Why Dog-Show Clubs Should Not Sign Exclusive Contracts with Dog Show Photographers.

(Gondolin Photography) — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:30:24 GMT

The reason is very simple. There is NO up-side for the Club. And you expose the Club to legal issues.

Dog Clubs generally claim all the rights to photography at a show. It's important to recognize this is only a claim. The strength of the claim varies depending on the venue. If the show is a public event on public property, like a county park, that claim is very weak. If the show is held on private property, the claim is stronger, but only when the club enforces it by asking the property owner to eject the unwelcome photographer. On the other side, the Photographer has a very strong claim on any images they create. That claim is supported by copyright laws. Then there's the whole middle ground of a photographer using someone's image or likeness to generate revenue, and so on. Books have been written on this stuff. Suffice it to say, it can get messy and lawyers can get involved if someone gets cranky enough.

Dog Show Photographers will occasionally ask for an exclusive contract to photograph a show. The only purpose is to protect their revenue. They have expenses and their time is valuable, so they need to be confident they will generate enough income to cover those things. Fair enough.

But Dog-Show Clubs should be very careful what they offer. Granting an overly generous exclusive right to the photographer for all kinds of photography can lead to a lot of undesirable consequences.

Let's look at some kinds of Photography that can occur at a Dog Show:

Judge and Ribbon Win shots. Everyone knows what these are. They are formal pictures and are the bread and butter of dog show photographers. This is where they make most of their money.
Candids. Walk around shots: people chatting, dogs getting ready, kids playing, etc. Everyone at the show takes these. Dog Show Photographers who take these hope they can sell a few more pictures here, but these pictures have to have emotional impact to be attractive to buyers.
Portraits. Something more than candids. These tend to be posed, but are not judge shots. Usually buyers ask photographers for these.
In-the-ring or in-the-field action shots. My personal favorites. The dog is competing. Every shot is unique. Almost everyone is taking these kinds of pictures, using cell-phone cameras all the way up to pro digital SLRs. And they post them everywhere: Facebook, Flickr, and so on. As with candids, only well composed shots that appeal emotionally to the owner tend to sell.

When a club wants to engage a Show Photographer, they should offer the following:

Exclusive on Judge and Ribbon shots.
Official show status, which generally allows the photographer in the ring.
Publication in the show catalog and club website, with contact information for customers.

A club might offer some extra goodies to entice the photographer:

A follow-up email to show participants to help promote the photographer's work.
Compensated Hotel Rooms to help cover photographer expenses.
A guaranteed daily fee, again to cover expenses and to help ensure the photographer does not operate at a loss.

These last three items are optional, and are examples of how a club can construct a deal with a photographer to help make sure the photographer has a successful business experience.

But that's where it should stop. Clubs should not offer an exclusive on the other types of photography. It will just lead to pain. As I said earlier, there is no up-side for the club, enforcement becomes difficult, and lawyers can get involved. Clubs should just avoid the problem; Don't grant exclusive rights beyond Judge and Ribbon Shots. Only promise things that are very specific and easy to deliver.

Imagine a photographer with an exclusive contract covering all four of the types of photography I listed earlier. Now imagine that photographer demanding that someone attending the show - a club member or show participant - stop taking pictures. Or an enthusiast who is taking a lot of pictures at ringside (like me). Or a friend taking a nice formal picture of a dog they bred which happens to live on the opposite coast. Oh, you say, they wouldn't do that. Well, you're right, many times they won't, but some have done exactly that in the past, and some will do exactly that in the future. After all, the club has granted them that right through an exclusive contract. And if your club doesn't enforce the contract, you and your club can get sued. Heck, you might even get sued by someone who claims they have a right to take pictures of their dog but are getting harassed by the photographer. Or someone takes pictures and posts them later on Facebook and Flickr. Imagine the photographer sees this and gets angry. And sues. No matter what, you've got some unhappy attendees, an unhappy photographer, unwanted drama, and so on. It's a mess and it is totally avoidable.

Show Committees can avoid this disaster by refusing to grant an exclusive on photography types 2-4. Don't budge on this, even if the photographer pushes it. If you really want that photographer, find another way to guarantee their revenue, but make it easy on the club and lower your risk. You may still have to enforce the exclusive on the Judge and Ribbon Shots, and don't think this won't be work all by itself: Consider that there are people who come up and stand right behind the Show Photographer after he sets up the Judge and Ribbon shot and takes the exact same shot right behind his back. This really ticks them off, but it only takes a little work by the Club to enforce the exclusive contract here. If you enforce this, you will get a lot of respect from the Show Photographers.

For the other types of photography, encourage the Show Photographer to take pictures and offer them to the attendees via web sales. If the Show Photographer takes nice candids, portraits, and in-the-ring shots, they will sell. In my experience, such pictures are all unique and Show Photographers don't need an exclusive here. There is little or no revenue to protect: Customers will buy the picture if it speaks to them, irrespective of who took it.

The other reason a club should not grant an exclusive for all types of photography at the show is that sometimes the Photographer is unable to perform. It happens. It's usually one person. Life throws them curves. We all understand this. By signing an exclusive, a club has increased the risk that no memories of the show will be available to attendees.

Random thoughts:

The club can ask the Show Photographer for a digital copy of all Judge and Ribbon win shots for club archives.
There is a 50/50 chance the photographer will be out of business in 3 years. If they are creating a record of your show, find a way to preserve a copy for the club. Twenty years later, future members will be thrilled.
The club might explore term-based exclusive rights with the photographer. For example, exclusive rights to sell pictures for 6 months. I recommend avoiding this, though, since the club will still be put into the position of enforcement for all the reasons listed above.
A club might ask anyone photographing the show to pay a nominal fee for that privilege. The revenue from this fee might be used to guarantee the revenue of the Official Show Photographers. Or the Club might keep it to pay show expenses. As an example, Seattle Kennel Club does this. The fee is $100. But they also charge admission for attendees (it's a very expensive show), and they can put terms and conditions on anyone who is on the show grounds. Again, I don't recommend this as it puts the club in the position of enforcement; In my opinion, it's just not worth the hassle.

Why I Photograph Dogs, And Flat-Coats in Particular.

(Gondolin Photography) — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 23:55:57 GMT

Flat-Coats are my breed. It's what we own and show, and so I have a very personal interest in the breed in general.

Photography is my art. It's not my day job. While I happen to sell pictures, that's not my primary motivation. I get a great deal of satisfaction when I take a really nice action shot of a Flat-Coat, either in the show ring or in the field. Getting a great shot of a black dog can be hard, and so getting the shot is emotionally rewarding. And doubly so when I can share it with the person who owns the dog.

The same is true for Goldens, but perhaps to a lesser extent.

When I started photographing Flat-Coat Nationals in 1999, I originally gave away my pictures. That was with film and making prints, and it got kind of expensive especially when I started taking a LOT of pictures the following year. In 2001 I bought a very expensive digital camera, the Canon D30. I started charging for digital pictures and enlargements to pay for my expenses and my gear. I also tried my hand at being an official show Photographer a couple of times, and while I managed to meet my obligations, I decided that was too much like real work. In 2007, I finally got in over my head when I photographed the Golden National and I couldn't meet my objectives with my available time. That experience got me to focus on why I was taking pictures in the first place and to get back to basics, which was to feed my art and to share the occasional great image with fellow dog owners.

It's funny. I think I would have had less trouble if I had just continued to give away my pictures. Selling sets up expectations from people who want results immediately, who assume I do photography full-time, or that I am acting under some official cover when in fact I often have none. Inevitably, some people are not satisfied. Yes, every business has cranky customers, I know. But those negative experiences take a lot of the fun away. And sometimes opportunities are blocked.

Being a Dog Show Photographer is hard, and I have great respect for those that do it well.

A New Website

(Gondolin Photography) — Mon, 28 May 2012 18:43:10 GMT

After some research, I have decided to give Zenfolio a try. Obviously I have a lot of pictures, and I really get bogged down with the order fulfillment stuff. Zenfolio takes care of all of that, and that lets me stay focused on taking pictures, which I enjoy. The only downside is the upload time, which is fairly lengthy for full resolution images.

Most pictures are posted as-is from the camera. If there is a specific picture you think would benefit from some work in Photoshop (e.g. too washed out or too dark), let me know. I can edit specific images and repost fairly easily. As an example of improvements, look at the "MyPicks" folder in the "Portraits" area. That should give you an idea of what an image can become with a little work.

This website is not free. There are hosting fees. The gear I use is not cheap. Each product you can buy has a base cost, and the vendors all take their cut. Even so, I have tried to keep costs moderately low.

I hope you enjoy the pictures.

Posted:

1999 FCRSA
2011 FCRSA (in progress)

Gondolin Photography: Blog

Why Dog-Show Clubs Should Not Sign Exclusive Contracts with Dog Show Photographers.

Why I Photograph Dogs, And Flat-Coats in Particular.

A New Website