What Happens When A Pulitzer Prize-Winning Photographer Is Asked For Free Photos

[ABX]

Have you ever wondered where newspapers get all those amazing photographs from? The ones that adorn their pages and make us take a second look? This is what happens when a photographer is asked for the use of his images for free.

Pulitzer prize winner David Carson – who is the photojournalist with the St Louis Post-Dispatch – was the person who won the award for his coverage of the protests in Ferguson, Missouri. Contacted via a CBS twitter account to request the usage of his images in exchange for credits, you can follow that tweet here and see how he responded to the request......

http://www.brightgram.com/what-happens-when-a-pulitzer-prize-winning-photographer-is-asked-for-free-photos/

[Wingnut]

Hmmm.  I see a douchebag.  And for once it is not the salaried employee working for the network with billions of dollars.

[ABX]

Hmmm.  I see a douchebag.  And for once it is not the salaried employee working for the network with billions of dollars.

I think he is just fed up. The major media companies constantly ask people for free use of photos. On top of that, the offer of 'exposure' is so over-used and insulting, it has become a joke in the photography world.

The old saying 'a picture is worth a thousand words' isn't actually accurate. It should be 'a picture is worth a thousand dollars'.

[Wingnut]

I think he is just fed up. The major media companies constantly ask people for free use of photos. On top of that, the offer of 'exposure' is so over-used and insulting, it has become a joke in the photography world.

The old saying 'a picture is worth a thousand words' isn't actually accurate. It should be 'a picture is worth a thousand dollars'.

Having sold my pictures to newspapers for no photo credit ( Just a note under the pic  saying "Staff Photo")  I kinda see your point.   But, you know they had the decency to contact him.   The douche reply was on him.

[Cripplecreek]

Anything I send to our local paper I only ask to be credited by name knowing full well that they can get free pics from somebody else. I don't think they even have staff photographers anymore. Its a 2 way street. If I sell the rights to my pics I lose the rights to them.

Seems that Mr Jameson wasn't kidding when he told Peter Parker to get the hell out of his office.

Our local paper printed these that I took.

[ABX]

Anything I send to our local paper I only ask to be credited by name knowing full well that they can get free pics from somebody else. I don't think they even have staff photographers anymore. Its a 2 way street. If I sell the rights to my pics I lose the rights to them.

Seems that Mr Jameson wasn't kidding when he told Peter Parker to get the hell out of his office.

Our local paper printed these that I took.

You can sell limited use licensing so you retain the copyright. It is actually pretty rare for a photographer to sell a copyright.

[Cripplecreek]

You can sell limited use licensing so you retain the copyright. It is actually pretty rare for a photographer to sell a copyright.

But most small papers won't pay for photos anyway and the NY Times couldn't care less about any small town flyover country parade. There is just so little leverage on the side of the photographer that most just want named credit to show their work to those who may pay.

A photographer at Michigan speedway told me he spent 20 years photographing cars and drivers for small tracks before Sports Illustrated started contracting him for big money.

However, I'll never not be angry at what liberalism has done to photography and the arts overall.

[Free Vulcan]

There's obviously only one conclusion possible when two liberals are duking it out.

Pop some popcorn.