7th September 2004, 08:51 PM
Perhaps photography now as we know is becoming too commercialised. In what manner? Competitions that tie up with photographic society and government/private company is a form of advertisements. Advertisement is a form of cost to them. To get some return, they "aquire" photos and pictures belong to them, in terms of copyright. When they want to publish another advertisement, can save some money by choosing what they already have. They win-win, we lose-lose.
Originally Posted by snappist
There are some competition that return the photos back to the photographers for non-winning entries such as the South West CDC - PSS Nature competition. They at least respect the photographer whose pictures were selected for competition. With non-winning entries returned, they can do nothing.
Lets be fair to our local photographic society. They only supply the backbone, they are not the one that make use of our photos but rather the tie-up organisation/company.
There are also forms of photographic competition, or rather salons. This is an arena where photographers pit against each other for acceptance and medals. Entries will be returned and selected enteries will be published in a book with the photographers name with it. This is respect among photographers who know the importance.
With the advancement of digital photography, digital photography competition is becoming more popular. Problem with digital photography, people submit high resolution digital entry (regardless of manupilation or not). After competition, these digital files are easily archievable and easy for them to manupilate in the future. Perhaps that is the problem with clickart where they require all participants to submit digitally. Save their time to scan. Somemore got sponsor to supply equipment
another issue will pop up from here. Yes, czeyang submitted a digital entry to clickart for competition and subsequently image re-appears in some ads promoting arts scene in singapore. Perfectly alright up to the terms and condition. Problem is, the image was "manupilated" and resurfaced in ads. Now, who owns the right of the image (discarding the terms and conditions)? You supply the primary image, they are the one that make it "work" so to say. Jialat, the new form is not your original form of work. Can claim ownership?
Last edited by forbytes; 7th September 2004 at 08:54 PM.
9th September 2004, 05:34 PM
I called up MP group asia, supposedly the company organizing ClickArt, but they just transfer me from one person to another, giving me the walkaround... sigh...
10th September 2004, 02:58 PM
By helping SBG to org the photo competion and lending their name to them, under these unfair terms, I get the feeling that PSS is not helping the photographer. As an org that is suppose to help promote and upgrade the standard of photography here, they do not seem to help protect the photographer's rights. As an org. they should be trying to push for greater copyright protection. Singapore is known to be one of the countries to have very good copyright protection but in photography, we have the PSS turning a blind eye to it. I guess their respond will be " if you feel so strongly about your rights, don't join ". Is this the kind of respond we can accept from an org like PSS?
10th September 2004, 08:58 PM
I would be proud if my photos are being published. Too bad my standard is not there yet hee.........
11th September 2004, 12:45 AM
Vince, are there the same paternal rights rules in the Sg copyright legislation as the parent 1988 CDPA in the UK?
12th September 2004, 06:13 PM
Any possability of including a watermark next time you post a picture you cherish ???
Just a question .... any thoughts on this idea ???
13th September 2004, 09:54 AM
specifically what kind of rights do you mean by "paternal rights"? in Singapore, we don't refer to copyrights as paternal rights.
Originally Posted by Jed
for some reason, the other thread on model releases and the call for calendar seem to have been deleted without a trace on why...
13th September 2004, 06:23 PM
All I can add to this debate is, If you dun like the rules, don't participate.
By participating, you have agreed to their terms and wavied your rights in accordingly.
So, if you found that they are still using your photos without payment or your written permission after 2 years, SUEthem as breach of contract. Give them jiak lark jiak lark and teach them a lesson that they will never forget (and perhaps reward yourself with a 20D).
Is this a cheapo way of getting free images and plenty of it, IMHO, YES.
Afterall, this is ART. Spend a few millions $$$ per year on useless things like a few bottles hanging in the air or that few pile of dirty paint on a wall and called it art !!
To me it is $$$ poorly spend. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to have this $$$ on civil training like CPR & 1st Aid for the masses ?