I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before (I loved Wednesday's episode, for the record), but is there a reason why people were blurred in the back during the flashback to Tracy/Luke's wedding reception? I think I noticed Brook Lynn but I wasn't sure. Is it because the actors are no longer with the show - it seemed really out of place.

We all asked, and MrQ told me it had something to do with the higher ups at ABC, I believe.

I still find that weird--in the past soaps rarely if ever worry about that for flashbacks--I assumed there may have been some character who was recast. Or maybe they wanted to be artistic and just focus on the key characters.... riiight.

We all asked, and MrQ told me it had something to do with the higher ups at ABC, I believe.

What's weird was Abby wasn't blurred at all

What's weird was Abby wasn't blurred at all

You could only see half her face though

ETA = wrong thread.

Edited November 23, 201213 yr by Y&RWorldTurner

Nope.

Whew! Thank goodness...

They would have to pay the actors residuals for using their image since they're no longer on contract with the show.

Are you sure? Because I remember Lilly Melgar saying she wished they would give her money for showing her picture whenever Sonny starts bringing Lily up when he's at a lowpoint.

Are you sure? Because I remember Lilly Melgar saying she wished they would give her money for showing her picture whenever Sonny starts bringing Lily up when he's at a lowpoint.

I think there are contractual differences between film of an actor acting and photos/stills which are owned by the show (and were perhaps taken for publicity purposes). I did a TV show where they used a photo of me in a subsequent episode and I did not get paid for that, nor did I get paid for my picture being used in a calendar because that picture was owned by the show. It's weird. But I do remember someone saying in a SOD article years ago that they couldn't use photos of Cortlandt family members no longer on AMC in frames on the piano because they'd have to pay the actors. I dunno, worth researching for a definitive answer.

Are you sure? Because I remember Lilly Melgar saying she wished they would give her money for showing her picture whenever Sonny starts bringing Lily up when he's at a lowpoint.

I was reading in my "Writing for the Soaps" book and they said the show has to pay residuals. The book was published in 1984. I think it has to do with actually scenes. Also, I know as a photographer that, unless I sign a work for hire agreement, all of the photographs I take are mine automatically. If ABC used there own photographer or had one sign a Work For Hire ABC owns all rights to the photograph.

I think there are contractual differences between film of an actor acting and photos/stills which are owned by the show (and were perhaps taken for publicity purposes). I did a TV show where they used a photo of me in a subsequent episode and I did not get paid for that, nor did I get paid for my picture being used in a calendar because that picture was owned by the show. It's weird. But I do remember someone saying in a SOD article years ago that they couldn't use photos of Cortlandt family members no longer on AMC in frames on the piano because they'd have to pay the actors. I dunno, worth researching for a definitive answer.

Thats weird. You see I don't buy into all the conspiracy theories but at the same time that makes you wonder.

What about soap repeats though? They don't pay the actors again for those.

Yes, I have read in the past that there are no residuals for soaps (nor would there have ever been a need for them in the past as they weren't ever repeated or syndicated until the '80s).

Here's this:

Why do I NOT Get Residuals? a.k.a. Pitfalls to Counting on Residuals

◊ You were working on a soap opera (AFTRA has jurisdiction over most of these). Many of them only show on the network once (with repeated airings on Soap Net). The pay structure for day time TV is very different and you might not make as much as you might expect from a primetime show on the same network.

http://www.bizparentz.org/residualpayments.html

I think there are contractual differences between film of an actor acting and photos/stills which are owned by the show (and were perhaps taken for publicity purposes). I did a TV show where they used a photo of me in a subsequent episode and I did not get paid for that, nor did I get paid for my picture being used in a calendar because that picture was owned by the show. It's weird. But I do remember someone saying in a SOD article years ago that they couldn't use photos of Cortlandt family members no longer on AMC in frames on the piano because they'd have to pay the actors. I dunno, worth researching for a definitive answer.

I'd love a definite answer. Obviously we HAVE had many flashbacks before that show actors who are no longer on a show...

You were in a TV show?? And a calendar?? What kinda calendar?

I really, a an actor, want to be on a soap very badly.

Yes, I have read in the past that there are no residuals for soaps (nor would there have ever been a need for them in the past as they weren't ever repeated or syndicated until the '80s).

Here's this:

Why do I NOT Get Residuals? a.k.a. Pitfalls to Counting on Residuals

◊ You were working on a soap opera (AFTRA has jurisdiction over most of these). Many of them only show on the network once (with repeated airings on Soap Net). The pay structure for day time TV is very different and you might not make as much as you might expect from a primetime show on the same network.

http://www.bizparent...alpayments.html

I know they definitely don't get payed for syndication as I've heard B&B actors talk about it before. It makes the show money but not the actors.

I'd love a definite answer. Obviously we HAVE had many flashbacks before that show actors who are no longer on a show...

You were in a TV show?? And a calendar?? What kinda calendar?

Settle down Soapsuds! No, it was just a teeny tiny part in a show several years ago but they did a calendar of various scenes and one photo is a pic of me and some other characters. I didn't get a dime from that, but I do get residuals from dvd sales and cable/pay per view.

I was also contacted when scenes that I was in were being used for a retrospective-type program. Paley requested that I allow them to use my image "gratis". I said sure, why not. They weren't going to pay one way or the other so it was no pay and be seen or no pay and be blurred.