"still Looking's" Top 12 National Escorts Calendar

This is cute, great idea

Good morning all - Oh how I LOVE drama on Eccie, I normally try to stay away from this sort of BS, however I just can't help myself in replying about the situation:

CryptKicker / KCQuestor - could not be more right! (see above comments)

First off I NEVER asked or "demanded" the OP to remove the images, I simply asked him to do ONE of three things:

1. Reupload the original uncropped images showing the watermarks.
2. Give proper credit to my photo business in a followup reply to the post.
3. Ask a Mod to update the cropped images with the uncropped photos originally submited by ladies.

You are correct!

I even offered to email him the uncropped original images if he provided me his email address.

You are correct!

I did notice that he left Mrs. September: Victoria Jolie watermark (Santillo) on the bottom right side of the image, but decided to crop off mine?? I thought he said NO watermarks, humm?

I allowed that one as it was covered by the image coast and it was small and I felt did not detract from the picture. Truth be told I couldn't get the picture to crop in the format sent to me.

We chatted through PM first, and I never asked, demanded or requested a Mod take the images down. I never even contacted a Mod to inquire about the possibility of doing so. That was OP's decision which really only hurts the ladies in the end.

I had the pictures taken down because "your" water mark is offensively LARGE! And I had NO intention of putting the originals up. Did you ask the providers if I did in fact sapecificly request NO PHOTOGRAHERS names on pictures? I'm sure you didn't because you don't care. Not about my request or the providers. We all know exactly who you care about... YOU!

I have no problem with my clients (the ladies) choice to submit any images I create to any online competition, magazine or use in marketing for her business. Thats why I am in business and do my craft. I only have a problem when someone (whos not my client) deliberately crops or changes my © images to use for their own purpose but doesn't allow credit where credit is do.

We all get it you want CREDIT! I checked as did my attorney and both Kat VonDee & TyraXXX show case pictures don't have that "cute" little "copyright" icon on them. Why is that if they are copyrighted pictures? Is that perhaps an over sight?

I'll be happy to post their entire PM string so people can make up their own minds as to what I asked and how it was handled on the other side with OP. Assuming its not a code violation to post PM discussions in open forums?

Yeah you do that. Post the PM'S. While you're at it post the "private" PM'S & EMAILS that specificly request NO PHOTOGRAPHERS names be on the pictures. Maybe you can even post your communication between you and Cryptkicker!?

That is all, have a wonderful xmas! Originally Posted by bcdstudios

This is your post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kat VonDee
I'm glad I had the chance you work with you!!! I think it's time for another shoot

Kat VonDee - Anytime, any place, sounds like a date baby girl! I've got a few extra ideas up my sleeve - shirt sleeves as you know I don't wear pants when I shoot! LOL!!!!!!!! (JK ladies - or am I?)

And same right back at you BCD STUDIOS. Happy Holidays and I hope you get EVERYTHING you have coming to you!

Sir BCD…

I am so glad that I did not offend or upset you because that was truly not my intention. I am a very curious and inquisitive person and I am not as educated as others in this field and so I appreciate all of the feedback from you, the mods and Still Looking…

I have been a long time admirer of your work and I have been carrying the photo of the BEAUTIFUL BLONDE that is laying naked on red satin with red thigh high vinyl boots in my phone for QUITE SOME TIME!! Just an incredible shot!!

So, if I can ever get up the courage to LEAVE TEXAS…and venture into your neck of the woods… then I would be honored to pose for you… and if you look at my Facebook or my website then you will see that I love THEMED PHOTO SHOOTS and I have had the pleasure of designing most of the shoots that I have done thus far…

Right now I am planning a Valentine Day Shoot since I had to cancel my Holiday Photo shoot due to my munchkins getting ill… However, I think you would love some of the outfits that I have planned so far…

Thank you for your patience with my inquisitive nature…

Your appreciative slave,

Guinevere

Here are both images he posted, that I asked to be credited for you all to decide if they are distracting, offensive or not to the viewer. He is entitled to his opinion if the BCD Studios watermark is offensive or not AND I'm entitled to believe if global warming is real or not! (LOL) It's ALL a matter of personal opinion and personal tastes etc.





Hope that clears up the other side to the story, as there are always two sides to everything. I am a professional photographer who offers professional photography services - Still Photos and HD Videos. I always listen and work closely with all my clients to find mutual understandings for the providers marketing use + needs. I have had NO complaints about my services from my clients and am happy to answer all questions about usage rights with the images we create. If they aren't using them then my time and talents are wasted. I'm not creating images just to sit on my hard drive for me to look at in the privacy of my studio. I am here to share beautiful images of stunning women and bring joy to the world. :P

BTW if you'd like to read a new post about Copyright in San Antonio about this calendar topic is here: http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=935458

Please feel fee to leave your comments about it representing KC, in the San Antonio forum! Have a great night all!

Thanks for the link bcdstudios. I just read the thread. My first thought is that Slave Guinevere, should make a trip up to KC lol. Then I found post #52 particularly interesting. Something that every lady should think about/ discuss before she hires a photographer.

The client may be offered © to images taken in the majority of private photography.
Interesting read here http://www.ppa.com/about/content.cfm?ItemNumber=1720

First of all.....on the original topic. Nice calendar.

Second....I have no dog in this fight over the pictures but I do have a question.....when a lady does a photo shoot who owns the pictures, the lady or the studio? Just curious.......

I saw the pic of Kat in person less than a week ago ... I was NOT offended

First of all.....on the original topic. Nice calendar.

Second....I have no dog in this fight over the pictures but I do have a question.....when a lady does a photo shoot who owns the pictures, the lady or the studio? Just curious....... Originally Posted by Bubba

Yeah..because sometimes..like most times it has the providers name inkmarked..or the studio. Kinda like a TM..or copyright.. When this thing was just getting started, Gabby did them for free..he believed the scenery made it worth while..

I hope he is doing well..

Thanks for the link bcdstudios. I just read the thread. My first thought is that Slave Guinevere, should make a trip up to KC lol. Then I found post #52 particularly interesting. Something that every lady should think about/ discuss before she hires a photographer. Originally Posted by growler

Yes Slave Guinevere should come to KC and I'll try to encourage her to do so. (Themed photo shoot provided by BCD Studios - hint, hint!!)

There is a big difference between my (PAID) client using the photos to market her business and a total stranger receiving an image and cropping or manipulating it to fit his / her use without asking the photographer (who watermarked the images originally) to do so. It's the fact that SL didn't think to ask the model or photog about the terms agreed upon to change the image. He just took it upon himself to manipulate an image that wasn't his and didn't ask anyone if he could do something like that on MY image, noting he didn't care about the other watermarked image he DIDN'T crop. Because his opinion my watermark was too BIG and OFFENSIVE. He just "played" the ignorant card - He didn't understand (or agree) about copyright laws until he talked to his "lawyer" friend. I simply asked him to repost the uncropped images…

BTW I approved and thought the calendar was a great idea for the ladies selected before the calendar post was made by SL. TyraXXX asked me to retouch her images specifically for that purpose and NEVER mentioned to me NOT to have my watermark on there specifically per SL request.

Obviously the ladies submitting the images had no problem submitting the watermarked images to SL to use in the calendar or use in their showcase ads etc (Or they could have asked me or cropped it themselves). Obviously many of my clients even add their own watermarks (and I have done so for them) to the images I create for them to avoid other providers stealing the images. I've never asked them to remove or take down those images.

I use many ways to promote my photo business - watermarks, forum posts, word of mouth, referrals from past satisfied clients. Just because a client hires me to shoot her photos doesn't mean that she owns the copyright - this isn't just me - this is an industry standard policy. However it is up to the individual photographer to decide how and what policy is best for their business + their clients.

My policy is simple: My (provider) clients can use their images I create to market their business in anyway they see fit. They can post them, share them, advertise them on websites, upload to their online model galleries. I have even shot adult content in the past that they can sell photos or videos on their website for VIP clients / paid memberships. Do I get a % or cut of that? NO. All I ask in return is if they are asked who does their photography they mention my business. Can a provider crop or edit the photos? Sure they can I'm not gonna spend my valuable time searching the internet for edited photos by my clients. Its just a professional courtesy we discuss prior to the shoot and 90% of past clients have had NO problems leaving my "discreet" studio watermark there. Thank you to my past clients who have honored this request!

If anyone cares to know more: (in Commercial / Advertising Photography) If a client hires a pro photog to shoot advertising images they pay a Usage Fee in addition to the cost of the shoot (Creative Fee = Photogs Day Rate), shoot expenses, retouching, online gallery, digital processing of images, studio rentals, talent, hair and makeup, etc. The Usage Rate can vary depending on where said client wants to use the images and the number of images to be used in the ad campaign. The client can choose to use the photos in print advertising, magazines, newspapers, TV broadcast, online, mobile, billboards etc. Through all this the photographer still retains the copyright and the Usage Rate is negotiated over a specific amount of time (3 months, 6 months) 1 year is standard. Once the negotiated time expires the client can decide to move on to another ad campaign or renew the license and run the ads again and pay the photog additional usage fees. This can continue as long as the client feels the images are producing quality advertising ROI. IF the client wishes to purchase the copyright outright (where the photog has NO rights to said images) normally that can be 3-5x the Usage Rate. Thus giving the client unlimited rights to use the images as they see fit and the option to sell said images to another party (getting $$ in return) BUT also avoids having to pay the photog for any $$ revenue into the future. Both sides get something in return - rights to use images + $$$.

Of course this concept doesn't really apply to small clients (such as providers) as they have limited photog budgets - of course if ANY provider wishes to buy the copyright from one of our shoots for $2000+ I am totally open for negotiation!! (BTW that's a joke) Don't shoot the messenger (me) to the above info, it's for educational purposes ONLY!

I work with all types of clients (large budgets / small budgets) and am always willing to work within our mutual means to do business. I'm a realist and know if I don't get hired to do a shoot then I'm "unemployed". However clients also understand that their images make them tons of money (assuming quality images) in return so its not something many clients worry about. Most people just wish to DO business, make money, build their business and hope to retire early!

Now my brain hurts - so to relieve the pressure from my brain, here is something else to think about: sexy spinner Kat VonDee and beautiful TyraXXX: (BOTH published calendar models!)

First of all.....on the original topic. Nice calendar.

Second....I have no dog in this fight over the pictures but I do have a question.....when a lady does a photo shoot who owns the pictures, the lady or the studio? Just curious....... Originally Posted by Bubba

Unless it's spelled out, in writing, they belong to the photographer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcdstudios
Hello San Antonio (Love your River walk BTW!), below are my thoughts to Still Lookings comments on his calendar post:

First off I NEVER asked or "demanded" the OP (Still Looking) to remove the images, I simply asked him to do ONE of three things:

1. Reupload the original uncropped images showing the watermarks.
2. Give proper credit to my photo business in a followup reply to the post.
3. Ask a Mod to update the cropped images with the uncropped photos originally submited by ladies.

Checked my PM'S & email and don't see this option!? (High Lighted in RED)

We (SL and I) chatted through PM first, and I never asked, demanded or requested a Mod take the images down. I never even contacted a Mod to inquire about the possibility of doing so. That was OP's decision which really only hurts the ladies in the end. I have NO problem with my clients (the ladies) choice to submit any images I create to ANY online competition, magazine or use in marketing for her business.

Well that a lie. You had a problem with these pictures? My first response was that the providers were requested to submit pictures without PHOTOGRAPHERS names on them. I respectfully asked you to check with the providers. Your immediate response was that you demanded credit for the pictures and they were you copy righted pictures. You offered to send me the same pictures with the large water mark. I elected to just remove the pictures because of you copy right claim.

Your posts in the Kansas forum in my threAD:
BTW I approved and thought the calendar was a great idea for the ladies selected before the calendar post was made by SL. TyraXXX asked me to retouch her images specifically for that purpose and NEVER mentioned to me NOT to have my watermark on there specifically per SL request.

You approved? Who in the wide world of sports do you think you are? What gives "you" the right to approve or disapprove of my threAD?

My policy is simple: My (provider) clients can use their images I create to market their business in anyway they see fit. They can post them, share them, advertise them on websites, upload to their online model galleries. I have even shot adult content in the past that they can sell photos or videos on their website for VIP clients / paid memberships. Do I get a % or cut of that? NO. All I ask in return is if they are asked who does their photography they mention my business. Can a provider crop or edit the photos? Sure they can I'm not gonna spend my valuable time searching the internet for edited photos by my clients. Its just a professional courtesy we discuss prior to the shoot and 90% of past clients have had NO problems leaving my "discreet" studio watermark there. Thank you to my past clients who have honored this request!

Another lie as you sure picked up on these did you not? Did you check with the providers to see if in fact I requested no PHOTOGRAPHERS names on pictures? Had you done so you would have found out I did. That didn't concern you. All you cared about is your gigantic banner being slapped across the pictures... giving "you" credit as you put it.

IF the client wishes to purchase the copyright outright (where the photog has NO rights to said images) normally that can be 3-5x the Usage Rate.

WOW! Do all your clients know this? I think I'll check with a few other photographers and see if that’s their policy including SKF'S photographer.


Thats why I am in business and do my craft. That includes his (SL) online calendar, which I specifically retouched the (offending) photo of TyraXXX as she requested for the original calendar post.  I only have a problem when someone (Still Looking: who's not my client!) deliberately crops off my watermark or changes my Copyrighted images to use for their own purpose but doesn't allow credit where credit is do.

BULL SHIT! Out of one side of your mouth you work with your clients out of the other side you DEMAND 3 to 5 times as much for the rights to the pictures or you will demand credit as you so eloquently put it.

I even offered to email him the uncropped original images if he provided me his email address. I did notice that he left Mrs. September: Victoria Jolie watermark (Santillo) on the bottom right side of the image, but decided to crop off mine?? I thought he said NO watermarks, humm? SL reasoning to this forum comment was it wasn't as BIG as mine and he found it less offensive. He never asked or gave me the choice to make a smaller watermark on my images he originally posted. If he HAD requested that I may have done so - VS - SL removing the images from the original calendar post. Say what? Yes, I am that flexible to special client requests!!!!


You’re not flexible your just a little cry baby who was pissed you couldn't get credit for your pictures. As I previously explained the IMAGECOAST covered most of the discrete photographers name and sadly I was unable to crop that picture in the format it was sent. Had I been able to do so, I would have done so.

So now you bitched in Kansas and here in San Antonio. We all know I cropped the pictures. We all know you took them. So is that it? Or will you be going to all 10 of the forums where the calendar was posted sharing your sad tale?
SL never contacted me prior to posting my images to ask if he could crop or manipulate the image to remove my watermark. Maybe if he had done so I would have been OK with it and allowed him to do so. He should ask and not assume what he is doing is right? Heck he knew who I was and had the ability to contact me about it, I never knew who he was prior to the first PM I sent him. He could have just emailed me from my website as Im normally pretty flexible when it comes to promoting ladies who use my photography services.



OMG! REALLY? If I would have contacted you it would of been ok? Ok now I see the caliber of person I'm dealing with. What a joke. I knew you? Exactly how arrogant are you? I have no idea who you are until I got your PM requesting the water mark be put back! Why in the hell would I contact you? Your relationship is with the providers not me. They should have told you I expected NO PHOTOGRAPHERS names on the pictures. If I email or proof will you just go away?

And you have been a board member almost as long as me. Lets not play stupid as to what the rules are.

Another one of your ridiculous posts in my Kansas threAD:
I'll be happy to post their entire PM string so people can make up their own minds as to what I asked and how it was handled on the other side with OP. Assuming its not a code violation to post PM discussions in open forums?

Their? Hummmmm are you also "their" agent? Code violation? WTF? The only code violation is that you took a little project around the holidays and put up a big stink because you think your special. You talk out of both sides of your mouth and most certainly are a hypocrite.

Here are both images he posted, that I asked to be credited for you all to decide if they are "distracting, offensive" or not to the viewer. He is entitled to his opinion if the BCD Studios watermark is offensive or not AND I'm entitled to believe if global warming is real or not! (LOL) It's ALL a matter of personal opinion and personal tastes etc. To each his own.

Global warming may or may not be real? You don't deal with facts do you? Do you just make this shit up as you go?





Hope that clears up the other side to the story, as there are always two sides to everything. I am a professional photographer who offers professional photography services - Still Photos and HD Videos. I always listen and work closely with all my clients to find mutual understandings for the providers marketing use + needs. I have had NO complaints about my services from my clients and am happy to answer all questions about usage rights with the images we create. If they aren't using them then my time and talents are wasted. I'm not creating images just to sit on my hard drive for me to look at in the privacy of my studio. I am here to share beautiful images of stunning women and bring joy to the world.

So long as you get credit or get paid 3-5 TIMES the "normal" rate.... right?

:P With that I say - Peace be to all!



The only thing more offensive than your large BANNER is a large banner or pictures I've seen where every inch is protected by an agled repeated water wark. I'll have much more time for you BCD when I'm back from vacation. I can't wait!

Yes Slave Guinevere should come to KC and I'll try to encourage her to do so. (Themed photo shoot provided by BCD Studios - hint, hint!!)

There is a big difference between my (PAID) client using the photos to market her business and a total stranger receiving an image and cropping or manipulating it to fit his / her use without asking the photographer (who watermarked the images originally) to do so. It's the fact that SL didn't think to ask the model or photog about the terms agreed upon to change the image.

I made it clear to every provider and to you in our very first correspondance that I wanted NO PHOTOGRAPHERS names on the pictures. I have told you I can forward proof of this but you should simply be able to verify this with the providers invloved. What is it going to take to get this through to you?


He just took it upon himself to manipulate an image that wasn't his and didn't ask anyone if he could do something like that on MY image, noting he didn't care about the other watermarked image he DIDN'T crop. Because his opinion my watermark was too BIG and OFFENSIVE. He just "played" the ignorant card - He didn't understand (or agree) about copyright laws until he talked to his "lawyer" friend. I simply asked him to repost the uncropped images…

BTW I approved and thought the calendar was a great idea for the ladies selected before the calendar post was made by SL. TyraXXX asked me to retouch her images specifically for that purpose and NEVER mentioned to me NOT to have my watermark on there specifically per SL request.

You approved? What a joke! Once again... do you want proof?

Obviously the ladies submitting the images had no problem submitting the watermarked images to SL to use in the calendar or use in their showcase ads etc (Or they could have asked me or cropped it themselves). Obviously many of my clients even add their own watermarks (and I have done so for them) to the images I create for them to avoid other providers stealing the images. I've never asked them to remove or take down those images.

I'm starting to think you were behind this whole thing based on how late I got the picture(s). If thats true you are one sad manipulating individual.

I use many ways to promote my photo business - watermarks, forum posts, word of mouth, referrals from past satisfied clients. Just because a client hires me to shoot her photos doesn't mean that she owns the copyright - this isn't just me - this is an industry standard policy. However it is up to the individual photographer to decide how and what policy is best for their business + their clients.

My policy is simple: My (provider) clients can use their images I create to market their business in anyway they see fit. They can post them, share them, advertise them on websites, upload to their online model galleries. I have even shot adult content in the past that they can sell photos or videos on their website for VIP clients / paid memberships. Do I get a % or cut of that? NO. All I ask in return is if they are asked who does their photography they mention my business. Can a provider crop or edit the photos? Sure they can I'm not gonna spend my valuable time searching the internet for edited photos by my clients. Its just a professional courtesy we discuss prior to the shoot and 90% of past clients have had NO problems leaving my "discreet" studio watermark there. Thank you to my past clients who have honored this request!

Discreet? What a joke!

If anyone cares to know more: (in Commercial / Advertising Photography) If a client hires a pro photog to shoot advertising images they pay a Usage Fee in addition to the cost of the shoot (Creative Fee = Photogs Day Rate), shoot expenses, retouching, online gallery, digital processing of images, studio rentals, talent, hair and makeup, etc. The Usage Rate can vary depending on where said client wants to use the images and the number of images to be used in the ad campaign. The client can choose to use the photos in print advertising, magazines, newspapers, TV broadcast, online, mobile, billboards etc. Through all this the photographer still retains the copyright and the Usage Rate is negotiated over a specific amount of time (3 months, 6 months) 1 year is standard. Once the negotiated time expires the client can decide to move on to another ad campaign or renew the license and run the ads again and pay the photog additional usage fees. This can continue as long as the client feels the images are producing quality advertising ROI. IF the client wishes to purchase the copyright outright (where the photog has NO rights to said images) normally that can be 3-5x the Usage Rate. Thus giving the client unlimited rights to use the images as they see fit and the option to sell said images to another party (getting $$ in return) BUT also avoids having to pay the photog for any $$ revenue into the future. Both sides get something in return - rights to use images + $$$.

WOW! 3-5 times the rate!? DAYUM and I don't mean in a good way!

Of course this concept doesn't really apply to small clients (such as providers) as they have limited photog budgets - of course if ANY provider wishes to buy the copyright from one of our shoots for $2000+ I am totally open for negotiation!! (BTW that's a joke) Don't shoot the messenger (me) to the above info, it's for educational purposes ONLY!

Yeah your real funny!

I work with all types of clients (large budgets / small budgets) and am always willing to work within our mutual means to do business. I'm a realist and know if I don't get hired to do a shoot then I'm "unemployed". However clients also understand that their images make them tons of money (assuming quality images) in return so its not something many clients worry about. Most people just wish to DO business, make money, build their business and hope to retire early!

Now my brain hurts - so to relieve the pressure from my brain, here is something else to think about: sexy spinner Kat VonDee and beautiful TyraXXX: (BOTH published calendar models!)

Originally Posted by bcdstudios

Pls put your fight away from the thread and stick to the subject, if not there is no point to keep this thread OPEN.

Hey, no offense Modda but there is a very good reason to keep the thread open. Every time they quote each other we get to see those amazing pics of Kat and Tyra again. Shhhhh!! :~p