LN to photogs... suck it .

srmtr
Posts
77
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Oceanside, CA, USA
5/7/2008 1:19pm
eddie wrote:
from mathees ... There were threats of boycotts, elbows thrown, breathes held and general unruliness in the ranks. I thought there was going to be a...
from mathees ...


There were threats of boycotts, elbows thrown, breathes held and general unruliness in the ranks. I thought there was going to be a scene right out of the “Beat It” video with the two gangs breakdance fighting. Am I talking about Reed and KW? Or J-Law and the local church? Nope, I’m talking about the photographers and Live Nation. Every week there is a track map given out with the places the guys can stand on the track shaded in green and the dangerous places colored red. In Vegas, the whole map was red for some reason—they weren’t allowed anywhere around the track, just in the endzone in front of the podium—and the guys were not happy, wondering how you people and sponsors of the races were going to get images of the race and I think they had a right to be upset. At the risk of being called an ass-kisser, Davey Coombs stepped in and brokered a peace deal and one lane was opened up down the infield for all the shooters. We almost had a war people!

Yeah.

Another one of those camera jockeys making waves.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 1:20pm
Sheesh...I surrender.
VintageFast
Posts
38
Joined
8/23/2006
Location
Arlington, TX, USA
5/7/2008 1:27pm
Didn't RV take out a track worker when TC railed him into the scaffolding?

Coulda been a camera guy just as easily.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 2:41pm
Didn't RV take out a track worker when TC railed him into the scaffolding?

Coulda been a camera guy just as easily.
Yeah, that guy was moving to replace a tuff block. Normally that's an area that no one would be in during the race.

I talked to him last weekend in Vegas. He said the tuff block hit him first, and that the bike went over the top. He didn't get tweaked at all.

The Shop

srmtr
Posts
77
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Oceanside, CA, USA
5/7/2008 3:06pm
In one of the recent broadcasts, maybe Seattle, I don't remember for sure, I laughed because they are so strict on the photographers and where they can be, then in one of the races the 30 sec. board was up and suddenly a TV cameraman and his helper go running across the start straight. They are much more safety conscious than the photographers.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 3:19pm
Well, how else are video guys going to get up-the-skirt shots of the Monster 30-second girls, if they're not out there in the middle of the start straight? Smile
Digger437
Posts
1394
Joined
9/4/2006
Location
Wisconsin Rapids, WI, USA
5/7/2008 3:21pm
Even if those guys got run over on the start as long as they get the money shot!
Matt Wozney
Posts
2803
Joined
8/26/2006
Location
Clayton, DE, USA
5/7/2008 3:45pm
Pansies. Real men stand in the middle of an arenacross track with their eye glued to the viewfinder. Bogard once cleared my noggin by about 18...
Pansies. Real men stand in the middle of an arenacross track with their eye glued to the viewfinder.

Bogard once cleared my noggin by about 18 inches when I wasn't looking. True story.
I guess I'm a real man then....but I got hit though HAHA.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 5:06pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 6:53pm
Seattle

chadwik74
Posts
1257
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
CA
5/7/2008 5:11pm
More shit for the riders to hit?
todder
Posts
1608
Joined
10/20/2006
Location
Sw, WI, USA
5/7/2008 5:47pm
Problem solved.

GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 5:54pm
todder wrote:
Problem solved. [img]http://www.virtusphere.com/images/VS_2_transp.jpg[/img]
Problem solved.

I like it!
eddie
Posts
3020
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Bragg Creek, AB, CA
5/7/2008 6:37pm
todder wrote:
Problem solved. [img]http://www.virtusphere.com/images/VS_2_transp.jpg[/img]
Problem solved.

not big enough to fit their egos into .
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 7:16pm Edited Date/Time 5/7/2008 7:17pm
I have a big ego? I had no idea. Thanks for letting me know. Whistling
rocrac
Posts
2454
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
5/7/2008 7:27pm
GuyB wrote:
Seattle
Seattle

Jeeezus those shots never make the broadcasts. Who are they kidding?
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/7/2008 7:30pm
Private collection?
Devil1nNj
Posts
960
Joined
11/12/2006
Location
Hewitt, NJ, USA
5/7/2008 7:45pm
Thats been my screen saver since the first time I saw it!! HAHA
Those monster skirts turn a Red Bull can into a Monster can in no time.
oshow
Posts
4083
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
5/8/2008 5:57am
How do you know she's got a monster? Evil
5/8/2008 8:00am
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the track. They'd let anyone out there. I remember shooting the San Diego Supercross in 1984 and there were at least 150 people on the infield, just milling around. Then in the '90s, once TV came into the picture, they cleaned everyone out of the infield and they started limiting access for the photographers. It got so bad at Anaheim, one year, that they had all the photographers boxed in around the pitchers mound and that was the only place you could shoot. It sucked and everyone was pissed about it.

Every year the SX promoters say they're going to do something about it. They have meetings with the magazine publishers and photographers, trying to work out some kind of solution. Sometimes things changes and sometimes they don't. It goes back an forth.

Basically it comes down to two issues, IMO. 1. They don't want photographers getting in the way of the TV guys. And number 2, Insurance liability. But I think number 1 weighs in heavier than #2.

Vegas has always been a tough one for photo access. Since the stadium floor is so cramped, the risk for a photog-takeout is a lot higher and floor shooting has always been limited.

But this all nothing new. It'll get better and it will get worse. I shot four supercrosses this year and access wasn't all that bad, and it wasn't all that great either.

Thankfully the outdoors are here again, where access isn't ever a problem.

CH

BobbyM
Posts
21436
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
USA
5/8/2008 8:42am
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the...
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the track. They'd let anyone out there. I remember shooting the San Diego Supercross in 1984 and there were at least 150 people on the infield, just milling around. Then in the '90s, once TV came into the picture, they cleaned everyone out of the infield and they started limiting access for the photographers. It got so bad at Anaheim, one year, that they had all the photographers boxed in around the pitchers mound and that was the only place you could shoot. It sucked and everyone was pissed about it.

Every year the SX promoters say they're going to do something about it. They have meetings with the magazine publishers and photographers, trying to work out some kind of solution. Sometimes things changes and sometimes they don't. It goes back an forth.

Basically it comes down to two issues, IMO. 1. They don't want photographers getting in the way of the TV guys. And number 2, Insurance liability. But I think number 1 weighs in heavier than #2.

Vegas has always been a tough one for photo access. Since the stadium floor is so cramped, the risk for a photog-takeout is a lot higher and floor shooting has always been limited.

But this all nothing new. It'll get better and it will get worse. I shot four supercrosses this year and access wasn't all that bad, and it wasn't all that great either.

Thankfully the outdoors are here again, where access isn't ever a problem.

CH

yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor?

i always wondered about that.

could the rider sue if a pic had him looking like a goon or doing a big endo?

i'm serious. tfs said at one time that somebody owned them...not sure who he said it was though.
APLMAN
Posts
439
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
East Wenatchee, WA, USA
5/8/2008 8:46am
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the...
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the track. They'd let anyone out there. I remember shooting the San Diego Supercross in 1984 and there were at least 150 people on the infield, just milling around. Then in the '90s, once TV came into the picture, they cleaned everyone out of the infield and they started limiting access for the photographers. It got so bad at Anaheim, one year, that they had all the photographers boxed in around the pitchers mound and that was the only place you could shoot. It sucked and everyone was pissed about it.

Every year the SX promoters say they're going to do something about it. They have meetings with the magazine publishers and photographers, trying to work out some kind of solution. Sometimes things changes and sometimes they don't. It goes back an forth.

Basically it comes down to two issues, IMO. 1. They don't want photographers getting in the way of the TV guys. And number 2, Insurance liability. But I think number 1 weighs in heavier than #2.

Vegas has always been a tough one for photo access. Since the stadium floor is so cramped, the risk for a photog-takeout is a lot higher and floor shooting has always been limited.

But this all nothing new. It'll get better and it will get worse. I shot four supercrosses this year and access wasn't all that bad, and it wasn't all that great either.

Thankfully the outdoors are here again, where access isn't ever a problem.

CH

BobbyM wrote:
yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor? i always wondered about that. could the rider...
yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor?

i always wondered about that.

could the rider sue if a pic had him looking like a goon or doing a big endo?

i'm serious. tfs said at one time that somebody owned them...not sure who he said it was though.
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the races.

The promoter and/or sanctioning body should own the original rights and then "sell" the ability to use whatever they can capture to the photogs.
BobbyM
Posts
21436
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
USA
5/8/2008 8:52am
The only way not to have flaggers is go to a light system with flashing yellow lights at different points like at car races.
great idea wrench,
Magoo wanted to do that with wheelchair bound ex motocrossers . he said that would make them feel like they are part of the sport still and they could give back to it AND they would be good at it too. it would be a non profit organization that he headed up and it would almost pay for it self. whitecock and the other former mufucking assholes at the AMA said fuck you danny magoo.
5/8/2008 8:52am
The person who shot the photo always owns the copyright, unless they are in a "work for hire" situation. In that case, the employer owns the copyright.

The riders own the rights to their own "image." Meaning a company can't use their image in advertising unless there was an agreement in place.

Editorially, any photo can be used--even an embarassing photo--and the rider has no recourse since they are public figures.

Photographers can sell photos to companies that existing contracts with the riders. They can also sell to publications for editorial use without restrictions.

Photographer cannot sell photos of the riders to the general public. That would be commercial use and in violation of the riders rights to his image. Photographers could sell rider photos to the public if they have an agreement with the riders.

That's about it.

CH
5/8/2008 8:57am
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the...
This same battle has been going on for years and it goes in cycles. Back in the late '80s it was the wild west on the track. They'd let anyone out there. I remember shooting the San Diego Supercross in 1984 and there were at least 150 people on the infield, just milling around. Then in the '90s, once TV came into the picture, they cleaned everyone out of the infield and they started limiting access for the photographers. It got so bad at Anaheim, one year, that they had all the photographers boxed in around the pitchers mound and that was the only place you could shoot. It sucked and everyone was pissed about it.

Every year the SX promoters say they're going to do something about it. They have meetings with the magazine publishers and photographers, trying to work out some kind of solution. Sometimes things changes and sometimes they don't. It goes back an forth.

Basically it comes down to two issues, IMO. 1. They don't want photographers getting in the way of the TV guys. And number 2, Insurance liability. But I think number 1 weighs in heavier than #2.

Vegas has always been a tough one for photo access. Since the stadium floor is so cramped, the risk for a photog-takeout is a lot higher and floor shooting has always been limited.

But this all nothing new. It'll get better and it will get worse. I shot four supercrosses this year and access wasn't all that bad, and it wasn't all that great either.

Thankfully the outdoors are here again, where access isn't ever a problem.

CH

BobbyM wrote:
yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor? i always wondered about that. could the rider...
yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor?

i always wondered about that.

could the rider sue if a pic had him looking like a goon or doing a big endo?

i'm serious. tfs said at one time that somebody owned them...not sure who he said it was though.
APLMAN wrote:
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the...
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the races.

The promoter and/or sanctioning body should own the original rights and then "sell" the ability to use whatever they can capture to the photogs.
Actually that was an issue and I believe there is a clause in the AMA Pro license application process. I'm pretty sure the promoters can use the riders image to promote their races via posters and advertising.

But if they want to use the riders image on a t-shirt that they are going to sell at the track, I'm prett sure they have to work it out financially with the rider. That would be use for commercial gain.

CH
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL, USA
5/8/2008 9:01am
APLMAN wrote:
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the...
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the races.

The promoter and/or sanctioning body should own the original rights and then "sell" the ability to use whatever they can capture to the photogs.
I believe it does or did at one point.
I know a couple years ago quite a few riders were pissed about it.
I believe it is also how a company like Moto-Tees got to use rider images without compensation to that rider, but to my understanding that has since changed and riders on T's do get some compensation, not a lot, but some.
5/8/2008 9:08am
BobbyM wrote:
yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor? i always wondered about that. could the rider...
yea but who owns those images to sell? you, the rider, the agent, the public or the promotor?

i always wondered about that.

could the rider sue if a pic had him looking like a goon or doing a big endo?

i'm serious. tfs said at one time that somebody owned them...not sure who he said it was though.
APLMAN wrote:
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the...
I'd be surprised if the pro license application didn't have a clause that the promoter/sanctioning body has the rights to any and all images from the races.

The promoter and/or sanctioning body should own the original rights and then "sell" the ability to use whatever they can capture to the photogs.
Actually that was an issue and I believe there is a clause in the AMA Pro license application process. I'm pretty sure the promoters can use...
Actually that was an issue and I believe there is a clause in the AMA Pro license application process. I'm pretty sure the promoters can use the riders image to promote their races via posters and advertising.

But if they want to use the riders image on a t-shirt that they are going to sell at the track, I'm prett sure they have to work it out financially with the rider. That would be use for commercial gain.

CH
Just read your post again...my reading comprehension is a little low this morning.

Clear Channel did try to claim ownership rights of the photos shot at their events, but everyone just ignored it. If they ever tried to enforce it, no photographer in his right mind would ever shoot another supercross.

The AMA or promoters should not own the rights to what others shoot. This is such a small niche sport that they should welcome any and all press or photos that are published. If they tried to control where the photos go or who sells them, all that free press would dry up. That's not good for anybody.

CH

P.S. Guy-B, why are there no edit features on this board? Just asking.
Racetime
Posts
867
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
5/8/2008 9:09am
It wasn't just Vegas.

LN was in a pissy-ass mood all year and none of us could find the real reason. It's like the series just changed 100% for the bad since even the USO.

Go look at LN's stock price and go back a year. That is all you need to know. It plummeted big time in Dec and turned them into pissed-off freaks. They just hated everyone in 2008 and none of them ever seemed to enjoy doing races. It was only the money.

DC meddles endlessly, plays both sides of the fence.
KAWboy14
Posts
6502
Joined
12/31/2007
Location
Austin, TX, USA
5/8/2008 12:47pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 6:53pm
Racetime wrote:
It wasn't just Vegas. LN was in a pissy-ass mood all year and none of us could find the real reason. It's like the series just...
It wasn't just Vegas.

LN was in a pissy-ass mood all year and none of us could find the real reason. It's like the series just changed 100% for the bad since even the USO.

Go look at LN's stock price and go back a year. That is all you need to know. It plummeted big time in Dec and turned them into pissed-off freaks. They just hated everyone in 2008 and none of them ever seemed to enjoy doing races. It was only the money.

DC meddles endlessly, plays both sides of the fence.
no way money influences the guys who run sx at LN tfs......they run sx because they love the sport and grew it to what it is today out of love of the riders and the fans, thier bad attitude had to be because they werent gettin laid any more! Smile
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA, USA
5/8/2008 6:27pm
Chris, you should be able to edit your own posts.

Post a reply to: LN to photogs... suck it .

The Latest