Jump to content

Ken Wolter

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Ken Wolter

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In fact, I can see Minnesota from my dining room window. The city was named Hudson because a mayor in the 1850's thought the area reminded him of Hudson, New York. And yes, people around here have accents like in the movie Fargo. Of course, I don't, doncha know.
  2. I lived in Salinas for a few years when I worked a Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center Monterey. I took that image in 2013. That lettuce field image with Toro Park in the background is my top selling image of all time and I had no idea when I took the photo it would have done as well as it has. Not all that much thought went into the image, to be honest. I miss the California Central Coast a great deal. I can't wait for the pandemic to subside so I can visit again Point Lobos, Wilder Ranch, The Pinnacles and other places of beauty. Thanks for the compliment and best wishes fro
  3. When I began as a Shutterstock contributor ten years ago, I barely knew what I was doing. I thought of myself as a fairly good photographer and I thought I would turn my camera into pocket change for new gear. I faced all the challenges of new contributors with constant rejections and poor sales. Like a lot of people, I nearly gave up on stock photography. It wasn't until 2014 when I changed my focus to Editorial that my fortunes changed for the better. And it was at that time I set a goal for myself. I decided that I would make it my objective to have 5000 images in my Shutterstock port by t
  4. There was a movement a few years ago that got my attention. It looks like he took down his web site, or I simply can't reach it right now. Regardless, there are some good ideas here if anybody wants to watch.
  5. This is the verbiage I used in my response to a copyright troll attorney who wanted $2000 to settle a case for an editorial image I took of a statue at a wayside rest in rural South Dakota. "I am in receipt of your letter dated March 5, 2019 in reference the sculpture “Dignity” in which you state that I am illegally using images for monetary gain for commercial purposes. You state that I am in violation of U.S. copyright law and you cite legal statutes you believe are relevant. Your claims of copyright violation are factually inaccurate as these images are licensed for “Editorial” us
  6. What do you think of this? On one hand, I see small claims court legislation for photographers as a positive move. Most of the people reading this post have had their images stolen and it's beyond aggravating. One the other hand, I see that it could adversely affect my niche of stock photography which is editorial stock. In the past year I have received letters from two attorneys claiming to represent clients and claiming copyright infringement. In both cases they were editorial images and the lawyers' claims were frivolous and without merit. They asked for money to settle out court and I refu
  7. If the photo was taken in Israel, you will want to acquaint yourself with laws of the nation. In the United States it's pretty much settled law that a photograph taken in public of documentary or newsworthy value can be licensed as "editorial." There are exceptions, but this is the general rule. A few months ago I got a letter from an attorney asking for $2000.00 for an editorial image I took of a statue in the middle of South Dakota. I knew right away that the attorney was a copyright troll. First, he had no legal basis for his claim. The statue was at wayside rest and my caption clearly desc
  8. Yes, current news works -- especially when it has lasting power. I about spilled my beer and tipped over the popcorn bowl few months back when this image appeared on Showtime's The Circu s. The image was taken in January, 2017 during the Minnesota Women's March and has done well for me.
  9. Last week I posted in this forum the story of my encounter with an out of control security guard outside Xcel Energy headquarters in downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA This was after I paused briefly to take a series of three photos while on public property of the Xcel Energy sign for my editorial stock library. I am pleased to announce that Xcel Energy responded to my letter in a highly professional manner. I am satisfied with their response and I plan no further action. Thanks to all who responded to my earlier post. It is greatly appreciated.
  10. Thank you to everyone for your feedback. If and when I receive a response from Xcel Energy I will keep everyone posted. I plan to give the company a week to reply.
  11. I shoot mainly editorial and I am used to being followed and otherwise harassed by security personnel who I seem to attract like flies to honey. It goes with the territory and I don't let it get under my skin. I know that if I have taken an image on corporate grounds I need to smile and play dumb. However, I know that in the United States with only a few exceptions, photography from a public location is perfectly legal. Saturday, was a new low. Attached is my letter to the CEO of Xcel Energy following an incident where I was bull rushed by an out of control security guard in downtown Min
  12. In the United States, so long as you are on public property, you can photograph businesses and people for editorial. Personally, I do this all the time and I even bend the rules by shooting stills and video from private businesses' parking lots. I work quickly and keep one eye over my shoulder. If I'm challenged by security while I'm on private business property, I play dumb and leave -- it never pays to have a debate with Paul Blart the Mall Cop. There are a few caveats. For one, I do not photograph or film children, the handicapped or people obviously down on their luck out of respect. Secon
  13. I have a collection in Lightroom named "Shutterstock Rejections." If I feel halfway strongly that the rejection was in error I put the image in that collection and let it set for a few months. If after a period of time I still feel strongly that the rejection was in error, I will resubmit. My resubmitted images are nearly always accepted. In fact, several have turned into top performers. All that said, it's interesting how often the reviewers get it right. Often when I go back and look at the rejected image to see if I should resubmit, I conclude it's kind of a crummy image and is not worth re
  14. I have had exactly the same experience. Starting earlier this year and out of the blue, nearly all my video submissions were rejected for frame rate/shutter speed reasons. The few that I had accepted were at exactly the same frame rate and shutter speed as those rejected. In the middle of the year, I had a large batch of video clips that were accepted and I breathed a sigh of relief thinking that the problem had worked itself out. Then, my last submission of video clips were all rejected with the all to familiar frame rate/ shutter speed reason.
  15. I think there might be a fly in the ointment within the new submission process. When my phone started notifying me madly for each image that had been reviewed, I thought that World War III had just commenced! The good news is that each of my 33 images had been approved. :-)
  • Create New...