digital Artform wrote:
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/crg/225143292.html

Oscars red carpet? Pretty cool gig for whoever gets it

You cant be serious!  This is a terrible deal.  You get nothing, they get the copyright and you take the job away from a shooter who would be paid a semi-livable wage otherwise.  I know this sounds like great exposure for amateurs, but its a sad reminder to profesionals about the bullshit that companies are trying to pull.  I think Wikepedia can come up with the $500 day rate for a professional photographer.  I hope they get what they pay for; which is nothing.

digital Artform wrote:
Are you high right now?

That's for wikipedia. I'm all for it.

how will you feel six months from now when wiki gets sold to google for megabucks

digital Artform wrote:
Are you high right now?

That's for wikipedia. I'm all for it.

Lets put this in perspective.  Lets pretend that we are plumbers and not photographers.  Lets say you are a professional plumber.  You have $30,000 worth of plumbing tools.  You have several thousands of dollars worth of plumbing overhead to meet each month.  You have taxes to pay, a mortgage, a family to feed, and a retirement that you need to be saving for.  The "shitter" at Wickepdeia seems to be broken.  So they post on Craigslist that they are offering the opportunity for some lucky professional plumber to drive to their office and spend several hours of their time digging around in their toilet trying to dislodge the mega-turd that some Wickepedia exec grumped the night before.  Boy, fishing around in the toilet while you lose money sounds like a great bit of experience to me.  Actually, a plumber would probably laugh his ass off and post it on a plumber forum for everyone to ridicule.  But because people dont understand that photography is a business, and as a business it must make money otherwise the business and the owner of the business will go bankrupt, then we get people actually promoting rip-offs like they are a good thing.  Next time the studio toilet gets clogged try calling around to plumbers and offering them the opportunity to fix the toilet of a superstar photographer and see how they react.  Im pretty shure they wont be jumping at the opportunity.

johnkphotography wrote:

Lets put this in perspective.  Lets pretend that we are plumbers and not photographers.  Lets say you are a professional plumber.  You have $30,000 worth of plumbing tools.  You have several thousands of dollars worth of plumbing overhead to meet each month.  You have taxes to pay, a mortgage, a family to feed, and a retirement that you need to be saving for.  The "shitter" at Wickepdeia seems to be broken.  So they post on Craigslist that they are offering the opportunity for some lucky professional plumber to drive to their office and spend several hours of their time digging around in their toilet trying to dislodge the mega-turd that some Wickepedia exec grumped the night before.  Boy, fishing around in the toilet while you lose money sounds like a great bit of experience to me.  Actually, a plumber would probably laugh his ass off and post it on a plumber forum for everyone to ridicule.  But because people dont understand that photography is a business, and as a business it must make money otherwise the business and the owner of the business will go bankrupt, then we get people actually promoting rip-offs like they are a good thing.  Next time the studio toilet gets clogged try calling around to plumbers and offering them the opportunity to fix the toilet of a superstar photographer and see how they react.  Im pretty shure they wont be jumping at the opportunity.

I just spit my coffee all over my desk...lol

As color as that was..it was dead on and a very good explanation of why this is a bad deal.  I can't believe a company with that much money would stoop so low.  What happens if they get a guy with a "decent" camera that can't shoot worth a shit.  They don't lose money..but they sure as hell wont be able to profit from the event.  Dumb move.

Steven Eldridge wrote:
I just spit my coffee all over my desk...lol

I hope you got some in your keyboard. Wikipedia is trying to do good in the world.

digital Artform wrote:
Yes, but to finish your analogy about the shitter being broken at wikipedia you have to add the key ingredient:

Wikipedia would be a school offering free educations to children in Africa.

Wickipedia offers free educations to children in Africa?  Are they educating them with the info on Wickepedia?  I hope not, that could be a disaster.  The plumber would still want  to be compensated, as would the photographer.  The United way pays for their photography, as does the salvation Army and inumerable other charities and non-profits alike.  Im not even sure that Wickepedia is a non-profit and Im relatively certain that they arent a charity.  So if cahrities pay, why should wickepedia get it for free.  Do you think their domain is free?  Or their webhosting? or their servers? of their employees? or their rent? or their utilities?  They pay for everything else just like the rest of us.  They need to pay for their photography services as well.

johnkphotography wrote:
Lets put this in perspective.  Lets pretend that we are plumbers and not photographers.  Lets say you are a professional plumber.  You have $30,000 worth of plumbing tools.  You have several thousands of dollars worth of plumbing overhead to meet each month.  You have taxes to pay, a mortgage, a family to feed, and a retirement that you need to be saving for.  The "shitter" at Wickepdeia seems to be broken.  So they post on Craigslist that they are offering the opportunity for some lucky professional plumber to drive to their office and spend several hours of their time digging around in their toilet trying to dislodge the mega-turd that some Wickepedia exec grumped the night before.  Boy, fishing around in the toilet while you lose money sounds like a great bit of experience to me.  Actually, a plumber would probably laugh his ass off and post it on a plumber forum for everyone to ridicule.  But because people dont understand that photography is a business, and as a business it must make money otherwise the business and the owner of the business will go bankrupt, then we get people actually promoting rip-offs like they are a good thing.  Next time the studio toilet gets clogged try calling around to plumbers and offering them the opportunity to fix the toilet of a superstar photographer and see how they react.  Im pretty shure they wont be jumping at the opportunity.

you said it gooder than me..

i'm a carpenter and work off of craigslist, i no longer give free estimates, i tell people, i'l show up to work, but i dont give advise, i found someone called me, as well as 3 other carpenters and asked how we'd do the job, then the went to home depot and used our knowledge so they could hire a day laborer..

craigslist is cool, but half the people who go their are looking for free when they could be paying their share

digital Artform wrote:
Are you high right now?

That's for wikipedia. I'm all for it.

I love wikipedia!

digital Artform wrote:
I hope you got some in your keyboard. Wikipedia is trying to do good in the world.

At what point did I knock their work?  Furthermore, how does covering the red carpet help anyone? 

Please don't think that non-profit means non-profit.  They are making money and would guess way more than what they spend on helping people.  If they are for-profit then we definately know they are raking it in.

I donate every year to various charities...but that doesn't make me a saint and still have to pay the plumber.

digital Artform wrote:
By your own ideology if people want to participate in a race to the bottom - for what is in essence a philanthropic cause - that's their problem - and nothing you can do about it.

You are almost right.  What I can do about it is to ask you to please quit posting turds on MM.  You are aiding the race to the bottom and supporting business practices that are detrimental to the photography industry.  By posting stuff like this, you bring the value of what we do down.  What affects one of us in the industry affects all of us.  Until photographers start appreciating this and band together to uphold good business practices we will be stuck dealing with people who do not understand the value of an image.  Obviously, for Wickepedia it may be a moot point.  They see the value of the images as $0 and that is how much they are willing to pay for them.  If you believe your images are worth that same amount, by all means, submit your $0 bid and you may even get the job.  But if we work together and refuse to work for nothing, then they will either hire a photographer at the market rate, or not have images from the show.  No money, no photos.

johnkphotography wrote:
Until photographers start appreciating this and band together to uphold good business practices we will be stuck dealing with people who do not understand the value of an image.

Ah, a union organizer, eh?

johnkphotography wrote:

You are almost right.  What I can do about it is to ask you to please quit posting turds on MM.  You are aiding the race to the bottom and supporting business practices that are detrimental to the photography industry.  By posting stuff like this, you bring the value of what we do down.  What affects one of us in the industry affects all of us.  Until photographers start appreciating this and band together to uphold good business practices we will be stuck dealing with people who do not understand the value of an image.  Obviously, for Wickepedia it may be a moot point.  They see the value of the images as $0 and that is how much they are willing to pay for them.  If you believe your images are worth that same amount, by all means, submit your $0 bid and you may even get the job.  But if we work together and refuse to work for nothing, then they will either hire a photographer at the market rate, or not have images from the show.  No money, no photos.

Here Here!

digital Artform wrote:

Ah, a union organizer, eh?

No, but I am a member of ASMP (American Society of Media Photographers?).  Lets not shift the conversation to Unions though.  Maybe you should consider joining a professional association so that you too can get involved in the photo industry.

digital Artform wrote:
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/crg/225143292.html

Oscars red carpet? Pretty cool gig for whoever gets it

Sounds like a bullshit post ....why would they use craigslist for a high profile event....all they need to do is pick up the phone. If they deal with celebs...they can get a photog. in about 10 mins.

johnkphotography wrote:
Maybe you should consider joining a professional association so that you too can get involved in the photo industry.

no he shouldnt.....he's not a professional.

good luck dude!  have fun.  its really not surprising they are trying to get it for free.  getty or wireimage only pays 100 per event anyway.  why anyone would want to do this stuff is beyond me.

heres a tip: if you see russell crowe or sean penn...get pushy with them.  they will give you the BEST photos.  just STAY ON THEM.....PUSHY!!!!!!! DO IT!!!!!!!

digital Artform wrote:
Sounds like a union to me. Must be the Al Franken influence in Minnesota.

Nice try.  Changing the topic is a time honored debate tradition.  Trying to get people riled up so they forget about what we were talking about in the first place.  I suppose there is no more debate.  You support the race to the bottom and I dont.  Its only too bad that you most likely rely on something other than photography for your income while 100% of my income comes from photography.

On a side note, Ive never met Al Franken.  But I have met Norm Coleman numerous times.  He's an asshole.

digital Artform wrote:
Um. I'm not debating. I've already won.

As I said before, if you have a problem with people donating their photography to the creative commons you have a simple remedy: cry.

I hope that the visual effects industry does not have to suffer the same bane of amateurs giving away work as the photography industry has.  Its hard for me to believe that you have no interest in better business practices even though you work in the creative industry.  Its like a firefighter with no smoke alarms in their own home, or a locksmith with no locks on his doors.

digital Artform wrote:
Um. I'm not debating. I've already won.

As I said before, if you have a problem with people donating their photography to the creative commons you have a simple remedy: cry.

lol

Rossi Photography wrote:
Sounds like a cool gig and all but...

"Compensation: None, but you will be credited with every photo permanently on one of the world's top sites."

You'd think one of the world's top site's would be able to pay something.

So far so shitty, but here's the REAL deal breaker:  "...Uploading the photos...which we keep the copyright of..."

They're friggen joking especially when dealing with celeb pix.

Studio36

JS Dudley Photography wrote:
Personally, I think the ad doesn't sound legit in the first place.  Wikipedia has the money to spend on quality work, so why would they ask for it for free?  I can tell you for a fact that groups with a real possibility of getting peope to work for free because of what they do (i.e., American Heart Association) will still look for a pro and pay for quality without ever even asking if they can get it for free.  To do otherwise is just a poor business practice, even if it does save money. 
I know, a lot of people do busines through Craigslist, but finding a photographer for Oscar coverage?  It's kind of like fishing for sharks in a river; yeah, it MIGHT work, but you probably aren't going to catch the big one. 
And if the ad is for real, I hope they get exactly what they are looking to pay for: some star-struck GWC who just wants to go out and play.

This is WikiNews, not Wikipedia, so I'm guessing they have zero budget. (reach not among top 100,000 according to Alexa)
The contact point from the ad appears in WikiNews as an accredited user. I suppose an imposter could post an ad with his email in the text, but why?

I like the line from the ad:

"Your sole responsibilities are:
    - Showing up with a decent camera.
- Shouting every so often a celebrities.
    - Uploading the photos (which we keep the copyright of)."

Shouting or shooting, maybe both?

I'm curious if WikiNews is really granted press credentials for the Oscars, maybe it's from the bleacher seats...

johnkphotography wrote:
Lets put this in perspective.  Lets pretend that we are plumbers and not photographers.  Lets say you are a professional plumber.  You have $30,000 worth of plumbing tools.  You have several thousands of dollars worth of plumbing overhead to meet each month.  You have taxes to pay, a mortgage, a family to feed, and a retirement that you need to be saving for.  The "shitter" at Wickepdeia seems to be broken.  So they post on Craigslist that they are offering the opportunity for some lucky professional plumber to drive to their office and spend several hours of their time digging around in their toilet trying to dislodge the mega-turd that some Wickepedia exec grumped the night before.  Boy, fishing around in the toilet while you lose money sounds like a great bit of experience to me.  Actually, a plumber would probably laugh his ass off and post it on a plumber forum for everyone to ridicule.  But because people dont understand that photography is a business, and as a business it must make money otherwise the business and the owner of the business will go bankrupt, then we get people actually promoting rip-offs like they are a good thing.  Next time the studio toilet gets clogged try calling around to plumbers and offering them the opportunity to fix the toilet of a superstar photographer and see how they react.  Im pretty shure they wont be jumping at the opportunity.

Seriously, you should email this brilliant analogy to Wikipedia (or Wikinews... whatever).

johnkphotography wrote:
I hope that the visual effects industry does not have to suffer the same bane of amateurs giving away work as the photography industry has.  Its hard for me to believe that you have no interest in better business practices even though you work in the creative industry.

Are you kidding me? It's rife with it. But if you have a problem with competition under Capitalism maybe you should try another economic system. There are others, you know.