What would you have done?

[aspender]

Just out of interest...

If you had been at the Cutty Sark fire early this morning armed with your camera/cameraphone, what would you have done with the photos?

For instance would you:

Go to BBC News online and email/MMS photos to them
Put them on flickr/photobucket etc

Or, would you have realised their potential value and decided to try and sell them? If so, how?

ETA: This is aimed more at the enthusiastic amateurs amongst us rather than those with pro leanings or existing relationships with agencies etc.

Edited by aspender on Monday 21st May 15:35

[Cuban]

Now that's a leading question - you don't smoke per chance do you...

[aspender]

No Guv, wasn't anywhere near it Just interested in the responses.

[chris.mapey]

I would have emailed the BBC / Sky News / Sun / Mirror group etc with the photos, asking them to offer on them.

Then approach some agencies (Getty maybe) to see if they are interested.

If no response then, go to local paper level

If still no response, then ebay the camera kit & take up knitting...

Chris

[elderly]

Years ago in Black & White days, I spotted what I thought was a news-worthy
photograph.
I took it along myself to three newspapers in Fleet Street.

They didn't use it but all of them sent me £20 so as not to disuade me
from trying again .

[aspender]

chris.mapey said:

I would have emailed the BBC / Sky News / Sun / Mirror group etc with the photos, asking them to offer on them.

Ok, cool. So you would have realised that you have a commodity that has value. How do you then feel about the fact that every image and piece of video footage the BBC used on the web and News24 (at least to begin with) was sent in by the general public and used under T&Cs which allow the BBC to use the material royalty free, in perpetuity, and gives them the right to syndicate it (i.e. resell and make money) to other news organisations?

[monkeyhanger]

aspender said:

How do you then feel about the fact that every image and piece of video footage the BBC used on the web and News24 (at least to begin with) was sent in by the general public and used under T&Cs which allow the BBC to use the material royalty free, in perpetuity, and gives them the right to syndicate it (i.e. resell and make money) to other news organisations?

Anyone that submits pics to a news organisation FREE OF CHARGE and fails to realise that they immediately forfeit all rights deserves a good kicking.

[sidaorb]

About 10 years ago, was woken from my sleep between night shifts by sirens, looked out of bedroom window only to find total black smoke, grabbed camera AND 8mm camcorder, got a few photos and video of a furniture warehouse burning to the ground. Didnt have any joy with the photos but rang Thames News from my mobile, who said there cameras couldnt get anywhere near due to traffic (fire was on the A10 in Enfield), they agreed to meet me about 3 miles from the scene, handed over the tape, signed some forms etc.
4 second clip shown on the local news after the 10pm news. Cheque arrived a week later for £250.00

That calculates to £225,000 p/h

So in answer to your question, grab camera and camcorder and get hold of sky / reuters etc asap.

[aspender]

monkeyhanger said:

Anyone that submits pics to a news organisation FREE OF CHARGE and fails to realise that they immediately forfeit all rights deserves a good kicking.

But the vast majority of the public don't realise, and are easily swayed by seeing their work up in print/on screen etc. Therefore shouldn't it be incumbent on responsible news organizations such as the BBC to tell people what they are giving up before they accept content in this way?

What effect does this have on jobbing photojourno's?

A sufficiently interesting subject, so I've written a blog post it which people may or may not find interesting.

[cy88]

aspender said:

monkeyhanger said:

Anyone that submits pics to a news organisation FREE OF CHARGE and fails to realise that they immediately forfeit all rights deserves a good kicking.

But the vast majority of the public don't realise, and are easily swayed by seeing their work up in print/on screen etc. Therefore shouldn't it be incumbent on responsible news organizations such as the BBC to tell people what they are giving up before they accept content in this way?

What effect does this have on jobbing photojourno's?

A sufficiently interesting subject, so I've written a blog post it which people may or may not find interesting.

I suppose if the BBC started paying people for images then our licence fee would go up

[F308 MAN]

a few years ago a publican pal of mine was awoken by the noise etc of the recent fire at york minster.
he had an instamatic, 126 film, camera with three shots left.
he steadied the camera on the window cill and took the shots.

the resultant pic was featured in most of the dailys and was a double spread front (and back) cover on the Sunday Times "Year in Review" (whatever year it was).

the same pic is on postcards still being sold today.

Ray went to an agency and made a fortune.
I'll try and google for the pic.

d