Posts Tagged ‘statue’

French Feminists Say Iconic V-J Day Kiss Photo Shows Sexual Assault, Want Statue Taken Down

vjday

Feminists in France are demanding that a statue based on Alfred Eisenstaedt‘s iconic ‘VJ-day in Times Square’ photo be taken down. They say that the original image it was based on is one that portrays sexual assault.

Read more…

If You Try to Publish a Picture of this Statue in Denmark, You’d Better be Ready to Pay Up

LittleMermaid

One of Denmark’s most photographed attractions, a Little Mermaid statue, comes with a strange caveat: it can’t be photographed. Or rather, a photograph of it can’t be used in a publication of any sort, even for journalistic purposes, without a big fat invoice finding its way to your door. Read more…

Student Breaks 19th Century Statue In an Attempt to Grab a #Selfie

SelfieStatue1

Selfies. We can’t seem to get enough of them. And while they’re somewhat awkward and obnoxious at times, they’re rather harmless, innocent and don’t cause any damage, right? Wrong. Or at least it was in the case of a student who reportedly broke an early 19th century statue in a museum (see update) in Milan, Italy. Read more…

Camera Captures Ancient Egyptian Statue Spinning On Its Own

Time-lapse videos are all the rage these days, but the one above is unlike any that have ever been made. It shows an ancient Egyptian statue spinning around in a glass on its own.
Read more…

Man Gets His Aerial Camera Stuck in the Arms of Lady Justice

ladyjustice

If you ever try your hand at shooting photos or videos from the sky using a remote-controlled helicopter, do your best to avoid trees, tall buildings, and… statues. Ohio-based cameraman Terry Cline found out the dangers of statues the hard way this past weekend. While capturing aerial imagery, Cline got his flying camera stuck in the arms of a statue 100 feet above the ground.
Read more…

Photographers’ Liability Insurance and a $300,000 Ancient Figurine

Last week we reported on how photographers and a magazine are being sued for $300,000 for allegedly breaking a 2,630-year-old statue while photographing it for an assignment. While many people, including us, pointed to it as an example of why carrying liability insurance is a good idea for photographers, a more appropriate question is: does a typical insurance plan even cover something like that? David Walker over at PDN writes that it doesn’t:

And as it turns out, standard liability insurance typically carried by photographers would NOT cover the accidental dropping of, say, a $300,000 Nok figurine on the set. That’s because liability insurance policies typically exclude damage claims “for property of others in the care, custody or control of the insured,” says Scott Taylor of Taylor & Taylor Associates

[…] The Nok figurine, or any other prop or object being photographed as part of the shoot, would almost certainly fall under one of those exclusions. Architectural photographer Peter Aaron says he found out about those exclusions after an assignment some years ago where an assistant mishandled an architect’s model of a skyscraper. “It pancaked,” Aaron says. The architect demanded $5,000 in compensation. Aaron turned to his insurance company. “They said that’s not something we cover,” Aaron says. He had to pay out of pocket (though he negotiated a lower settlement).

So how can you protect yourself against damage to extremely valuable items? You can either purchase third-party property insurance in addition to your liability insurance, or just have the owners move their own valuables.

What If You Break a $300,000 Figurine While on Assignment? [PDN]


Image credit: insurance by Alan Cleaver

Butterfingered Photographers Being Sued for $300,000 by Art Collector

Here’s a good example of why photographers should think about carrying liability insurance: Art + Auction magazine is being sued for $300,000 by art collector Corice Amran after its photographers accidentally knocked over a 2,630-year-old Nigerian Nok statue. The magazine was photographing the terracotta statue — the oldest known figurative sculpture south of the Sahara — at Amran’s house in May 2011 when the photographers decided to pick it up and move it to the opposite side of the room. According to the lawsuit,

During the photographers’ move of the Nok figure, the Nok figure fell onto the floor and was smashed into a myriad of pieces, cannot be restored and is a total loss. Defendant, through the photographers, acted negligently and without the due care necessary with respect to the Nok figure, particularly in light of its rarity, value and fragility. As the result of defendant’s negligence, the 2,630-year-old Nok figure owned by plaintiff was destroyed.

At least it was an inanimate statue and not a baby

(via Courthouse News via Boing Boing)