Contracts, Photo Releases and other Nonsense!!

I shot a concert the the other night, unfortunately I was ambushed with a contract at the door, “no signature, no entry mate!” I was told.  Having already travelled 90 minutes to get there I figured I’d sign it, and decide what to do with the images at a later date.  The contract is less ominoous than others that I’ve seen but this had unusual seemingly random clauses that didn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense.  There was no questioning of copyright for once, but other really odd stuff like “images may only appear on a website for a maximum of thirty consecutive days“… why??  who knows, but obviously not very portfolio friendly.  Also the record company who’s contract it was, wanted a byline credit for the record company whenever any of the images were used, again, bizzarre.

I’ll not mention the artist or the record company because I’ve asked to get it recinded, luckily my magazine who commissioned the work is again standing behind me and has told the artists management that there will be no coverage of the artist or event until they drop the contract.

The really bizarre thing is that it hurts the artist and PR agency, because the contract is issued by the record company (not the artists management).  Sometimes I share some shots with the PR/Management comapny as a good will gesture, however the contract I was made to sign disallows this, oops!  I’ve asked at the very least that anyone applying for a photography pass for any of their future gigs should be sent the contract in advance to them to allow them to make the decision whether to attend or not before they travel, rather than getting ambushed on the door!

I’ll keep you updated, in the meantime, I’ve started a thread on Concert & Music Photographers Network to get the feedback from others experiences and thoughts about contracts and photo release forms.

Good shootin’ everyone!

Is the Pap Culture hurting (Music) Photography?

I recently read either read an article or watched something on TV where an old hand in the photography business (it might have been Dennis Stone the Heathrow celebrity photographer), wherever and whatever it was, they were remenising about the kind of access you used to be able to get to stars and how it’s all changed.  Another music photographer recently said that the difference between Paps and most other photographers is that Paps try to make their subject look as bad as possible, other ‘togs do their best to make their subject look as good as possible.  So where did the line become so blurred?  Even in the few short years I’ve been shooting at concerts there seems to be this general anti-photographer feeling, unless you’re hired by the studio/label/PR, at which point you’re introduced by one of the inner circle.  I could have it all wrong, but that’s my feeling about the whole thing.

So my question is, how do we (the music photographer niche) go about winning that trust back and perhaps even going back to the times when proper access was easier to come-by, and when they didn’t have a constant contingent of bodyguards and lawyers automatically assuming everyone is out there to rip them off?

Apologies for the rant.