Landscape, Nature And Travel Photography

With much anticipation I’m off to Yosemite for the weekend. Roughly 1 year ago today I had the good fortune of visiting Yosemite valley after a fresh snow. Although it’s not looking likely that I’ll have the same luck this weekend it should still be a fun trip with numerous photo opportunities. If you’re in the park this weekend and want to cross paths email me. Happy Leap Day!

Bridal Veil Fall, Yosemite National Park
View More Photos of Yosemite National Park …

Technorati Tags: Yosemite, landscape, photo, photography, Bridal Veil, fall, snow, winter, stock

Last week in my post “How The Rights To Your Photo Are Being Hijacked Through Photo Contests & Social Media” I mentioned that social media sites like Facebook were grabbing the rights of submitted photos as many photo contests are now doing. Clearly this trend to grab the rights of submitted photography by any organization is alarming.

After my initial post I decided to take a closer look at how Facebook references images as I used the site through out the week. As I accessed friends profile pages I’d check to see how images were being referenced in their personal photos section and/or through Facebook applications. What I found really alarmed me.

As noted in my original post I found it unseemly if not unethical that any organization would conceal a rights grab of user-generated content (photography, music, lyrics, writing, etc.) by burying it in pages of legalese. If the terms in the Terms of Use weren’t confusing enough for the average person (see below) it gets even more confusing. Facebook is unique among social media sites in that they support an application platform. Independently created Facebook applications enable members to take quizzes, aggregate content from blogs and other social media sites, give gifts, post photos in picture frames, etc.

What I found is that unknowingly people using applications that reference photos are in fact indirectly posting photos to Facebook subjecting them to the excessively far-reaching terms specified in their Terms of Use. It’s not very obvious but many applications that you’d think would reference images from their source location (say a blog for example via Flog Blog) are in fact duplicating images and hosting them on Facebook. The net result being images hosted on Facebook as though you had manually uploaded them. The distinction legally is identical, but is far from obvious for the end user.

Want to know if the photo you’re seeing on Facebook is hosted in Facebook? Right click on the image and view properties. What you’ll find is that ALL copies of your images are hosted on a Facebook server (example domains: “photos-d.ak.facebook.com”, “photos-921.ll.facebook.com”, etc.)

When you post User Content to the Site, you authorize and direct us to make such copies thereof as we deem necessary in order to facilitate the posting and storage of the User Content on the Site. By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise, on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing. You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content. Facebook does not assert any ownership over your User Content; rather, as between us and you, subject to the rights granted to us in these Terms, you retain full ownership of all of your User Content and any intellectual property rights or other proprietary rights associated with your User Content.
- Facebook Terms of Use as of today 2/26/08

How does Facebook’s approach differ and why does it matter?

Some of the more common Facebook applications reference and pull content via an RSS feed. RSS feeds as they behave in most other applications such as RSS Readers reference content from their source location. For example I host my images on my web server and reference/link to them in my blog entries. RSS Readers then display my blog entry and image in a web browser. The image in my blog post is then displayed and served from my server. Facebook on the other hand reads the RSS feed and then duplicates the image from the source server and then serves up the image from a Facebook server.

Image Location on Facebook
Note: Although this exemplifies a Flickr RSS feed the same is true of my blog RSS feed via the “Flog Blog” application.

Image Location on Google Reader

The combination of this content duplication and the far-reaching terms of their Terms of Use should alarm every Facebook user not just photographers. I am certain that components of the quoted Terms of Use regarding user-generated content are necessary. Displaying content online is a worldwide affair and not every image is formatted to fit Facebook’s layout. Facebook chooses to go farther than is necessary. In all my time posting photos online I have never seen a site claim the right to “sublicense” submitted work. Much of the terms “irrevocable”, “perpetual”, “fully paid”, etc. are excessively one sided particularly in combination with their follow-up term of grabbing the right to “distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise“.

Let it be known no web site is free. It may seem like you’re getting to use a free web site, but companies like Facebook, Google, etc. are providing online services in exchange for your personal data that is used to serve advertising; advertising that they charge a pretty penny to display. Whether you realize it or not you are bartering your personal information for their online services. Facebook is taking it one step further by grabbing the rights to user-generated content namely your photography.

For many giving up privacy by serving up your personal information to such companies is an acceptable sacrifice. That acceptable sacrifice has its limits as Facebook found out with their Beacon online ad system in late 2007. I would argue that Facebook to date has dodged a bullet in that most people are unaware of the broad terms that amount to a rights grab of user generated content on their site. Facebook should be pressured to revise their Terms of Use as they were pressured to modify Beacon. Until that time I will no longer have my photography displayed in any form on Facebook.

Technorati Tags: Facebook, rights, copyright, photo, photography, ToU, Terms of Use, Google, advertising, Beacon, UGC, user generated content

The great thing about nature is that it consistantly amazes. Case in point is the beautiful build up of lichen and moss in the trees at Point Lobos State Reserve. This is no doubt one of the most beautiful locations in California and these trees are but one facet of this gem of state land.

Lichen, Moss & Trees II – Point Lobos State Reserve, California

Trees & Moss – Point Lobos State Reserve, California

Technorati Tags: tree, moss, lichen, Point Lobos State Reserve, California

Today Getty Images announced that they’re sealing the deal on a take over by private equity firm Hellman & Friedman for $2.4 billion including debt.

This isn’t much of a surprise as Getty has been shopping themselves around for a while as their stock price has continued to fall. Considering the difficulties they’ve been having I’m surprised at the 39% premium that is being offered even if strategically Getty has great importance with the large volume of images they control.

From a photographer’s perspective Getty has done nothing but alienate me. Several years ago Read more…

The California coastline is always a dynamic environment especially as storms generate large surf. Like clockwork nearly every big storm there are news stories of people knocked from the rocks by rogue waves and killed. When taking photos in precarious places along the coast one always has to have one eye out to sea. Even 15 feet above the water during this shoot I still had to retreat a couple of times as large sets moved their way in. Being respectful of Mother Nature often includes being cautious and factoring in the unpredictability of your surroundings.

Stormy Coastline – Monterey, California

Technorati Tags: Monterey, California, storm, coast, coastline, seascape, photo, photography, stock, surf, wave

Sadly it seems like months ago, but only two weeks ago this was my “office” view. Kayaking off the coast of Maui with numerous Humpback whales in the area was awe inspiring. I have to admit one whale came up right behind my wife and I and scared the hell out of us. The loud exhale of this giant animal can do that when you don’t see them coming.

Pictured below is a whale and her calf diving. Before they disappeared they had been casually hanging out and putting on quite a show for roughly 20 minutes. We were very lucky to see such an extended display of mother/calf interaction and I have to admit I’m hooked. The next time I’m in Maui I’ll be quite eager to whale watch via kayak again.

Humpback Whale Tail and Calf Peduncle Arch – Maui, Hawaii

Technorati Tags: Humpback, whale, tail, calf, peduncle arch, Maui, Hawaii, wildlife, photo, photography, stock, whale watch, kayak

I have to admit when I see a beautiful landscape or nature photo I instantly think two things:
1. “I’d love to visit this location and get this shot.”
2. “How would I strive to get my very own perspective of this scene.”

In fact when I do visit certain locations its tough not to snap the classic perspective captured by greats such as Ansel Adams, Galen Rowell, Edward Weston, and contemporary artists like Art Wolfe, John Sexton, James Kay and William Neill. In fact this repetition of classic shots is a common event that all photographers do at some point. For some it is part of the journey of self-discovery and for others its a means of collecting scenes on a to-do list.

One concept I’ve been throwing around in my mind is the concept of “Creative Debt”. This concept again came up when I was admiring the latest work of Bert Stern who just completed a shoot titled Lindsay Lohan as Marilyn Monroe in “The Last Sitting” for the New York magazine. The gallery contains (6) six images of Lindsay Lohan nude or in partial dress as Marilyn Monroe had been photographed by Bert Stern some 46 years earlier in the original “Last Sitting” (termed as such because it was the last time Marilyn Monroe was photographed before she died). The photography is no doubt art in my mind and hardly pornographic. (Note: You’ll still want to refrain from viewing it at work.) Over the years other fashion photographers have taken images similar to Bert Stern’s original Marilyn Monroe set just as countless landscape photographers have taken similar images to Ansel Adams.

“Creative Debt” what is it?

“Creative Debt” merely translates to a creative state where its easier to fall back on something safe, something done before and something with a known level of interest by viewers. More succinctly it is when creative components of an image whether composition, perspective, styling, etc. are owed to another photographer or even an older photo shoot completed by the same photographer. Great examples of this include numerous photos taken by other photographers of Ansel Adams’ Yosemite Valley from the tunnel view lookout or the Snake River view of the Grand Tetons and as just exemplified the Bert Stern ‘Lindsay Lohan as Marilyn Monroe in the “Last Sitting”‘ photo set. “Creative Debt” is hardly something to knock, but merely something to be conscious of as a photographer.

“Creative Debt” is the middle ground between the pit that is “Creative Block” and the pinnacle of finding your own perspective. Personally I dread “Creative Debt” as much as I dread a “Creative Block” simply because I’ve grown addicted to the high of capturing something unique. As with most highs it’s a fleeting sensation, hence the lure to keep pursuing truly unique photos. If I’m lucky the few unique photos I capture are equally appreciated by those that view them.

Something to think about the next time you head out with your camera or view photographs.

Technorati Tags: creative debt, photography, philosophy, landscape, Ansel Adams, Galen Rowell, Edward Weston, Art Wolfe, John Sexton, James Kay, William Neill, Bert Stern, Marilyn Monroe, Lindsay Lohan, nude, portfolio, New York, magazine

So you’ve got this incredible image that you’ve got to show the world. Not only are you going to share it with your friends online, but you’re also going to enter it in a contest or two to win some fabulous prizes. Well before you do I recommend reading the fine print, that includes the the Terms of Use (ToU) for web sites and Contest Rules for, you guessed it, photo contests.

One of the most underhanded tactics sweeping the online and publishing world is the hijacking of photo rights through inequitable terms buried in the fine print of legalese for contests and web sites. The perpetrators will no doubt surprise you, they include the likes of Facebook, National Geographic + PDN, Popular Photo, and more.

This issue is not a new one and has reared its ugly head in the past on other photo sharing sites, but now this tactic is becoming increasingly common with major players. Offending words such as perpetual, royalty-free license and irrevocable are being introduced to hijack the rights to photographs of well intended photographers looking to play the odds to have their work recognized in a contest or just to simply share with friends.

So what does this mean? It means companies, that used to pay for quality photography to fill the pages of their publications, are now taking advantage of well intentioned photographers to develop royalty-free photo libraries they now can tap to fill the pages of their publication or place in promotional advertisements.

I almost forgot about this underhanded tactic until I started to play with the idea of submitting to the Popular Photography contest “Are You the Next Great Photographer?” sponsored by Apple. In talking with a friend and fellow photographer Richard Wong it was noted the terms outlined in Popular Photography’s Terms of Use were not photographer friendly.

HFM U.S. Rights to Materials Provided by Users
By posting messages, uploading files, inputting data or engaging in any other form of communication (individually or collectively “Communications”) to the HFM U.S. Web Site, you grant to HFM U.S. a perpetual, worldwide, irrevocable, unrestricted, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, copy, license, sublicense, adapt, distribute, display, publicly perform, reproduce, transmit, modify, edit and otherwise exploit such Communications and any ideas or original materials contained in such Communications, in all media now known or hereafter developed. This grant shall include the right to exploit any and all proprietary rights in such Communications including, without limitation, any and all rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction. You waive all rights you may have to inspect and/or approve of any use by HFM U.S. of any material or idea submitted by you in any Communications. You waive all rights to any claim against HFM U.S. for any alleged or actual infringements of any proprietary rights, rights of privacy and publicity, moral rights, and rights of attribution in connection with such Communications. You agree and understand that HFM U.S. is under no obligation to use any material or ideas submitted by you in any Communications in any way whatsoever, and is not responsible for maintaining, and may delete at any time, any of your Communications. More…

The odd thing about this contest was that there were not specific terms tied to the contest so I wrote Popular Photography to get clarification. The response to my inquiry was:

“ This came together at the 11^th hour so no specific terms and conditions were written, so the general site T&C will apply. We are not appropriating the copyright of submitted content and will make our best effort to obtain photographer permission before publishing any of the photographs.“

Needless to say after reviewing the Terms of Use, particularly the quoted section above, I opted to abstain from participating. If Popular Photography doesn’t value photographers rights enough to think things through ahead of time why would I chance forfeiting the right to my photographic work with their publication?

The latest contest to employ this tactic is the National Geographic Traveler and PDN “The Great Outdoors Photo Contest“. What’s so surprising about this is PDN’s association with it. PDN normally is quite the advocate of photographer’s rights. The tactic to grab photo rights is contrary to the pro-photographers rights stance that PDN normally takes.

An excerpt from the original fine print of this contest:

“Entries may be published by Sponsors and/or their designees, licensees or affiliates (the “Authorized Parties”) in magazines, on websites, or in any other medium, at Authorized Parties’ discretion. By participating, all entrants grant a license in the Entries to the Authorized Parties, and acknowledge that any Authorized Party may use the entries and a name credit in any media now or hereafter known, without restriction, including commercially using the entries to the fullest extent possible worldwide in perpetuity. Authorized Parties will not be required to pay any additional consideration or seek any additional approval in connection with such use.”

After a blog entry by the Photo Attorney and an email campaign by disgusted photographers the contest rules were revised. See Outdoors Photo Contest Rules Change – GREAT!

As far as this goes with National Geographic, if you think this might be a fluke think again. National Geographic’s Terms of Use for submitting to their “Your Shot” magazine/site feature is eerily similar if not worse.

You grant to National Geographic Society and its subsidiaries and licensees (“NGS”) the following rights: a royalty-free, worldwide, perpetual license to display, distribute, reproduce and create derivatives of the Photograph, in whole or in part, without further review or participation from you, in any medium now existing or subsequently developed, in editorial, commercial, promotional and trade uses in connection with NGS Products. An NGS Product is defined as “a product of NGS, a corporate subsidiary, affiliate, joint venturer or licensee of NGS, in any language, which is associated with an NGS trademark and over which NGS has Editorial Control.” For the purposes of this Agreement, “Editorial Control” means the right to review, consult regarding, formulate standards for, or to exercise a veto over the appearance, text, use, or promotion of the product. This license includes the nonexclusive right to make the Photograph available to third parties (i) for library or other research uses through microfiche, microfilm, or any other archival storage and retrieval form, including but not limited to electronic databases and document delivery services; and (ii) for distribution in connection with an NGS press conference or press release. More…

You don’t enter contests you say? Well if you use social media web sites you need to be just as wary. Facebook’s Terms of Use are just as bad. It’s for this reason that I don’t upload any of my work directly to Facebook.

“By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise, on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.” More…

It’s beyond belief to what length these companies seem to be going to acquire the rights to photographic work, in the broadest form, from unsuspecting photographers. If you’re thinking about submitting photography to a contest, a social media web site or any publication I highly recommend taking a close look at the Terms of Use and/or contest rules. Don’t be fooled into thinking this is the norm because a well known publication/site or two resorts to these tactics. This is in fact the exception to the rule and one that photographers need to push back on. Case in point to the success of the pressure put forth by photographers with the National Geographic Traveler and PDN contest.

Technorati Tags: photography, photo, rights, PDN, National Geographic, Facebook, social media, Popular Photography, contest, The Great Outdoors Photo Contest, Are You the Next Great Photographer?