|
Paper photoshops my image without permission
|
The image on the left was shot by me for a story on a certain website last week at my internship ( a Dutch press agency). The right one was published in a local Dutch paper called BN/de Stem. They added the arrows and the board without my permission and without stating that in the paper. I feel quite angry that a paper just stakes my image and manipulates it without asking me (or my editor) and don’t even bother to say that in the article. They also didn’t add a creditline.
Am I right too be angry, or am I just overreacting?
with kind regards,
Rutgher Pruijm
by
[a former member]
at
2008-01-18 18:16:51 UTC
(ed.
Mar 12 2008
)
Rotterdam
,
Netherlands
|
Bookmark
|
|
Report spam→
|
|
hmmm. if they added the credit line, then I’d be pissed about the retouching. As it is, I’d be pissed more about not having the credit line. But then I’d be pissed about the retouching. What they should have done is credit the photog and the retoucher.
You DID get paid, right? Or can I be pissed about that too?
It’s a conundrum.
by
[former member]
|
18 Jan 2008 18:01
| boston, ma,
United States
|
|
Report spam→
|
Well I’m an intern so I don’t get payed per photo. But I just thought that the photo editors at that paper should have known better. No creditline, retouching without permission and doing a bad job at it too…shame shame shame
by
[former member]
|
18 Jan 2008 18:01
| Rotterdam,
Netherlands
|
|
Report spam→
|
I think if you’re at a press agency, there are bosses of yours that should be alerted and left to deal with it.
|
good point.
by
[former member]
|
18 Jan 2008 20:01
| boston, ma,
United States
|
|
Report spam→
|
yes, my editor said that he will contact the paper sometime next week.
by
[former member]
|
18 Jan 2008 21:01
| Rotterdam,
Netherlands
|
|
Report spam→
|
He doesn’t have to worry. Now that you’ve mentioned it here, the blogosphere will take over. :)
|
You can be angry right now:) I’ve ever been in the same situation..
|
isnt it frustraiting to “not be paid per foto” ? i mean, where is the point in that?
|
they should have been happy to tell you, the intern, that they wanted to use your photo – for the base of the photo illustration…why they cut you out of the process, i dunno…
|
interesting… really good point about how they should not have minded giving you credit. i really feel like “they” often just never think of that.
want some fun? google “molotov man”. read “on the rights of molotov man”, a reprint from a great story in Harpers, to start with, and then all the other hoo-haa spinoff, but the bottom line i always come to is: what if this had been a collaboration based on the painter simply acknowledging the photographer? how cool could THAT have been?
…of course, both these “artists” got a whole boatload of press over this, and we all know there’s no such thing as bad press. heh.
by
[former member]
|
22 Jan 2008 10:01
(ed. Jan 22 2008)
| boston, ma,
United States
|
|
Report spam→
|
You can’t buy a sixpack of beer with good press, can you ;-)
|
dammit. hitting me where it hurts. (don’t be cuttin into my beer money)
:)
by
[former member]
|
22 Jan 2008 11:01
| boston, ma,
United States
|
|
Report spam→
|
On Molotov man and Susan Meislas litigation :
http://onthecommons.org/node/1076
|
The chief editor of the newspaper called and apologized, he didn’t know that the photo department did what they did and he was not happy with it also. So it’s all good now.
by
[former member]
|
22 Jan 2008 18:01
| Rotterdam,
Netherlands
|
|
Report spam→
|
If I shot it with the darts and they took them out I’d be pissed.
|
|
Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
|
 via RSS
Recommended
|
 via email
You can unsubscribe later.
|
|
|
|
