> Your Access All Areas pass to the latest in Australian rock music! News, Reviews, Photos, Forums and more

Bananaphone · 12:13 PM

All that follows is the opinion of Matt Palmer, music photographer.

I have been a contributing photographer for FasterLouder for some time and I am bitterly disappointed that FasterLouder management has done a back flip over the issue of photographers rights and now refuse to support me as a contributor in a stoush I have become embroiled in with a band management company over the rights to photographs.

I turned up to photograph The Vines for FasterLouder and was presented with a contract on behalf of The Vines management company, which would have severely limited what I could do with MY photos. Rather than sign away my rights I attempted to negotiate the contract, and failing to reach any compromise, refused to sign it, thus not being able to photograph the band.

FL management has given me permission to turn down these contracts in the past, but on bringing that up in my conversation with them, they claimed that this stance had a "time limit" of sorts and that rather than work out our issues and focus on better communication, they would rather I just not do any work for them any more to avoid controversy. Whilst reviewers are allowed to communicate their opinions, photographers are not whether by words or photograph.

I then received a letter from Winterman & Goldstein threatening me with legal action over my comments about the contract along with a cease and desist notice which demanded I incriminate myself by providing them with a huge amount of information they were not entitled to.

Despite not seeing the actual contract with my writing on it, or my dialogue with the management, FasterLouder claimed that their contract already exempted portfolio use (my main issue and what I discussed with the tour manager), and that despite the fact that the management company is ran with an ex lawyer, that they did not understand their own contracts. (All contracts need to be understood by all parties to be legally binding.)

Fasterlouder couldn't keep their story straight for more than 2 minutes, swinging wildly between how unprofessional I am and then to their genuine respect for my stance on these contracts. When I offered to provide them with the full dialogue between myself and the management they accepted and then disassociated themselves from me completely a few hours later.

When I discussed that in order for these contracts to be legally binding anyway, they would have to be sent in advance as well as meeting other legal criteria, FL defended their workflow by claiming that creating legally binding contracts was too much work. I then asked why they couldn't distribute a standard proper contract for all artists that can be downloaded off their website and handed out on allocation confirmations, but it was all too much work!

I also gained valuable career advice, they told me that in order to make a career as a professional music photographer I would have to regularly sign contracts that prevent me from making any money or even using the photos to market my own services. Figure that out! And then there was the quote "Well I guess you haven't shot anyone as big as the vines before" Ha!

Fasterlouder was talking inane shit. And Fasterlouder's disdain for its own contributors doesn't stop there.

Here are some further examples:

FL denies, confirms, and acts stupid all at the same time when approached about the one paid photographer on their books. He doesn't exist and yet hes very easy to find. To hide him away like a bad secret is an insult to his work and it's an insult to the rest of the photographers who make no money from FL at all.

But wait, we get paid in tickets right? 30 - 40 bucks for transport + a few hours work. (I'd bill this at approximately 300 - 500 hours at a corporate rate) Just because we like doing it doesn't mean it isn't work, I like my corporate stuff too.

And then there's social photos! Fasterlouder demands them so you can "develop your portfolio". No, really, it's because it helps drive traffic and boost loyalty amongst readers. Yep, it's a money making excercise, and we're feeding it. God forbid you have the flu (like I did at You Am I), because instead of praising you for working sick, or for delivering a damn good live gallery, they'll just ask... where are the socials? It's better to make the punters sick so long as you get socials of them.

And while they push all this crap from week to week they have the audacity to interview Tony Mott about his favorite festival photos. They promote a photographer that would never ever shoot FL conditions while similtaneously promoting him as the Australian shooter everyone should aspire to.

Here are a few quotes from a growing group of highly qualified and experienced ex fasterlouder shooters, who say their piece a whole lot better than I do.

"If you do a big festival/event they expect you to work overnight and have all the photos uploaded by 9am the next morning. They won't even pay expenses if you have to travel or stay overnight to cover a festival for them."

"Sound Alliance has a turnover of over $15m and gets all its content for free. Nice work if you can get it." (SA runs fasterlouder and inthemix)

"That place just seems to works on some culture of fear; be a good boy/girl and we'll reward you with higher profile gigs; stand up for yourself, paint us in a bad light and you're easy to replace with a photographer who won't question anything that's asked of them."

"Fasterlouder have always treated their contributors below any threat to their income - they are dollar driven, not driven by a love of music or love of quality photographs - you just have to look at all the crowd photos they expect you to do."

"They are owned (or were owned) by inthemix who specialise in dance music - they saw there was an opportunity to use the same model to make money from the rock n roll scene."

Heck there is more, but I might finish on another anecdote. I put my hand up to shoot Death Cab for Cutie about 2 months before they hit our shores. Plenty of time to forget that I was allocated to it, and instead a new guy was sent. A new guy that ended up filming (yes, video camera!) the performance from the photo pit. You can bet the publicist never found out about that gaffe, infact I wonder if any FL staff will blabber on about how it didn't happen to save face.

So next time you're submitting your contributions through that awful uploader (which needs an investment of that 15 million let me tell you) remember, do this because you want to, not because they want you to. To them, you're just providing a crapload of free content for them to run ads on.

If you would like further comment about what I have said I am contactable through www.okletsgo.com.au and all legal threats can be sent there also, where they can be laughed at and then ignored.

spindoctor

It looks like FL management continues it's policy of treating contributors with contempt.

libby

Hi Matt

I'm really disappointed to hear this. You and I got along great in the handover period between Cec and Sarah and discussed these issues at length. Let's clarify exactly how that played out. Firstly, we were talking on the phone about in-demand gigs and how FL is required to provide coverage (especially when we're a media partner). Our communication was always really friendly and I can even remember you saying thanks for some opportunities that you wouldn't have otherwise had access to. The post you've just made is a massive departure from the spirit of that relationship and I'm really disappointed that my team and my business are under fire (with many ill-informed comments included).

Both Dee and I explained that signing contracts is up to the individual, but for high demand gigs you could pretty much assume that there'll be contracts and if you're concerned about that, please let another shooter take the gig. We also spoke about some of the contracts' content and questioned whether or not they could be enforced in Australia anyway, because copyright, IP and moral rights are handled so differently in other territories - that's still unclear to me but I am watching these issues with great interest

The most recent incident with the Vines revolves around contract terms that are quite standard, so your reaction seems out of kilter with the situation. If you strenuously object, then by all means bypass gigs that are likely to require you to sign a contract and shoot whichever other gigs you like.

Our model has always been focused on user-generated content. Just as people post their galleries to flickr, Facebook or pretty much anywhere, we love providing a platform specifically about music that gathers together content around that subject area. We arrange access to gigs to make sure our team can get in the pit and in exchange there can be times where the promoters require the photographer to comply with Ts and Cs. We have never hidden this info, but we rarely know the content of contracts prior to a gig. I flagged for some of the V sideshows that there'd likely by tough contracts to sign and to tell me in advance if you weren't cool with that. You were informed and accepted that to be the case and did a great job too. You modest mouse/hot hot heat gallery was awesome.

In terms of our expectations for festival coverage, we get so many requests from great contributors for high profile events. We know that people who aren't at the event want to get access to coverage as early as possible, so we decided that we'd aim to be the first place for shots to be posted. Again, this is specified in advance so that if you don't think you can achieve that goal, then please let the opportunity go to someone who can. Is that really so bad? Ditto for rewarding contributors who have done a great job by giving them preference for gigs they want. Shouldn't that be the case? If I have an amazing experience with a photographer, they do some great galleries, post on deadline and express interest in another upcoming gig - what else should I do?

In terms of Sound Alliance as a business, there's so much about your comments that I could pull apart - should I even get started?

Everyone's entitled to an opinion, so if there are major concerns about the way we operate then the easiest way to object is by opting out. Sharing your views with us is always valuable, even if they are negative. So many sites censor content like this, rather than address it - but I'm not one to run from criticism

Yes, we do have a photo editor on staff. He's employed on a part-time basis in Sydney and assists us by approving galleries, working on the admin side of things and shooting galleries where needed.

The turnover figures include gross ticket revenue (e.g. think about Splendour, say they sell $3 or 4m of tickets, that's included in the figure of $15m. You'd only need a few major events and you'd be looking at the turnover largely being comprised of gross ticketing receipts)

We aim to keep improving the site and accept that we still have much to do. Without millions in venture capital that some of our competitors have, it can be tricky to keep up when for example, our uploader is compared to Facebook or flickr. You're basically stacking up the capabilities of a grassroots business against the capacity of multi-biliion dollar enterprises. It's not surprising that we don't always stack up ;-)

I work closely with an awesome editorial team in Sydney and they in turn work with some brilliant people across Australia to keep content humming across our sites. I can assure you that if anyone felt they were treated with contempt by our editorial team, their job would be on the line. Sarah, Jack, the state eds and the team across our other sites communicate professionally and always do their best to look after the diverse range of needs of contributors – not an easy job, but one they tackle admirably

Matt, I'm really sorry at how aggrieved you're feeling. I don't think I've ever hidden our goals/objectives from you. We've provided a bunch of gig opps you can either accept or reject and in the meantime provided you with one heck of a soapboax to vent on. I can only hope getting it all off your chest has helped you feel better

Cheers
Libby

Bananaphone · 1:43 PM

Libby, the problem is that whilst you may have your shit together, I dealt with people that did not. Sadly, fasterlouder is not run by an army of Libbys. It's run by many people with a very broad idea of what is wrong and what is right. It's not enough to have you turn around and be reasonable after someone else has been completely unreasonable.

Before posting this I had contacted both vines management and discussed with fasterlouder working together to improve and draft an acceptable music shooting contract for all parties. Instead of seeing my offer to make a contribution to improve the music industry at large, I was insulted for suggesting something different from what we've all accepted out of apathy.

It shouldn't come to a surprise that I took my comments further, to the people that matter, the people that still care about music.

How was the contract I was sent ok? Have you seen the version with my handwriting on it? How is it ok to send a photographer on a job they are not being paid for, for fasterlouder's benefit, but not even be able to display the photos on their own website, or on flickr, or on whatever way they share their passion with the world.

All I asked from Sarah, and anyone from fasterlouder, is that if the contract is going to be crap - say so, so I can give it to another shooter. You shouldn't be covering these gigs AT ALL frankly unless the management companies are prepared to work with your contributors.

Also, at the risk of saying too much of everything, the Vines only had 1 photographer in their photopit. Someone I know quite well that is a permanent and paid employee of his publication. Hardly "in demand" across the industry at least.

But as I stated above, operating within legal obligations of contracts was deemed as too much effort. It's so much easier to blindside people at the door with contractual bullshit that Fasterlouder claims the band managers don't even know how to explain themselves. And if it's not good enough for them to understand, why expect us to sign it?

The whole state of photographic contracts in music is a huge joke and actions like that taken by management and by FL do nothing to improve the situation.

If a country like Norway amongst others in Europe can take a stand and refuse to provide coverage to companies pushing bad contracts than why can't Australia do the same thing? And if Fasterlouder is some bastion for user driven content, why aren't they leading the way.

If only you treated your contributors with the same criteria as those on your payroll.

You're welcome to contact me to discuss any or all of my points, my contact is through okletsgo.com.au

fever

I'm not weighing in on treatment, etc, but in the case of photo release forms...

Professional photographers shoot shows on assignment for publications. It's natural that they should sign a photo contract that limits use to that publication as accreditation is rarely given to freelance photographers.

Bananaphone

fever, there are no Australian professional music photographers, because of contracts like this.

Throw me some names? Dan Boud, his money comes from being a photo editor. Matt booy, I hear he's a designer on the side. Mott? he made it before all this bs. There isn't a music photographer around except perhaps Mott (who would support himself with other shoots) who doesn't work something else to support it. There is no money in it because music managers strangle every last bit they can get out of it.

I am not saying it's unusual, I'm saying it's fucking stupid. Music is the only industry that pushes it's photographers around. In every other industry it would cost thousands of dollars for us to give away our copyright, or have our usage restricted in such a way.

spindoctor

Let me put you right on a couple of facts:

1 - Accreditation is given to freelancers regularly.

2 - Some publications have a policy that they will not allow photographers to sign any of these releases and yet the photographers are allowed to shoot the show.

I speak from first hand knowledge on both.

You won't see Tony Mott signing a release form.

If Fasterlouder had editorial policy where photographers were not required to sign releases and made sure that all photos taken by a photographer remained the property of that photographer there wouldn't be a problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fever

I'm not weighing in on treatment, etc, but in the case of photo release forms...

Professional photographers shoot shows on assignment for publications. It's natural that they should sign a photo contract that limits use to that publication as accreditation is rarely given to freelance photographers.

fever

I think I read an interview with Tony Mott where he said he signs release forms as Donald Duck??

Bananaphone

Sounds familiar. Try doing that through FL. It'll all be a laugh until the bands manager gets shitty about it.

leni_t

I spoke to the man face to face (Tony Mott) and he said yes he signs Donal Duck, and suggested I try the same. But its Tony Mott, and yes Im not Tony Mott.

Bananaphone

Just got word in a private message that Nic Bezzina and Dan Boud amongst other big names even used to shoot for Fasterlouder.

But instead of celebrating these connections (which would be good marketing for FL), people stop contributing for less positive reasons.

de-tec-tive

i think this *probably* should have been posted in the ask FL forum, or emailed to a state editor, as opposed to bagging FL on their own forum... sorry but i think it's a little rude.

Bananaphone · 9:06 PM

Yeah you're right de-tec-tive, I probably haven't talked to any of the editors about this on the phone last week when they called me at work.

I'd say dumping a contributor and treating them like an untouchable for defending photographers rights is a little rude myself.

I think the people here deserve to know that the website they are devoting their time to is losing contributors due to stupid bs like this, and that FL has been unprepared to give photographers a fair go.

icutmyownhair

bananphone, your photos are muchly awesome.

NiteShok

This is very interesting, Matt, and I thank you for sharing with us. You're right, contributors deserve to know this sort of stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by icutmyownhair

bananphone, your photos are muchly awesome.

Seconded. I'd taken a look before, but some of those Sounds of Spring ones you posted are great!

mooney88

i contribute the funnies

Damage

What can I say but "Here Fuckin Here".

I found that there was a lot trying to be imposed on shooters, but wasn't getting through due to the diligence and integrity of previous eds.

With the changing of the guard, all I can say is that you are not the only shooter that has, and is having, a mass of trouble with FL and it's support of the work supplied, and the shooters them selves.

There is much that has happened to many dedicated and good shooters that did (note PAST TENSE) contribute regularly to FL.

Good luck in all that you do … don't let the barstards get you down!
They are "So Rock They Can't Hear Us" "P

In a nutshell, many of us are happy shoot for free. In saying that, it does not sit well to have ones intelligence or integrity questioned, or worse, completely disregarded.

Sympathetic.

dream_brother

Quote:

Originally Posted by de-tec-tive

i think this *probably* should have been posted in the ask FL forum, or emailed to a state editor, as opposed to bagging FL on their own forum... sorry but i think it's a little rude.

you would say that seeing as you're potentially the forums most neutral person. vanillaicecreamfoofightersnodoubtwhitewhitewhite.

i dont care who's wrong or who's right. you're all cunts.

especially you, FL.

geeewocka

"i dont care who's wrong or who's right. you're all cunts."

sorry but that's the best quote ever

gumbuoy

HI Matt (and everyone),

I'm going to say 2 things.

1. There's something you seem to have avoided mentioning in both this post and your flickr rant. Before the gig, you sent an email to the promoters, bypassing FasterLouder, asking to be allowed to shoot the last song of the set, presumably because you wanted to shoot Craig Nicholls smashing his guitar, as he is wont to do. When this request was denied, for insurance reasons, you send them a scathing email about other shooters being allowed in to shoot him smashing his guitar? This approach is extremely unprofessional, and to bypass fasterlouder in this request is even worse - to have us hear this from the promoter is embarassing to FL. If these emails weren't sent, please feel free to post the emails you did send and receive, i'm hearing this second hand. You just dont seem to have mentioned this here or elsewhere.

2. You seem to have your timeframes all wrong.
1. You went to the gig, were handed a contract and didnt want to sign it.
2. you texted me, explaining the situation.
3. i said i would prefer getting the content, but if you didnt want to sign it, then that was the way it was.
4. that night, you sent me an email, which i forwarded to the sarah, explaining the situation.

This whole mess could have ended right there, with all parties getting on with their lives. But YOU posted a rant against the band, their managers, their promoters, claiming they were ruining music. The promoters found it, asked you to remove it, and you refused. This is where you and FL start crossing paths. So please dont state that we removed you from the contribs list because you refused to sign the contract, because thats a complete lie.

In your flickr rant, you've sinced trashed FL, and your fellow FL photographers. basically anyone who disagrees with you cops a serve.
here's the flickr link for those who are interested:
http://flickr.com/groups/concertshot...7608615302317/

Thommo

Matt,

I have been following your saga for about a week now. I must say that I agree completely with you regarding the signing of contracts and would like to believe that my editor (karen) would back me 100% if i refused to sign one due to excessive terms. But i dont really agree with how you have gone about expressing your opinion

I did shoot the vines show in canberra for FL and did sign the contract, I actually took a photo of it (which i managed to delete !) as i thought it was a bit iffy. As I understand it though unless you actually sign over your copyright you can do whatever you like with your photos unless they are defamatory.

I must say though, and i say this with all respect, would you be in the same position now if you hadnt have mouthed off about the contract, if you hadnt have posted that image on flickr, i would say at the worst you might have a slightly cranky state ed. I posted image from the vines show on my flickr, if the vines management was really trying to stop people posting images on flickr dont you think they would just search after the show/tour?

These contracts, whilst a crock of shit, exist mainly to prevent unauthorised merchandising. Which is fair enough in my opinion.

I dont think you are alone in feeling under appriecated as a contributor, the simple fact is that FL and photography in general will always have someone willing to do a job for free, now the varience in quality is extreme, look at someone like Kylie Keene (kyza) or Dan Bedford (geeewocka) just to name a few you cant tell me they arent as good as mott, boud or booy. Like all areas in photography, its not only what you know, its who you know, in a time now where every family has a DSLR in the house and hence the potiental to take professional quality images, not only do you have to be a shit hot photographer, you also have to know people. This is where i honestly do think you have shot yourself in the foot. You will obviously no longer be shooting for FL, You will now be a known person to god knows how many management companies.

And it has to be asked, why is it that if you have felt so strongly about FL for a while now and kept shooting. Im sorry mate but i just dont understand what you hope to acheive by burning all your bridges.

I really do wish you the best of luck with any legal proceedings, and will continue to follow your work, as it is really great stuff!

Thommo

EDIT: seems i was beaten

spindoctor

Quote:

Originally Posted by gumbuoy

HI Matt (and everyone),

1. There's something you seem to have avoided mentioning in both this post and your flickr rant. Before the gig, you sent an email to the promoters, bypassing FasterLouder, asking to be allowed to shoot the last song of the set, presumably because you wanted to shoot Craig Nicholls smashing his guitar, as he is wont to do. When this request was denied, for insurance reasons, you send them a scathing email about other shooters being allowed in to shoot him smashing his guitar? This approach is extremely unprofessional, and to bypass fasterlouder in this request is even worse - to have us hear this from the promoter is embarassing to FL. If these emails weren't sent, please feel free to post the emails you did send and receive, i'm hearing this second hand. You just dont seem to have mentioned this here or elsewhere.

There are a couple of things here that are a complete load of horse shit.

What possible insurance reasons? If there are insurance reasons for a photographer there would be insurance issues with patrons.

"and to bypass fasterlouder in this request is even worse" get your hand off it - what is wrong with making a request to a promoter?

I don't know if Matt contacted the promoter or not... what's wrong with contacting a promoter directly?

Dexter Ramone

Is it just me or does there come a time where some photographers get themselves a website, have shot a bunch of bands, and suddenly think they are hot shit?

From reading everything in this thread, it sounds like you've made a personal crusade to fight for photographers rights everywhere, against a system whose contributor basis is very well documented and extremely helpful to beginner through to advanced photographers and music journalists alike.

You know what you get yourself into when you shoot for FL. You contribute for free. (why this is so hotly contested by many photographers monthly I don't know) Why you would feel the need to take advantage of the opportunities that contributing to the site brings, and then bitch and moan when it comes time to actually produce what you had agreed to do in the first place seems a bit rich, and incredibly precious.

I'm not a photographer, but I've dabbled in writing for the site, and I don't think I'd ever think to get away with emailing the promoter behind FLs back to gain a higher level of clearance than what had been agreed originally. Especially when you apparently plan to do this for a career?

If you truly believe you are the amazingly talented and popular photo journalist you are claiming to be, perhaps you can access your own photo journalist opportunities for your massively popular website www.okletsgo.com.au

After reading your Flikr discussions with some exFlers, who I assume have all moved on to bigger and better things... and current ones still wanting FL opportunities (but still wanting to bitch and moan about the conditions at the same time of course) I'm not sure if I've missed the point through the whole thing, or if you have.

Simplified.
You want to take photos. Noone is going to pay you for it. FL has an in with the Vines promoter. You accept the job. You go behind FLs back and get refused. You get your back up about it. You refuse to sign the release at the show (your choice) you bitch and moan ferociously about it.

Did I miss something?

Dexter Ramone

Quote:

Originally Posted by spindoctor

"and to bypass fasterlouder in this request is even worse" get your hand off it - what is wrong with making a request to a promoter?

I don't know if Matt contacted the promoter or not... what's wrong with contacting a promoter directly?

Isn't it common courtesy to do it through the publication? It just seems like every step of the process has taken the most difficult and rude road..

Welcome back too Spindoctor!

Klips

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dexter Ramone

You know what you get yourself into when you shoot for FL. You contribute for free. (why this is so hotly contested by many photographers monthly I don't know) Why you would feel the need to take advantage of the opportunities that contributing to the site brings, and then bitch and moan when it comes time to actually produce what you had agreed to do in the first place seems a bit rich, and incredibly precious.

Thankyou, that's perfect.

gumbuoy

Quote:

Originally Posted by spindoctor

There are a couple of things here that are a complete load of horse shit.

What possible insurance reasons? If there are insurance reasons for a photographer there would be insurance issues with patrons.

"and to bypass fasterlouder in this request is even worse" get your hand off it - what is wrong with making a request to a promoter?

I don't know if Matt contacted the promoter or not... what's wrong with contacting a promoter directly?

Like I said, it's all hearsay to me, so it might not have been insurance reasons,

but whatever the reasons are, if they say no, the conversation ends there, there's no need for a back and forth.

and you should make the request through the publication because its common practice, not to mention common courtesy. You get identified as an FL shooter for a gig, you make a request, the promoter assumes that request comes from FasterLouder, not just the shooter. the promoter rejects the request, they assume they're rejecting an FL request, if it goes back and forth, the promoter gets sick of hearing from a FL shooter, and maybe they don't give FL a spot next time around. Don't you think FL should at least be aware this is going on behind our backs?

mooney88

i prefer the photos i take on the 2mp camera on my phone anyways.

and i agree with what dex said.

Bananaphone · 1:40 AM

There are some large discrepancies between your account and reality gumbuoy. Something I would expect from someone who admits themselves that their claims are only heresay. Why even weigh in if you have nothing valid to say?

"When this request was denied, for insurance reasons, you send them a scathing email about other shooters being allowed in to shoot him smashing his guitar? "

This is complete and utter bullshit. I did not contact them again regarding the issue until AFTER I had shot the gig. And my commentary was around my amusement that the gig poster promoting the entire tour was a photo taken during the last song of their performance. It was not scathing.

I contacted the publicist directly because us shooters don't agree to anything before getting to the venue, thats part of the whole problem, we get no terms and conditions til we get there when we should get them on confirmation.

I contacted the publicist not having an inkling of an idea of the contract that awaited and knowing that gumbuoy here wasn't going to do anything for me. He can't even get the numbering of his points in order... 121234. I also believe that I let you know that I was keen to try and shoot the last song and that I was trying to see if I could make that happen. Given your history with not only death cab for cutie but the debacle that was the valley fiesta, I believe you'd lose your own head if it wasn't screwed on. Not to mention the way you just forget that gigs are even on and completely forget to organise passes. Maybe a nice guy, and a good writer, but no organisational mastermind, so let's leave that there shall we?

Had I snuck a camera in and shot the last stage and got fantastic shots, gumbuoy would have posted them without a second thought. He wouldn't question how I got them, and yet he wants to criticise me doing things above board... do you think he would have taken my shots down knowing that they were shot outside of the 2 song contract? I don't think so. He and Fasterlouder have ALREADY benefitted from me pulling strings outside of the editor, I was on stage during the bluejuice set at Valley Fiesta and there was no complaints that I organised that myself. What a surprise!

As for my rant, it was merely saying that the contract provided was damaging to music photography and thus the gig was not shot. The only word relating to the parties was "vines management". I never trashed the band or the publicists, and I deliberately did not name any management. I document all my shoots and the vines were no different. If a black rectangle was all I had to show for the night then that's what I'd post. The rant was only posted AFTER I had already taken information down. If fasterlouder had balls you would have posted a black rectangle too.

The promoters found the black rectangle, sent me an abusive cease and desist, and I complied with parts of it to promote dialogue despite the fact that I was not obliged to do anything. Had the email not been abusive and threatening I would have taken the contents down asap and had a chat to them. Please goes a long way. But instead, given that they were deliberately trying to bully me into doing things legally objectionable, I responded.

As for my rant on flickr, how about seeing the bigger picture and noticing all the photographers around the world agreeing with it. How about seeing the big picture and asking yourself how we all came to this opinion, why people are bagging FL's treatment of photographers in the first place. You won't "beat" my opinion until you understand where it is coming from. We didn't all just wake up on the wrong side of the bed, god forbid, we might be onto something here!

And you're welcome to point out where I have bagged out FL photographers. Just because Leni warned against something, doesn't mean it happened.

Bananaphone · 1:36 AM

As for your ill informed comments dexter, I have never bitched and moaned about furfilling my obligations. I worked for 11 hours straight and shot 28 bands at Sounds of Spring, and there wasn't a peep out of me, nor a thankyou from anyone at FL. I have no problem with getting the job done, but when I do it and then FL acts like they've done me a massive favor... that's just completely ignorant. I've earned my ticket price before I even get to the venue, often thoroughly researching every band and what they do on stage. Interviewers read, I read pictures moving and static.

Approaching the publicist was merely a case of trying to get a better result for FL and it's readers by getting better shots. I expected it to be refused, and had no grudge against this at all. Some doors can be opened just by asking, and some can't. I have produced good results including the headline photo for Fasterlouder's Valley Fiesta article by having a chat to people, FL free, behind the scenes. No complaints came from me going outside the channels to make that happen?

I think you'd find if you talked to most of the shooters complaining about money, it's not money itself, it's the treatment. Money only comes up as an example of unfair treatment where one photographer is deemed worth paying and yet the others are not offered the same opportunity regardless of their work.

Dexter Ramone

Again, you speak as if FL holds you hear against your will; and that the whole worlds photography injustices are centralised here. Of course faceless photographers of the world are going to rally behind you on a flikr forum and tell you to go to battle for them, as it isn't damaging their reputation as much as it is yours.

You have glossed over the actual issues here again, instead focussing on a few personal quibbles you seem to have with Gumbouys management on the night of the Vines show.
I didn't know that he was expected to take your call at what I assume was after 7pm on the night of the gig, and drop everything to fix your situation.

Was there other photographers there on the night? Did they sign the form?

As for 'never bitching and moaning' (excusing the fact that this whole thread could be seen as a large one) your first post singles out a time where you had the flu, but you got along to the gig, and took some photos. You didn't take the punter shots like what is agreed between FL and the photographer, and you thought that it was rude and totally unjustified of FL to question you on it? Did you not get a sick note or a letter from your parents excusing half the pictures missing from that night?

I assume by the bottomless pit that is the chip on your shoulder that FL isnt the first website you've contributed towards as you signed up in January of this year. It would be unfathomable to me to hear an apparent professional ranting like you are with less than a years experience with a camera. Which bodes the question... If the conditions are so exceptional at your last highly paid contributor role, why did you leave it???

Bananaphone

Sorry that you feel my answers aren't adequate to you dexter, sadly you aren't the only one discussing this issue.

"Was there other photographers there on the night? Did they sign the form?"

1 paid photographer whom I know, and is paid by his publication as a staff member.

"You didn't take the punter shots like what is agreed between FL and the photographer"

Fasterlouder and I do not have, and never have had, an agreement regarding social photos before the Vines gig. An agreement was only ever met or even discussed when the You Am I shots were discussed.

"If the conditions are so exceptional at your last highly paid contributor role, why did you leave it???"

I haven't, or the other, or the other, or infact the other.

dream_brother

Banaphone;Obama
Dexter;McCain

gumbuoy

Quote: