EDowning wrote:
As they say in the south "I don't have a dog in this hunt", and I don't care about the Russell Group or any faction involved, enough to get involved in the specifics of the legal argument. Like most of the previous posts, I don't know the legalities well enough to comment.
However,
I would like to address it from this stand point, I have done quite a number of photo shoots, air to air, with my airplanes, and with the exception of Tim Savage's people and (yes) Mike O'leary and Nick Blacow, they have all been a generally poor experience. For the most part,now, I only do shoots, with one of my planes as the photo ship and my camera, my people shooting etc.
Why? , you ask. Well, it costs a lot to fly these shoots probably (3000 - 4500 per hour, all in) and with the exceptions noted above, I don't get a darn thing out of it. Over and over, I have had people beg to go up and shoot, and then either try to sell me the right to use the pictures of my own airplane or just plain never give up the photos that were promised to be shared.
I'm sure most of you wouldn't behave that way, but I would just suggest that you think of it from the owners perspective as well.
On the other hand, I have have also had several people who have took pics from the ground, that have contacted me and offered them to me gratis, for my personal use. Very cool.
So, it cuts both ways.
Well said Eric, every year there are air-to-air photo's taken at airshows for calendars that meant the aircraft was fueled, flown for several hours of flight out of there own pockets and for what. Its best to have the only dog in the hunt...
Lynn