TRAVEL CHANNEL SHOOT -- 9/17

aikibujin wrote: Hmmm... I know quite a few programmers who loves to write code on their own (for free) on a regular basis, just for fun. So I guess when they go to work and write programs, they should also do it for free?

I'll take that. Excellent point. Perhaps my only point was if Johnny wanted to be paid, I hope we can agree, this isn't exactly the best way to get hired.

Suppose what bothered me was how the first stream of posts ask what they'd be paid. Once that was made clear, then it got rather ugly. Wishing our community would have responded in a more positive manner.

cragman2 wrote: Bear Grylls! He could drink pee on the summit of Stolen Chimney!

NICE!!!

Sounds like a bunch of Kardashians on this thread; makes me not want to visit Moab.

This is funny, I could care less about paying people...corporate America...blah blah...but Wall St, Potash, and Moab is got enough publicity as is, it doesn't need anymore.

Travis Haussener wrote:This is funny, I could care less about paying people...corporate America...blah blah...but Wall St, Potash, and Moab is got enough publicity as is, it doesn't need anymore.

It is a desert after all. I recall back when Last Chance in New Mexico was sort of the locals secret spot and many didn't want it's location published. Finally broke out, and today, it's hard to get out there on a weekend and not find other climbers. Before, most days, we had the canyon to ourselves. It wasn't long before climbers burned the area down...literally! Shut it down for two solid years.

News flash! Moab, a town of 5,000 sees 1.5 million visitors a year. Yes 1.5 MILLION.

This has been great to watch. I asked the question because there are a whole host of folks that live in Moab, regularly climb for fun and who derive their livelihood from climbing, rigging and monitoring filming for the various land managers.
Asking for volunteers to rig and climb for free so the the production can be done on a shoestring takes money from the mouths of professional climbers, riggers and talent.
Travel Channel didn't ask you to film it for free though doing it on a shoestring devalues the work for all shooters, yourselves included.
Similarly filming "volunteers" and going around professional climbers, riggers and talent devalues those jobs. If those involved in this industry simply said no to shoestring budgets, volunteers, shadowing and held their ground and asked for what their services are worth it would be better for everyone trying to make a living outside.
Filming and Still Photography, the production of "Content" is a BIG business that few on this thread have a clue about. Johnnymuir has been through that arc and understands. So many here, bound to a desk that couldn't possibly imagine making a living doing something most consider fun, don't.

Got that filming permit and monitor set up for the shoot right?

Jake T wrote:Johnnymuir wrote: When the god damn New York Times came knocking to me, I caved and gave them that image for free... how is it fair for them not to pay me? Is That a trick question?

No, its a commentary on how one of the most successful media outlets in the world didn't even offer to pay me for a photo. And then, they go and F up the crediting for the first 24 hours, so I missed out on all the free publicity I was supposed to get, which was the only compensation for my work! Real slick operation they run.

Craig Childre wrote: I'll take that. Excellent point. Perhaps my only point was if Johnny wanted to be paid, I hope we can agree, this isn't exactly the best way to get hired. Suppose what bothered me was how the first stream of posts ask what they'd be paid. Once that was made clear, then it got rather ugly. Wishing our community would have responded in a more positive manner.

I have no interest in being on tv, for pay or for free, so my rants have been about what I perceive to be yet another corporation taking advantage of people so they can make more money. And it got ugly because someone came here asking for people to volunteer their time FOR FREE while he makes money off of them. That is not right, no matter how you cut it. If the guy was doing a film for himself and wanted to pitch it to Travel Channel, ok, working for free up front has its place there. But the way the original post was worded made it clear that this is a for-profit venture for a highly recognized and profitable TV channel. For them not to pay, not even to feed you? What are we doing this for then?

Again, if I want a shed built in my backyard, think someone will do it for free, cuz I'll write them up on my blog?

Cdec, I agree with everything you say. Its too bad that will probably never happen :(

I wonder how packed Wall Street is gonna be today....

johnnymuir wrote:When the god damn New York Times came knocking to me, I caved and gave them that image for free, cuz it was good for my resume at the time. But how is that fair, that one of the largest media outlets on earth, that makes more in profit in two minutes than I do in a year, how is it fair for them not to pay me? They are charging money for people to see their content, and I am providing part of that content, why am I not being paid for it?

They did pay you - by enabling you to pad your resume.
"Pay" isn't always monetary.

Marc801 wrote: They did pay you - by enabling you to pad your resume. "Pay" isn't always monetary.

See above. They miscredited the photo for the first 24 hours it was up. So they didnt pad my resume the way they should have. The first 24 hours an article is up are the most important, especially in today's short attention span world.

No one cares anymore... you hate these guys... great, no one cares... NY times screwed you... great, no one cares ... you don't want to be on TV, no one cares... my only care right now... to avoid reading another post by Mr Muir. I wish you well, but simply put, I could care less.

Craig Childre wrote:No one cares anymore... you hate these guys... great, no one cares... NY times screwed you... great, no one cares ... you don't want to be on TV, no one cares... my only care right now... to avoid reading another post by Mr Muir. I wish you well, but simply put, I could care less.

But wait, if you could care less, that implies that you do care in the first place. :/

Johnymuir-

As a professional photographer, did you compensate the people in your photos . . . or plan to pay them had you been paid?

Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk
Guideline #1: don't be a jerk

I'm guilty of utilizing a commonly misused phrase.

'Couldn't care less' is what I'd intended to communicate.

Climb safe, be well, do good. As for this topic I have nothing left to add or take from any further discussion.

Well this thread took a turn for the worse.... I'm against the Travel Channel filming at Wall Street because there are already a fuck ton of climbers there. Why bring more?

I think this debate comes down to an issue of consent. If climbers want to be paid to be filmed then thy should demand it. If they don't, as they are already there recreationally then they shouldn't demand anything.....

Sam Keller wrote:I'm against the Travel Channel filming at Wall Street because there are already a fuck ton of climbers there. Why bring more?

I honestly don't think there will be a noticeable increase at all. How much of an overlap of climbers and Travel Channel watchers demographics is there, really?

Dear Johnny Muir,

We are so sorry. We understand that we really messed up your day like 5 years ago, and I hope you know that the hours you have spent complaining to random people on the internet was not wasted. We plan to remedy the situation by contacting everyone who wondered who shot the photo and letting them know that you were the photographer... Actually it looks like you have already told more people on the internet about the situation than actually ever wondered who shot the one photo you gave us for free. Have a great weekend, you will be hearing from our lawyers on Monday regarding you libelous rantings on this forum.

-TNYT

Whatever happened to Rule #1? You all need to step away from the keyboard and go out and climb.

You can tell the climbing season is winding down and the snarkiness/trolling season is back.....