what would you do?

[theague]

I work for a municipality in Washington. I specifically work in a group that manages this website: www.govME.org (http://www.govME.org) (Now you know which municipality) :)

The photos that are on that front page are old and obviously not the best quality. If you refresh the page the photo changes each time. There are a half-dozen or so.

Since the city is constantly building new things etc they want updated images. My boss and co-workers know that photography is my hobby which makes me the best candidate to take the new photos in their minds. The IT/GIS section I work for has a camera, some crappy thing.

Option 1... I go out and take photos with the company camera. They turn out so-so and they go on the website. Most likely my name will not be attached to them but people will know i shot them and I personally do not want to base any part of my reputation or skill as a photographer on the available equipment and lighting conditions during the time they'd most likely ask me to do the photography. (The photos on that website have actually been published in GIS and Public Works publications with credit to the person that shot them). I assume the city has or took the "rights" to these photos due to a lack of knowledge by many parties.

Option 2. I use my equipment. I may get credit in some way on the website for the photos and I obviously retain the rights to the photos. I doubt they would be willing to compensate me for them at all. I might not even get credit at all. I'm sure there is more to this but I can't think of it all...

So what would you do? Use the company equipment and revoke any rights to the images? Risk producing sub-par images with it? Get no credit or compensation? OR Use your equipment and try to get something out of it? I could also just get TOLD to go take the photos... lol

THoughts or ideas?????

[chakalakasp]

I'd use their equipment and not try too hard. If they don't value good photography enough to pay actual money for it, why spend effort creating good images?

Doesn't say much good for Tacoma, Washington, in my opinion. The city of Tacoma can afford 500 bucks for some decent photos to put on their website. It costs more than that to fill a few potholes.

[gjl711]

I am in a very similar situation. I am an engineering manager and engineering is my primary job. However, we are also responsible for for putting together the manuals, release notes, and websites. We could hire an outside photographer for these, but I stepped forward and volunteered to become that photographer as I had done product photog in the past. Anyway, I love doing the work and I get paid no extra, but it is fun.
Anyway, I would do the same here. Take your equipment and take the best photos you can. It might not pay off here and now, but it will be fun and who knows, maybe somewhere down the line you can convince them to invest in better equipment. Heck, I finally convinced my boss that we needed a 5D and the 85 f1.2 :). Now if I could only convince him that it needs to come home with me every once in a while. ;)

[breal101]

My dad used to say if a job was worth doing it was worth doing right. It is up to you to decide if the job is worth doing. The rights may belong to the city under the work for hire part of copyright law, depends I would guess if you are doing the shots on their time. Many years ago I worked as a photographer for a large government agency, they owned the rights to everything I shot for them. Thinking of that job made me the remember the politics involved with civil service in particular. Anyone who went above and beyond the call of duty was generally considered to be brown nosing, grandstanding or trying to make a name for themselves. If that attitude exists in your department it may be a good idea to be ordered to do the job, and complain about it appropriately.

[theague]

Like chakalakasp said, the city or my boss, doesn't truly value good images. I don't think he honestly sees a difference. I had my parents over at my place earlier tonight. I asked my dad since he's into photography as well. My mother said, she didn't see a diff since she doesn't know much about what a good photograph is.

From the standpoint of the design team, they don't care if it's a good photo. All they care about is if the GIS info is correct, accurate and accessible.

I would like to do a good job. it'd also be somewhere my images were displayed. Images have the tendency to be shared between departments though and I get the feeling if they turned out to be good that the city would want to and try to use them elsewhere. Wouldn't this technically require me to relinquish rights to the photos?

[hando]

You are on staff. You do what your boss tells you to do. If you take the photos in work time, you get paid your normal salary and therefore all images are owned by your employer. You cannot be a contractor and an employee at the same time.

So the way I see it, you use their equipment and if they are not happy with the results you suggest that you could do a better job with your own equipment. At this point you may be able to negotiate a deal for you to use your own equipment.

But in any case your employer will still own the copyright for the images while you are being paid your usual salary, just like you cannot finish a normal day's IT/GIS work and claim to own everything you did that day while at work.

[short5]

You are a good photographer Theague, use your equipment, take pride in your work and be glad you got to go take pictures and practice with your equipment on their time. I don't know the legalities but I would insist on the retaining copyrights and give them editorial use rights. They may use them all over their stuff but that is good. you can always tell a perspective client they can see your work on the website, a pretty impressive reference if you ask me.

[Julio]

You are on staff. You do what your boss tells you to do. If you take the photos in work time, you get paid your normal salary and therefore all images are owned by your employer. You cannot be a contractor and an employee at the same time.

So the way I see it, you use their equipment and if they are not happy with the results you suggest that you could do a better job with your own equipment. At this point you may be able to negotiate a deal for you to use your own equipment.

But in any case your employer will still own the copyright for the images while you are being paid your usual salary, just like you cannot finish a normal day's IT/GIS work and claim to own everything you did that day while at work.


Exactly!!! And...

My dad used to say if a job was worth doing it was worth doing right. It is up to you to decide if the job is worth doing.

[LBaldwin]

I think what is truly sad is that the managers think that any image is OK as long as they don't have to pay for it. Regardless of the gear you use the employer owns the images as long as they are paying you while you shoot. BTW even if you are on your own time they may still own the images due to your access and the general WFH in most hire packets.

The erosion of the professional's rep continues....

Les

[nwa2]

I work for a water utility in the UK and we take a professional (and commercial) interest in the way that the business is portraid on our web site. Images are sourced from many places including on line galleries, a photographer on a retainer and staff.

I sit next to the communications team who do all this, they encourage staff to get their cameras out and take photographs and if good enough will use them on the "Intranet"; Internet or company news magazine and annual accounts etc..

As for getting paid, if staff take pictures on company time, they get their reward in their salary and also recognition around the business. But staff can also take pictures in their own time, in which case they can be paid for the work. The advantage staff have is that they have direct access to the picture buyer and also have an idea of the stories that are likely to come up. If staff can compete in terms of quality against a pro then their work could be used professionally.

I guess it comes down to company culture and how staff are valued!!!

[Becky N]

You are a good photographer Theague, use your equipment, take pride in your work and be glad you got to go take pictures and practice with your equipment on their time. I don't know the legalities but I would insist on the retaining copyrights and give them editorial use rights. They may use them all over their stuff but that is good. you can always tell a perspective client they can see your work on the website, a pretty impressive reference if you ask me.

Would have to agree.

Theague, any chance you could take a sample shot with both your equipment and the business equipment and show them side by side. You might be able to negotiate something, if they open their eyes and can see the kind of images that can be produced with the right equipment.

[gjl711]

I think what is truly sad is that the managers think that any image is OK as long as they don't have to pay for it. .. I think that this attitude happens many times because it has nothing to do with the day to day job, but someone from above has mandated that it happen. It is prevalent all throughout government agencies and large companies alike and I, as most here are probably guilty of it at some level. For me the best example is time sheets. We have to fill them out and I am sure that someone somewhere pats attention to them, but they do not affect my pay, nor the work I do. It is just a corporate bean someone can push around. I do not take them seriously so I am constantly late and I just make stuff up. Basically, it's good enough to keep my boss from complaining, but thats about it.

[Sp00ks]

I personally think this comes down to work ethic. Do you want to do the best job you can or just slap a crappy image up on the page? It's as simple as that. Your on company time so the images, web page, etc. belong to the company. Leave some info in the exif data if you want credit.

The training department asks me to come over and shoot some product shots. This guy uses my shots, never asks permission, he probably never thought about it. But it gets me out of the day to day regular stuff and I get to get out of the office for awhile and it's cool to see my shots in manuals and product info. I know they are my shots and I can say "I shot those" if I feel like it.

[chakalakasp]

I personally think this comes down to work ethic. Do you want to do the best job you can or just slap a crappy image up on the page? It's as simple as that. Your on company time so the images, web page, etc. belong to the company. Leave some info in the exif data if you want credit.

The training department asks me to come over and shoot some product shots. This guy uses my shots, never asks permission, he probably never thought about it. But it gets me out of the day to day regular stuff and I get to get out of the office for awhile and it's cool to see my shots in manuals and product info. I know they are my shots and I can say "I shot those" if I feel like it.

What kind of company do you work for? If you are not a staff photographer and your shots are appearing in manuals and you work for even a medium sized company, you are giving away thousands of dollars worth of work. You're basically taking money out of the mouth of real photographers; it's this sort of thing that is killing the industry right now. At the very least, you should ask for a raise if you're going to start doing your regular job *and* work-for-hire product photography.

[PhotosGuy]

Option 2. I use my equipment. I may get credit in some way on the website for the photos and I obviously retain the rights to the photos. I doubt they would be willing to compensate me for them at all. I might not even get credit at all. Can you put a small (C) 2007... at the bottom of the images? If so, ...
1/ I'd take them on my own time & ask for token payment.
2/ It would be a precedent.
3/ If anyone else wanted to use them...

[freaking102]

An employee in a professional position is usually expected to do whatever the job calls for. An employee in an hourly-lnonprofessional position can sit on their hands and refuse to do something outside of their job description. A point and shoot in creative, skilled hands should be sufficient to take shots good enough for small website pics. Assuming you are in a "professional" position, I suggest you grab the "company" camera or your own camera (whichever you prefer) and show your coworkers you are creative. If you impress them, then maybe you can add "photographer" to your current job responsibilities.

[Sp00ks]

What kind of company do you work for? If you are not a staff photographer and your shots are appearing in manuals and you work for even a medium sized company, you are giving away thousands of dollars worth of work. You're basically taking money out of the mouth of real photographers; it's this sort of thing that is killing the industry right now. At the very least, you should ask for a raise if you're going to start doing your regular job *and* work-for-hire product photography.

I am single handedly responsible for photographers starving childeren and the squalor they must endure.

C'mon, so I have a few shots in a couple training manuals. It's use my shots or some P&S used by the training staff because they are trying to make our training classes better.

I have no problems with the salary I make as it is. It is not often you hear an American employee say that in this day and time. My company is enormous. Something like the worlds 3rd largest company. They employ thier own photography staff but they concentrate on things that effect share holders and stock price not some little hand bound training manual.

Thanks for trying to make me feel guilty about doing a good job for my company, you don't work for the union do you? geez.

This isn't the wedding forum is it?

[gjl711]

.. you are giving away thousands of dollars worth of work. You're basically taking money out of the mouth of real photographers; it's this sort of thing that is killing the industry right now. A.... So, what you saying is that I can never take an aspirin because it deprives doctors of income. Never go to a home improvement store because it deprives tradesmen of income. Never fill my own car because it deprives gas station attendants of income, or never cook my own meal because it deprives cheffs of income. This logic only works if your willing to extend it to everyone.

[chakalakasp]

I am single handedly responsible for photographers starving childeren and the squalor they must endure.

C'mon, so I have a few shots in a couple training manuals. It's use my shots or some P&S used by the training staff because they are trying to make our training classes better.

I have no problems with the salary I make as it is. It is not often you hear an American employee say that in this day and time. My company is enormous. Something like the worlds 3rd largest company. They employ thier own photography staff but they concentrate on things that effect share holders and stock price not some little hand bound training manual.

Thanks for trying to make me feel guilty about doing a good job for my company, you don't work for the union do you? geez.

This isn't the wedding forum is it?

It's totally your right to do things for your company that are outside of your job, but you are, indeed, doing a service that would normally cost at least a hundred dollars per image, even for a training manual. You are saving your company money and devaluing the photography market by doing things for free, but I understand that job security is a benefit, too. :)

[chakalakasp]

So, what you saying is that I can never take an aspirin because it deprives doctors of income. Never go to a home improvement store because it deprives tradesmen of income. Never fill my own car because it deprives gas station attendants of income, or never cook my own meal because it deprives cheffs of income. This logic only works if your willing to extend it to everyone.

You really equate photography to pumping gasoline? Do gasoline pumpers need years of experience and thousands of dollars personally invested in equipment to do their job?

Aside from that, the poster wasn't suggesting that he was taking photos for himself. He was taking them for his company. A more accurate analogy would be if you worked at a gas station as a pumper and the boss asked you to shoot his daughter's birthday party on the clock.

[theague]

I think, after reading everyone's comments, that for me it boils down to wanting to retain the rights to the photographs. I would prefer to use my own gear and I would prefer to provide the best possible images. I'm guessing that legally I would have to be willing to take the photographs outside of work ours and not be on the clock when I'm doing it?
Photography is not my paid job, not even close. I'm not a supervisor or salaried employee. I work for the government and I am in a union which technically means I do not have to nor should I be out taking photographs for Public Works to be using. However, if I choose not to do it, the same person that did it last time will do it with very similar results... =/

[gjl711]

You really equate photography to pumping gasoline? Do gasoline pumpers need years of experience and thousands of dollars personally invested in equipment to do their job? ... But thats not my point. Anything you do yourself potentially takes away a revenue generating opportunity for someone. Photography is not something so sacrosanct that only the privileged professional few should be allowed to do it. Anyone who can hold a camera and press a button can do it and most such as Theague's co-worker do not get professional results. But if some non-professionals can do it well enough so to rival the work of a professional why should they not be allowed to to?

... and I am in a union which technically means I do not have to nor should I be out taking photographs for Public Works to be using. .... =/ Hmmm. You might want to check into this one a bit more as unions can get real nasty if you do work that is outside of the union defined job. Maybe unions have become more flexible over the years, but a long time ago I worked in a plant and was union. I got myself in all kinds of trouble because I tightened a bolt. I was not suppose to do that, the maintenance guys were. I told them that the bolt came loose several times a day and a few turns of the wrench was all it needed. They wrote me up anyway. I'm sure somewhere it says on "My Permanent Record" that I am a bolt tightener.

[LBaldwin]

gjl777,

Don't go so whole hog one way. Actually I don't think that most companies will hire a photographer for an internal document. But in this case it is for public viewing so putting your best foot forward should rule the day. BTW do you do your own dentistry?

Sure I go to the hardware store, but for parts to do a room addition, I leave that to the pros. Doing a minor few shots is one thing but fresh well done photos for public viewing or use should be done by a working pro. As a matter of fact i would bet that the gov't
section he works for probably requires that they take it out to bid. Most state and fed gov't orgs have such rules to prevent small and meduim businesses from losing potential contracts. Our country is about doing business, our gov't should not be competeing against our tax payers.

Les

[theague]

There are no photographers employed by the City of Tacoma. I do know they have hired some in the past for assignment but never in the case of anything being used on govME. I'm not too worried about Union backlash as there are far worse cross-union things going on above and beyond me taking a few photographs.

[theague]

As a matter of fact i would bet that the gov't
section he works for probably requires that they take it out to bid. Most state and fed gov't orgs have such rules to prevent small and meduim businesses from losing potential contracts. Our country is about doing business, our gov't should be competeing against our tax payers.
Les

The Public Works division is only required to take things to bid that are above $15,000 in an informal bid process. $50,000 and above requires a formal bid process. Anything under $5,000 can be done with a procurement card.

My boss does not understand, nor will he inquire about the legality or appropriate way to use photographs on the website. If I chose not to do the work he would get it done for free in some other way. Putting the best foot forward should rule the day but unfortnately in this case it will not. :(

[LBaldwin]

[quote=gjl711;2767593]But thats not my point. Anything you do yourself potentially takes away a revenue generating opportunity for someone. Photography is not something so sacrosanct that only the privileged professional few should be allowed to do it. Anyone who can hold a camera and press a button can do it and most such as Theague's co-worker do not get professional results. But if some non-professionals can do it well enough so to rival the work of a professional why should they not be allowed to to?
edited
quote]

That is an outright insult. You have a made a wide and sweeping generalization that basically denigrates the last 30+ years of study, on my own and with top professionals from many walks of life. I am not now nor have I ever been a hack, button pusher or camera holder.

I have studied my craft, bought my own gear and worked my ass off to get the meager success I have have garnered. I get paid very well for my work, and am still not satisfied. I have to my credit magazine covers, newpapers front pages and several awards from both editors and other photographers groups.

So you may be a button pusher, but until you learn some respect for others work and their capabilities you will remain exactly that. Yes their is some top notch work being done by amatuers on this very web site but that does not mean that they can be a pro. The two don't always equate.

Les

[theague]

So Baldwin, what would you do given my situation? Would you refuse to take the images and allow a less talented co-worker provide shots as are now featured on the website? Or would you step up and shoot them yourself with your gear and try to keep the rights?

[chakalakasp]

So Baldwin, what would you do given my situation? Would you refuse to take the images and allow a less talented co-worker provide shots as are now featured on the website? Or would you step up and shoot them yourself with your gear and try to keep the rights?

I guess the question is: what do YOU wish to get from this? What do you stand to gain from taking the pictures for them? A promotion? Job security? Kudos? It's clear what the city of Tacoma stands to gain: money. They aren't willing to spend any money to get good photographs of their great city, which would theoretically drive more commerce into the area. Normally, this would mean that they won't get good photographs of their great city, but you're considering stepping up to the plate. But what are you getting from it? They aren't paying you anything extra. They're going to use your photos for free in a commercial setting, possibly diluting any value they might have had to other prospective clients. If all you want is some great pictures of Tacoma for your portfolio, what's preventing you from going out each night and shooting them for yourself and then saving them for a client that isn't such a tightwad?

If, in the end, you feel that you are getting enough out of the deal to make you happy, then shoot away. If you're just "doing them a favor", then screw them. Large municipal governments don't need favors from commercial photographers.

BTW, your boss's job is to aquire photography of the city for the city's website, but he doesn't know anything about licensing? Does he have pointy hair? ;)

[LBaldwin]

So Baldwin, what would you do given my situation? Would you refuse to take the images and allow a less talented co-worker provide shots as are now featured on the website? Or would you step up and shoot them yourself with your gear and try to keep the rights?

Keeping the rights will probably be impossible because you work for them.
They would most likely own the images anyway. I have no heartburn with that issue as long as you get paid to do the work. Just like an inhouse newsphotographer, they get paid to create images but do not get to sell them.

Here is what I would do, Tell your boss that you would be happy to create some wonderful images for the website and that you are going to use your own gear. But that you want to do it, outside your normal work hours so that you get OT for it. Now you also want to get the byline credit for it something like this "Photography by Theague/City of Tacoma" So that others see that it is your work. Also you want to get written permission to use those same images for your own portfolio. Since you have no established business you can;t really charge for them, but getting credit and using a contract that stipulates the above will get you started in learning how a pro works on the business side.

Since you are an employee they own your butt:oops: and can do darn near anything they want, but see what you can get for your efforts.

Good luck,

Les

[theague]

I actually have a business license and could easily add photography to that license. I technically have an established business that has been in operation for 4+ years. This might not be relevant though as I know nothing about the business side of photography. lol

I wouldn't dare take the photos during regular business hours because I don't care for the available lighting during regular business hours. I do intend on scouting the locations during business hours though on a number of different occasions so that I can determine the best time of day for lighting.

I think your suggestion is the most fair so far. Thanks for the input.

[nwa2]

What kind of company do you work for? If you are not a staff photographer and your shots are appearing in manuals and you work for even a medium sized company, you are giving away thousands of dollars worth of work. You're basically taking money out of the mouth of real photographers; it's this sort of thing that is killing the industry right now. At the very least, you should ask for a raise if you're going to start doing your regular job *and* work-for-hire product photography.

I have similarly been involved in wrighting manuals for industrial plant and I have asked colleagues to take pics with the office P&S to include in the manual. This costs next to nothing and adds a huge value to the product. If I were to engage a pro, the job would take longer (adding to the cost) and I would also have to pay the pro. The competitive environment in photography is changing with new technology, pro's need to stop complaining and change with it or find a new career.

[LBaldwin]

I have similarly been involved in wrighting manuals for industrial plant and I have asked colleagues to take pics with the office P&S to include in the manual. This costs next to nothing and adds a huge value to the product. If I were to engage a pro, the job would take longer (adding to the cost) and I would also have to pay the pro. The competitive environment in photography is changing with new technology, pro's need to stop complaining and change with it or find a new career.

I agree wholeheartedly. But please keep this post in mind when you are RIF'ed, or your position is outsourced, or your company steals all of it's employees retriement funds and goes to timbuktoo.

Yes the environment is changing and some will say for the better. I am not one of them. Images are free, cameras are expensive, and to top it off the resepct we once garnered has been eroded from without and from within.

I depend on my ability to create images for a large part of my income. I cannot compete to someone who gives them away for free. So if it gets too bad I will come to your town seek asylum and tell them that I can do your job cheaper faster and better and see if they swallow the bait, and hire me. Regardless of the country, companies are greedy... I may be first, but you could be next.

Les

[Sp00ks]

It's totally your right to do things for your company that are outside of your job, but you are, indeed, doing a service that would normally cost at least a hundred dollars per image, even for a training manual. You are saving your company money and devaluing the photography market by doing things for free, but I understand that job security is a benefit, too. :)

I understand your point exactly. My point is that the company is not going to pay for a professional photographer to shoot the images for a training manual. They just won't do it. So the choices are some crappy photos or I give them a few half way decent shots. They are in fact creating a training manual to train my technical team. I want them to be able to see what the documentation is depicting.

So what would you do? Use the company equipment and revoke any rights to the images? Risk producing sub-par images with it? Get no credit or compensation? OR Use your equipment and try to get something out of it? I could also just get TOLD to go take the photos... lol

This was the original question. These are his choices and this is what I was responding to. He never stated that hiring a pro was even an option, right? I did not tell him "screw a pro, you can do it yourself".

I am highly respectful of the business. I know what it must take to make it as a pro.

I agree wholeheartedly. But please keep this post in mind when you are RIF'ed, or your position is outsourced, or your company steals all of it's employees retriement funds and goes to timbuktoo.

Yes the environment is changing and some will say for the better. I am not one of them. Images are free, cameras are expensive, and to top it off the resepct we once garnered has been eroded from without and from within.

I depend on my ability to create images for a large part of my income. I cannot compete to someone who gives them away for free. So if it gets too bad I will come to your town seek asylum and tell them that I can do your job cheaper faster and better and see if they swallow the bait, and hire me. Regardless of the country, companies are greedy... I may be first, but you could be next.

I totally agree with what you are saying. In fact I have been there. I have had to change careers due to what you have outlined. (I worked for Worldcom.....)
I have been asked to do pro work by my boss. and I turned it down stating "I am not a pro photographer" and also added "do I get to quit my day job" and his tune immediately changed. One thing you Pro's need to also realize is that all of us "armatures" with shiny new camera's that are half way decent at "pictar taken" are not out to get your job or take food from the mouth of babes.

[LBaldwin]

I am not sorry you got RIF'd from worldcom it was a sinking ship any way, but do feel for having been through it, me too more than once. Actually lots of armatures (hehe) are out to do pro gigs and supplement their income. Here is Sillycon vally we have boat loads of engineer types who create technically perfect image, just like what they saw on a calandar. They have a great ability to copy great images. Very few can create something all their own and it is getting tougher all the time. I had just bid on a simple 5 person real estate portait gig. They liked my creativity, loved proposed stying and
wanted me to give them what amounts to a 50% discount to get the gig. It seems they contacted a friend at a local large University (tenured faculty) and they quoted a price far below my CODB. Mind you this person teaches photography to students (fine art I think) and she basicly undercut me be several hundred dollars. She does not shoot professionally (commercially) does not have a busienss license, no insurance, no overhead etc. She will use the schools gear, studio space and collect a meager amount for the job. They RE gang? They are celebrating their 2nd $5mil quarter in sales....

BTW my bid was under $1000 for about 5 hours of shooting and PP time.

Les

[Sp00ks]

Ok, some amatures (darn spell check got me, lol) are out to get your job. Agreed. You can have it, I don't want it. It's a tough business. It happens everyday in all businesses. I don't think that is the intent in this thread though.

Worldcom was a blessing in disguise for me, career wise. I feel sorry for the employees, many people lost nearly everything they had. Upper management got off easy. I hear Verizon Business is trying to do things right.

[LBaldwin]

I wished i lived nearer Raleigh. CA is not the friendliest place sometimes. Send me some BBQ will ya? Need some collard greens too. Just to keep on topic I am cooking up a southern photoshoot...

Les

[theague]

Seems my problem has solved itself. I just had an email forwarded to me. Apparently another department is sending out "our contract photographer pro later this week to get some photographs of various engineers on-the-job, and get some around-the-town scenics as well."
My boss is possibly going to piggy back onto this. I really want to be in the meeting with this guy to ask him questions and see what the city pays for it. Also if he releases the rights etc... lol

Thanks for all the input everyone. It will help in the future I'm sure.