• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • @HBE, you are absolutely right about the $.04 royalty on statements. Last year, I analyzed 15 years of sales from one prolific stock shooter, and from 2003 to 2017 the average price-per-sale went from $117.00 to $7.41. The license types were 85% RM / 12% RF / 3% video.

      I also agree that agencies no longer seriously apply the "3x the usual fee" price for violations that we set as an industry standard for stock in the 1980s. That language was clearly listed in every delivery memo and invoice, and probably still is, but it's ignored. Earlier in this thread, I mention Permission Machine that digitally tracks violations and attempts to collect fees on behalf of the photographer for a percentage of the amount collected (and there are several companies doing the same).

      As a test, I ran 57 of my blog post images through the machine (which is based on Google's reverse-image tracking software) and was quite surprised to see the many violations. Of course, most were not worth the time and effort it takes to track down the responsible person and collect. The systems are focused on identifying cases that the company is the most likely to recover damages from / sell licenses to. 

      The "remedy" for the violator is typically to just remove the photo, as a DMCA Takedown notice gives violators a chance to do. The DMCA includes the "safe harbor" provision which protects websites from taking blame when it comes to copyright takedowns.

      If thumbnail reference images (served up via link to the original) could be tracked so the photographer could be paid for display usage, that would help. We see this constantly when an article's featured image is shared with the snippet via social media. But since the user isn't hosting the image, case law has ruled that this is not copyright infringement. And the publisher, who paid a flat fee license for a single article usage, is not paying the photographer extra for those impressions.

      BTW, I know many of the original Tony Stone photographers (Darrell Gulin, Art Wolfe, Frans Lanting, Stuart and Michelle Westmoreland, Tom Bean, and Bob Daemmrich come to mind) so I'm sure we have friends and colleagues in common! Welcome to Cake!

    • It came from hard experience. We used to default to larger sizes, thinking pros would want the best displays, and then pros got their images stolen. We discovered that Hell hath no fury like pros whose images are stolen.

      We also provide a way to choose embed sizes.

    • We Getty photographers, in frustration at some of the dealings of Getty images around our images (=our money), formed a group to address the issues. The problem is that freelance photogs are individuals all running their own businesses in their own ways; we could never really get enough momentum and cohesion to deal with it. The same is true of non-stock photogs. And, there are some serious laws about pricing (the issue for stock photographers at the time) and unions, etc.

      ASMP was a fine organization, but never had the clout or interest or money to address these issues.

      Photogs' union great idea, but never worked.

    • the only ones who make money on stock anymore are studios in Eastern Europe. They keep their costs low and churn out the images, using a lot of analytics to figure out what sells.

      Chris, I have no idea; stopped shooting stock because not worth the costs any more (tho it was great in the salad days..). I have a hard time believing that those guys in "Eastern Europe" -- can do it: cameras are expensive. Model costs may be much less (most porn comes from "eastern Europe), but they still need art direction, props that work anywhere in the world (appropriate clothes that don't look like cheap junk).

      Here's an ad for a business presentation company I found in a British biz mag I found on a flight to London on BA. Example of crap art direction in every way possible.


    • Absolutely have common friends via TSI/GI.

      Bob Daemmrich? funny; he was a newspaper staff photog; never really thought of him as a TSI/GI photog, but he did have some out there. My direct email is now heart.before.ego at gee mail (dot) com if you want to talk outside of CAKE and will give you my real name, which I don't use here because of GI.