Ken Davey wrote:
Michael A. Covington wrote:
"Frank ess" wrote in message
...
Michael A. Covington wrote:

I think that all of us could be contributing to local newspapers
(if we want to) very easily because of the ease of e-mailing the
pictures.
...
"I encourage other amateur astronomers to do this. It's one of the
best ways to share your pictures with others."

And to undermine the careers of serious, income-earning professional
photographers, unless you were paid.

Against a free market economy, are you? I made a deal that I thought
was advantageous for me. People in numerous fields -- especially
writers and computer programmers, of which I am one -- have learned
that giving away a certain amount of work free helps to *promote*,
not undermine, their careers.

Besides, the amateur photographer who e-mails pictures to a newspaper
could easily be *starting* a career, not undermining somebody else's.
Or do you feel that nobody in the future should become a
photographer, so that the old-timers can have a monopoly on all the
work?
Were you? How much? Did your contract with the newspaper require
that you relinquish rights to the picture? Did the newspaper cut you
out of income from future uses?

The paper got nonexclusive rights to one rather mediocre picture. (I
am well aware of rights issues. In fact at no point did I sign
anything; I simply gave them permission, by e-mail, to print the
picture as news.) Although not paid money, I was credited by name,
and my book was mentioned. To me, that is a valuable indirect
advertisement.
Besides, the newspaper is part of the community, and I enjoy sharing
things with my neighbors.

I suppose you know that newspapers are among the greediest of
rights-grabbers and photographer-devaluers.

We should _not_ feed them, no matter how good it feels at the
moment. It may be that the crest has passed and the slippery slope
has control, but if you respect photography as a career, every
little bit of friction can slow the decline...

Ah. And we should abolish the World Wide Web, because that, too, is
a way for people to share their pictures and writings with the public
thereby "undermining" the careers of professionals?

And abolish amateur astronomy, amateur woodworking, amateur
basketball, etc., because all these things put "professionals" out of
a job?
I don't think so.

Michael A. Covington
Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur
www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html

Well said Mike.
But the subject Frank brought up is indeed a very complicated one,
and a hellofa can of worms I might add.. No one should sell or
otherwise trade a product is a manner that knowingly damages the
economic well-being of those that have invested (I speak of
individuals, not corporations or rapacious capitalists).
Frank seems to have a 'thing' about newspapers and I would agree when
it comes to the huge chain-type operations, not local community
publications. I predict a long life for this thread (G).
Regards.
Ken.

Thank you for your reply, Ken. I don't have a particular 'thing' about
newspapers; just about organizations who squeeze every bit of juice from
their employees, contractors, and freelancers and keep the profits from
the changes. What they publish, more and more often, is mediocre
pictures, many times freeze-frames from amateur video. The whole process
is eroding the quality of their products. I'd like to see the decline
halted, or at least retarded.


Mike, it seems to me you lost track of what I said and asked in my
message, and flailed around whipping up a suds storm of suppositions and
extrapolations all your own.

I say: people with respect for working photographers should _not_ give
away their work. It hurts current and future career photographers.

You say you received just compensation. Good for you. That's all you
needed to say, but clearly not all you had to say. Fine. Just don't
imagine any words, deeds, or actions into my posts. In the meantime,
maybe someone will reconsider a 'donation' to one cause, and support
another.


--
Frank ess