Did anyone catch the comms from this?
LifeNET Flight crashes in Drexel Hill PA
- Thread starter Yocuz
- Start date
- Status
I lived right around the corner from that church a number of years ago. Grew up about a mile or so from there. Truly a miracle everyone survived. Props to the pilot for getting the bird down with no property damage and no fatalities. Could truly have been worse
Pretty much what the Fire Chief said. Don't hear of many with an outcome like this. Thanks for posting the audio.
Close up shot of pilot and baby. Miraculous! That church must truly be a house of God
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,635
John, I photoshopped this picture to look as good as possible. It's a keeper. Having won many NPPA national awards over the years this is a winner! It will be in contention for photo of the year I'm sure.View attachment 114934
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,635
Yep not going crazy over anything, I've been in the news media business for 50 years. I'm an active member and subscriber of the Associated Press and this photo is on The Wire. The way the Associated Press works is... You contribute, you take LOL.
That is all wonderful, but irrelevant. You took a copyrighted photo, altered it and then posted your alteration to a public forum. That is why I said be careful. You are in violation of copyright law whether you want to admit it or not. The copyright holder could come after you for damages and have no trouble winning. With photography, the copyright is invoked when the shutter button is pressed.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,635
Not worth arguing about. Nppa guidelines say you cannot alter a picture that would be similar to taking out power lines, removing a Coke can from a table. Adding something or taking something away. Many awards have been revoked for that reason. Photoshopping a photo that has reproduced poorly for one reason or another is not altering a photo. Every news photographer Photoshop their pictures, paginators tone and color correct front pages so they look good. It's like the old days in the darkroom when you would dodge or burn someone's face that was lighter or darker.
Again the photo is on The Wire. Any paper or subscriber can pick it up and use it and certainly would Photoshop it to reproduce the best way it can be in their paper. Often when you publish in a paper each press or paginator will treat a picture differently.
No profit was made by showing the members that photo, again that was already out there.
Thanks for your concern though, I think we're okay.
Again the photo is on The Wire. Any paper or subscriber can pick it up and use it and certainly would Photoshop it to reproduce the best way it can be in their paper. Often when you publish in a paper each press or paginator will treat a picture differently.
No profit was made by showing the members that photo, again that was already out there.
Thanks for your concern though, I think we're okay.
Spoken like a true Clark Kent beat reporter.
Operative words - "their pictures". That does not give you the right to alter their pictures. You altered the color and added a caption. NPPA guidelines are not law. It is the law that counts and if that was my photo you and I would be in front of a judge if you refused my request to take your alteration down. As a photographer, I am sensitive to people who take other's photos and change them without permission. Carry on and best wishes. You are correct in one respect - it is no longer worth talking about. What happens, happens. I am guilty of expecting too much from people.
What about the pilot who says its not his picture did he sign a release?
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,635
We may be getting wires crossed here and I can understand that. If anyone goes out and takes a picture it's their picture and they have copyright.
The pictures that we're talking about here are Associated Press photos. Just for fun I looked up that photo and it was used all over the world including the Daily Mail.
When I took a picture when I was a employed full-time as a fully accredited news photographer for a daily accredited newspaper when I push that shutter button I did not have copyright of that photo. My newspaper did.
My newspaper was a subscriber to the Associated Press and the understanding is you can use any photo that's on The Wire and Associated Press can ask for any photo that you have published for the world's subscribers to use. After I retired and worked freelance I became a subscriber myself.
There were cases when a private citizen would come in with a photo and want to sell it to us. For example a Princeton University girl took a picture of Russell Crowe giving her the finger during the filming of Beautiful Minds at Princeton University. She called me oh, I was the photo editor at that time and asked if she could sell the picture. Sure... I said how about a hundred bucks and she said great. I ran up to the controller's office and the business officer cut me a check for her and I ran out there grabbed the roll of film. You signed a paper that said that she owned the photo but we had the right to use it in our paper as much as we wanted but we would not put it on the AP wire. When I got back to the paper it was a kind of crappy photo but I was able to photoshop it and it came out great. It also ended up on the New York Daily News page 2, however LOL they paid her $1,500... She still owned All Rights.
Don't want to get into a pi**ing match here but this is what I did for a living
As far as the pilot goes Buddy, any event that happens in the public domain can be photographed. My policy always was if someone really protested having their picture taken I respected their wishes even though my editors would not like me doing that... in this case, in a public event a news photographer takes the picture. I'm sure there's lots of criminals who would object to having their perp walk photographed, too bad.
Believe me there were many photos that I took that I personally would not show my executive editor or publisher because I didn't want them to go into the paper, I remember a five-year-old girl crushed under an overturned car and I never showed them the picture. If they knew I made that decision I would have been fired on the spot. They were the ones who were responsible for making that decision, not me.
The pictures that we're talking about here are Associated Press photos. Just for fun I looked up that photo and it was used all over the world including the Daily Mail.
When I took a picture when I was a employed full-time as a fully accredited news photographer for a daily accredited newspaper when I push that shutter button I did not have copyright of that photo. My newspaper did.
My newspaper was a subscriber to the Associated Press and the understanding is you can use any photo that's on The Wire and Associated Press can ask for any photo that you have published for the world's subscribers to use. After I retired and worked freelance I became a subscriber myself.
There were cases when a private citizen would come in with a photo and want to sell it to us. For example a Princeton University girl took a picture of Russell Crowe giving her the finger during the filming of Beautiful Minds at Princeton University. She called me oh, I was the photo editor at that time and asked if she could sell the picture. Sure... I said how about a hundred bucks and she said great. I ran up to the controller's office and the business officer cut me a check for her and I ran out there grabbed the roll of film. You signed a paper that said that she owned the photo but we had the right to use it in our paper as much as we wanted but we would not put it on the AP wire. When I got back to the paper it was a kind of crappy photo but I was able to photoshop it and it came out great. It also ended up on the New York Daily News page 2, however LOL they paid her $1,500... She still owned All Rights.
Don't want to get into a pi**ing match here but this is what I did for a living
As far as the pilot goes Buddy, any event that happens in the public domain can be photographed. My policy always was if someone really protested having their picture taken I respected their wishes even though my editors would not like me doing that... in this case, in a public event a news photographer takes the picture. I'm sure there's lots of criminals who would object to having their perp walk photographed, too bad.
Believe me there were many photos that I took that I personally would not show my executive editor or publisher because I didn't want them to go into the paper, I remember a five-year-old girl crushed under an overturned car and I never showed them the picture. If they knew I made that decision I would have been fired on the spot. They were the ones who were responsible for making that decision, not me.
Last edited:
Just curious as I see several blurred out more and more now.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,635
Yeah and some Publications like the tabloids that will happen because of the legal clout of the subject and the threat to sue. It's easier just to blur out the picture then to get into a legal battle that the publication would probably win. Also in some cases innocent people get caught up in photos with bad people and in that case it's also legal issue so as not to besmirch or incriminate an innocent person. We never blurred-out photos, we just didn't use them.
The pilot was seriously injured. He was undergoing surgery and was unable to talk to the ntsb personnel.
- Status