Responsibility for other photogs?

[RMThompson]

Recently an acquaitance of mine had a bad experience with a photog. She doesn't live near me, and hired someone in her state to take some "bodouir" pictures of her to send to her husband, and to make a long story short the pictures got plastered all over the photogs website and Myspace, without permission. She learned her lesson and had it out with the photog.

However I, being curious, checked out this photog and their services. I was appalled to see some terribly photography, technically speaking as well as artisitcally, and even worse PRICING. These pictures had numerous mistakes each, which is fine for a learner, I make mistakes all the time since I am still new at this, but the photog was charging up to 200 dollars PER HOUR, with no prints.

I wanted to email the photog and yell at them, but I didn't. I wanted to tell people on Myspace, but I didnt... but I felt weird because I felt responsible and ashamed that someone calling themselves a photographer would take advantage.

So the question is:

AS photographers do we take SOME resposibility for each other?

discuss!

 

[~Stella~]

No. If I felt responsible for all the inept, unethical, and possibly illegal activities of people in my profession, I'd be suicidal by now.

That's not to say one should not assist another person when one can reasonably do so. That's wholely different from taking responsibility for the actions of a third party.

 

[Mike_E]

Aside from the quiet "You know you're going to Hell for this, don't you?" there's not much we can do. The freedoms we have are freely abused by some but too precious to give up to stop them.

The best you can do is to educate as many as you can to what it means to be a Professional and thereby severely limit the hacks ability to make a living.

 

[Mike Jordan]

If it's soemone that doesn't want help, all you can do is stand quietly by and let someone like this continue doing it the way they want. No matter how bad they are, how much they gouge, how un-professional they are, don't say anything. But that doesn't mean you can't also be standing close enough that you can pick up the customers that wise up to how bad he is and are looking for someone that takes good pictures, doesn't gouge and is every bit the professional. There's nothing wrong with that at all.

Mike

 

[Garbz]

It ultimately falls on the customer to double check this stuff. A fool and their money are easily separated!

I'd be crazy to hire a photographer (well ok that's a given but even if I didn't do it my self) without first checking their work and their pricing and their competitors.

 

[LaFoto]

As to your question in how far you - as one photographer - need to have pangs of conscience about the bad quality of work and ripping people off with what they charge of another photographer (only because the two of you are operating under the same name, i.e. photographer), I say: no, you have no reason whatsoever to feel responsible, and to maybe even apologise in that other photog's name to that friend of yours who got ripped off and sort of abused, too (by putting up her photos publicly without her consent). The fact that we all call ourselves WHAT we call ourselves does not automatically mean that we are more responsible for each other than we would consider ourselves to be between two otherwise strangers to each other.

Legally, and with regards to her finding her photos spread out across the Internet without her consent, I don't really know how much she can do. From what little I have read about such things here, she would need to be able to proove (consistently) that she suffered a personal loss out of her photos being published without her consent (or is that according to German law now?), i.e. got sacked from her job or something like that. It is very hard work to find such proof (other than that she was thoroughly miffed, which is too little "personal loss" for the judges), unless that photog's taking a) bad pics of her and b) spreading them out without her consent really made her lose her job/husband/house/income... :scratch: I think.... As I am saying: I don't really KNOW.

 

[Christina]

I feel môre shame in people who. Photograph Random stuff with no intentions to learn, grow or respect others general knowledge to help.


These people are the ones who call themselves photographers and give bad names to others!

 

[Battou]

If she lives in the US she can persue a Copyright on the images and have them enforced under a "work for hire" clause. I think.

 

[Jeff Canes]

did she sign a release form for photographer to use the photos

 

[Battou]

The thing that sux is it is a nasty little loophole that, what dose and dose not qualify at low levels is very cloudy, but many contracts have a clause in them granting such permissions. If she signed any thing, it's likely it was in there, and she would have to go threw and read the contract in full. If in fact it is there, there is nothing that can be done until such deleterious effects such as ones mentioned by LaFoto. Even then if it's not there or no psychical contract was signed, it could prove difficult to prove the intellectual property ownership as WFH and reverting it to the employer, as everything below motion pictures and maps is an endless sea of grey to me.