Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Marc / Mary;
this is one subject that _really_ gets my grapes in a bunch,
if you get my drift.
maybe i'm naive, but my take is that an editor wouldn't DREAM
of publishing "copy" without the author's byline. yet, photos
are published without same on a routine basis regardless
of any warning to the contrary, byline requirements, copyright
info etc., etc., ad nauseum.
(also, i have heard it rumored that you don't get bylines, even
if there may be pay involved, in a union newspaper because of
union regulations. can anyone comment on this ?)
i suppose i fall into the serious ameture category as shooting
is not my primary form of income. the first few times
this happened, i was glad to be published, i inserted a
tear-sheet into my portfolio & called it a day. 25-30 years
later the novelty has worn off. what's the difference 100 years
from now ? the difference is that editors will STILL be treating
photographers as invisible. setting an example wouldn't bother
me a bit. where might i send contributions to the cause ?
sincerely
jerry (trying to get my grapes unbunched) haussler
www.zephyrblau.com
p.s. i wonder how Jim Marshall handles this type of thing ?
>I discovered on Thursday evening last that a local up-market
>newspaper had published a picture of mine -- attributed, mind you, to
>one "Mary" Small -- in an article of a local jazz drummer. This
>fellow has admitted giving the magazine the picture but his comment
>was, "so what"? (He is a REAL straight-shooter, no drugs, no
>alcohol, Thinks Good Thoughts and kayaks down the South Slope of
>Mount Everest, plus he has a couple of doctrates in optical science.)