot. Don't be embarrassed to tell them they don't go well in the shot.

This interesting enough for you?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2684/4018887609_727eea0aa7_b.jpg

 

[Felix0890]

That actually proves my point more. The shot is interesting but it's still a bad shot. You should have captured more on top and at the bottom. Showing the bottom would have made him look as if he were flying towards the ball (I'm assuming his legs weren't touching the ground). The ball being cut off at the top just looks bad to me. Also, technical-wise, he's not in full focus. I would have used a wider aperture to make him stand out more.

This interesting enough for you?

And there's that attitude again. I know you're 15 and the hormones are flaring but try to cool it down.

 

[Dao]

Dantheman4334, don't take it too personal. I do believe you have room to improve. And that is actually good, you know. Someone here maybe able to give you some good advice to improve your photography skills.

 

[DennyCrane]

You are a minor. Your civil rights are extremely limited. And you may be held accountable for actions occurring off-campus. Your school district has these policies for one reason... and it ain't because they're jealous of your Ansel Adams/godlike/OMG skillz.

It's for the protection of the kids at your school.

There are predators out there who will seek out kids using bits of information and pictures found online. Imagine being a parent whose kid turned up missing because some jackass broke policy and posted pictures of their daughter online? Yeah... that's why that rule exists. If you're aspiring to become any kind of pro photog, you'd better start learning now how to work within the rules. If you get a reputation for breaking rules (or laws) to get a picture, no one will hire you.

And for the record, while your work may be slightly better than adequate compared to other 15 year olds, it appears average to an adult. Your ego is going to be your biggest enemy in your future until you gain the humility all beginners require.

And of course, that said, I'm not a lawyer. I just play one on TV.

 

[EhJsNe]

This is where going to a small, desperate, private school comes in handy.

The first time I broke the rules about posting pictures online...I got detention for a week...and I managed to get the football team, my cross country team, and a few other people to go with me. They all misbehaived and was loud and didnt do what they should be doing...but they cant punish me, since "It wasnt my fault they decided to sit on detention with me" and "I was perfectly behaived!"

The second time I threatened to leave the school. That was the end of them trying enforcing the rules to me. pwnd.

 

[DennyCrane]

I'm thinking... does this school have a photography club? If not, get some teacher to be the adviser and start one. This can lead to getting work out there... but still likely not to be sold...

Does the school have a paper? See above.

 

[In2daBlue]

I'm a photojournalist and have had many battles about who owns my work, where I can be restricted in shooting, etc. I can tell you, if it were me, I would tread lightly on this one as I think the school district will win. One poster said that it's a public event on public property and therefore you are not restricted. That is just plain wrong. Call an attorney or your local Press Association to confirm if you would like.

Although the school field (all district property) is public property it is in fact owned by the school district, which can place rules, regulations and, yes, even restrictions on photos taken on the school grounds. If a principal asks me, as a member of the working press to leave the grounds with my camera and I don't, I can be arrested for trespassing.

Obviously, though, the school knows you are there, but that example goes to show the previous post about public event/public property is just not true. Furthermore, the poster who said you might be considered an "agent" for the school is exactly right. If you are being given access to the field as a yearbook photographer than your images do not belong to you, they belong to the yearbook and the school. The same is true for me when I shoot any sporting event whether its major league sports, NCAA or high school football. I am granted access to the field as an agent for my newspaper and the images that I take do not belong to me, they are the property of the newspaper that received the credentials to get on the field. If I tried to sell one of those images on the side I would be fired for copyright violation.

Finally, whether a yearbook shooter or a member of the professional press, a school absolutely has the right to dictate terms on the images that are taken. The NFL does. NCAA schools do. And, even some high schools that I have shot have dictated image use restrictions. It's absolutely within their rights.

A real test for you would be to resign from the yearbook and ask to shoot the games as commercial freelance photographer. They will either A) Not grant you access to the field, B) Grant you access to the field but ask you to sign a contract agreeing to their terms for image use (which could include the same restrictions) or C) Grant you access to the field with no restrictions at all, which at that point you're golden.

Again, you're talking about the rights of the working press here (even if just for a yearbook) and I can tell you that the laws don't side with you on this one. If you don't believe me, contact a first amendment attorney or you local Press Association to get it straight from the horse's mouth.

Good luck.

P.S. I think your images are good for your age, limited gear and general lack of experience.

 

[Plato]

Although the school field (all district policy) is public property it is in fact owned by the school district, which can place rules, regulations and, yes, even restrictions on photos taken on the school grounds. If a principal asks me, as a member of the working press to leave the grounds with my camera and I don't, I can be arrested for trespassing.

That brings back memories of my time on the local Board of Education, including a year as President. In the U.S.A., at least in New Jersey, you're 100% correct. School property is NOT the same as a street or a park or even city hall.

 

[FrankLamont]

^^ is very true -- a lot of areas are counted as part of the 'private' property: in the meaning that what you take can be limited and/or restricted.

To the OP: while you do have some quite nice photos, there is no harm in improving, and improve you can. We all can. You need to take critiques on board and use them, not reject comments.