Warley NEC National Show 25th & 26th November 2023

[WIMorrison]

2 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

 

OK; so where's this rule?

 

A good place to start is the Met Police, but a google search for Photographers rights will also throw them all up 😉

[AY Mod]

8 minutes ago, WIMorrison said:

A good place to start is the Met Police, but a google search for Photographers rights will also throw them all up 

 

Please quote your references; don't just make things up and say there's a reference out there. Oh, and any proof of experience where you were successful.

[AY Mod]

18 minutes ago, Phatbob said:

These rules? 😊

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
 

Can anybody honestly claim to remember all this lot? 😉

 

Those won't cover billing someone if they took a picture of you or your property whilst at a public event.

 

It does, however, provide clear reference to the contrary.

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/62

 

(2)The copyright in such a work is not infringed by—
(a)making a graphic work representing it,
(b)making a photograph or film of it, or
(c)[F1making a broadcast of] a visual image of it.

 

[PMP]

2 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

 

OK; so where's this rule?

^^ Absolutely. We’ve been through this many times over the years in ‘exhibition threads’. No such rule exists. If anyone paid up they must have been completely unaware of their rights, as the post is written, getting someone to pay could be dangerously close to fraudulent activity.
If as a freelance photographer I take a picture of an artefact at an exhibition, where photography isn’t controlled or prohibited/restricted by the T&C’s of my entry, I can use it as I wish. If I want to sell the image I can, if I want to use it to criticise the artefact (even unfairly/rudely/mocking etc) I can do so, as long as I don’t fall foul of libelous comments.

The simple rule is if you don’t want your artefact photographed and the image distributed unrestricted, do not exhibit at a public exhibition where photography is allowed.

[Chris M]

Speaking personally I always feel quite flattered if someone decides to publish a photo of one of my layouts. 

[PMP]

1 hour ago, Phatbob said:

These rules? 😊

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
 

Can anybody honestly claim to remember all this lot? 😉

If you’re working in a professional capacity it’s your duty to understand them and act accordingly. It’s not that difficult. 

[PMP]

19 minutes ago, Chris M said:

Speaking personally I always feel quite flattered if someone decides to publish a photo of one of my layouts. 

So do I, with certain exceptions.
An exhibition used an image of mine, of one of my layouts to advertise their show in a magazine. They didn’t ask to use the image which they stole from my website. Not only that, I wasn’t even attending the show, and it was a show I never would have attended as either exhibitor or visitor. So they were publishing my photo and using my layout image to sell their show. They didn’t tell the magazine the image was a copyright infringement. They had a very simple explanation given to them with two choices. Pay the invoice I’d provide, or make a suitable payment to a specific charity, they chose the second (cheaper) option.

Edited December 1, 2023 by PMP
Addition

[NHY 581]

1 hour ago, WIMorrison said:

A good place to start is the Met Police,

 

Go on.......................

 

 

3 hours ago, WIMorrison said:

As a photographer I know the 'rules' applicable to photography and I often have to quote them to people trying to stop me taking a picture of their building, monument, view, etc. The key is that I cannot be stopped taking the image provided I am standing in a public space, and it is that definition of a public space that it critical. I have even had recourse to asking the police to assist me with unruly security people who are not conversant with the law.

 

Many buildings are set back from the road, and they will often have marks on the pavement indicating where the footprint of the building actually extends to. These marks may be brass dots, they may be what appears to be a draining line, or sometimes they are even painted. Outside that line is a public space, inside belongs to the property owner and as such you must have their permission to photograph within the curtilage of their property.  

 

It is also the case that if you have to pay to enter somewhere the it is not public property and as such you will need to owners permission to take photographs and they would be within their rights to say that the images you take are their copyright. However, fortunately many places choose not to take up their rights and waive such requirements. In the case of the NEC it is private, though they seem to allow photography, though it is dependent upon the exhibition management to state whether photography is allowed, most will allow photographs, but not all do and it is always polite to ask permission from the owner of the exhibit if photography is permitted. Again, most will say yes because they are exhibiting and are happy to see them images taken - when someone asks me I always ask who the images are being taken for, when it is personal I have no objection, when it is commercial e.g. newspaper, magazine, etc. I always ask for their contact details and when I see them in print I ask for payment (though most make payment before hand)

 

The simple rule is, if in doubt ask permission, you will find that it is almost always provided and it is better to have permission than have an argument later.

 

 

Payment ?  So, a photographer takes an image of your layout and in conversation it's established that it may end up in a magazine and it becomes something you want payment for ? 

 

Being invited to exhibit your work at an exhibition is a privilege, well that's how I regard it anyway. If a photo of me or my trainset appears in print, that is a nice by product of that exhibition appearance. I have no idea how many times me or my layouts have photographed at a show or how the photos are used...and frankly, I'm not worried. 

 

But if you are worried, perhaps a large sign setting out your requirements should be affixed to your layouts at shows. 

 

That should break the ice between you and the paying public whom you're there to entertain........

 

Rob

[MarkSG]

1 hour ago, Phatbob said:

These rules? 😊

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
 

Can anybody honestly claim to remember all this lot? 😉

 

I don't think anybody is expected to remember all of it. Not least because there's more to it than just legislation - case law matters, too. But anyone who deals with intellectual property in a professional capacity (or even as a significantly involved amateur) should be familiar with the parts of it that apply to them, and be familiar with where to go to check the details that they don't know off the top of their head.

 

One of the biggest gotchas of intellectual property law, though, is that there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach. The rules which apply to photographs aren't the same as the rules which apply to 3D objects. The rules which apply to 3D objects aren't the same as the rules which apply to software. Design right is different to copyright. Copyright is different to database right. And so on. And that's before we even get into the qestion of derivative works. This is what tends to trip people up in cases where you're dealing with multiple inter-related rights and properties, of which railway models are a very good example.

[queensquare]

I don’t know the legal ins and outs but I dread to think how many thousands of pictures have been taken of my models over the years. On the whole I’m not bothered what the photographer wants to do with them although it is nice to be asked, mainly so I can pose a train for the photographer and get my ugly mug out of the way! I’m not even that bothered if they are subsequently published either on line or in a magazine as a postscript to a show. I did have one run in with an editor who published pictures (joint copyright, previously used in an article) where they wrote an article for one of the layout of the year type bookazines , without my knowledge that  was wrong from start to finish. Essentially he felt it was ok to just make it up!! After a bit of a battle the magazine printed an apology and corrections.

What I do object to is people banging away without asking with a flash. This is not only incredibly rude but can be dangerous. I’ve been known to get very grumpy if the offender objects to my objection. Usually they desist and apologise although one particularly objectional chap at Wells this year just carried on and then made the school boy error of squaring up to me - he was lucky to get out with his self and his camera intact!!

 

Jerry

 

Edit to say I’ve just reread this and I do come across as being a bit grumpy - I’m really not. Please feel free to take as many pictures of my models as you want - just don’t use a flash! 😊👍

Edited December 1, 2023 by queensquare

[Clive Mortimore]

All this talk about what is right or wrong with taking photographs at a show, no one asked me if it was OK that I appeared in the background of their photos.  I am the handsome bald headed bloke with a grey beard and glasses.

 

Did I say earlier on in this thread I enjoyed going to the NEC this year, I think that was the main reason I went, to have a fun time.

[woodenhead]

8 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

All this talk about what is right or wrong with taking photographs at a show, no one asked me if it was OK that I appeared in the background of their photos.  I am the handsome bald headed bloke with a grey beard and glasses.

 

Did I say earlier on in this thread I enjoyed going to the NEC this year, I think that was the main reason I went, to have a fun time.

No, I'm the handsome bald headed bloke with a grey beard and glasses.

 

Maybe that's the common factor to enjoying Warley.

Edited December 1, 2023 by woodenhead

[97406]

9 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

No, I'm the handsome bald headed bloke with a grey beard and glasses.

 

Imposter!

[Jol Wilkinson]

2 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

 

Go on.......................

 

 

 

 

Payment ?  So, a photographer takes an image of your layout and in conversation it's established that it may end up in a magazine and it becomes something you want payment for ? 

 

Being invited to exhibit your work at an exhibition is a privilege, well that's how I regard it anyway. If a photo of me or my trainset appears in print, that is a nice by product of that exhibition appearance. I have no idea how many times me or my layouts have photographed at a show or how the photos are used...and frankly, I'm not worried. 

 

But if you are worried, perhaps a large sign setting out your requirements should be affixed to your layouts at shows. 

 

That should break the ice between you and the paying public whom you're there to entertain........

 

Rob

If the photographer gets payment for selling photos of your artistic creation, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect them to contribute some of that to you?

 

I have had no issue with people taking photos of my layout, especially when they have the courtesy to ask. However I would feel less so if they profit from it without asking. That would include someone taking a video to show on a YouTube channel for which they get payment, especially if, as is sometimes the case their film skills leave something to be be desired.

[ikcdab]

On 30/11/2023 at 13:20, Chris M said:

I found the early removal of stand numbers rather annoying as well. It made my task of visiting certain layouts to pick up forms almost impossible. I will certainly be having a discussion on that subject.

 

In the other hand it has to be said that while these signs are not in fact made of reinforced titanium someone at the club has to print them out and then encapsulate them. Anyone fancy encapsulating 250 A4 sheets in their spare time? 

Crikey.  I navigated my way around all weekend perfectly well without having to refer to stand numbers once. You just follow the map and after you have walked round once, it's all pretty familiar.  These things easily get lost during breakdown and it is a pain to reprint every year, so I have every sympathy.

[AY Mod]

21 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

If the photographer gets payment for selling photos of your artistic creation, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect them to contribute some of that to you?

 

I have had no issue with people taking photos of my layout, especially when they have the courtesy to ask. However I would feel less so if they profit from it without asking. That would include someone taking a video to show on a YouTube channel for which they get payment, especially if, as is sometimes the case their film skills leave something to be be desired.

 

That may be your expectation but, I fear, you will remain continually disappointed.

[woodenhead]

21 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

Crikey.  I navigated my way around all weekend perfectly well without having to refer to stand numbers once. You just follow the map and after you have walked round once, it's all pretty familiar.  These things easily get lost during breakdown and it is a pain to reprint every year, so I have every sympathy.

What map?  I just walked everywhere around the hall and saw what I saw, no expectations on what might appear.

 

Luckily I took one turn and found Digitrains hidden away, the one stand I wanted to visit, if only I had looked for a map 🤣

[dasatcopthorne]

A very interesting point about YouTube channel owners featuring builders' layouts and earning money from advertisers.

 

I have never considered that.

 

Dave.

[Gilbert]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

No, I'm the handsome bald headed bloke with a grey beard and glasses.

 

Maybe that's the common factor to enjoying Warley.

I am Spartacus....

[The White Rabbit]

2 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

... Being invited to exhibit your work at an exhibition is a privilege, well that's how I regard it anyway. If a photo of me or my trainset appears in print, that is a nice by product of that exhibition appearance. I have no idea how many times me or my layouts have photographed at a show or how the photos are used...and frankly, I'm not worried. 

 

But if you are worried, perhaps a large sign setting out your requirements should be affixed to your layouts at shows.  ... 

 

And Rob's layout has just featured in Kernow's weekly newsletter. Personally I'd prefer to stay out of shot but I'm happy for people to photograph my layouts or dioramas for 'personal' use/interest/reference. I've also supplied images (free of charge) for exhibitions and shops (including Kernow) to help their publicity. Re more commercial use, irrespective of the intricacies of IPR law, I would regard it as good manners to ask.  

 

In the days when I was exhibiting, we did display a sign about photography - it's generally OK but PLEASE warn us if you want to use flash photography: 

 

1 hour ago, queensquare said:

... What I do object to is people banging away without asking with a flash. This is not only incredibly rude but can be dangerous. I’ve been known to get very grumpy if the offender objects to my objection. ... 

 

Plus one... I'm fine with non commercial photography and (as above) it's flattering. But unannounced flash photography gets me riled too. I've been dazzled more than once. 

[PMP]

29 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

If the photographer gets payment for selling photos of your artistic creation, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect them to contribute some of that to you?

 

I think people are getting to focused (see what I did there) on the subject being a model railway item. It’s no different to going to a classic car show, or an airshow. If a photographer took a good picture of a spitfire and sold it to planes weekly, you’d not expect them to reimburse the aircraft operator, or pilot. Take a nice picture of the red arrows display at your village fete, who do you pay?

Public space, no photo T&C’s restrictions, = open season.

[AY Mod]

14 minutes ago, PMP said:

I think people are getting to focused (see what I did there) on the subject being a model railway item. It’s no different to going to a classic car show, or an airshow. If a photographer took a good picture of a spitfire and sold it to planes weekly, you’d not expect them to reimburse the aircraft operator, or pilot. Take a nice picture of the red arrows display at your village fete, who do you pay?

Public space, no photo T&C’s restrictions, = open season.

 

The Flying Shortbreadtin will be fitted with a tablet catcher and Tam O'Shanter to accept high speed license fees.

[roundhouse]

On 01/12/2023 at 19:07, The White Rabbit said:

 

And Rob's layout has just featured in Kernow's weekly newsletter. Personally I'd prefer to stay out of shot but I'm happy for people to photograph my layouts or dioramas for 'personal' use/interest/reference. I've also supplied images (free of charge) for exhibitions and shops (including Kernow) to help their publicity. Re more commercial use, irrespective of the intricacies of IPR law, I would regard it as good manners to ask.  

 

In the days when I was exhibiting, we did display a sign about photography - it's generally OK but PLEASE warn us if you want to use flash photography: 

 

 

Plus one... I'm fine with non commercial photography and (as above) it's flattering. But unannounced flash photography gets me riled too. I've been dazzled more than once. 

Some years ago I had to put signs up on our layout at a show saying ' No flash photos please due to illness' (or something very similar) as one of our team just had an eye operation. Luckily all obliged but otherwise I am happy for people to take photos without asking and these days few use flash due to phones etc being so much better in low light. Its nice to know if they are going to be published so we can look out for them.

Edited December 3, 2023 by roundhouse

[melmerby]

9 minutes ago, The White Rabbit said:

But unannounced flash photography gets me riled too. I've been dazzled more than once. 

I never use flash, there is normally enough light to get a decent shot without, especially with more layouts using LED lighting and the NEC's background light level quite good.

[PMP]

15 minutes ago, dasatcopthorne said:

A very interesting point about YouTube channel owners featuring builders' layouts and earning money from advertisers.

 

I have never considered that.

 

Dave.

Videography is no different from stills photography in essence. The same basic rules apply in terms of legality and responsibilities.

YT, insta and Tiktok etc have just made it ‘easier’ for people to make money from images.