Re: Sorta got published
So you gonna show us or what??? Bob S. On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:35:09 -0600, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, its not normally a picture I would consider to submit for publication, but it got published nontheless. It was a picture I took of our CEO. An article about our company appeared in the periodical EE-times, and the picture was included in the main page. Kinda cool, but I sure had been hoping something more substantial for this first time. Geesh, I thought loosing your virty was supposed to be more fun. rg
Re: Sorta got published
Good for you, Gonz! However: Geesh, I thought loosing your virty was supposed to be more fun. Virility? Ouch. :-) -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
Re: Sorta got published
Congrats! rg2
Re: Sorta got published
I'm kinda embarrassed to show it, but I'll dig it up rg Bob Sullivan wrote: So you gonna show us or what??? Bob S. On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:35:09 -0600, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, its not normally a picture I would consider to submit for publication, but it got published nontheless. It was a picture I took of our CEO. An article about our company appeared in the periodical EE-times, and the picture was included in the main page. Kinda cool, but I sure had been hoping something more substantial for this first time. Geesh, I thought loosing your virty was supposed to be more fun. rg
Re: Sorta got published
Juan Buhler wrote: Good for you, Gonz! Thanks. Wish it had been something really nice however... However: Geesh, I thought loosing your virty was supposed to be more fun. Virility? LOL Ouch. :-)
Re: Sorta got published
Quoting Rebekah Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: rg2 As a point of interest, are you two related?
Re: Sorta got published
yup, his initials are rg and so are mine, I'm his kid, so i thought it would be cool if i were rg number 2 - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 2:01 PM Subject: Re: Sorta got published Quoting Rebekah Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: rg2 As a point of interest, are you two related?
Re: Sorta got published
LOL, does the rg vs rg2 give it away? Quoting Finding Nemo: ERNR meet offspring... offspring, meet ERNR rg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Rebekah Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: rg2 As a point of interest, are you two related?
Re: Sorta got published
Bob Sullivan wrote: So you gonna show us or what??? Bob S. Well, here goes: (warning, some are 100Kbytes) This is the original pic: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-orig.jpg They asked me to crop it to this: (shame, since if I had known they wanted a close crop I would have been closer/used longer lens) http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-small.jpg In the article, they further mangled it to this: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-article-cropped.JPG Now I've got to go find my own copy. LOL. rg
Re: Sorta got published
Quoting Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: LOL, does the rg vs rg2 give it away? Well, it wasn't just the fact that the last name's the same and you're from the same area. After all, you've got a very popular surname for Texas. It was: Last name's the same, live in the same area, and BOTH USE PENTAX! Seemed like too much of a coincidence ... ERNR
Re: Sorta got published
Long, medium, and close-up. Typical for editors. You will learn to shoot all three. 90% o'the time they (editors) will use the close up, and you will feel the LS was the best of them because it shows context and can stand alone. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Gonz wrote: Bob Sullivan wrote: So you gonna show us or what??? Bob S. Well, here goes: (warning, some are 100Kbytes) This is the original pic: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-orig.jpg They asked me to crop it to this: (shame, since if I had known they wanted a close crop I would have been closer/used longer lens) http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-small.jpg In the article, they further mangled it to this: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-article-cropped.JPG Now I've got to go find my own copy. LOL. rg -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.4 - Release Date: 2/1/2005
Re: Sorta got published
Hi, Congratulations! Well, here goes: (warning, some are 100Kbytes) This is the original pic: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-orig.jpg looks like he spends all day stapling Kleenex together... -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Sorta got published
Oh don't get me wrong, I had several close ups, but just not the ones they wanted. This one got picked because he was engaged in conversation. The lighting was terrible, so I had to use the ceiling to bounce the flash, making it difficult to move in and out of the right range without getting in the way. Next time though, I'll spend most of my time on closeups like you say. rg Graywolf wrote: Long, medium, and close-up. Typical for editors. You will learn to shoot all three. 90% o'the time they (editors) will use the close up, and you will feel the LS was the best of them because it shows context and can stand alone. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Gonz wrote: Bob Sullivan wrote: So you gonna show us or what??? Bob S. Well, here goes: (warning, some are 100Kbytes) This is the original pic: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-orig.jpg They asked me to crop it to this: (shame, since if I had known they wanted a close crop I would have been closer/used longer lens) http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-talking-small.jpg In the article, they further mangled it to this: http://www.g0nz.com/images/vess-article-cropped.JPG Now I've got to go find my own copy. LOL. rg
Re: Sorta got published
LOL, does the rg vs rg2 give it away? Well, it wasn't just the fact that the last name's the same and you're from the same area. After all, you've got a very popular surname for Texas. It was: Last name's the same, live in the same area, and BOTH USE PENTAX! yep, he's the whole reason I like pentax, my first camera was a basic olympus, got most of my learning how to take care of a camera on that one (dropped it down a mountain. twice. still takes great pictures) and then I inherited his pentax p30t. I am slowly acquiring his equipment. Just don't tell him that all his lenses are missing. :o) Sure is about time someone figured it out. rg2
Re: Sorta got published
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:35:09 -0600, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, its not normally a picture I would consider to submit for publication, but it got published nontheless. It was a picture I took of our CEO. An article about our company appeared in the periodical EE-times, and the picture was included in the main page. Kinda cool, but I sure had been hoping something more substantial for this first time. Geesh, I thought loosing your virty was supposed to be more fun. rg Well, there's no sort of about it. You got published, man! Congratulations, Gonz! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Sorta got published
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:35:09 -0600, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Geesh, I thought loosing your virty was supposed to be more fun. BTW, virginity is an upstanding and moral concept. It's a ~good~ thing. You don't have to use asterixes. vbg cheers, frank PS: unless maybe you're a bit shy using such language with Rebekkah around and all... LOL -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PUG image published
Markus, actually this photo was taken in early September, my tripod/camera/lens was located 23 miles north of the image location, ( a great lens that 600mm FA!). The temperature where I shot from was around 60 degrees F. In response to your survey question: what was the biggest prize you got for an amateur photo ever? The biggest prize I've gotten is an Epson 2000P printer, from Epson, 24X10X6.6 VBG several years ago. At that time it was available for around $750 IIRC. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PUG image published Hi Kenneth must have been pretty cold out there, nothing for me :-) A very good photo and composition... By the way, a little survey: what was the biggest prize you got for an amateur photo ever? thanks for sharing it Markus KW http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html KW It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. KW First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor KW merchandise and $300.
Re: I got published!
Congrats. There is no higher praise than payment.
Re: PUG image published
Congratulations. I'm not surprised at all. -Lon Kenneth Waller wrote: Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300.
Re: I got published!
Awesome, inspiring! rg wendy beard wrote: Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: PUG image published
Congrats, Ken. Well deserved too. I would say My Kind Of Photography, but you already took that phrase...:-) A great shot. Jostein - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 2:23 AM Subject: PUG image published Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Kenneth Waller
Re: I got published!
Me too! And it is a picture taken with the Optio S4. Approximately A4 sized portrait of the Swedish clarinet player Martin Fröst in our regional paper today (we have a music festival here). All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
RE: I got published!
It is a good feeling, and congratulations! You have been validated! John Power -Original Message- From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 8:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: I got published! Awesome, inspiring! rg wendy beard wrote: Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
RE: PUG image published
Yes, I very much liked the contrast. Excellent photo, and congratulations. I also liked your notes, showing how far away you were. John Power -Original Message- From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 10:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PUG image published Congrats, Ken. Well deserved too. I would say My Kind Of Photography, but you already took that phrase...:-) A great shot. Jostein - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 2:23 AM Subject: PUG image published Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Kenneth Waller
I got published!
Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: I got published!
Hi! Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Thumbs up! Boris
Re: I got published!
This one time, at band camp, wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Awsome, keep up the good work Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: I got published!
It's a start! Congrats Wendy. So how many copies did you buy? ;) Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 10:33 PM Subject: I got published! Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
RE: I got published!
Congrats, Wendy!!! Keep it up! Andy This one time, at band camp, wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased!
Re: I got published!
--- wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! That rocks, Wendy! Congrats. cheers, frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: I got published!
Wendy shared: Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Yea, Wendy!! ERN
Re: I got published!
If you could sell 50 of those $20 photos a week you could even make a modest living from them. (Sorry, realities of the business) That I hope does not take away from the feeling of validation you got from having the photo accepted. Congratulations. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: I got published!
Good, Wendy! As a sidenote, be sure about the rights you give them. Some major magazines and newspapers are downright ugly what they want from poor freelancers, like all-the-rights-for-next-1000-years (NYT, etc). Fra
RE: I got published!
Congratulations, Wendy! Amita
Re: I got published!
Wendy, Congratulations! It is always a thrill to see your own work in print. Even though it wasn't much money, it is a start. -- Best regards, Bruce Tuesday, August 3, 2004, 5:33:21 AM, you wrote: wb Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my wb return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that wb one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility wb magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! wb Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to wb Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. wb Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! wb Wendy wb Wendy Beard, wb Ottawa, Canada wb http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: I got published!
Hey, big or small - being published is being published. Congrats! - Original Message - From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 7:33 AM Subject: I got published! Been away for a week or so doing agility stuff with the girls. Upon my return, I cleared out the post box of mail and found to my surprise that one of my photos has been used in Clean Run, and American Dog Agility magazine. Even got a cheque for $20! Two of my photos were also used in a book called Belgians from Start to Finished by SallyAnn Comstock. Haven't quite hit the big time, but I'm pretty pleased! Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
PUG image published
Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Kenneth Waller
Re: PUG image published
Good form Ken! Landscape with a 600 indeed! Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 10:23 AM Subject: PUG image published Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Kenneth Waller
Re: PUG image published
Ken, Don't let Mike J. know about that! VBG Congrats on a fine photo and well deserved recognition. -- Best regards, Bruce Tuesday, August 3, 2004, 5:23:25 PM, you wrote: KW Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the KW scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this KW image - The North Face of Denali -@ KW http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html KW It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. KW First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor KW merchandise and $300. KW Kenneth Waller
RE: PUG image published
Congratulations! You deserved it, gorgeous photo. Don -Original Message- From: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 7:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PUG image published Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Kenneth Waller
RE: PUG image published
-Original Message- From: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 6:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PUG image published Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Congratulations!! ERN
RE: PUG image published
That's great Kenneth! Congratulations! tan. -Original Message- From: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 4 August 2004 10:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PUG image published Just got word that my August PUG submission was awarded First place in the scenic category in a contest sponsored by Alaska Magazine. You can view this image - The North Face of Denali -@ http://pug.komkon.org/04aug/northfa1.html It will appear in the September issue of that magazine. First place got me a years subscription to the magazine, some outdoor merchandise and $300. Kenneth Waller
Re: Smithsonian contest (was: Defining previously Published for a photo contest)
On Saturday, Nov 22, 2003, at 16:01 America/New_York, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Ryan, nice to know they are letting you in... I'm wondering if they will be seeing tons of Pentaxes in this contest! That's up to all of us, Ann! --jc
Re: Smithsonian contest (was: Defining previously Published for a photo contest)
Ryan, nice to know they are letting you in... I'm wondering if they will be seeing tons of Pentaxes in this contest! annsan Ryan Lee wrote: Hey Ann.. Following your lead I thought I'd buzz them.. Good call! :) Ryan Thank you for your recent letter regarding SMITHSONIAN magazine's photo contest. Australians are quite welcome to enter, just make sure you send your entry early enough to get here before the deadline. We appreciate your interest. Sincerely, Karla A. Henry Reader Services SMITHSONIAN - Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 5:30 AM Subject: Re: Smithsonian contest (was: Defining previously Published for a photo contest) Ryan Lee wrote: I haven't been paying too close attention to this thread, and I may have missed it if it's been answered already- is this contest open to non-US residents? e.g. Australia.. Thanks, Ryan The rules: (says nothing about geographical limitations) http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues03/sep03/lines.html
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
On 17/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I know it's a rare occurance, but I actually agree with Cotty on this one. vbg I mean, there's published, and there's ~published~, if ya know what I mean. Geez, if you take their rules to letter, then I guess anyone who has posted pics on Photo.net and such on-line galleries has published, too. I'd say it has to be in print, in a reasonably widely circulated publication (not like a church newsletter or something). Like Cotty says, if they should confront you, shrug your shoulders and act surprised. Don't worry, no one here will rat you out on the PUG thing... vbg gobsmacked Frank and me agreeing on something?? And why not. Just going on from Frank's comments above - where do you draw the line? Presumably if you hang a pic on a wall and show it to one other person, then by some definitions floating about these pages, it has been published! I think that the competition rules need clarifying on this. Surely there will be mention of what they mean by 'published' in some small print somewhere? Trouble is, if you ask, you might not like what you find. And there is a distinct possibility that a prize could be revoked for breaking competition rules - so as Robb says, no tears. When in Rome. One thing I would say, and this applies more to commercial competitions rather than those run by hallowed institutions (although not exclusively) is that you have to watch out for what rights are lost by winning such a competition. Often, the organisers achieve the right to publish the winning pics - and in fact any entered pics that may not win anything at all - in any way they see fit, and more importantly for no monetary recompense to the photographer! IMO this is devious and wrong. I simply would not enter a competition that expected this. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
On 18/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I would love to see a contact sheet of both your photos of me and mine of yours how bout it? Meet behind the bicycle sheds at 4pm. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Cotty wrote: On 18/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I would love to see a contact sheet of both your photos of me and mine of yours how bout it? Meet behind the bicycle sheds at 4pm. Cheers, Cotty Um that was meant for Shel - and meant to be sent privately -- ugh ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Ann Sanfedele wrote: Cotty wrote: On 18/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I would love to see a contact sheet of both your photos of me and mine of yours how bout it? Meet behind the bicycle sheds at 4pm. Cheers, Cotty Um that was meant for Shel - and meant to be sent privately -- ugh Uhhh, do you know that for a fact? Hmmm? keith g
Re: Smithsonian contest (was: Defining previously Published for a photo contest)
Ryan Lee wrote: I haven't been paying too close attention to this thread, and I may have missed it if it's been answered already- is this contest open to non-US residents? e.g. Australia.. Thanks, Ryan The rules: (says nothing about geographical limitations) http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues03/sep03/lines.html
RE: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Frank, I believe that photonet is one of those places that state that anything posted there is copyright by them and the poster. Other folks don't like to use photos that may be copyrighted by more than one person. I read stuff on photonet fairly often. I'm going to do a real seach of their site policy. Regardless of whether photonet does that or not, I know that that is the policy for several sites I visit frequently. Len * There's no place like 127.0.0.1 frank theriault wrote: Geez, if you take their rules to letter, then I guess anyone who has posted pics on Photo.net and such on-line galleries has published, too. I'd say it has to be in print, in a reasonably widely circulated publication (not like a church newsletter or something). Like Cotty says, if they should confront you, shrug your shoulders and act surprised. Don't worry, no one here will rat you out on the PUG thing... vbg cheers, frank alright, alright _ I'll go tot he source and report back :) ann
Re: Smithsonian contest (was: Defining previously Published for a photo contest)
Hey Ann.. Following your lead I thought I'd buzz them.. Good call! :) Ryan Thank you for your recent letter regarding SMITHSONIAN magazine's photo contest. Australians are quite welcome to enter, just make sure you send your entry early enough to get here before the deadline. We appreciate your interest. Sincerely, Karla A. Henry Reader Services SMITHSONIAN - Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 5:30 AM Subject: Re: Smithsonian contest (was: Defining previously Published for a photo contest) Ryan Lee wrote: I haven't been paying too close attention to this thread, and I may have missed it if it's been answered already- is this contest open to non-US residents? e.g. Australia.. Thanks, Ryan The rules: (says nothing about geographical limitations) http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues03/sep03/lines.html
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Ann ... Did you get info from the web site or from the magazine. I checked both, and don't recall them saying not to contact them ... except after you've submitted the pics. IOW, it's ok to get clarification and information about making the submission, but after that, they kust want to be left alone. That's my understanding, anyway. I actually had read both, and it wasn't entirely clear - it sounded liked they wanted you not to ask questions - thought it wasnt specifically stated. Which is why I hoped others had read it. And since you said you got two different answers. I have a feeling it becomes rather like a rebate offer -- if you don't follow it to the letter of the law the early sorters toss your entry. I know that you'd make me into beef stew if that pic ever surfaced, so it shall remain forever secreted away. However, it's a great portrait, and you look smashing in it. However, it'll remain our secret LOL say, didnt I take some of YOU on that roll of film Side bet? Hmmm what are the terms? sucker someone in to making the bet for a lot -- then buy me an ist 'd and you'd win :) shel (stew slowly cooking in the big stew pot ... just six more hours to go before the melding process begins) I guess I don't have to ask where the beef is bg ann
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Paul Stenquist wrote: I sell a lot of photographs to magazines. I have never had a problem with previously published unless the photo appeared on a printed page in another mag. No one that I know worries about photos that have appeared in obscure places on the net. Thus, PUG photos are not published, at least not in my world. I'd not worry about it if I were merely submitting to be published -- it is the contest rules are rules thing that can get a little dicey. ann On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 07:21 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 16 Nov 2003 at 17:50, Paul Stenquist wrote: The PUG is an informal sharing of photographs, much like showing it to our neighbor. There is no compensation, therefore it is not published. Sorry there are plenty of instances where work is published without the author attaining payment for the work, consider the publication of medical research for instance (ie a study on the reason that belly button lint is very often blue/gray in colour :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Yep ... Ann Sanfedele wrote: say, didnt I take some of YOU on that roll of film
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Hi, Sunday, November 16, 2003, 10:51:52 PM, you wrote: If it's publicly visible then it's published, like a written note about a missing dog taped to a telegraph pole. or pigeon: http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/platformforart/images/shrigley/5.jpg -- Cheers, Bobmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
graywolf wrote: Ann, you should check with them about how they define publication. It could differ a lot form generally held ideas about that. In my opinion both the PUG and your Website would be considered publication as they are widely available to the public, but the Smithsonian may not be so inclusive. Sadly, that was my feeling as well.- As Shel mentioned he successfully got a reply , even though he got two DIFFERENT replies, I will do so before I enter anything, for sure. (I went ahead and put what I thought I might enter into the Dec PUG) (not like I'm putting any heat on myself :) ) annsan The cheeky New Yorker -- Ann Sanfedele wrote: Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? One of the other rules is one is not allowed to contact them about the contest submissions and they won't be responsible for illegal submissions. Ugh. annsan the puzzled -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
On 17 Nov 2003 at 12:34, graywolf wrote: Ann, you should check with them about how they define publication. It could differ a lot form generally held ideas about that. In my opinion both the PUG and your Website would be considered publication as they are widely available to the public, but the Smithsonian may not be so inclusive. In the broadest definition to publish is to make (an item/article etc) known to a third party there is absolutely no reference to print/payment of the validity of any particular media. The Smithsonian might have their own definition (which isn't defined it seems) and I guess I'd submit regardless however I wouldn't cry if a prize was revoked after the issue of prior publication was raised. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
I know it's a rare occurance, but I actually agree with Cotty on this one. vbg I mean, there's published, and there's ~published~, if ya know what I mean. Geez, if you take their rules to letter, then I guess anyone who has posted pics on Photo.net and such on-line galleries has published, too. I'd say it has to be in print, in a reasonably widely circulated publication (not like a church newsletter or something). Like Cotty says, if they should confront you, shrug your shoulders and act surprised. Don't worry, no one here will rat you out on the PUG thing... vbg cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go for it Ann. Consider that by 'published' they meant in print. Feign ignorance if questioned. .02 and good luck :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcommpgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
What do they call that? Reductio ad absurdum? (My latin's real bad - come to think of it, so's my English). Seems to me that the very example of published that you provide, Rob, proves the point that a literal definition of the word simply couldn't apply for the Smithsonian's purposes. Surely no one would suggest that if Ann lost a cat 20 years ago, and put up flyers with little Fluffy's photo on them, that she should consider herself a published photographer for the purposes of disqualifying herself from the contest, would they? There are lots of other examples of publishing that shouldn't keep someone out of the contest: family newsletters that some put in Christmas cards, monthly church newsletters, that sort of thing. And, let's face it, there are some things that surely go away with the passage of time. If one (like this author) approaches the 1/2 century mark, would having a couple of photos published in their high school yearbook disqualify (shut up, I went to high school in my teens! g)? I would think they'd turn a blind eye to that, as well. I'm sure that the intent of the rule is to stop professional photographers (whatever the hell they are) from submitting stuff. Just my usual worthless meanderings... vbg cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] If it's publicly visible then it's published, like a written note about a missing dog taped to a telegraph pole. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/featurespgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Hi, Just before I crawl back under my rock, I wanted to say that I misread the rules. I thought they prohibited published photographers from submitting, but, upon more careful re-reading, I see that it's the actual submitted photos that can't be previously published. Ah well, that'll learn me fer sticking my nose in before fully understanding the situation. Still, I don't think PUG'ed pics should be considered as published for the purposes of the contest. cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:30:02 -0500 What do they call that? Reductio ad absurdum? (My latin's real bad - come to think of it, so's my English). Seems to me that the very example of published that you provide, Rob, proves the point that a literal definition of the word simply couldn't apply for the Smithsonian's purposes. Surely no one would suggest that if Ann lost a cat 20 years ago, and put up flyers with little Fluffy's photo on them, that she should consider herself a published photographer for the purposes of disqualifying herself from the contest, would they? There are lots of other examples of publishing that shouldn't keep someone out of the contest: family newsletters that some put in Christmas cards, monthly church newsletters, that sort of thing. And, let's face it, there are some things that surely go away with the passage of time. If one (like this author) approaches the 1/2 century mark, would having a couple of photos published in their high school yearbook disqualify (shut up, I went to high school in my teens! g)? I would think they'd turn a blind eye to that, as well. I'm sure that the intent of the rule is to stop professional photographers (whatever the hell they are) from submitting stuff. Just my usual worthless meanderings... vbg cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] If it's publicly visible then it's published, like a written note about a missing dog taped to a telegraph pole. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/featurespgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcommpgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
There are lots of other examples of publishing that shouldn't keep someone out of the contest: family newsletters that some put in Christmas cards, monthly church newsletters, that sort of thing. And, let's face it, there are some things that surely go away with the passage of time. If one (like this author) approaches the 1/2 century mark, would having a couple of photos published in their high school yearbook disqualify (shut up, I went to high school in my teens! g)? I would think they'd turn a blind eye to that, as well. Oh, did they have high schools back then? Bill
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Rob Studdert wrote: missing dog taped to a telegraph pole. Telegraph pole?!?!? Don't ya'll use telephones down there?!?! r, d, g -- Gary -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 7.0.197 / Virus Database: 261.1.0 - Release Date: 11/14/2003
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Nah, I just made up all that stuff about going to high school. vbg -frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Oh, did they have high schools back then? Bill _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcommpgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
frank theriault wrote:ght. (snip, snip, snip) I continue to think that the Smithsonian really shouldn't care if someone, especially the lovely Ann, published a submitted photo on PUG. Now, if she had it published in National Geographic, that might be different. I guess that what I'm trying in my blunderheaded way to say is: one really should look at the intent of the rule. I'm guessing that (as someone said previously), it has more to do with copyright considerations than anything else. My guess is that they really don't care about PUG, or anyone's personal homepage. But, OTOH, it really matters not what I think, does it? vbg cheers, frank aw shucks - lovely, gee, see ann blush :) (If I'd been published in the National Geographic I wouldn't be hanging out with you low lifes:) ) Anyway, I wrote the email just now - will see what I get back -- here is what I said: (subject line ; definition of Previously published needs clarification I hope I can get an answer to this -- to me ,it was unclear in the specs for the Photo contest. Can a photo that is on one's home page on the web be entered (as long as it has never appeared in print) ? Is a photo exhibited in a gallery, on or off line, which has NOT been sold , eligible (as long as it has never appeared in print?) I sure don't want to enter something that I'm especially proud of and have it rejected because I also had it on my home page. A friend posed this question to you in email and told me he had gotten two opposing opinions. so... Help! Thanks! Will let you all know what i get in reply annsan
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Shel Belinkoff wrote: It would embarrass you ... I'll say no more on a public forum. Ann Sanfedele wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote: Yep ... Ann Sanfedele wrote: say, didnt I take some of YOU on that roll of film Ahem... it seems only fair that I get to see one of THOSE scanned! a not my best work? soft focus? actually, I think my extreme reaction to your scavolllo type portrait of me was how miserable I looked _ i was pretty shaken up after the auto accident and felt it came through in the picture... so it was like reliving a bad dream I can still see the thing in my mind. strange... There have been many more unflattering pictures of me taken by a couple of PDML'ers but if I was being happy I didn't care so much. I would love to see a contact sheet of both your photos of me and mine of yours how bout it? a
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
I think you missed on this one Frank. No previously published photos, not no previously published photographers. -- frank theriault wrote: What do they call that? Reductio ad absurdum? (My latin's real bad - come to think of it, so's my English). Seems to me that the very example of published that you provide, Rob, proves the point that a literal definition of the word simply couldn't apply for the Smithsonian's purposes. Surely no one would suggest that if Ann lost a cat 20 years ago, and put up flyers with little Fluffy's photo on them, that she should consider herself a published photographer for the purposes of disqualifying herself from the contest, would they? There are lots of other examples of publishing that shouldn't keep someone out of the contest: family newsletters that some put in Christmas cards, monthly church newsletters, that sort of thing. And, let's face it, there are some things that surely go away with the passage of time. If one (like this author) approaches the 1/2 century mark, would having a couple of photos published in their high school yearbook disqualify (shut up, I went to high school in my teens! g)? I would think they'd turn a blind eye to that, as well. I'm sure that the intent of the rule is to stop professional photographers (whatever the hell they are) from submitting stuff. Just my usual worthless meanderings... vbg cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] If it's publicly visible then it's published, like a written note about a missing dog taped to a telegraph pole. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/featurespgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? One of the other rules is one is not allowed to contact them about the contest submissions and they won't be responsible for illegal submissions. Ugh. annsan the puzzled
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
- Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele Subject: Defining previously Published for a photo contest Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? The PUG is considered a publication, AFAIK. I recall haiving this discussion with Igor (our man at Komkon), and that was his interpretation also. I think that anything that is put on you own website could be interpreted as being in a personal portfolio, and hence not published, but it also depends on who is doing the interpretating.. William Robb
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? One of the other rules is one is not allowed to contact them about the contest submissions and they won't be responsible for illegal submissions. Ugh. annsan the puzzled If it's appeared in the PUG, I wouldn't worry about it. To some that is previously published, but it's a loose definition. If the Smithsonian is going to physically publish the winners, i.e., on paper, I would take that to mean previously published on paper like in a magazine. One exception to this might be if someone's picture is known all over the web, but it has never been physically published. Like with a famous photographer. But that's unlikely, because they probably would have physically published it as well in some manner. The other reason not to worry is, a limited number of people see the PUG. And, nyah, home pages really don't count. Some people claim posts like this one are published. I think we need new words, because I don't consider it published myself. Marnie aka Doe If I did consider it published, then, boy, do I need a copy editor. ;-)
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Hi Ann ... I have a few pics for that contest, and was concerned about them having been put up on my web site and that one was in the PUG. I sent an email asking for clarification and received TWO replies, one saying that if it's on the web, it's considered published, the other taking a different POV. I'm gonna submit anyway ... I think I saved the reply that said the pics were not considered to be published. However, you really shouldn't enter. I'm gonna win in all categories ... maybe you can work on perfecting that beef stew recipe LOL Now I'm gonna get more hate mail about how condescending I am, and how my ego is so friggin huge, and how I think I'm God's gift to photography. Well, it's all true LOL and it's all done with old cameras and outdated BW negative film LOL shel Ann Sanfedele wrote: Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published?
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
Hi, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? If you show it to your friends, it's published as far as British law is concerned. It has become available to others by an act of the owner. One of the other rules is one is not allowed to contact them about the contest submissions and they won't be responsible for illegal submissions. Looks like one to avoid. Bracket it with the enter and lose your copyright because we will take it over types. Anyway, Shel says he's going to win and we know that _has_ to be right. gringringringrin mike
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
No and no. Previously published is a photo in a consumer magazine or other format that was on sale to the public. Unless someone is paying to see it, it is not published. Paul On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 01:56 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? One of the other rules is one is not allowed to contact them about the contest submissions and they won't be responsible for illegal submissions. Ugh. annsan the puzzled
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
The PUG is an informal sharing of photographs, much like showing it to our neighbor. There is no compensation, therefore it is not published. On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 02:00 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele Subject: Defining previously Published for a photo contest Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? The PUG is considered a publication, AFAIK. I recall haiving this discussion with Igor (our man at Komkon), and that was his interpretation also. I think that anything that is put on you own website could be interpreted as being in a personal portfolio, and hence not published, but it also depends on who is doing the interpretating.. William Robb
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 05:17 PM, Cotty wrote: \ Go for it Ann. Consider that by 'published' they meant in print. Feign ignorance if questioned. .02 and good luck :-) Exactly. Does anyone really think they're going to check entries against the PUG? And does anyone think that great photos shot in the last few years haven't been posted somewhere on the web. Get real.
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
On 16 Nov 2003 at 17:50, Paul Stenquist wrote: The PUG is an informal sharing of photographs, much like showing it to our neighbor. There is no compensation, therefore it is not published. Sorry there are plenty of instances where work is published without the author attaining payment for the work, consider the publication of medical research for instance (ie a study on the reason that belly button lint is very often blue/gray in colour :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest On 16 Nov 2003 at 17:50, Paul Stenquist wrote: The PUG is an informal sharing of photographs, much like showing it to our neighbor. There is no compensation, therefore it is not published. Sorry there are plenty of instances where work is published without the author attaining payment for the work, consider the publication of medical research for instance (ie a study on the reason that belly button lint is very often blue/gray in colour :-) This may be one of those differences between the way things are done in the USA and TCW. Since Ann is in the USA, and the Smithsonian is also an American institution, if thats the way it's done there, then that's that. OTOH, if TCW law is different, that would affect her entering the photo in a British (as an example) publication. William Robb
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
- Original Message - From: Ann Sanfedele Subject: Defining previously Published for a photo contest Smithsonian contest coming up - One of the rules is No previously published works. Is a photo in the PUG considered published? Is a photo on my homepage previously published? My guess is that provision is there to protect the Smithsonian against copyright infringement lawsuits from other publications. Where you retain all rights with anything you submit to the PUG, you just give them permission to display the image, I would not consider it published. I would get a complete set of rules from the Smithsonian before submitting, paying close attention to what rights you are signing off by submitting an image. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
I sell a lot of photographs to magazines. I have never had a problem with previously published unless the photo appeared on a printed page in another mag. No one that I know worries about photos that have appeared in obscure places on the net. Thus, PUG photos are not published, at least not in my world. On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 07:21 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 16 Nov 2003 at 17:50, Paul Stenquist wrote: The PUG is an informal sharing of photographs, much like showing it to our neighbor. There is no compensation, therefore it is not published. Sorry there are plenty of instances where work is published without the author attaining payment for the work, consider the publication of medical research for instance (ie a study on the reason that belly button lint is very often blue/gray in colour :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest
In my wildest fantasies I can't imagine that the Smithsonian would consider a photo that appeared in the PUG to be published. I wouldn't even raise the issue. Send it in. On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 06:36 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: Defining previously Published for a photo contest On 16 Nov 2003 at 17:50, Paul Stenquist wrote: The PUG is an informal sharing of photographs, much like showing it to our neighbor. There is no compensation, therefore it is not published. Sorry there are plenty of instances where work is published without the author attaining payment for the work, consider the publication of medical research for instance (ie a study on the reason that belly button lint is very often blue/gray in colour :-) This may be one of those differences between the way things are done in the USA and TCW. Since Ann is in the USA, and the Smithsonian is also an American institution, if thats the way it's done there, then that's that. OTOH, if TCW law is different, that would affect her entering the photo in a British (as an example) publication. William Robb
Thanks; Re: Published
After I posted my message about being published, I received SO many kind words from y'all!! I feel a bit awkward about not replying to each, but there were so many, and this list already runs so big. So, one post to say thanks to ALL of you who responded -- I appreciated each and every one. ERNR
Re: Published
Congrats! That really is a great shot! What were these difficulties you mentioned with the PZ-1 for this shot? True story: The first night, I took the PZ-1 and found a number of logistical difficulties in using it for this shot. So I chose the WR-90 the next night, largely because of the Bulb Timer mode, but also because it's water-resistant and not an SLR.
Published
The current (December 2003) issue of Hooked on the Outdoors magazine contains my Oct. 1998 Cumberland Falls moonbow photograph. I never heard of this magazine until its director of photography emailed me a couple of months ago to ask about using that photo -- he'd found it on my website. Technical details: Time exposure made with Pentax IQZoom WR90, on Fuji colour negative film. ERNR
Re: Published
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The current (December 2003) issue of Hooked on the Outdoors magazine contains my Oct. 1998 Cumberland Falls moonbow photograph. I never heard of this magazine until its director of photography emailed me a couple of months ago to ask about using that photo -- he'd found it on my website. Technical details: Time exposure made with Pentax IQZoom WR90, on Fuji colour negative film. ERNR Congrats! - Chris -- Chris Murray /\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN http://apeman.org/ XAGAINST HTML MAIL Cell: 604.861.8307 / \/ Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
RE: Published
Cool ERNR! Way to go! Could you give your website address so we can go look at the shot? Congratulations! Will you get any pennies for the shot or just eternal gratitude and public exposure? - THaller
Re: Published
Way to go :-) --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The current (December 2003) issue of Hooked on the Outdoors magazine contains my Oct. 1998 Cumberland Falls moonbow photograph. I never heard of this magazine until its director of photography emailed me a couple of months ago to ask about using that photo -- he'd found it on my website. Technical details: Time exposure made with Pentax IQZoom WR90, on Fuji colour negative film. ERNR __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Published
Excellent(in Mr. Burns voice lol) Dave The current (December 2003) issue of Hooked on the Outdoors magazine contains my Oct. 1998 Cumberland Falls moonbow photograph. I never heard of this magazine until its director of photography emailed me a couple of months ago to ask about using that photo -- he'd found it on my website. Technical details: Time exposure made with Pentax IQZoom WR90, on Fuji colour negative film. ERNR
RE: Published
Cool ERNR! Way to go! Could you give your website address so we can go look at the shot? http://members.aol.com/ernreed/Page3.htm the moonbow is second from the bottom (fourth image down) Congratulations! Will you get any pennies for the shot or just eternal gratitude and public exposure? Supposed to get a number of pennies, which I really hope will arrive in time to help with my Christmas shopping. Thanks for your reply!
Re: Published
http://members.aol.com/ernreed/Page3.htm the moonbow is second from the bottom (fourth image down) Congratulations! Will you get any pennies for the shot or just eternal gratitude and public exposure? Supposed to get a number of pennies, which I really hope will arrive in time to help with my Christmas shopping. Super cool. What a nice Xmas gift. Congrats! Marnie aka Doe Shows web pages are not a complete waste of time, too. :-)
Re: Published
Congrats!! And with a lowly PS, to boot! cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Published Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:49:20 CST The current (December 2003) issue of Hooked on the Outdoors magazine contains my Oct. 1998 Cumberland Falls moonbow photograph. I never heard of this magazine until its director of photography emailed me a couple of months ago to ask about using that photo -- he'd found it on my website. Technical details: Time exposure made with Pentax IQZoom WR90, on Fuji colour negative film. ERNR _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photospgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Published
Frank posted: Congrats!! And with a lowly PS, to boot! cheers, frank True story: The first night, I took the PZ-1 and found a number of logistical difficulties in using it for this shot. So I chose the WR-90 the next night, largely because of the Bulb Timer mode, but also because it's water-resistant and not an SLR.
Re:Waller's Published-was: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer
Geez, Ken, I looked at the subject line, and figured it was just a pic taken with a Pentax camera. You're being too modest! I've adjusted the subject line accordingly, however. vbg Congrats!! It's a photograph worthy of publication. Great job. cheers, frank Kenneth Waller wrote: Had a pleasant surprise today.snip -- I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi - Henri Cartier-Bresson
Work published, no pay (Was: Toronto PDML people...)
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 12:44 AM Subject: Re: Toronto PDML people... I just had a magazine print an article of mine without getting copyright and without paying and it's looking like it'll cost more to sue than I'd get out of it, Are you sure about this, Mark? Was there a misunderstanding between the two of you, or did they just flatly print it without your permission? If the latter is the case - up here around (Scandinavia) this would be a clear cut case, where you'd be entitled at least the double standard fee for your type of article + maybe some extra for damages. You wouldn't (at least not here around) even need a lawyer. Just send them a bill. If they refuse to pay, you gather the evidence, send it to appropriate court and ask them to collect the money for you + interest + pay for your (own legal) work. Or is this a magazine that you need to stay friends with? Good luck, either way. Lasse
Re: To Everyone who has been published
From: Collin Brendemuehl What was your first published photograph? (Yeah, I know I'm late on this topic, but I started and didn't have time to finish it earlier and just want to be part of the gang... :-) ) At the (university) School of Journalism around 1988 I published a few photos of myself along with a few essays and some dadaistic poetry I wrote for the school paper (a few hundred prints I'd guess). That's also when I slowly started picking up photography again, (although my journalist training was writing and doing television), initially by making use of the school darkroom to make prints of my own and the family bw negs and dsuting off a Praktica kit I had got very cheap from my brother in law. (Oh, yes now I remember, I also bought a Minox, a amall lens-fold-out with a great 2.8/35mm lens. A great success among the girls, who thought it so cute that they never minded being shot by it, not even the shyest ones. (Got to get it working again - I guess it fell one too many times out of my chest pocket.) The first published shot in a regular news paper may have been October 1990 (although there was another piece on local politicians that may have preceeded it - I can't find it right now), when I (both in writing and shooting (bw with Praktica + Cosina or Chinon 35mm (single coated) + cheap small manual only Agfatronic flash) reported on a historical scoop I made at the Swedish National Archives in finding a (Imperial) Russian war treasure (bills, coins, coupons, stamps etc) that the Swedish Army took at the end of a military expedition to Åland (the Aland Islands) in 1918. The first photographer only published shot, was in August 1993 when, at a local athletic competition, a young girl set a national record in sixathlon (I believe it was for the young ones). Local athletics, along with music, town planning/construction, some street life etc, is one of my photo genres and I was just starting out learning how to do it. I had missed most of that day's events due to some World Championship Atlethics on television the same day, and was actually about to leave the grounds. There was however this last event announced, 800 meters girls, and there was a mention of one of girls having the chance to set a national record for girls aged 13, why I stopped and shot a number of frames. (Still w Praktica + Chinon 135mm, some Fuji colour) Because of the results I called the sports editor of one of the papers and told him about it and that I had pictures. The next day they ran the story with a moderately sized picture (payed for) of the girl running. (As it happened, this girl developed her talent (she made the national team in javelin) and I have photographically been able to document a ten year carriére of hers. A rewarding collaboration.) From then on I have published photos almost as much as I have been published in writing (or maybe not - haven't thought about comparing or keeping count before) Sometimes just one or the other, sometimes both. Thanks for reading (it got longer than intended), Lasse
Re: To Everyone who has been published
As far back as I can recall, my first published photograph was a product shot for my former employer's web site. I think you can still see it here: http://www.didi.com/www/areas/products/monkey2/MK1/index.html I was doing engineering work on the Monkey2 at that time as well as taking a class in studio lighting. Our graphic designer needed a product shot so I took advantage of my studio time and did it with a Cambo 4x5 on Kodak E100. --jc
Re: To Everyone who has been published
John Poirier wrote: My first published photo was..are you ready for this?..a three-legged chicken. Shot on the first roll of film I processed and printed myself, 1974. It ran in a local weekly, but I don't remember whether I got paid. That was shortly after getting my first SLR, too. An Argus/Cosina STL1000, I think (A rather decent, rugged M42 mount beast). Couldn't afford Pentax then! John Poirier What conditionis the chicken in now? Could it be used to unsubcribe to PDML? (ann ducks, cause she's chicken) annsan - Original Message - From: Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: February 23, 2003 5:54 PM Subject: To Everyone who has been published What was your first published photograph? Mine was some bw work for Prison Ministries in Omaha, taken in maximum security. Just something for the brochure. About the same time I did some for Wayne Alderson his union/management seminars. Again, just something for the brochure. And, I didn't get paid for either one. Gotta start somewhere, I guess. Collin
Re: To Everyone who has been published
Collin Brendemuehl polled: What was your first published photograph? A mugshot of a friend [at the time - she's my partner now] for a research paper she co-wrote for a chemistry journal. It hardly counts because it was her work, not mine, that earned the publishing in the first place! The pic was just cropped out of a snapshot I took of her, using my point shoot at a party before the serious drinking started. The camera was a Pentax Espio 738. This was a year or so before I got my first SLR. I never was paid ;) That was about 5 years ago. I haven't been published since and I'm not specifically looking for it. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: To Everyone who has been published
Collin Brendemuehl polled: What was your first published photograph? about 15yrs ago I did a series of photos of the members of our band for a promo piece in the local paper for free. I still get a nice feeling when I remember how they ooohed aaahed over those nice big *Brownie!* negs. ... best looking images in the whole rag!!8^D Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: To Everyone who has been published
Thanks, MIke Regards Albano --- Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My first one was a couple of months ago, in a magazine for buildings-home-owners:Nuestro Consorcio (small run of 1000 magazines). It was the cover. I'll be doing the next cover, next month. If you want to see the pic and cover: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=285079 Very nice Albano. --Mike = Albano Garcia El Pibe Asahi __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: To Everyone who has been published
--I shot Supreme Court Justice David Souter, right after he got appointed, shopping at the Co-op in Harvard Square. Lucky he survived, otherwise your emails would have a 'US State Penitentiary' sig on them... ;-) Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: To Everyone who has been published
Though not published as part of an article or a magazine cover, one of my photos was published in this year's winter edition of the Canadian Dogsport magazine as the winning entry in their photo competition. Does that count? Congrats and woof! Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
