Places and ExplorOz Image Library
Submitted: Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 17:30
ThreadID:
32086
Views:
2218
Replies:
13
FollowUps:
23
This Thread has been Archived
ExplorOz Team - David
Hi all,
This information will come out in the next newsletter however I thought I would pass it on early via the
forum and get some
feedback.
With the advent of
Places it appears that we are building one of the first geo-referenced image libraries which contains Australian landmarks and tourism images. During our research of the
Places images we became aware of a number of sites that "apparently" have images available for a fee. Most of them are rubbish or are very general. So we have decided to proceed with the
places image library in such a fashion as to share the opportunity to generate a return on images you supply to the library.
As of now
all places images have had a copyright notice overlaid to reduce/remove the ability for people to just download the image and use it without permission (as we already know this has happened - it is a pity to have to do this but seems to be the best way to protect our interests). We will add a message on the image display screens to advise people of the commercial costs of reuse of the images we have in the library (this will be based on resolution & size of the master image which you upload to the library). If someone wants to use an image we will return 50% of the nett revenue received to the submitter of the photo.
All the mechanics of this have not been built however I just wanted to gauge some
feedback from those people who have submitted or would consider submitting images under this type of arrangement. All
feedback on this topic welcome.
Reply By: greydemon - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 19:06
Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 19:06
Hi David,
I already have images with a stock library and have had a few sales. I can confirm for members that 50% of the fee for the photographer is standard. The fee itself depends on the use to which the image is to be put. Main factors are the size of the image and the circulation. Placement can also have an influence, for example the front cover of a magazine is worth more than an inside page. Limited issue usages such as souvenir coasters or calendars bring in much less than magazines and books. Low Res images can be used on websites but are of no use for print media and similar.
Until fairly recently only slide images would be accepted, with medium or large format prefered, now digital is OK but high resolution is required. For a while I got away with using a 6.3 megapixel SLR camera but have recently had to upgrade to an 8.1 megapixel to produce the required quality (Canon 20D).
Most photographers have hundreds of images with their stock library/libraries, about 10 years ago when I started the conventional wisdom was that on average you could expect to earn $1.00 per image per year. With inflation that is probably now $1.25 !
Of course, you can get lucky, a friend installed his
pool on the proceeds of a series of images taken at the local zoo ( he had special access, the shots couldn't jhave been taken from the public area)
Have fun but don't expect to get rich.
Nick
AnswerID:
162532
Follow Up By: Willem - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 20:41
Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 20:41
Greydemon
Interesting.
Ten years ago we sold sold a number of trannies to a very
well known Publishing House at an agreed value of $40 each passing copyright to the new owner. This value was low at that time as the publisher took quite a number of photos.
FollowupID:
417289
Follow Up By: greydemon - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 23:03
Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 23:03
Selling copyright is something I would normally only agree to for a) a lot of money, or b) for non-profit organisations ( sporting clubs my kids are involved in for example).
The normal procedure is for the photographer to retain the copyright and the user pays for use. Commissioned photos are a bit different as you are paid an agreed fee and expenses for your expertise up front and are usually shooting a subject provided by the hirer - company shots for board reports for example.
The comment elsewhere about paying for images in advance would never work - there just isn't enough money around in this business. The stock library, in this case Exploroz, really just acts as an agent, providing the shopwindow for you to display your wares. There is a lot of work in assessing, cataloguing and sending out images and then following up with invoicing and passing on payment to the photographer so the agent earns their 50%.
The key to running a stock library is quality, quality, and quality.
Nick
FollowupID:
417323
Follow Up By: Wombat - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 11:06
Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 11:06
You've taken the 3kg hammer and clobbered that little sucker right on the head, Nick. May I suggest that from a client's perspective, as
well as quality of the images being paramount, other important factors for a successful stock library are easy access to the appropriate images. They must be catalogued in a manner whereby they can accessed, analysed and compared easily.
FollowupID:
417389
Reply By: ExplorOz Team - David - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 01:27
Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 01:27
Oh one little addtional bit if info - you can now create new
places there is a new place button at the end of the index and
search pages. So if yo know of a place and it is not in the system please feel free to add it.
BTW: If you do not know the
GPS pos etc that is fine we can add it later. You only need to know the Name, State and type of point to load a place. It wouldbe best to have the position nut if you do not know do not guess someone will most likley know and update it donw the track.
AnswerID:
162591
Follow Up By: Wayne (NSW) - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 08:22
Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 08:22
You can tell when David has been working late.
The mind is working faster than the fingers.
Wayne
FollowupID:
417348
Reply By: Member - David 0- Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 23:32
Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 23:32
David
It is a nice touch, the whole place photo thing. I am not sure what demand you have for images, but there are very good stock libraries on the net, with extensive searching and cataloging capabilities. Still it may be worth a shot.
I personally would not submit photographs for sale under a royalty free arrangement unless for significantly higher gain than for a royalty arrangement, and then only after very careful consideration.
Though I already submit images to a stock library, I would consider submitting some images to such a scheme in order to raise my profile withing a specific genre, if I thought it worthwhile, but not royalty free.
Keep up the good work, and hope this helps.
PS Photo in competition past-Running creek appears to be on the coast but the map shows it inland???
Dave O
AnswerID:
162755