Stock
Have you given Getty Images exclusive rights to represent some of your
images? Are those same images available for licensing on Veer or Corbis
under the brand name Ocean Photography? Many photographers will be
surprised to discover the answer is YES. Photographers who produced images for PhotoDisc and Photographer’s
Choice RF have recently found some of their images on Veer being
marketed through the Ocean Photography brand.
The IPTC (International Telecommunications Council) is challenging
vendors across the media industry to create the conditions for
interoperability for metadata embedded in media files. Following
a 2006 Metadata Manifesto issued by the Stock Artists Alliance, the
IPTC has created a new updated document the Embedded Metadata Manifesto
to cover all media types, including stills and video. The manifesto
outlines a set of 5 principles.
iStockphoto has announced the launch of its premium-quality Vetta video collection with clip prices that range from 55 to 150 credits (credit prices vary from $0.99 to $1.54 depending on the size of the credit package purchased). Currently there are over 300,000 video clips on iStock, but only a few thousand of the best are in the Vetta collection. However, it is expected that the Vetta collection will grow rapidly. Approximately 5,000 videographers have contributed clips to iStock.
Photographers are trying to assess how much the acquisition of PhotoLibrary will add to Getty’s gross revenue and what impact it might have on Getty’s overall control of the stock photo market. I estimate that gross 2010 revenue for still photo licensing worldwide was about $1.45 billion. Over the years I have defined the “stock photo market” as including the licensing of still photos and illustrations, but not footage or any of the auxiliary activities that Getty, Corbis and some other companies are involved in. I also include in my gross figure revenue generated by the picture divisions of AP, Reuters, AFP, etc. and of course the editorial division of Getty Images.
APA (American Photographic Artists) members have “uniformly agreed that Getty Images’ proposed changes are unacceptable.” Through its counsel,
Nelson & McCulloch LLP, APA contacted Getty Images prior to the April 30th deadline and made clear its position on the new contract. The organization requested, “that Getty Images stay or extend its self-imposed deadline for forcing contributors to sign (its) agreements.” Getty Images refused to respond to APA’S inquiry.
It’s no surprise to anyone in the stock photo business that average fees
for image use are declining. The questions are how much, what’s causing
the decline, can we make it up in volume and how can we turn it around?
ASMP’s Executive Director Eugene
Mopsik speaks out on the ASMP position relative to the new Getty Images photographer contract. ASMP has been carrying on a dialogue with
Getty for some years as a photographer advocate. While ASMP has had recent discussions
with Getty, substantive results in the best interests of photographers
have not been achieved. Therefore, ASMP believes that it is important
for photographers to stay knowledgeable about the changes in the market and to
be aware of options including changing distributors and self-marketing.
Stipple, a San Francisco-based technology company, has released a suite
of products that will turn editorial images into e-commerce storefronts
for consumers. The principle behind this new development is that
consumers often want to purchase something that is pictured in an
editorial image. It might be a T-shirt, a dress or the jeans a celebrity
is wearing; or a purse; or shoes; an electronic gadget; or golf clubs –
you get the idea. How does the consumer find the brand name of product
pictured and where to buy it
According to Tech Crunch
Getty Images has acquired competitor
The Photolibrary Group. Terms of the acquisition were not disclosed and as of this writing no additional information is available on the Getty web site.
Getty Images has announced that it has acquired PicScout, a leader in
identifying image use, metadata and licensing information on the web.
Founded in 2002 by Offir Gutelzon and Eyal Gura the company is based in
Herzliya, Israel and has 60 employees. The PicScout brand will remain,
and the R&D team is expected to remain in Israel.
Some textbook publishers have begun to ask photographers to invoice them for the right to use images for the “life of the edition” of a book. The following is the language from one such request. "
Please bill us for publication rights for the life of the edition. … we would like by this permission request to sell additional units through the life of the edition...."
Universal Images Group (UIG), and Encyclopaedia Britannica (EB) have
entered into a 10-year License Agreement that makes UIG the exclusive
provider of still pictures, video and footage for EB’s online
educational image service, Image Quest. UIG, the distribution
business of the Virtual Picture Desk (VPD), has provided 2 million
educational still images for Britannica Image Quest and will
subsequently provide motion content including video and footage clips.
The Image Quest online subscription service went live in September 2010
with content from more than 50 world-class image providers.
When customers first requested rights to use images in both print and
online it seemed reasonable to charge a supplemental fee for the online
use that was much less than the print price. Today, electronic use is at
least equal to print and tomorrow it will be the predominate use of all
imagery. If we continue to price electronic as a lesser usage we will
be offering a huge discount on the price for the majority of our future
licenses. Therefore we must come up with an entirely new strategy for licensing electronic uses.
PhotoShelter and
Agency Access have just released a free ebook entitled “
What Buyers Want From Photographers.” The information resulted from a 35 question survey sent to Agency Access’ global database of 55,000 photography buyers. 500 responded to the survey.
In December the United States Postal Service released 3 billion copies
of a first-class postage stamp that showed a low angle close up of the
head and crown of the Statue of Liberty, symbol of American freedom. About
a month ago the service was shocked to discover that the image supplied
by Getty Images was not of the 305 foot tall statue designed by
sculptor Frederic-Auguste Bartholdi and located on Liberty Island off
the tip of Manhattan, but of a half-sized replica outside the New
York-New York Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas.
In the microstock world, when establishing prices for online image use
distributors should consider developing ways to distinguish between
personal or social media uses and those for commercial purposes.
Customers who use images for commercial purposes, and earn revenue as a
result, should be charged more than those whose image use is for
personal, non-revenue generating purposes. On the print side of the
business microstock sellers have already solved this problem to a
degree. They charge more for larger file sizes that are commonly needed
for print uses, and even more when print uses are expected to exceed
500,000 copies.
One way to satisfy customer demands for lower prices without reducing
overall operating costs is to cut the amount paid for the product you’re
selling. Over the past decade some stock photo distributors have used
this strategy very effectively. This article examines the effect that discount prices are having on the ability of stock photographers to earn a living.
Anyone who earns significant revenue from producing or licensing stock
images for educational purposes should be looking, as soon as possible,
for another line of business. Why? It is rapidly becoming
impossible to earn enough from licensing images for educational use to
cover the costs of producing them. For decades photographers have been
willing to license rights for limited usage of their images with the
understanding that if a greater use is made the photographer will
receive additional compensation. This system was originally developed to
help publishers limit their risk in the event that some of the book
they produced did not sell well or generate as much revenue as hoped.
Every photographer detests copyright infringers. When one of their
images is used without compensation they want to be paid not only their
normal fee for the use but a reasonable amount for chasing down the
infringer and enough penalty to insure that the infringer won’t do it
again. The goal is to give everyone incentive to be honest. But is going after infringers really accomplishing that goal and is it generating more business for the future?
I was recently asked by a RM photographer, “Can you provide some
insights into the kinds of volumes that are generated when images are
licensed at microstock prices?” This story provides some information and links as to how to learn more about microstock volumes.
Many photographers licensing images at RM and traditional RF prices
believe that it is impossible to have as profitable business licensing
images at Microstock prices. They argue that despite the fact that some
microstock photographers earn significant revenue due to sales volume
their expenses must be so high that there is very little profit for
their time invested. This story explores the validity of that theory.
Prior to 1976 a commissioning client owned the copyright to images
created by photographers. At that time the vast majority of images that appeared in
publications and advertising were created on assignment. The 1976 copyright law changed all that and gave photographers control of their work and the ability to license narrow and specific rights. Now, the business world is pushing photographers back into a model that
looks very much like pre-1976. The promise of a continual income stream
from our creations often seems distant and unobtainable.
A rights-managed photographer recently told me that travel photographers must continue to
market their work as rights-managed because there is not enough
customer demand on microstock sites for travel images to enable
photographers to cover their costs and make a profit. He acknowledged that people who shoot model released business and
lifestyle photographs might be able to earn enough to profit from
licensing their images as microstock, but argued that it won't work for
the travel photographer. I decided to search iStockphoto for some popular locations and see how
many times the top ten images from each of these locations had been
downloaded.
The new
Getty Images Contributor Agreement is now available. It raises a number of issues for Getty photographers. Photographers must sign the new contract before the end or April in order to continue to submit new images. If they choose not to sign Getty will continue to license their images until their current contract expires. At that point their images will be removed from the database.
Cutcaster recently conducted a survey using their own database and Adbase’s email list of creatives in multiple industries in North America. The professional backgrounds of the recipients cover most industries. They received 344 responses almost all of which came from North America with the next largest groups being South America and the UK. See the preliminary results at
http://blog.cutcaster.com/2011/02/10/picture-buyer-stats-released-market-information-for-online-image-users/