me, Me, ME, ME! (the perils of publication).

One of the delights of having your photographic work ‘out there’, is having it seen.

Unfortunately most of the time other people see it too. I say ‘unfortunately’ because sometimes ‘interesting’ things can happen as a consequence of it’s visibility. Such as the deluded “do you realise that little smudge in the bottom corner of your calendar image is my house and I’m not happy with it”  (well sell the house if you’re not happy with it) and the “I’m in your picture, so you owe me some compensation” gambit.  And so on.

I’ve had this sort of thing happen several times, but a professional photog friend had never in 40 years of photography experienced anything like it and was really worried when he was contacted by letter with a thinly veiled threat of legal action.

The letter he received went roughly as follows:

 

Dear Sir,

I noticed in the xxxxx Ski supplement to the xxxxx News, an image showing the piste in xxxxxx Ski Area with various skiers coming down and in the middle a very noticeable skier wearing a bright red ski suit.

On closer inspection I noted this individual is me, and no permission was sought nor given for this. I have consulted my solicitor and he has advised me to keep the matter informal initially, and simply write to you to ask for some response and to discuss payment.

I will presume that as a professional photographer you will be receiving payment for your work and as you have considered my skiing ability and colourful clothing suitable to be included in your image, it is only fair that I too should be compensated.

I have been skiing for 20 years and it has cost me a considerable amount of money in travel, lift passes, instruction and other expenses to get to the level of ability that I might be considered as suitably skilled to be your model. Bearing this fact in mind, I therefore request that you submit a reasonable proposal for settlement which I will discuss with my solicitor.

Failing a response from you I will instruct my solicitor to pursue this matter immediately.

Yours sincerely,

xxxx xxxxx

 

I told him to relax and that I would compose a response on his behalf which he could sign and send. It went something like this (I don’t have the original to hand to copy, and apologies also for any dodgy maths that may have slipped through my hasty calculator session, error-spotting is welcomed!):

 

Dear xxxx xxxxx

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Thank you for your letter  which I read with interest, and although under no obligation to respond, nor seek your permission for publication, I have decided I will avail myself of your offer to discuss the matter “informally”. Having considered your request, and although under no obligation to pay you, I have decided to offer you a payment as a gesture of goodwill. This should not be taken to infer any acceptance of ‘liability’ in any form.

Based on your supplied information, I have made the following calculations, and you will note, overestimating costs in several areas.

You clearly state you have been skiing for 20 years. From experience a skiing day is approx. 6 hours. So on this basis I calculate as follows:

Time spent skiing over 20 years:

Assuming 1 ski holiday of two weeks each year for 20 years (12 days skiing x 6 hours = 72 hours x 20 years) = 1440 hours

UK skiing 2 weekends/month x 6 months (Nov – Apr) = 24 days x 6 hours = 144 hours x 20 years = 2880 hours

Total hours actually skiing 4320 hours

Costs

Two week ski holidays @ average £1000 x 20 years = £20,000
Lift passes abroad – 20 years @ £200 = £4000
UK skiing travel – 12 weekends x 20 years = 240 weekends @ £50 fuel = £12,000
UK skiing accommodation 240 weekends x 3 nights @ £25 = £18,000
Lift passes 240 weekends x 2 days = 480 days x £20 = £9600
Ski gear – salopettes every 3 years = 7 sets @ £300 = £2100
Boots every 4 years = 5 pairs @ £200 = £1000
Skis every 4 years = 5 pairs @ £250 = £1250
Ski instruction abroad for first 10 years (generously assuming you might be a slow learner)  10 holidays x 12 days = 120 days @ £50 day =£6000
Ski instruction UK (because you may be a slow learner 10 years x 12 weekends = 120 weekends x 2 days = 240 days @ £40 day = £9600
Total skiing costs = £83,550
Total hours spent skiing = 4320
cost per hour £19.34  which I will round up to £20

On the basis that 1 hour is 3600 seconds, I calculate that each second of your time (cost per hour divided by 3600)  is worth 0.5555555 of a penny.

Based on my normal shutter speed of 1/1000 sec (that is ‘one thousandth of a second’) which I use for capturing ski action:

I estimate that you are due  the sum of 0.0005555 pence (0.5555555 divided by 1/1000).

As I’m generous I will round it up to a full 1p which I think you will agree offers you excellent reward for sharing your “hard won skills”.

Please submit either:

A) your invoice for this sum for immediate payment (including VAT if appropriate);   or

B) your own calculations for a different amount, including details of ALL expenses incurred over your twenty year career, and copies of all receipts (tickets, lift passes, accommodation, fuel receipts etc). These should be accompanied by a signed declaration from your solicitor that they have been scrutinised by him/her and deemed to be appropriate and accurate. Once I have received these I will gladly recalculate your remuneration based on your own wholly accurate figures and issue your payment forthwith.

It has been a pleasure working with you.

Yours sincerely

 

xxxxx xxxxxx

 

 

We were extremely surprised that the individual did not communicate further, not even to offer thanks for the remarkably generous settlement offered.

Some people are just so ungrateful.

 

 

 

Author — John Macpherson

John MacPherson was born and lives in the Scottish Highlands. He trained as a welder in the Glasgow shipyards, before completing an apprenticeship as a carpenter, and then qualified as a Social Worker in Disability Services. Along the way he has cooked on canal barges, trained as an Alpine Ski Leader & worked as an Instructor for Skiers with disabilities, been a canoe instructor, and tutor of night classes in carpentry, stained glass design and manufacture, and archery. He has travelled extensively on various continents, undertaking solo trips by bicycle, or motorcycle. He has had narrow escapes from an ambush by terrorists, been hit by lightning, caught in an erupting volcano, trapped in a mobile home by a tornado, kidnapped by a dog's hairdresser, rammed by a basking shark and was once bitten by a wild otter. He has combined all this with professional photography, which he has practised for over 35 years. He teaches photography and acts as a photography guide & tutor in the UK and abroad. His biggest challenge is keeping his 27 year old Land Rover 110 on the road. He loves telling and hearing stories.

Discussion (17 Comments)

  1. Peter says:

    Nice one John:) Particularly your assumption that he might be a slow learner…

  2. Jon Sparks says:

    Love the reply, but in theory it does still concede the principle

  3. sam says:

    Absolutely Priceless!!

  4. Sonny T says:

    I burst my right lung laughing

  5. Fast Eddie says:

    Excellent.

  6. Leslie Stoddart says:

    Brilliant response and i’m not surprised that you didn’t hear from them again! I think I’ve spotted an error though. When you estimate the amount due to them the calculation should be “0.5555555 multiplied by 1/1000”. If you divide it then it actually works out at at £555.55

  7. You’ve lost me there Leslie! How can dividing make something bigger? (speaking as a mathslexic)
    Is this some fraction monkey business? My calculator shows the opposite to what you just said…..puzzled!

  8. Leslie Stoddart says:

    It’s because you are dividing by a fraction. Think about if it was a really long exposure, say 5 seconds. The sum would then be 0.555555555 (cost per second) x 5 (number of seconds) Because you are using an exposure time of under 1 second the sum doesn’t change. 1/1000 written as a decimal is 0.001. Try the sum on your calculator again but use 0.001.

  9. Oh bugger!

    I did add a disclaimer that the maths might be suspect! The original (luckily) did not have the written calculation that appears above in parenthesis: (0.5555555 divided by 1/1000) only the resulting figure.

    So my estimation of the costs is therefore correct, but my written expression of the maths is wrong! Oops. Well spotted.

    Thats duckrabbit for you – looked at from one perspective it’s a rabbit, and from another it’s definitely a duck.

  10. PS will you do my tax return for me please? 🙂

  11. Absolutly brilliant cant praise you enough you entertained him to the bitter end.

  12. Very funny! I’ll be in touch when I next need an amusing P*** Off letter!

  13. John Starns says:

    Brilliant, just brilliant!

  14. Carlin says:

    haha fantasic, just tweeted this 🙂

  15. Ian Price says:

    Excellent story

    Must admit I would have panicked if I received such a letter

    Ian..

  16. Tracey Wilkinson says:

    Fantastic, I know where to come now when I get my first stupid request. There is actually a similar story on Talk Photography; the tog took a picture at a public festival and the sponsor (a large company) complained about some stree images he posted that had their logo in the picture and claimed copyright infringement (it’s classed as incidental inclusion so doesn’t count as copyright infringement).

  17. James Thorpe says:

    Awesome response! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.