MJ.ackson
Michael Jackson at a Las Vegas Casino 2 years ago6 total reviews
Comment from Shoelace
Not the greatest shot in the world, but still a cool photo! I agree, I am not a big MJ fan, but he is a celeb, and it is always cool when you can take their picture!
The deal on selling this photo. You as the photographer have every right to sell this without MJ's permission. It is in a public location, he was walking out of a public bathroom, so you have every right to take a photo and sell it. What you cannot do is take the photo and use it as a marketing tool to promote something. This would then be illegal because you are using MJ's name and "celeb" presence to sell your product, and to do this legally, you would need a contract in place. Bottom line, if you want to sell it, you can. I would still check with a lawyer however just to be sure if you end having someone that wants to buy it.
Shoelace
   |
Not the greatest shot in the world, but still a cool photo! I agree, I am not a big MJ fan, but he is a celeb, and it is always cool when you can take their picture!
The deal on selling this photo. You as the photographer have every right to sell this without MJ's permission. It is in a public location, he was walking out of a public bathroom, so you have every right to take a photo and sell it. What you cannot do is take the photo and use it as a marketing tool to promote something. This would then be illegal because you are using MJ's name and "celeb" presence to sell your product, and to do this legally, you would need a contract in place. Bottom line, if you want to sell it, you can. I would still check with a lawyer however just to be sure if you end having someone that wants to buy it.
Shoelace
Comment Written 01-Jun-2004
Comment from Ukman
As far as I'm concerned putting a photo of a star on this site is very poor taste and to try profiting from this is worst. It is good quality as far as photography is concerned but that's it.
reply by the author on 23-May-2004
|
As far as I'm concerned putting a photo of a star on this site is very poor taste and to try profiting from this is worst. It is good quality as far as photography is concerned but that's it.
Comment Written 22-May-2004
reply by the author on 23-May-2004
-
Well that is your opinion Thank You.
Comment from Cricket
Great shot for holding the camera above your head and not being able to see. The clarity is good. No, don't care a bit for MJ but you did a good job of getting a picture.
Many Blessings,
Cricket
reply by the author on 21-May-2004
|
Great shot for holding the camera above your head and not being able to see. The clarity is good. No, don't care a bit for MJ but you did a good job of getting a picture.
Many Blessings,
Cricket
Comment Written 20-May-2004
reply by the author on 21-May-2004
-
Thanks! I do not care for him myself but he is a celeb. so what the heck! LOL
Comment from Stanbo
That is a good shot maybe you should call yourself paparatzi. This is a very good shot it does not look like you were holding it over your head. Nice job
reply by the author on 20-May-2004
|
That is a good shot maybe you should call yourself paparatzi. This is a very good shot it does not look like you were holding it over your head. Nice job
Comment Written 20-May-2004
reply by the author on 20-May-2004
-
Thanks I reall did I was happy it turned out so well everyone kept stopping me to see the photo I had taken I wanted to pint them up and go back and sell them to people LOL!
Comment from Papa
likaut, certainly one does not ordinarily get the opportunity to photograph a celebrity. So, congratulations on that. Although I have to add that these people must be plagued by folks wanting this kind of contact. In any case, there is far too much glare on the subject to be able to say it's a good image, and so much of the other areas are blacked out and very unappealing.
Peace, Papa
reply by the author on 20-May-2004
|
likaut, certainly one does not ordinarily get the opportunity to photograph a celebrity. So, congratulations on that. Although I have to add that these people must be plagued by folks wanting this kind of contact. In any case, there is far too much glare on the subject to be able to say it's a good image, and so much of the other areas are blacked out and very unappealing.
Peace, Papa
Comment Written 20-May-2004
reply by the author on 20-May-2004
-
Thanks. I know he is a sore subject But I think this is a cool pic.
Comment from Sysop912
Personally I would pull it and contact a tabloid with your story and photo, it might well be work something more than a few reviews. As far as I know, you are perfectly with-in your right to photograph public figures in a public place. If your image was taken in front of a urinal (if he uses one), I think there might be other implications.
Now about the image, even though your technique was inventive and worked, as it currently stands as a photograph, there are a few flaws that can be easily corrected. First being the shadowy shoulder and partial head of the figure on the right blocking some of your target. My suggestion would be to crop that person out of the shot. It looks reasonably sharp though hie face does seem slightly overexposed, but that could be the reflection of so much plastic and glue
Good image overall with a few corrections I think this could be a great shot. I'm not sure that everyone has read or understands the criteria for critiquing photos, so don't be surprised if you get a lot of Five star ratings for this image. I'm afraid that folks may not rate it on the photographic merit, but rather on the rare glimpse of a very well known personality. Read the other reviews you receive carefully and make the assessment yourself as to what they will be rating you on.
On my first note, I really do think you should explore the possibilities of marketing this image to the tabloids with your story, it may net you some residual income. (Just a thought)
Brian
reply by the author on 20-May-2004
|
Personally I would pull it and contact a tabloid with your story and photo, it might well be work something more than a few reviews. As far as I know, you are perfectly with-in your right to photograph public figures in a public place. If your image was taken in front of a urinal (if he uses one), I think there might be other implications.
Now about the image, even though your technique was inventive and worked, as it currently stands as a photograph, there are a few flaws that can be easily corrected. First being the shadowy shoulder and partial head of the figure on the right blocking some of your target. My suggestion would be to crop that person out of the shot. It looks reasonably sharp though hie face does seem slightly overexposed, but that could be the reflection of so much plastic and glue
Good image overall with a few corrections I think this could be a great shot. I'm not sure that everyone has read or understands the criteria for critiquing photos, so don't be surprised if you get a lot of Five star ratings for this image. I'm afraid that folks may not rate it on the photographic merit, but rather on the rare glimpse of a very well known personality. Read the other reviews you receive carefully and make the assessment yourself as to what they will be rating you on.
On my first note, I really do think you should explore the possibilities of marketing this image to the tabloids with your story, it may net you some residual income. (Just a thought)
Brian
Comment Written 20-May-2004
reply by the author on 20-May-2004
-
Thanks. I will check into the tabloid sugestion and I think I did pretty good for not even know what I was going to get by holding the camera above everyone and shooting blind!