I recently was hired to shoot for a client who will be participating in a sporting event. Said sporting event also has official photographers by the event organizers, but they are only paid via direct sales to participants, no upfront payment. Taking this job means ill be cutting in potential sales for the official photographers, whom I am also friends and shoot with from time to time.
My question is, is it morally ok for me to take the job in these situations? My client came directly to me even when they could’ve chosen the official photographers themselves. Should I just honor my clients wishes and go ahead? Looking at the big picture I realize the bigger assholes are the organizers who don’t pay their official photographers upfront.
Has anyone been put in similar situations? I’d really appreciate some second thoughts and discussions. Thanks.
If event organizers don’t ban unaffiliated professional photographers, then I think you’re probably OK. Because here’s the way I look at it – and others can feel free to disagree. You have one client. There’s no guarantee that this client would make a purchase from the other photographers based on your description of this event.
Now, if you amass a portfolio of clients for said event, or take photos of everyone and make sales afterwards yourself – without being an official photog – then we have an ethical problem.
The event doesn’t ban other unaffiliated photographers, pro or not. I’m inclined to agree that it is only one client, compared to the latter example you gave, so pretty far from a huge ethical problem. Thank you for the clarity.
EXplain the ethical problem? Is competition not the backbone of Capitalism, and the fact that they don’t prevent others from taking pictures as well leads me to the conclusion that there is no ethical problem, just one more tog taking snaps.