photographing/recording musicians

Subject: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 05:04 AM

I do not mind being photographed providing im asked[like il duce I prefer a sideways profile].providing it is not being used for commercial purposes[including magazines etc]I also feel the same way about recording
I feel it is discourteous not to ask,how do others feel?Dick Miles.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 05:23 AM

Dunno it never happened to me.
You must be incredibly handsome and a very good artiste to have such problems.LOL
(Yes we know he is)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 07:34 AM

In my experience, it's bloody hard getting people to stop photographing you when you're performing, no matter how you ask. It's very off-putting having all those camera flashes when you're trying to read your words.

It's even harder getting a decent picture of someone performing - they always seem to be grimacing, or have their eyes closed or bob about at the wrong moment. It's far easier to get them to pose beforehand or afterwards.

It's funny how an audience think nothing of clicking away at a folk concert but would hardly dream of doing so in a production of 'The Messiah'.

LTS

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Leadfingers
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 07:40 AM

I just wish that some of the people who have 'snapped' us when we were working would be polite enough to get an E mail address and forward copies !

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: M.Ted
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 09:11 AM

These days, at the beginning of nearly everything, in addition to being asked not to take photos, make recordings, or shoot videos, and in addition to being told to turn their cell phones off, people are also being asked to turn off everything with a luminous display, since it is impossible to list the range of other devices that people now bring to, and attempt to use during, theatrical performances. I suspect this, and not any sort of deference to high art, is why your "Messiah" is not photographically interupted.

For myself, I nearly never take pictures of folksingers, for the reasons that Liz has put forth. If you want good pictures, actors are the ticket, as they have studied such things as smiling, keeping their eyes open, and standing straight.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: JeZeBeL
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 10:45 AM

I love taking photos of musicians, mainly close ups of fingers moving along the instrument (action shots if you like), but I ALWAYS ask before I take any photos, and the furthest they get is my living room wall, or my photo albumn.

I have taken my mini disk player to sessions before, but this is purely to aid me in learning new tunes. Again, I always ask if people mind and if they do, then I don't do it.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: PoppaGator
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 02:00 PM

It's very off-putting having all those camera flashes when you're trying to read your words.

A good argument against reading lyrics when you're supposedly "performing"!

No offense, Liz (or anyone else who appears on a bandstand with "cheat sheets"). As I freely admitted in the recent thread on this subject, I've come to rely on notes at which I can glance, whereas when I was younger and led a much less complicated life, I could sing purely from memory, and I had a much larger working repertoire than I do today.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 02:49 PM

In these days of mobile phone cameras & recorders, there's very little anyone can do about it, unless you spot it.
I think it's the height of bad manners, incidentally, to photograph or record anyone without asking.

I was playing in a small pub for most of the summer; a 60 seater, where I'd be doing an hour or so, every night. I normally have my eyes closed when I sing (... that has gotten me into enough trouble over the years in itself...), but open them every once in a while during the space of a song (to see if anyone has a gun pointed at me).

I spotted someone 'acting suspiciously' (as we say in my neck of the woods...), and saw that he was trying to put a mini-disc into his wee recorder.

I just stopped the song, and looked at him til he turned around to see what was up, and then I ripped strips off him for being sneaky. I told him if he had have asked, and done the normal human moral thing, I'd have plugged his mini disc into the 'Tape Out' of the desk, for him

Lifting your instruments without permission is a NO NO

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:04 PM

A recording from the tape out of the desk usually sounds awful. The sound of the room is important, whether of not there is a PA.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:09 PM

My point to him being that if he was polite about it, I would have accommodated him 100%.

Tape out recordings can be bad quality, I'll acknowledge that....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:12 PM

Gettin' photographed while perfroming is for me real nice... It means that folks are into yer music...

Recording??? Different story... It should never be done without permission...

Thems is the rules...

B~

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: open mike
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 05:28 PM

...As for video taping (which included visual images as well as sound)
it is best to get official, written permission for the right to do so.
If the artist does give permission, they will often want a copy. So to
give the performer contact information of the photographer/videographer is important.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,qtwf
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 05:45 PM

Hiya,

Oops.

Once more with text?

A quick look through:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_1.htm

seems to imply that still photos of a musical performance is not an infringement of copyright. Video or audio recording quite definitely is.

In my small involvement with such things I have always told people using video or audio recorders to stop, but not photographers.

UNLESS they are using a flashgun, which is an awful thing for everybody!

And if there's even halfway decent lighting you'll get way better pictures without!

Cheers,

Q

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bert
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 06:25 PM

What Bobert and Open Mike say.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 06:39 PM

Ah but Poppagator - I reiterate what I said on that thread about memory... I defy anyone to sing the full, uncut 'Messiah' from memory!

And as for Faure's Requiem.... that's even longer!

As far as I remember, we've never asked our audiences to turn anything off - there are signs posted around our venues (usually churches) about turning mobile phones off, but photographing a classical concert is not really done. Hardly anyone would be interested in recording us performing - the repertoire we have is freely available, by artists far superior to those we use.

LTS

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Art Thieme
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 01:13 AM

It's a generational/paradigm thing. Stuff changes.

For me, I never cared if folks took pictures or recorded my shows or whatever. I wanted to get the songs I'd found out there---for other sigers to find. I even took a photo of Pete Seeger while I was on stage with the man. I'd do that when, in a festival workshop with others, they were sitting right next to me on stage.   Back then, it didn't matter to them or to me. We just didn't think about it. I did it for 30 years off and on.

Art

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 01:51 AM

Every picture I've ever seen of me performing sucks. Eyes shut or when opened rolled into the back of my head or mouth wide open catching flies, head tossed back, hair in shambles, snare on my lips, droole dripping from both sides of the mouth AND nostrials, looking sideways like a puppy with a question, spitting as if I were giving a weather report. I don't mind the pictures being taken, I'd just like 1 good one.
I don't care about the recordings either but if someone were to do a video/audio I'd be happy to if they'd give me a copy.

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 03:27 AM

I really don't mind folks taking pictures, recording, videos etc..
I would however, prefer that they do not distract me by asking so I usually nod my approval or call out to them between lines when I notice them.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 03:54 AM

As far as recording is concerned - no problem as long as you ask first, though it does depend on the circumstances.
Photographs - also depends on the circumstances.
In the early days of the Willie Clancy Summer School we were attending the main concert and had got a seat in the front row (had no intention of recording).
The stage had been set up with the p.a mikes and those of the organisers, who recorded all the events for archiving, when in swept a very well-known English record producer. He re-sited all the existing mikes and placed his own centre-stage.
Everybody was far too polite to mention his behaviour until the fiddle player Sean Maguire, one of the guests, spotted him, jumped off the stage, walked over to your man and said; "My agent's name is *****, my recording fee is ******, and if I see your fingers anywhere near those buttons I'll f*****g dance on them.
As a footnote (no pun intended), the recordist issued a number of albums using similar techniques in different places.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 04:23 AM

I wonder if magazines etc, such as the Living Planet and Rough Guide to Ireland,ask permission before they take photographs of musicians.
These guides are commercial enterprises,I personally dont mind as long as I am asked ,I believe it is the correct thing to do,and to also offer a pint,or a free copy of the book.
It can cause problems for people on social security or pensioners,if they are photographed busking,as I understand it in England you are only allowed to earn a fiver a week,if you are a pensioner.
since the co editor of The Rough Guide,occasionally graces us with his august presence,I hope he notes these considerations and the problems these guides can cause.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 08:16 AM

Early in 1990, I was busking in O'Connell St. Ennis.

Before long three people (a German TV crew) with a 'TV standard' Video camera, a large outdoor microphone (covered with obligatory large smelly sock), and an equally imposing large tape recorder.

Without so much as a 'by your leave' they filmed me for 10 mins, 2 or 3 songs, and then as I was in the middle of the next song, they started to pack up and move up the street.
I stopped the song, and called them back, and told them that 'appearance money' gets paid in Germany too, right?
In that case, I told them, this is my bank account number, and after exchanging addresses and phone numbers (especially theirs), I let them go on their way.

4 months later, they deposited 500 quid into my account.

They would have buggered off, though, if I had have kept my mouth shut.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 10:18 AM

Geoff dealt with that on another forum, Dick, as I'm sure you saw. I don't give a hoot about being snapped as long as we get time to hide the zimmers first. I don't mind being recorded and stuck up on YouTube either, as long as were playing a classy set of reels and not doing Wild Rover.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 10:24 AM

I've heard classy versions of The Wild Rover, in fairness...

But that is the point, really.
If we don't set the limits at the start, then what we may think of as 'good publicity' can turn out being the direct opposite.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Dan Schatz
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 10:56 AM

I confess it bothers me when people record without permission - particularly when those recordings are then spread around. If people ask, I usually say "yes," unless there is a particular reason (ie, the performance was not up to my usual standards).

For performers with CDs, recording can get in the way of CD sales - which often (depending on the level of professionalism) pay for either hobby or rent. Some festivals and venues record everything as a matter of course - which is fine, for archival purposes. I've even known performers who have gotten wonderful live records out of that kind of situation - but if it's ever going to see the light of day, permission really should be sought.

Photos I don't mind, though flash photography during a performance can be distracting. But my art is the music, not my looks, and I like to retain a little artistic control over the former.

Dan

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 11:32 AM

SteveShaw,he dealt with it after I had posted here.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 11:33 AM

SteveShaw,I just hope hes commissioned photographers remember it too,apint and abit of courtesy does not go amiss

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 11:53 AM

Hey I'd forgotten all about that! A Danish T.V. crew filmed about 15 mins of me at a gig a few years back. Spoke to me during the break and asked me to stick to my own stuff while they filmed. COOOOL!
I never thought to ask for their bank account numbers but they seemed content to give me the publicity for free.
You don't get much past Jim Lad.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 11:55 AM

That would be a different scenario for me, Jim.
I'd be chuffed, too

I just don't like people taking the music (or me, for that matter) for granted.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 12:51 PM

Call me Steve willya, Dick. You're as bad as that "Mr Shaw" brigade on you-know-where! ;-) Most people are friendly about their photography in our pub session and don't overdo it. They usually banter a bit with us even though they don't necessarily ask permission as such. That's good with me.   Unless you're a professional making a living out of playing I'd take it as a compliment that they want a memento of their night out. Unless you're an illegal immigrant or prison escapee of course!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 12:52 PM

Not you personally, I hasten to add!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: PoppaGator
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 01:58 PM

Some of the above discussion reminds me of a group of my fellow street singers (buskers) in New Orleans back in the late 60s/early 70s.

Three very aged Black gospel singers (2 women & 1 man) who used to work the French Quarter were filmed and recorded for the movie Easy Rider. The visual image of them performing on the street appears only very briefly, but their singing continues for quite a bit longer and provides a very haunting soundtrack for the entire climactic Mardi Gras cemetery/acid-trip scene.

These very simple folk were accustomed to getting by on a very modest income, and (as old as they were) probably had no idea of the magnitude of resources available to a Hollywood filmmaking company. I have often wondered if they received appropriate payment; it would have been very easy to deceive them and buy them off very cheaply. My best guess is that they got a flat one-day payment as "extras" but no additional consideration for their sizeable and critical contribution to the musical setting of the film.

Incidentally, that film had already been produced, and I had already seen it, by the time I first arrived in New Orleans. When I first met the little gospel group, I did not immediately recognize them from the movie, and we never talked about it. It was only later, when I saw the film a second time, that I recognized my friends ~ who by that time had disappeared from the streets, probably gone off to nursing homes by that time if not to their eternal rewards.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Geoff Wallis
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 02:11 PM

Dick Miles, there are no such 'magazines' as 'The Living Planet' and 'Rough Guide to Ireland' [at least, not in Ireland or the UK], but there are publishing companies called Lonely Planet and the Rough Guides. I happen to be, as you very well know, co-author of the latter's guide to OIreland.

I really do not understand why you have posted this question on three separate fora - this one, The Session and fRoots. My detailed answer to your question can be read on The Session, so I can only assume that you're on some kind of long-distance scavenger hunt.

Please do give it a rest.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Geoff Wallis
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 02:12 PM

Oh, beggar me, I didn't really mean to write 'OIreland'. Parapraxis, anyone?

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 04:09 PM

no,here is your detailed answer.
In the case of the Rough Guides, authors provide a detailed shot list for the photographer consisting of sights and attractions. Very few shots of musicians will appear in the forthcoming edition of the Ireland guide (or have featured in the previous editions which have included photographs). No shots of traditional musicians busking have ever appeared in any edition of the Ireland guide
on page 179 of my Rough Guide,is a photograph of buskers at Temple bar Dublin,now what they were playing we[you or I] do not know,But it does show that photographs of buskers have been taken in the past,which is not the Impression you are trying to give.
the book is called Ireland [TheRoughGuide].

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Geoff Wallis
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 04:21 PM

This is becoming really infuriating.

I will quote my answer already given on The Session site:

Dick, unlike you, I am *very* careful with my words. I wrote 'No shots of traditional musicians busking have ever appeared in any edition of the Ireland guide.' The photograph in question (in the 5th edition of the guide, published in 1999) features only two musicians, a double bass player and a snare drummer. I happen to be familiar with them, they weren't busking and they were playing rockabilly. The photograph was taken with their permission. I suggest you withdraw your comment and apologize.

I should remind you, Dick, that on a previous Mudcat thread some time ago you made a claim regarding the supposed publication of a particular photograph in an edition the Rough Guide to Ireland and were forced to withdraw said allegation when I pointed out that no such photograph had ever appeared in the book. You subsequently sent me an apologetic PM.

It would be equally gracious of you now to withdraw your comment above.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 04:44 PM

I apologise,and perhaps you might have the grace to apologise for your crass,and impolite remarks on Cross fertilisation thread on FROOTS,to which Ian Anderson had to remind you that everyone was entitled to ask questions,providing they were polite,you were completely out of order.
If you go around being out of order you must expect an adverse reaction,now lets get back to the thread.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Geoff Wallis
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 04:49 PM

Dick,

Thanks for your apology.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 04:56 PM

No. Dick you could have emailed this guy and settled things in private.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 06:27 PM

wHEN THEREIS ACAPTION THAT SAYS b

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 06:40 PM

There was a caption that said, Buskers Temple bar Dublin,if they were not buskers, why are you printing false information.
Jim lad ,
yes indeed I would have done if I had remembered he was a member ,unfortunately I didnt,Ihave apologised.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 10:54 PM

Not too many are big enough to apologize, I'll grant you that.
Nevertheless, this is the second defamatory thread in as many weeks. (not by you)
Time of year, I suppose.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 02:39 AM

To me this thread seemed a bit innocent at the start but there now seems that there was a hidden agenda. It was interesting enough until I felt like I was being drawn into someone's personnal laundry day.
You got some cleaning up to do Dick, or a bone to pick do it elsewhere!

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 04:03 AM

OK.
Let's get back on topic folks.
I'm in a quandary regarding media intrusion of any kind.

Example 1
About a year before he died, I was recording (Legitamately) Ivor Cutler at a concert in London for the BBC.
He stopped mid song at one point, and quietly said to a member of the audience.."Are you recording me?"........long pause......."Don't".

Example 2
Well known UK singer on spotting a video crew at the back of the hall, walked off stage, only returning when they'd left.

I would say that their actions were totally justified.

It all comes down to courtesy in the end.
If I'm playing in a session, and someone has a minidisc recorder as an aide memoire to learn a tune or two, no harm is done IMHO,

If it's obviously a professional (Vid/Audio/Photographer) then I would expect the people to seek permission first.

But then.....If it hadn't been for the bootleg recordings (not all, admittedly!!) of Nic Jones, then I wouldn't have been able to produce the Unearthed CD....Go figure!!

Regards Ralphie

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: MartinRyan
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 04:35 AM

I was at a local jazz gig in Galway last night. I knew they were keen to have some shots for their website, so brought along a recenty acquired, rather nice, digital camera. Not enough light to avoid flash. I waited till the last number then got into position and took a set as discreetly as possible (i.e. flash and a good zoom). The lady who currently runs the club shot across to me and I thought "Ooops!". In fact what she said was "Great! I forgot my camera tonight - can we have some copies please?." Of course!

Regards
p.s. For jazz heads: the group featured Bill Carrothers - excellent.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 04:35 AM

Coo, rescued by your last sentence! ;-) I only wish I was good enough to attract the attentions of video crews and the like. I would heartily disapprove, but at least that's one row I wouldn't mind having! But a little photo or MD recording - where's the harm in that.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 04:36 AM

Ralphie was the intended recipient there.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 05:17 AM

Steve Old Fruit!
Exactly....

Common sense really.

My band did a gig last Saturday, and a friend took a load of informal digi pictures, and sent them to me next day.
Most were rubbish, but a couple were very funny!!
No problem with that at all, just more inserts for the scrapbook.

On another track, seeing as part of this discussion is about having photos being published without permission, I discovered that in the Sidmouth retrospective book published a couple of years ago, there is a pic of me....I was dead chuffed!!
(Mind you, you have to look very hard to see me!)

But, there again, I'm not Paul McCartney, (substitute any other name here).
I don't have an agenda, but if a TV crew wanted to film me (In my dreams) I'd expect to be paid for it.
Sadly, nobody seems to want to. Sob!

Ralphie

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 05:42 AM

As regards you tube,I have no objection providing I can check the material first.an artist has a right to have control over his own material.
Ihave in the past allowed people to record me[if it is not for commercial purposes]and generally speaking they have asked
This is one of my gripes regarding Celtic Music,the suppression of my recorded material,
however one lp that they do not own,has three tracks out there on dickmilesmusic youtube.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 05:59 AM

Dick.
As far as I know, I do not appear on You Tube.
And if I did, I don't really care if it was a good or bad performance. I couldn't control it, even if I wanted to.
Life's too short for me to be bothered.
The Web is a Pandoras box, which was opened many years ago.
Live with it.
And please, let us not open the can of worms that is Celtic Music.
Been there, done that.
Ralph

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 06:42 AM

Ralphie you can control it,you ask to have items removed.
In the same way, when one makes a recording it states quite clearly,no unauthorised recording without permission,that is what copyright law is all about.
now I think you tube is excellent,but material should not be put up without the artists permission,and personally I would want to see the video first:because I can sit at home and make my own video of myself and select the best of a couple of takes,I then have control over my material.
you may have been there and done it,but you are not suffering, I am,and no I cant record it again, exactly as it was because the same session musicians are not available.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: greg stephens
Date: 21 Nov 07 - 07:12 AM

Let us, in general, be thankful for unauthorised recordings. When we consider that the powers-that-be spend their days doing things like deleting Bob Dylan's "Mad House in Castle Street"(who'd be interested in that old stuff, eh?), it is a jolly good thing that various individual anarcho-recorders are out there. Though they weren't, alas, for Madhouse.
    Mind you, I'm also totally with Dick Miles in his irritation with some unauthorised or uncredited photographs/videos/sound recordings. It is the uncredited subsequent use that is particularly annoying. But, as Ralphie sagely pointed out earlier, maybe the best thing to do about things that are annoying is not to get annoyed by them. Difficult, but it's often the only option!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 12:18 PM

classy versions of The Wild Rover

Yes, by Andy Turner (who swore he'd never do it till he found one), and by Jim Causley.

But, Nightmare On Castle Street? Yes, I was there on the studio floor. I know because someone else there told me I was. But Hans Fried recorded the songs from the play (audio line out only, who had a video recorder then?) and thus gained his Andy Warhol 15 minutes. Yes, I've talked with Arena producers since. But what I said of use is a bit unclear but I always watch replays if I can because of that nice screen credit.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 12:45 PM

I would appreciate any live recordings of Dick and Sue Miles[Weir]if there are any out there.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Hawker
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 01:28 PM

I Love singing and playing, I have no agenda, If someone wants to risk breaking their camera by using it to take a pic or a video of me, thats is their risk to take! If they record one of my own creations, thats fine too, even better if they learn it and sing it / play it, that is wot it was writ for! In fact I'd see that as a great honour that someone liked a tune / song well enough to want to play / sing it themselves, I can think of no better compliment. I am not playing music / singing to make a living, I am doing it for enjoyment, if I give enjoyment to others in the process I am more than happy, though I am well aware that this is not necessarily the case for all people on this site.
Cheers, Lucy

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Uncle Phil
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 02:57 PM

Interesting reading for someone, like me, who takes performance photos.

I understand why someone would object audio recording and performance videos – competing with the artists CD sales, distribution of the artist's music without their permission, distribution of inferior versions of the artist's music and so on. However none of this seems to apply to still photos.

Around here (Texas, USA, Western Hemisphere, Earth) there are few, if any, legal prohibitions to taking photographs in public places (photography legal issues have to do with how they are used, not how they are taken). However, I generally ask before taking performance pictures anyway, which usually means talking to someone from the venue rather than the artist, for various reasons.

I also frequently share photos with performers and/or event organizers, especially if I get a particularly good shot. I was talking to a touring singer, who used a photo of mine of a while back, about fan photos. She says she receives lots of fan photos, but most of them are not very flattering. That's not surprising since, as others have already pointed out in this thread, it's hard to take good performance photos.
- Phil

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Uncle Phil
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 02:59 PM

Interesting reading for someone, like me, who goes to see a lot of live music.

It really pisses me off when a photographer thinks he has the right to distract the listeners just to take his damn pictures. I'm talking idiot photographers who take flash pictures during the performance, idiots snap away while standing between the performer and the listeners, idiots who prowl in front to stage banging around a giant telephoto lens they could use to photograph gnats on Jupiter, idiots, like one I saw last summer, who wander onstage during a show to take a few snaps, etc, etc.
- Phil

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Ronny
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 04:18 PM

Anyone photographing or recording a live performance of any kind without prior permission is, in my book, asking for a good clout. They should at least be thrown off the premises. It's the height of ignorance and can often detract from the quality of the performance. There are also copyright issues where recordings are concerned.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Young Buchan
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 04:56 PM

Someone once sketched me while I was singing. I suspect that proves I sing songs that are too long!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 05:07 PM

I once asked John Tams if he minded if I ran a tape of his performance with Stalking Horses around 1991, it was in Sheffield. He said "I'd be flattered". It's usually small minded people who post on sites like this who object. In 28 minutes time I will have downloaded Cara Dillon's set in Salisbury last night. Thank goodness someone had the sense to record it.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 05:42 PM

And very good it is too.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 07:40 PM

Well said, Lucy. Come to The Tree and snap away, say I! But if you dump us on Youtube can it be of us doing our Spootiskerry set and not bl**dy Black Velvet Band please!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Whelkin
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 09:50 PM

Being photographed or filmed without permission is an intrusion of privacy but it is sadly not illegal. Unauthorised recording of a performance is theft, and should be treated as such.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 09:59 PM

It can hardly be called an intrusion of privacy unless your performing in the bathroom.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 05:26 AM

But is a session a performance? ;-)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Ricardo B
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 07:20 AM

I always remind the audience that they are welcome to record, take photographs, video or whatever. But I only accept audio copies on CD.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 09:58 AM

I just received a phone call.someone who took a photo of me playing for set dancers In Bantry Square.
No Problem, because they have asked my permission,nor do I mind if they ask permission afterwards,and give me a copy of the photo,but anything taken on avideo for you tube[live performance ,I prefer to see first].Dick Miles

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 10:09 AM

And of course Show of Hands positively encourage it!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Uncle Phil
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 01:44 PM

Out here in middle America I've never had an actual performer in the 3D world object to my taking still pictures. Some big venues, like Starplex in Dallas, prohibit photography and others prohibit professional photography, but most venues don't seem to care. Recording sound, with or without video, is frequently prohibited and I have had my photo kit checked to see if I was carrying recording equipment -- in Winfield for example.

I'm no lawyer, but here is how the legalities have been explained to me for Texas.

Your right to privacy is protected, which means that if I take pictures of you through the windows of your home or in the men's room or your hotel room or any other place you can reasonably expect to be private then you can sue me for taking your picture.

I can take photos in public places. If you try to sue me for taking photos in a public place, the suit will be thrown out of court. If you are politician or performer who actively seeks public attention the suit will be laughed out of court. I generally ask before pictures, but asking is a courtesy not a legal obligation.

A venue, like Starplex, can prohibit photography and toss folks out the door if they catch them taking pictures. If you really don't want your picture taken then ask the venue to prohibit it.

That's about it for taking pictures.

How the pictures are used is a whole different kettle of fish. Let's say I take a picture of you performing on stage at a local bar.

-- If someone publishes my picture along with false information about you ("GUEST, the noted plagiarist, shown here after his arrest for child molestation, has resumed his attacks on gay whales using nuclear weapons"), then you *can* sue the publisher.

-- If someone publishes my picture as editorial content ("GUEST, shown here, recently played a set Uncle Phil's bar"), then you *can't* sue the publisher and win. The same is true of me posting photos to share with family and friends.

-- If someone uses the photo for commercial purposes ("GUEST, shown here, endorses Rustbucket guitar strings"), then you *can* sue the publisher, unless the publisher can show a release, signed by you, saying it was ok to use the photo for that purpose.

The photographer normally is the one who gets the release signed, but that's just a matter of convenience because the photographer is always there when the photo is taken. The release itself actually protects of the user of the photo from being sued. The photographer also needs a signed release to sell pictures to a stock photography company or exhibit some pictures in a gallery. But again, the release is to keep the stock photo company or gallery from being sued, not the photographer. The photographer should have no further legal involvement except in the perverse case of a photographer who lies to the user about having a release.

Where the lawyers get rich is haggling about what is editorial use versus commercial use, ("GUEST, shown here playing on his beloved Rustbucket strings, recently performed Uncle Phil's Bar"); what is libelous and what isn't; does the release actually cover the way the publisher used the photograph, etc, etc, etc.
- Phil

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Stan
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 02:28 PM

Whatever the legal position is, and that is defined well enough, asking permission in advance is simply a matter of good manners. People have varying reasons for wanting or not wanting to be photographed or recorded. They have a moral right to be consulted and their wishes respected. Good manners cost nothing.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 05:03 PM

And of course Show of Hands positively encourage it indeed.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonecruncher
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 07:56 PM

If a photographer is doing his/her job properly the subject would not know that the photograph was being taken.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 24 Nov 07 - 08:09 AM

Cara Dillon's set in Salisbury on Wednesday was really good. I'm so glad that it was recorded!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Snap Happy
Date: 24 Nov 07 - 12:48 PM

"My band did a gig last Saturday, and a friend took a load of informal digi pictures, and sent them to me next day.
Most were rubbish, but a couple were very funny!!
No problem with that at all, just more inserts for the scrapbook."

Thanks for the crit Ralphie! Rubbish, eh? Be very careful - the blackmail material may even yet see the light of day [grins] As you know they were never intended to be works of art - just snaps. But yes, there were a couple of funny ones there - trying to work out whether one of those was the young 15 year olds in cowboy hats, hot pants and boots with the riding crops ,or not!! :-)

Joining in the scrum here, I think the difference with those photos was that they were taken quite openly, at the request of one of the band, and that any of the band that wants them - or possibly even if they don't! - will probably end up with copies (tidied up digitally). They're never going to see the light of any professional publication (unless one of the band commits mass murder, or suffers an ignoble end ) and are purely mementoes of an occasion.

I have taken photos elsewhere, and am still not sure whether I am 100% comfortable about doing it or not. To a large degree I've stopped taking them at concerts, as I personally now find that others doing so distract me (even without flash the lit up screens etc can be distracting), and additionally I've become aware that I'm concentrating on the shots rather than the singing. So on the whole the pix are usually taken before or after someone has performed rather than during. I've also got shots of sessions that I was taking part in - of the friends and others who were also there - but that's a sort of holiday scrap book - since other performers were doing likewise during the same sessions I don't feel quite the discomfort I might have done ... I even have a photo of Jim McFarland taking a photo at a late night session in Whitby this year... and come to that one of Ralphie taking a photo of someone taking a photo at Sidmouth ... so I'm not alone!!

A difficult call nevertheless. However, where the rules and regs say no photography or sound recording allowed I would most CERTAINLY desist!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Tom Nelligan
Date: 24 Nov 07 - 09:35 PM

In twenty or so years as a part-time folk music journalist, I've asked dozens of performers for permission to photograph them on stage in conection with a concert review or artist profile. Some have been big names in the folk world and some relatively obscure, but I have very rarely been refused. Most artists are thrilled that the magazine I write for these days (Dirty Linen) is going to give them some free publicity and they're happy to cooperate. I've had much more of a problem with venues that prohibit photography, even for working journalists who are attending the show on the press list. (If one particular promoter here in Boston ever wonders why his shows never get reviewed in Linen, it's because I don't do concert reviews that I can't illustrate with a photo.)

I do ask first -- that's just common courtesy. I don't use flash because that's annoying to both the performer and the audience. And on the couple occasions where someone has asked me for a few shots of themselves, I'm happy to oblige.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Gulliver
Date: 27 Nov 07 - 01:30 AM

Times are changing--every second kid has a video phone and every second granny a digital camera so one can expect lots more recording. I watched a live kids dance show on TV the other night and practically everyone in the audience (all adults, most pretty old) was filming it.

We get photographed/videoed every week 'cause we play in a touristy area and as long as no-one steps on our toes we don't really give a damn. In fact I'd start getting worried if they stopped doing this...

Don

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Uncle Phil
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 04:02 AM

Near the start of this thread there was some talk about how no one hesitates to photograph folk performers, but no one would ever photograph a performance of Handel's Messiah. Just for the record, I'll be helping photograph a performance of Handel's Messiah, with full symphony orchestra and chorus, next week (assuming I can find my way home through the winter weather).
- Phil

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 12:53 PM

presumably you have permission?
I do not mind being photographed providing im asked[like il duce I prefer a sideways profile].providing it is not being used for commercial purposes[including magazines etc]I also feel the same way about recording
I feel it is discourteous not to ask,how do others feel?Dick Miles.
Uncle Phil ,That was the original post,the crux of the matter is,as far as I am concerned, having the courtesy to ask first.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 01:12 PM

It is common human courtesy to ask permission to take anything from you, be it your car, your money, your likeness, or an example of your work.

The 'harm in it' is not the point (that's just the old reliable 'straw man' raising its ugly mug)... and just as one can't be just a 'little bit dead', one can neither be 'a little bit robbed from'

Ask me..., and 99.9% of the time I'l say, 'No Probs'..

If one does not ask first, one is an asshole, and I would be very quick to tell one so.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 01:20 PM

Ask people who take these recordings if they would like other members of the public to come to their place of work on a Monday morning and start recording what they do.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Uncle Phil
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 05:12 PM

Cap -
Oh my, yes - at their request as a matter of fact.
- Phil

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 05:28 PM

Interesting that the first recording of Led Zeppelin at the O2 Arena last Monday had over 10,000 downloads.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 05:30 PM

Sorry Bonzo,Led Zeppelin dont interest me much.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 17 Dec 07 - 05:32 PM

The principle's the same. If the recording is all kosher with the band, then no problem.

If it's not, it's theft.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 03:27 AM

I'm not sure I understand many of the objections to being photographed or recorded - surely it depends on (a) the reason for doing so and (b) the prevailing circumstances.
As far as sessions of traditional music and song are concerned, people record either to learn tunes and songs, or with the intention of trying to relive that session. As long as the recordist is not making him or herself a pain in the arse, I can see no objection to the former. When I was singing, I would have been flattered if the latter were the reason. In a club situation, you always ask. I can say that whenever we recorded at a folk-club, I can never remember having been refused permission.
It is not always possible to get everybody's permission to record during an open session, in which case, a touch of discretion and sensitivity is advisable.
Let's face it, recordings in these circumstances are seldom, if ever publicly usable.
The only objection I can see to photographs is the use of flash, which can be extremely intrusive, with or without permission.
I have to say that if our older traditional singers had adopted a similar prima-dona attitude to being recorded to that which has been displayed here, our repertoires, and our enjoyment and understanding of the tradition would have been very much diminished.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 04:27 AM

JIM,I dont mind as long as I am asked, even if it is retrospectively.
flashes[as well as flashers] can be offputting.
I am sure traditional singers such as Harry Cox,found microphones being stuck under their noses in folk clubs off putting,I am sure someone mentioned this about a year ago on a different thread.
With modern technology,recording equipment is now less obtrsuive,
it STILL boils down to a litle subtlety, a little courtesy,Good manners and sensitivity to the singer,and sensitivity to the rest of the audience,numerous people jumping up and down with flashes can spoil other peoples pleasure.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 06:25 AM

At a gig I did as part of the Morpeth Northumbrian Gathering back in April I was asked by a chap in the audience if he minded me filming part of my performance. This was novel, so I said okay, providing he put the resulting footage up on YouTube, which he did!

Here's the link: Sedayne at Morpeth 2007

The concert was 'Saint Cuthbert: A Life in Miracles', a sequence of of stories from Bede's 'Life...' canted with traditional Northumbrian songs to the accompaniment of my Hungarian Citera (aka The Musical Plank).

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 03:29 PM

Yes Jim, I think you are missing the point, really.

"I have to say that if our older traditional singers had adopted a similar prima-dona attitude to being recorded to that which has been displayed here, our repertoires, and our enjoyment and understanding of the tradition would have been very much diminished."

That's taking the analysis of the posts a bit far.. It is nothing more prima donna-ish than adhering to the simple social contract: 'don't take if you don't ask'.

The contention that the ...'performer is in the public eye, so screw the conventions...,' can get defined way beyond the point where logic lies.
If you were in a pub and having a chat with your friends, would I have the right therefore, to sit discreetely behind you and record your conversation, as Im a big fan of the pub culture and just love to hear everybody talk?
Given the same premise as you purport, I would.

Fine.... Could I then go through your rubbish bin in my quest for more research?

If not, why not?
If I don't need your permission for the former, I shouldn't need it for the latter.

It's called 'respect for your fellow man', Jim.

Sorry you can't see it that way.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 03:36 PM

I think our 'older traditional singers' had a more courteous bunch of people to deal with, anyway....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Barry, at my wife's workplace
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 07:19 PM

You don't need permission to go through some one's trash, once outed it's public. That's why police (US) don't need a warrant to search it. Of course that is a bit way out there but Jim has a point about the older source singers & sessions & I agree. If you don't want to be recorded in a session of have a snap shot taken then either back out of the session, tell the feller No outright or close the session to the public. There are many folks (tourists espicially) that wander into a session & have never seen the likes & want to take the memory home. How rude of any to demand permission from them, most won't know any musical or session edicate or have the slightest idea that it even exists, go look in a mirror, please, you're not all that gorgeous nor do you all sound so heavenly that you are the gift from angels. At a gig, that's where you work, differrent story altogether.
The Boston Globe shot pictures for the Sunday edition at last night's session (Green Briar in Brighton) not a complait or murmur heard from anyone. They did make themselves known but I don't think they asked permission of every person there.

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 18 Dec 07 - 08:22 PM

If you don't know, then it is no proof...

"you're not all that gorgeous nor do you all sound so heavenly that you are the gift from angels"
What does that have to do with it?

The thread is sort of split between those who show respect to others, and those who don't.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:44 AM

I'll take my tongue out of my cheek long enough to say this.

Please Brendy, this is filled with some self indulgence & some self importance, it was started that way, with that intention & a cheap shot of stirring the pot. All well & good if you're working at your job/gig, but pictures & recordings at sessions, give me a break.


Place a sign at the barroom door, "we are good, we ask that you ask us 1st for the photo op & a recording, so we can prepare ourselves".

At venues it is common that there are signs saying "No Cameras or Recording devices". That fair enough but sk the owner of any place where a session's being played & you'll probably find yourself out the door.

Jim's right about the old timers, they were more interested in the music to concern themselves with PR relations

Barr

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:09 AM

"don't take if you don't ask".
Of course you ask when you can; the situations I was referring to were those where it is not practical or even possible to get direct permission.
We have a week-long music summer school here in the west of Ireland where some of the finest musicians around play in extremely crowded sessions, at small recitals and at a major concert on the last night. The events are full of musicians, many of them learning instruments and desperate to get material to practice on. Many of them carry recorders in order to catch such material. What are you going to do - put up notices saying "will all those wishing to record please form an orderly queue for permission"?
I am often heartened when I meet younger singers and players whose singing and playing indicate that they have gone to source singers and musicians for their material and inspiration; this has only been made possible by the generosity of those older performers in allowing others to take their material.
Barry is right - we seem to have moved a long way from the situation when the songs and music were for sharing.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:18 AM

"... so we can prepare ourselves..."?

What kind of nonsense is that, Barry?
Come on.....

It's not a service musicians are providing at sessions; where I come from it is only a spectator sport if you're not in the music grouping. Remember that sessions were always meant to pass the music on between the musicians, first and foremost.

What on earth is wrong with asking permission. The 'Old Timers' would have been asked permission, too, 'cos in those days everybody was a hell of a lot nicer to each other.

"Please Brendy, this is filled with some self indulgence & some self importance, it was started that way, with that intention & a cheap shot of stirring the pot"

... not quite sure what that sentence means.

Anyway..., you don't seem to have a problem with the theory of asking musicians forst, so at least that's half the battle.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:25 AM

"...will all those wishing to record please form an orderly queue for permission..."

You don't have to go that far, Jim.

You could simply inform on such a notice that it is customary, and considered good manners to ask the musician's permission to record.
If you wanted to, that is

I know it can't be stopped; I'm more lamenting the fact that there are people out there who think it is their God-given right to record you no matter what.

If you read the posts, nobody objects to recording or photography, per se.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 12:04 PM

What Art Thieme said.

Several posters from the states have made the same point, but I'll add my version.

I've been doing old time music in the states for 40+ years and recording and photographing have always been a given.

I have many festival tapes with the same pattern:
- A tune is played.
- Someone asks "What was that?"
- The tune is named.
- There is a chorus of clicks as portable recording devices are turned off.

Cameras and recorders have always been ubiquitous at concerts as well.


Russ (Permanent GUEST and aging folkie)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 12:54 PM

I am happy to share my music,see[dickmilesmusicyoutube]and also my website, www dickmiles.com.
I do think it is good manners to ask first or even afterwards.
a few years ago it would have been customary if another musician had a tune, to ask the musician can you teach me it,speaking for myself I have never refused,
now someone can tape you on a mobile phone and learn the tune without asking.I think this attitude shows contempt,.[cant be bothered with the player, just want the tune]
when I learned tunes off a traditional fiddler friend of mine,part of the learning of the tunes was the friendship I built up with him.
learning about his life,learning how he came to learn the tunes himself,learning about local musical history etc.I would never have dreamed of recording him without his permission,in fact he explicitly said to me that I wasnt to let anyone else hear the recording[because he didnt think he played as well as he used to].
IMO if people are interested and respect music they should also be interested in AND respect the carrier.,they are likely to learn far more as well,the musiciamn might say well sometimes I dont play it like that ,but I do an ornament somewhere else ETC .

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 01:37 PM

Why don't we all stay home & play with ourselves, privately, it's not like we can't do it on our own, play with ourselves that is.

Making music with other musicians (as opposed to giging, or the practice of group practice/sessions, which I detest & should be called closed sessions) is a communal intercourse & many may take it for granted but it's sometimes the equalivant of a spiritual movement that deserves, demands & disires being captured. It, like we are a fleeting moment that might never happen in the same way again. Who thinks themselves so important that they'd demand permission of this? Think of how tempermental sessions are, 1 asshole can ruin it or just changing the corner where it's been played over the yrs can through it off, so if someone thinks it's worth recording or photographing tell 'em "fuck off" & ruin it for them, you & the rest of the gang. Swallow a little bit instead of spitting it'll leave a better taste in your mouth fo afterwards.

This is making a mountain out of a mole hill, stop taking yourselves so seriously, none of us are as important as the music so whatever it is that you think you're protecting by coverting your likeness or your sounds, get over it, it's not that big a deal if you get framed, shot or redubed without permission. It's not someone being cheeky, it's someone that has an enough of an interest to bother & may not be aware of your shelfessness. In over 30 yrs of sessions I've only incountered someone flashing in my face a couple of times, while it can be a toss off, so what, if I couldn't recover I didn't know my song/tune as well as I should've but I can say that there's been so much recording & snapshot taking by both participants & non participants that I see it as 2nd nature to the session. In some bars, pictures of musicians & session has become common decore for the walls & I rather like it too. Here in the New England area where I frequent the most & the few odd times in New York & San Francisco it's more unusual that this occurance would not take place.

Maybe you can ask the photographers to post the likenesses here on Mudcat, would you balk then?

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Hot to trot
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 01:48 PM

'I've only encountered someone flashing in my face a couple of times, while it can be a toss off so what, if I couldn't recover.'

Please keep your sexual experiences out of this thread.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:19 PM

HaHaHa, "hadn't seen it in that kind of light" HeHeHe

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,sparticus
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:37 PM

Well said Barry Finn!

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 02:54 PM

Examples of attitudes I think may have disappeared:
We were taping during a singers recital at the Willie Clancy Summer School one year when I realised we were rapidly running out of tape, so we decided to be selective until we could replenish our stock. One singer noticed we weren't recording him so, after the rectal he jumped off the stage and came over to us, demanding to know why we hadn't recorded such-and-such a song; "it's a great song, everybody should hear it". He then dragged us into a side room and insisted we record the song from him. He was right - it was a great song.
Martin Howley, an elderly rural labourer from North Clare gave us a few dozen songs in the mid-seventies.
We went over one summer and were told he was ill, so we went up to visit him. Finding him quite weak, we sat chatting for about half an hour, when he asked us did we have the tape recorder, as he had remembered a few more songs.
Pat insisted that we had only come to visit him and didn't want to put him to any trouble. His reply still brings a lump to the throat: "I'm a poor man; I have nothing to leave but my songs and I want you to have them".
He died of cancer of the eye a couple of months later; (a number of his songs can be heard on 'Around The Hills of Clare' the proceeds of which have been donated to The Irish Traditional Music Archive in Dublin, along with the recordings).
Anybody who ever visited Ewan MacColl (the Aleister Crowley of the revival) at his home will tell you of the filing cabinet draw stuffed with multi-copies of songs he and Peggy had researched for their own use, which were there to be taken away by anybody interested, the only condition being that you never took the one marked 'last copy' so that more duplicated could be made (this was in the days of carbon paper rather than a home printer). We still have several dozen copies of those songs, many with Peggy's tune transcriptions attached.
We visited Walter Pardon for the first time just after he had returned from the US bi-centenary celebrations. We drove to his house and found him working in the garden. Not wishing to interrupt him, we stood talking for ten minutes when he asked did we have a tape recorder. He brought us in and sang for the whole afternoon, stopping only to enquire whether he would offend Pat by singing 'The Bush of Australia'.
As long as people record songs and music discreetly - I wonder what the objection is to being recorded - what on earth do performers think is going to happen to such recordings.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 03:15 PM

Thanks Jim, do we love the limelight or do we love the music?

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 05:54 PM

most performers love both.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 10:23 PM

But in the end it's not about the performers is it, it's about the music. If you love it it will love you back, no strings attached!

When you bring everything else into play like cameras, comcorders, recording devices does it mean it has to then become about the performers or can it still stay all about the musice without the performer's ego gettiing in the way?

Barry

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Skivee
Date: 19 Dec 07 - 11:10 PM

Many of you know that I play in a band that performs at renaissance fairs around the country.
I don't mind folks taking our pictures. If fact we have gotten some very nice photos taken by fans...along with many that are unremarkable. Since we are being paid to perform in a public venue and we are featured performers, we know we will be photographed.
About the only time I was really bothered was when a guy with a high end amateur video camera walked up on stage during a song and moved across the stage videoing each of us from about 1/2 meter away, then moved off to the stairs on the other side. If I hadn't been mid-song, I would have given him something to chew on...self-indulgent jerk.
I also had to weigh the options of stopping the show to tell him off vs. making the interuption as short as possible by not reacting.
Most are not that stupid.
FYI I was a photographer for many years, so I know how it feels to be on both ends of the lens.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 01:33 AM

"As long as people record songs and music discreetly - I wonder what the objection is to being recorded...."

Jim, how many time to I/we have to tell you: asking first!

Respect and disrespect.

Personally I hate 'limelight'; you wont find a picture of me on my website. I just want to play the music.

But I don't want some a bunch of free-loaders coming around me thinking they can take anything from me without asking, and defending their right to do so.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 02:02 AM

I also notice that among the attitudes you think are disappearing, Jim is the respect with which you approached those people who were so kind as to give you their material.
I don't get the impression that you recorded them without their approval

You seem to have done away with all that social niceity in your last paragraph.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 12:37 PM

IMHO

A musician who "draws from" tradition in any way has one duty:
give the music as freely as it was given to you.

The music should not, must not, stop with you.

Russ (Permanent GUEST and occasional soapbox orator)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 02:07 PM

"A musician who "draws from" tradition in any way has one duty:
give the music as freely as it was given to you."

I agree, but I do notice you use the word give twice in that sentence.

It's a lot different from the word take

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 05:21 PM

Brendy,

Thanks for the feedback, but I need some clarification regarding your comment before I can address it.
I think you are qualifying your agreement, but how?

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 20 Dec 07 - 06:51 PM

Thanks Russ...
I'm more really talking about recording here..., and I am concentrating on the interaction (if any) between recorder and recordee.

I have read post after post, above how 'the older musicians' gave, ...'freely' even, their songs and music to 'the collectors'

Indeed they did, and I wouldn't have my knowledge without them.

So 'giving' is one thing.

On the other hand, we have many of the same posters advocating 'taking it anyway', which is a whole different attitude and interaction process from the mutual respect of the older days. It's almost an 'I'm OK, You're OK' scenario, if you want to involve the transactional aspect to it.

I have never refused time, music, or song to anyone who has asked me that simple "... do you mind if...?". It is the expression associated with the according of equal dignity to the human being you are interacting with, and if we do treat others the way we like to be treated ourselves, then any other ethic shouldn't come into the equation.

It's not an 'ego thing' (... that, again is only a Straw Man...), it's simply recognising that respect is a two-way street.

But I though all of that was obvious....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:18 AM

Brendy,
Yes, we did ask the people we recorded first, but the bulk of the recording we did was one-to-one, usually in their homes, and it was for the purpose of archiving. All this was agreed beforehand with the performers
To equate our situation to the one being discussed here would be extremely misleading.
Thoughout the thirty-odd years we spent collecting, the impression we always got is that what we were receiving permission for was the singers' time and effort - not the songs. It almost universally was taken for granted by them that we were welcome to the songs and stories - it almost went without saying.
Earlier I outlined a situation where it would have been difficult or even impossible to ask - I received no reply.
I think I find the term 'free-loaders' particularly offensive and depressing.
Anybody involved in traditional song and music could be described as a free-loader living off the generosity of others by those unpleasant enough to wish to describe them/us as such.
I'm sure there are lots of people out there who sing songs they got from recordings of Harry Cox, or Sam Larner, or Elizabeth Cronin - some of you might even have made albums which included such material.
Hands up those of you you contacted any of the families to ask permission to do so.
Twenty-odd years ago we recorded a wonderful Traveller woman singer with a magnificent repertoire, some of which we included on an anthology of Travellers' songs. One of those songs caught the fancy of a number of revival singers and has appeared on half a dozen of their albums. While it would have been relatively simple to do so, nobody ever contacted Mary to ask her permission to record the song; nobody ever asked our permission. NOR SHOULD THEY HAVE TO.
Whatever I might think of the various renditions of the song, the fact that it has been taken up means that it stands a fair chance of staying in circulation, which means that future generations will have a chance to get the same enjoyment from it that I have. This leaves me with the feeling that what we have been doing over half our lifetime has not been wasted.
To answer a point made by The Cap'n earlier; I'm sure Harry Cox, or anybody would have been extremely uncomfortable to have a microphone 'stuck under their noses', but in my experience, it's really not like that, particularly with the latest mini-recorders. People who wish to record usually do so from a distance, on small recorders, usually with built-in mikes - I often wonder whether what they are recording is listenable.
Sure, it's nice to be asked if somebody wants to record your performance, but it really isn't always possible.
And if sometimes people record without asking - so what - nobody is going to become rich on those recordings, and to go through the beg-for-the-biscuit routine every time you perform seems extremely petty, to say the least.
Walter Pardon summed it up for me. He had been told of two folk 'stars' squabbling over which of them was going to put one of his songs on their albums. He said "they're not my songs, they're everybodys".
He went on (can't find the direct quote so I'll paraphrase)
"I had a visit from a man from Happisburg (a few miles down the coast from where Walter lived). who told me I shouldn't be giving my songs away as once you gave them to somebody they were no longer yours. I told him, that may be true, but once you die, they'll die with you, so somebody may as well have the benefit of them".
Would that everybody shared Walter's foresight.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Lad
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 05:00 AM

Having just followed a link on another thread, re a You-Tube recording of Dougie MacLean which is pretty awful to say the least, I am sorely tempted to change my mind.
Recording without my permission is not a problem but putting it on the Internet.... I'd have to say "No" to that.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Edthefolkie
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 05:51 AM

From a mere punter's viewpoint - much of this is a question of degree isn't it?

Not long ago a very well known British musician (you can guess who) made a return to gigging after several years of severe illness. His band's first gig, which I attended, was a triumph for him, the band, and the audience. Our man was absolutely bowled over by our genuine love and respect for him, and everybody went home very happy and uplifted. Many of the audience photographed the gig and the band's website duly got some free photos.

However - a few weeks later camcorders appeared and one vid went straight to YouTube without permission from the band. Now they are professional musicians and, strictly speaking, their intellectual property rights were being nicked.

A few weeks later, another very well known gent who was once in a band with the first gent appeared at the same venue. He specifically asked for no shots to be taken - and everybody respected that.

I videoed the second gent with his band at a festival somewhere around 1983 using a ginormous VHS camera and recorder. In those days you would only see one or two other people at a festival with video kit. I would never post the footage anywhere without his permission. But the genie's out of the bottle now - you can film an hour of good footage with something the size of a matchbox.

So I can only suggest that if musicians do not want stills or movies, they should make it clear at the outset and the audience should not be upset - after all doing gigs is some people's main source of income and they ain't gonna know where the pics/vids are going to end up.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 06:35 AM

"Earlier I outlined a situation where it would have been difficult or even impossible to ask - I received no reply."

The replies are all over this thread, Jim... you ask before you record...., and I cannot find a place where I called you a free-loader

But still you don't get the point:
"I'm sure there are lots of people out there who sing songs they got from recordings of Harry Cox, or Sam Larner, or Elizabeth Cronin - some of you might even have made albums which included such material.
Hands up those of you you contacted any of the families to ask permission to do so."

We have been talking about recording the musicians themselves, not 'cover versions' of the material.

You really are trying hard to avoid the fact that it's a manners 'thing'

Because that's all it is to me....

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Clog Iron
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 02:03 PM

This is a difficult one. As somebody whose public performances on the Folk scene is as a musician with a dance team rather than as an individual artist on the festival concert stage, I've so far been flattered by the interest in what we do. There are photos of me on websites and we appear on YouTube. Knowing that it exists helps me though the day when I'm at work. However I wonder how I'd feel if there was a photo published that I wasn't happy about? I don't consider that as a minor performer within a large group I've somehow become public property. The issue of ownership of the music we play has been debated many times before - I think maybe lastly in the wake of Peter Kennedy's death - but what about our ownership of our own image? I don't know. I know that actors usually have clauses in their contracts where they receive payments if their photo or likeness is used on something like a book or a computer game as a spin off from the film or TV program they have appeared in.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 02:50 PM

People who wish to record usually do so from a distance, on small recorders, usually with built-in mikes - I often wonder whether what they are recording is listenable.

I have just been working with one of these Jim, an Edirol RO-9 made by Roland. When saved as a broadcast quality file (you have a choice) it is exactly that - broadcast quality. They are so tiny because there is no need to have a tape or similar (everything is saved on a card identical to that of a digital camera) and there is no speaker (use earphones or listen later via computer).

I am no expert on these things but the quality really is remarkable. So is the cost of course. These are not toys, but serious bits of kit. You could certainly use these for field recordings with confidence.

Dave

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Skivee
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:06 PM

Clog Iron said:" I don't consider that as a minor performer within a large group I've somehow become public property."
If you are performing in a public place, as part of a performance for the general public, then you cede you right to privacy. The general public would have the right to photograph you, even if they sell the photos. They are in their rights as long as the picture taking isn't disruptive and thephotos aren't used in some slanderous, or dishonest way.
In a private venue, this isn't as clear. The folks running a private venue can have a policy to restrict photography, sound recordings, etc..
On the other hand, asking permission is the best course. If a performer asks to not be photographed or recorded, I would respect that.
Pro phoyographers frequently cover themselves by obtaining a model release even when shooting is not restricted.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:40 PM

Brenday,

Thanks for the clarification.

My statement was purposely vague and mildly sanctimonious.

It is perfectly reasonable for you to hope that people will meet your expectations of politeness.

My experience with traditional musicians is that politeness is somewhat context dependent.

Russ (Permanent GUEST and traditional musician)

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 21 Dec 07 - 04:59 PM

Thanks Russ. I spot sanctimonious posts fairly quickly...
They usually start with 'IMHO' ;-)

Look..., I understand the way it goes in pubs & venues; it's where I reside. I meet polite people, and I meet impolite people.
I react with the level of politeness I am met with; I have always been like that, but I would never dream of discouraging anyone who shows an interest in the music.

People who are 'in it' for the music generally are polite; I spot those people fairly quickly, also, and I react to that.

Jim is right to a degree in that he (as I do) recognise that there are times when it is difficult to make that connection, and although nobody has to, it's jolly bad form not to go back and, even just for politeness' sake, to make things right with the person you recorded it from.
No-one might be making money from this, but you, as the recorder are more 'enriched' by that recording, I imagine.

The music is the important part of all of this; I acknowledge that, also.

But that should not give anybody the right to walk over the musician to get it.

IMO

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 04:09 AM

It's fairly obvious that we're not going to agree on this.
Yes, it is impolite to take photographs and record without permission, but no less impolite than taking the songs we have been handed down and singing them without seeking permission first (when that has been possible - and it has been possible in the last few decades), and often without even the acknowledgement of the source. On occasion, revival singers have even copyrighted arrangements/versions (the two words are interchangeable) of songs they have taken from our source singers.
"Walking over musicians"; who has attempted to justify such behaviour - not me, not anybody.
No, I wasn't accused of being a free-loader - the term in itself is a nasty and unnecessary one when used about anybody.
As far as taking photographs, some people have expressed their opposition to this in terms of the intrusive nature of flash -I agree with this totally. But others have spoken of it as if the very act of taking a photgraph 'steals the soul' as was once believed.
I have gained great pleasure and not a little knowledge from the photographs of Brian Shuel, Eddis Thomas and Doc Rowe, and no; I don't believe they tapped their subject on the shoulder and said, "excuse me, do you mind if I take your photograph". If they had done so, the end result would have been very different.
I am pleased we (Pat mainly) took time to get photographs of people we met (and knew) MacColl, Seeger, Seamus Ennis, Paddy Tunney, Martin Byrnes, Tim Lyons, Walter Pardon, Tom Lenihan, Martin Reidy, Junior Crehan, Duncan Williamson, and the hundreds of Travellers we found and recorded..... While we didn't always directly asked permission to do so, we made no attempts to hide when we were doing. The end result now stands as a record of the tradition as we encountered it and they are very much a part of our archive.
Passing on the songs was never just a favourable aspect of the tradition - IT WAS THE TRADITION, and without it, our song tradition would be very much impoverished - non-existant even.
Aural and visual recording has become a part of the passing-on process, whether we like it or not, and although it is, of course, preferable that certain niceties are observed, as far as I'm concerned, the passing on and keeping alive of our traditional songs and music is far more important.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 04:25 AM

... so basically, you don't give a toss.

Just thank the heavens then, that you have musicians to record in the first place.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:13 AM

Brendy,

Compare and contrast.......

... so basically, you don't give a toss.

... but I would never dream of discouraging anyone who shows an interest in the music.


Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:15 AM

Jim ,in the days when you sang,if you had sung a song and forgotten a line,or missed out a verse,something that has happened to most singers at some time,I am sure you would have been pissed off if someone had put it up on you tube,Without asking you first.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:34 AM

Yes Folkiedave. You omitted the first part of that sentence: "I react with the level of politeness I am met with"

Un-toss-givers generally start off on the back foot, with me.

The tradition survived before clandestine recording.
One is not a pre-requisite of the other.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 10:22 AM

Cap'n,
With respect, we are discussing the photographing and recording of singers and musicians, not what use is made of those photographs and recordings.
I have made clear my attitude to the mis-use of recordings (Kennedy etc), yet, when I raise the question of tinkering with songs got from traditional performers and then copyrighting them - (now that's what call theft) - deafening silence as usual.
It seems that we are once again working in the double standards zone.

"Just thank the heavens then, that you have musicians to record in the first place."
Brendy:
Depends on the musicians, surely
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 11:26 AM

Cap'n,
With respect, we are discussing the photographing and recording of singers and musicians, not what use is made of those photographs and recordings.Quote from Jim Carroll
surely the two are interconnected,the musician /singer is entitled to know what use the recordings are going to be put to,that is the importance of obtaining permission.
I was recorded by a fellow at Chelmsford folkclub in 1982,with my ex wife,he asked permission first,the recordings were for his own private use[he gave me a copy],fine,
The recording quality,was very good,the performances were good,I intend to have them transferred to cd,to add to a cd of a vinyl lp we made together,here is an example of the usefulness of people recording.but he asked permission first.
If he is out there and recognises himself, perhaps he could contact me,The date of the recording was 31 10 1982, Dick and Sue Miles Chelmsford Folk Club contact me at. http://www.dickmiles.com/introduction.htm,
.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 02:46 PM

The possibility of getting a recording which is suitable for general release in the conditions we are discussing is negligible.
I can recall only one occasion in thirty years where anybody was ripped off in the described circumstances.
The main concerts at one of the early Willie Clancy Schools was held at Spanish Point Convent rather than the usual venue, which was being worked on.
Just before it began, the owner of a well-known record company appeared, swept aside the pre-arranged p.a. microphones on the stage, proceeded to place his own in a suitable position for recording and sat down in the front row.
Because of who he was, the organisers did not stop him, and he made ready to record the concert, until the fiddle player Sean Maguire appeared on stage, walked over to your man and said, "My name is Sean Maguire, my agent's name is **** ****, my recording fee is *****, and if I see your fingers anywhere near those buttons I'll feckin' dance on them".
Such behaviour is extremely rare, should not, nor would be tolerated.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 04:20 PM

"Depends on the musicians, surely"

Musicians are musicians, Jim: The sipposed carriers of the tradition.
If you didn't have them you would have no tradition to record.

You told that story about Maguire before... must be a wee party-piece of yours

Well, obviously you will continue to dance all over other people in order to record the all-important music.

You lack respect, however in areas where it is extremely important to not to, and I find that a rather unpleasant trait in any person. Nothing, seemingly, is going to convince you to change your ways

It stains the term 'collector', Jim.
I have never met one with such a mercenary outlook.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 05:40 PM

I have never met one with such a mercenary outlook.

Wow, he must be worth a fortune then considering the hours upon hours upon weeks, upon months, upon years he has spent recording, writing and distributing traditional material.

Actually Brendy money has often been the last thing on his mind.

You clearly have no idea of the man (and his partner), of the work he has done, and the monetary reward he has taken from that.

Or to put it another way, the world of traditional music would be a much poorer place without him and Pat Mackenzie.

But don't take my word for it - here's what Peggy Seeger had to say in Living Tradition Magazine...

"....... there is no doubt that their work in the folksong world has been invaluable and dedicated. Most of the collectors who've done that have had a kind of tunnel vision, without which their work would not have been as productive. They stuck their necks out and their heads are getting chopped off. They are in good company."

She wrote that in the late 1990's - very prescient.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 06:08 PM

Look, Dave, I only go by what is said to me and the way it is said. I'm from the tradition; my maternal grandfather was the local fiddle legend where I come from, a song and music collector of note, and a fine singer, apparently, to boot.... so we can stop the name-dropping, now.

I know of Jim's work; I lived on the backroad between Tulla & Feakle for many years. East Clare is very close to me, and it is the style of traditional that me and my musical partner (a fiddle player from Lough Graney) play over here.

The interaction between Collector and Exponent has always been a more personal connection. Relationships, close ones, have been built up over the years between these people.
Those were in the days when people had more time....

Now, with all the modern, instant methods available, I'm afraid that that respect I talk of is in danger of getting turfed aside under the guise of 'collecting the music'

I'm sure that Jim does ask... I have no doubt about it, in fact. In 'the old days' I'm sure it was considered more of an occasion when the collector was knocking around. Nowadays everywhere you look there's a mini-disc or mp3 player being discreetely slipped into the front pocket.

Now, I don't mind being recorded; most of the musicians I know, don't.

I cannot see, however that if the trouble cannot be taken to get in touch somehow with the person you have recorded, to acknowledge them in that small way, then the circle has not been completed by the collector.

The fact that Jim says he does not think he should have to, is not a reflection on the work of the collector as a grouping, neither is it dependent on the useable quality of said recording.

It is a moral issue that concerns the relationships between people.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Art Thieme
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 08:50 PM

With all due respect:

Once again, this in-your-face, I'm-more-sociologically-correct-than-thou, confrontation/conversation never would've happened or been a problem some few short years ago. For those of us who were there then, this discourse simply wasn't relevant, then, and doesn't matter now.

Folks, things is-what-is! We will be dead and gone soon enough!! Then you can warp and re-write history all you want---to your heart's content. The photos and the music will have been saved and archived for the edification of all who care to find the stuff we cared so much about. It was a wondrous privilege and mission to sing the found gems on the byways of the U.S.A.---and an exhilarating treasure hunt of discovery where we spent our glorious youthful energies striving to put the gestalt together.

In the meantime, the FOLK ALLIANCE will be giving their most prestigious award to ROUNDER RECORDS at their 2008 convention in Memphis, Tennessee! Why??? For keeping so much of the saved material available for everyone in this strange new millennium...

Personally, I need to thank the many, many people and concert makers, and club owners, and radio stations who recorded my music through all the years, and handed me copies of the tapes they'd made. And they usually did it without permission from me because it just wasn't thought to be necessary!

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 22 Dec 07 - 09:00 PM

Fair enough, Art..., I'll leave it at that.

B.

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 07 - 03:12 AM

Brendy,
I never said I didn't think I have to ask - please don't put words in my mouth.
I have outlined situations where it was difficult, nigh impossible to ask, am I imagining them? If you believe so, please attend a session at the Willie Clancy School and count the recorders.
We tend not to record such events, they are not what we do.
"It stains the term 'collector', Jim. I have never met one with such a mercenary outlook."
All our collecting work has been one-to-one, go and listen to it sometime, it's in the British Library, the Irish Traditional Music Archive and The Irish Folklore Department, and soon will be available in West Clare when we manage to set up an archive there.
We have never made a penny out of our collected material. All royalties have been either paid to the singers or have been donated to ITMA for the furtherance of the music. We have never attempted to copyright what we have collected, but always attributed it to it's source. Please explain our 'mercenary outlook'.
Nor have we ever attempted to hang on to what we have collected, but have sought to make it as available as possible. We have always agreed with the people from whom we have recorded; - the songs, stories and music belong to everybody.
Mud-slinging never wins arguments, it only muddies them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: photographing/recording musicians
From: Brendy
Date: 23 Dec 07 - 03:57 AM

"I never said I didn't think I have to ask - please don't put words in my mouth."
From your post of 21 Dec 07 - 04:18 AM, Jim "And if sometimes people record without asking - so what..."

I accept your committment, Jim; the thread is also full of references to the way of thinking, not necessarily to you.

As I said to Art, I'll leave it like that....

B.