hmmm oh i didn't know it was a non-profit organisation. always though it was a business. if thats the case then i guess it is alright. except the overarching rights part.
being a non-profit organisation does not immediately absolve them of responsibility. non-profits are at the end of the day still run like businesses, just that profit-making is not their chief aim. they still got to balance their books at the end of the day, and i believe they PAY talented people to do that, as well as to handle the other aspects of their operation.
i applaud their efforts in injecting life into the arts scene here, but frankly, these still escape me:
1. photography seems to be a fringe concern on the minds of the organisers, and i qualify this by the fact that they seem to demanding free service + zero recognition. why is this so? if the event is properly documented then won't they have more fodder for publicity next year?
2. the insidious clause that 'all rights of pics taken belong to esplanade'. some of the CSers earlier stated the possible legal wrangling that might arise if pics are floated around without any control. however, it seems that only one or a few would be chosen so can't they simply sit down with the photographer(s) after the event and come to an agreement on what can or cannot be displayed? sure, a legal minefield is involved here but if more effort had been taken, i'm very sure that concessions can be made as to the photographer claiming his due credit and being allowed to showcase his work (deservedly so).
hell, i shoot for free for student (i am one) publications but the whole experience is treated as a collaborative effort and everyone benefits in the end due to the exposure gained and CREDIT received, as well as a nice boost to our portfolios. this spirit of collaboration seems to be what the organisers are trying to achieve, yet it appears that there is only a one-way street leading towards this realisation without just consideration to the all the parties involved.
i don't know about you guys but this seems like a slap in the face for photography in this country. so, music is art and photography isn't? (ok, i couldn't help that ) beautiful irony.
please realise that none of this is targeted at the TS, who has raised a very pertinent topic, though unintentionally.
Last edited by changster; 2nd July 2008 at 04:46 PM.
For information only.
BayBeats website and collaterals are done by a company called Hex:
I wonder if they reserve the rights to the songs performed as well.
Why do you guys keep jumping on no recognition etc. It's stated that credit will be given to the photographers.
In exchange for the pass and the given credit, the photog gives up the rights to the image. It is up to him/her to decide if that is a reasonable enough deal. For the full-time professional, this would usually be an unacceptable scenario, one still needs $ to buy rice and pay the bills.
But for the budding photog venturing into gig photography, this is a good opportunity to touch base with organisers, bands, people-that-matter, etc. Passes to shows don't come free (even though Baybeats in itself is a free event). Being able to shoot behind the barrier is a real luxury for gig photogs. The mosh pit can get really rowdy with a high chance of your equipment getting damaged somehow. The jostling will also compound your problems.
To secure a paid job to shoot a gig... you first need that nice looking portfolio. How best to get that? Sneaking cams in, jostling with the crowd is one way to go. But a great majority of the magnificent shots come from behind the barrier. How to get there? You need a pass. Plain and simple.
oh the mosh last year when A Vacant Affair performed was awesome. more than 50 bodies are flying around, arms swinging around aimlessly and peole jumping. you dont want to be in the center of the circle pit when that happens cause you'll get your cameras whacked.
but with the pass, you'll get to be in front of the crowd and not with the masses.
Last edited by escapologist; 2nd July 2008 at 11:07 PM.
Also just to add on... as far as baybeats go, no offence to organisers and supporters, it doesn't have value in terms of $ for photogs to begin with.
No wire agency will want a photo of the largely unheard of local indie bands. The big music mags aren't interested. In a pinch, local mags like Lime might get interested. but if they do, they will send their own staff photog down with press credentials.
So basically really, demanding to be paid for this sort of event hmmm... I think it might be pushing it a little. Get the experience. Get the contacts. So when the big names come into town... it would be easier to get in as a free-lancer if you know someone.
Ah... You should try getting drenched from head to toe by a fire hose like at some of the gigs I shot while overseas. That is why I seldom bother to bring my gear if I had not gotten a prior nod from the organisers and a proper pass.
The mosh pit is no place for breakable objects!
Oh wow. It's getting hot in here, yea? I didn't expect that this thread is going to be so controversial. *sigh*
I find it very amusing that people still let large organisations like this walk all over them. Just because you charge doesnt mean you lack passion, and just because you have passion doesnt mean you should do it for free. So long as their are naive photographers, like pretty much everyone who thinks this is a good oppertunity and a great idea around, there will always be someone around to exploit you. I also agree that we cant stop people applying for such ridiculous 'jobs', its your own choice, but just stop and think about what your doing for one minute. This is only a good oppertunity for the esplanade, they get some free photos, and heck, some of them may even be good.