First time published outside of the sport

[The111 0]

I posted about this in the wingsuit forum a few days ago, hope nobody minds the repost here.

I owe .

CLICK and see attached. Physics was my favorite class in college, so that makes it even cooler.

The book ships retail in February, I think.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[DSE 3]

So very, very sweet, my friend. I know you worked hard to see this through, and you should be damned proud.
Heck, I'm damned proud for you!

[freefalle 0]

nice Matt, very nice.

[SuperGirl 0]

wow, that's soooo awesome.
If my textbook looked like that in college, I would have switched majors to physics :)

[Zee 0]

Congrats man! That's a cool shot too...

Action©Sports

[skybytch 259]

Nice! Considering how much textbooks cost, I hope you got a good sized check.

[JSE 1]

I'm curious what the process was. Did you submit photos directly to them? Did they find you? Good work.

[Fast 0]

Congrats!!

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[The111 0]

Quote

I'm curious what the process was. Did you submit photos directly to them? Did they find you? Good work.

They found me. The author of the book specifically requested a shot of wingsuits in flight, and the graphic designer who was putting the book together tracked me down. Luckily for me there's not a lot of other people out there shooting wingsuit photos.

This is the 8th edition of the textbook, they've had other athletic photos (swimmers, skateboarders) on the covers of previous editions.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[The111 0]

Quote

Nice! Considering how much textbooks cost, I hope you got a good sized check.

I was a little unsure how to work the deal but DSE and Norman Kent both spent some time on the phone with me helping me make sure I didn't get screwed over.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[pcalandra 0]

Congratulations, thats awesome!

[Laszloimage 0]

Very nice Matt, Congrats!!!
Did you get credits in the book somewhere?
Descent pay?

I also have a book cover come out this year
author: Thomas A. Koldicz
title: In extreme leadership
publisher: Wiley&Sons

-Laszlo-

[The111 0]

Quote

Very nice Matt, Congrats!!!
Did you get credits in the book somewhere?
Descent pay?

Yes, inside the cover it lists my name and website too. I think the pay was ok.

Post up a pic of yours when it comes out!

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[ltdiver 3]

Very cool! I -knew- there was a reason I liked physics!

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[champu 1]

As a skydiver / wingsuit flyer / photographer / physics geek, I love this cover.

Very nice. Congratulations.

[Laszloimage 0]

Right on Matt
Keep it on!
...and by the way you worked for it!

[shunkka 0]

excelent job.... congrats

one question for u guys
i have to ask for permison (of the subject) to publish a photo if it`s not a public event?
if it`s a public event it`s clear... we dont have to... but if not?
thank you and congrats for the shot and work again

-------------------------
"jump, have fun, pull"

[dragon2 0]

The copyright laws are different per country. In The Netherlands, it depends on the location - if I take photos inside your house I'd have to ask your permission for publication always. Also it depends on the person - if I take a picture in a public setting where you are recognizable AND you are damaged by publication you may refuse. Now "getting damaged" is hard to prove - if I took a photo of you looking at our RedLight District, it may damage you but tough luck it's your own fault. "Getting damaged" is way harder to prove for newsevents and for celebreties.
If someone sees you taking photos even in a public setting and they ask you to STOP right now, then you can also not publish, if they complain later, tough luck.
If what you are photographing is copyrighted (certain buildings, statues, art etc) you can also not publish without permission.
If you are photographing "for hire" you can also not publish without permission (tandem videos anyone???).

Like I said, these "rules" may be different in your country.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[shunkka 0]

thanks for the reply
my question was more about "ethiquete" than legal stuff... with legal stuff is pretty simple... if it`s a public event where is no need for special permison to take pictures i can take and publish...

it`s about ethiquete... do you guys ask (or inform) the subject before publish?

thank you

-------------------------
"jump, have fun, pull"

[DSE 3]

Quote

The copyright laws are different per country. In The Netherlands, it depends on the location - if I take photos inside your house I'd have to ask your permission for publication always. Also it depends on the person - if I take a picture in a public setting where you are recognizable AND you are damaged by publication you may refuse. Now "getting damaged" is hard to prove - if I took a photo of you looking at our RedLight District, it may damage you but tough luck it's your own fault. "Getting damaged" is way harder to prove for newsevents and for celebreties.
If someone sees you taking photos even in a public setting and they ask you to STOP right now, then you can also not publish, if they complain later, tough luck.
If what you are photographing is copyrighted (certain buildings, statues, art etc) you can also not publish without permission.
If you are photographing "for hire" you can also not publish without permission (tandem videos anyone???).

Like I said, these "rules" may be different in your country.

Actually, the copyright laws are virtually identical in all but two countries. Berne Convention set most of the standards in place around the world. Release requirements vary (AFAIK) slightly, but not by much.

What you describe as the laws in the Netherlands are identical to most laws around the world.
As an example however, if I took a photo of Joe Blow coming out of a brothel in Amsterdam, tough luck, unless I intend on selling the photo to a magazine, and in that event, even in the Netherlands, the publisher requires a release.
Matt had all of his release etc information in order, based on the conversations I had with him.
Tandem videos may be published from our DZ, because part of the waiver waives the owners right to copyright on the jump. We (the DZ) owns all copyrights with regards to any tandem jump. One of our guys had a slot on Oprah recently, had we not had that waiver, it could have been a mess.
Additionally, we are required (as are the Netherlands) to place a notice of filming in a public place, at all reasonable entrances to the area being filmed, notifying the general public that we're filming in that area, and by entering the area, they are implying consent to be filmed.
Celebrities, politicians, sports icons are fair game anywhere in the world.

[dragon2 0]

Are you sure all countries have the same rules? Asia, Africa, South America, Eastern Europe? For instance in Thailand during WT2004 a photo by Bruno ended up on the frontpage of the national newspaper, nice full color big print, courtesy of the local photo shop. That same photo shop had loads of Bruno's pics plastered across it's walls and columns Now if they don't care about that, are you sure they care about the people who are actually IN the pic? Try and publish an unfavorable picture of the royal family there and the penalties are severe. Everyone else, I have my doubts

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[DSE 3]

What someone (or a newspaper) may have done and what the laws are are obviously two very different things. Am I sure? I'm sure only that there are few countries that didn't sign Berne and Berne is where the "rules of the universe" were set. Thailand is a signator. China regularly allows violations, and they're a signatory too.

Not knowing the specifics, maybe Bruno gave them a release? How did they get a printable copy if it didn't come from him? Dunno...either way...there are laws, and then there are what people do and often get away with.

you can find a list of signatories to the Berne here

[BMFin 0]

Quote

Actually, the copyright laws are virtually identical in all but two countries. Berne Convention set most of the standards in place around the world. Release requirements vary (AFAIK) slightly, but not by much.

As far as I have understod the main purpose for the bern convention is to clarify the problems of choosing wich national law should apply to a certain international situation.

Its purpose is not to standardize the substance of the law internationally. Its only to tell you wich law we should apply in situation X.

Further more the intellectual property law varys very much internationally. US differs from European significantly...

[dragon2 0]

Quote

Not knowing the specifics, maybe Bruno gave them a release? How did they get a printable copy if it didn't come from him?

He had given the shop a cd-r with photos to print, to sell I presume. Release my ^&*. Needless to say the camera team switched to another shop pronto.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

Actually, the copyright laws are virtually identical in all but two countries. Berne Convention set most of the standards in place around the world. Release requirements vary (AFAIK) slightly, but not by much.

Further more the intellectual property law varys very much internationally. US differs from European significantly...

Please cite specifics. Having shot, released, edited, produced, and broadcast in virtually every EU country, I've yet to see a significant difference in the past 10 years. Saw them early on, can specifically recall when I was recording for Virgin, copyright on the master had to be spelled out in all of the languages of the EU and Scandinavia. Netherlands, Finland, have unique laws regarding software copyrights, which in most countries is considered to be IP, but in other areas, falls into a variety of categories.
The Netherlands also offer authors of work greater authority in works for hire, but "auteursrechten" is not very far off the map as Berne applies.
Berne does far more than "clarify the problems of choosing wich national law should apply to a certain international situation."
As one example, Berne immediately grants copyright to all authors of all works in all signatory and observing countries, at the time of the authorship of the work. All of the add-ons to Berne, which most countries have also endorsed (such as WIPO, UCC, WCT, IPPT, and a few others I can't recall from memory) have only served as structural support for Berne. There is no such concept as "international copyright" and Berne does attempt to address that issue as a separate entity, however. There is a list on the LOC.gov site showing who unilaterally and bilaterally supports copyright relationships with the US, and for better or for worse, the world predominantly follows the lead of the US in this particular area. The last amendment to Berne served to effectively set this position in stone for a long while. No one else wants to spend the $$ doing their own thing.
I'm not a lawyer, I just play one on the internet. As a musician, composer, DP, and all the related avenues, this has become a passion for me over the past 25 years, when I first entered into a copyright lawsuit against Disney (and prevailed). FWIW, I also produced a DVD that folks should see (if you're interested in the minutiae of copyright.

Dragon, that *really* sucks about the shop. That's one of those situations where they're in violation, but you're in-country for a short time and to prosecute in a small area would not only be costly, but potentially impossible for an outsider to achieve.