Bing photography competition rights grab

Beware Bing's photo rights grab competition!

CS5 is out with free shipping

If you've got CS2 or later and primarily shoot editorial stock then you may not need to consider an upgrade. However if you're shooting microstock and/or RF images the CS5 photoshop's new Content-Aware Fill feature could well be enough alone to convince you an upgrade is worthwhile. This insanely intelligent fill has the potential to save hours of labour using old school cloning tools and potentially the ability to salvage previously unusable images.

Stock photography survey

Stock Artists Alliance Industry Survey

RF vs RM earnings report in macrostock

A review of my 2009 at Alamy and Agefotostock.

Resizing images for Alamy

How to resize images for submission to Alamy. Read the post at fstop57.com

Alamy soft or lacking definition

Alamy's rejection reason "soft and/or lacking definition", or the infamous SoLD, has become a bit of stumbling block for some Alamy contributors and provoked a fair bit of debate on their forums.

In an effort to start clearing up some confusion Alamy have updated their explanation of what they mean when they reject on the basis of SoLD. I say start because I expect this won't completely solve the problems and confusion and imagine they'll be coming out with a more in the future, probably with detailed examples.

While an Alamy rejection can be especially frustrating because of the way it knocks back all your images in the upload queue along with the one(s) rejected it should be remembered that Alamy do at least provide valuable feedback to contributors (on technical issues only as there is no editing at Alamy), which is not something you get from many agencies. So a rejection can at least be put to good use as a learning experience!

If you have an image you're a little doubtful about my main tip would be upload it on its own or in a small batch only. So if it does fall foul of QC you don't get a lot of other good images caught in the rejection too.

Stock photography licensing terms

I'm slowly building up a bank of articles over at fstop57 - the new home of this blog - that will hopefully provide a useful resource to both photographers and picture buyers involved in the stock photography industry.

At times it can seem a little silly to be writing about what you're familiar with and assume much of your audience will be too. However it is all to easy to forget how much can be jargon to those not so involved in a subject or coming it to for the first time.

I've been meaning to do more posts on the RF / RM licensing question for a while and recently read a worrying poll result over at Roberto's mystockphoto blog that reveals the extent to which professionals in the design industry are either ignorant or ill-informed on image licensing. This has motivated me to put up some basic information on stock photo licensing on fstop57.com as part of my resources section. Stock photo licensing basics covers the diferences between rights managed and royalty free licenses.

Clustershot

fstop57 is on the move! I'm migrating over to www.fstop57.com and a new post on Clustershot is up over there.

Depositphotos 100 dollar upload incentive

Luis has a post over at his microstocking blog which is a good follow up to my mention of Depositphotos.com and their $100 upload incentive. Luis has made the money quickly and reports the upload and submission is easy and their response times are quick. They have even credited him for rejected uploads.

My main hesitation with jumping on this offer was the time it takes submitting to some agencies so this is positive feedback. If the $100 can be earned in around a day of otherwise unproductive time slotted in around other activities then it can be worthwhile even if meaningful sales never eventuate. With FTP uploading can be largely automated and the submission sounds simple enough to plug away at in front of the goggle box if, like me, you waste hours watching nonsence!

Given the backing Depositphotos have given to attracting contributors I would assume and hope they will be coming out with some equally appealing incentives to draw buyers over to their site once they've built up the numbers. So with luck the $100 incentive may not be the only payouts contributors see.

Thanks to Luis for the feedback on the upload incentive.

Crestock royalty free stock photos sale

A quick post post for the stock photo buyers out there. Crestock's 50% off everything sale ends at midnight PST, so act quickly if you want to grab a bargain!

With possibly the tightest editing in the microstock sector Crestock have a built a collection of a very high overall quality. For stock image users who expect to have significant image needs during 2010 this is a great opportunity to slash costs or make your budget go twice as far by buying a credit package or subscription at half price.

How to start a new microstock agency

Bandwagons keep on rolling long after there is really any room left to jump aboard.

I'm really quite surprised to find there are still new microstock agencies popping up. Sure it is relatively cheap and easy to throw a site up. However, it takes a lot more effort to build a worthwhile collection of images that might start enticing buyers. Microstock is not new anymore, so any new agency has to somehow differentiate itself to potential buyers who are already familiar with and buying from one or more of the top six microstock sites.

This is where most of the newer sites playing catch up are struggling; their offerings are largely duplications of what is already on offer from the established players built up by non-exclusive contributors seeing each new site as another potential outlet for their images. Potential that unfortunately is often not realised as the buyers don't come in enough volume (microstock is all about volume). Think about it. Why would they, if there is essentially nothing new on offer?

Microstock contributors are becoming increasingly wary of investing time and energy uploading to new startups and so new agencies are resorting to using pay to upload enticements. Read the rest of this post over at fstop57.com

Free Photoshop alternatives for photographers.

While Adobe Photoshop is justifably the industry standard photo editing application it does come with a price tag to match. Like a lot of software there will be many users who only really use maybe 10% of what it can do and really can't justify its cost. I'm all for minimising costs when possible and there are some very practical alternatives to Photoshop that are completely free.

A quick google search will reveal the choices available for photo editing can be quite daunting in their sheer scale and variety. While it can be tempting to grab all the free stuff you can this can quickly lead to a lot of wasted time installing and playing around with multiple applications, many of which will probably become rarely used. When too much of your time is getting sucked up the quest for a free or cheap alternative starts becoming expensive!

So here are three free Photoshop replacements.

Irfanview
Irfanview is described as a graphic viewer which, while it isn't a full image editor, I think does it a great disservice as it does a lot more than that implies. It supports Photoshop filters and can be used for common basic adjustments that are often all that a photo requires. With plugins installed a host of extra features like IPTC editing are included. I like Irfanview for its simplicity and speed. I have it as my default application for image files to load into when clicked and often use it for batch processing and resizing. It is free for non-commercial use and only a US$12 donation is requested if you're getting serious with it! On its own though it doesn't replace Photoshop, so you need more editing power to complement its file management.

Paint
If you're on Windows you'll be familiar with the basic paint program that has featured in the accessories through its evolution. This is not that paint! Originally it was intended to replace the painting software that comes with windows and has gone way beyond that. You get a pretty full featured application that supports layers and has an active community developing tutorails, plugins etc, for free.

GIMP
Of course I have to mention the the GIMP. You can't go past this software if you're a demanding user that wants an alternative to Photoshop. It is available on multiple operating systems and broadly speaking is a match for Photoshop just without the expense; it is free open source software. The catch for many people, is in getting to grips with it. I know when I first played with it (while experimenting with Linux at the same time, so possibly too much for me at once) I found it frustrating figuring out how to do things I knew I could have dome in moments back in photoshop. As I said if you're wasting a lot of time trying to get to grips with free sofware it isn't so free anymore. However investing time in getting to grips with the GIMP is definitly worth the effort if you plan to use it as long term alternative, which it is certainly capable of being.

I'm pleased to say I'm not the only person who must have found GIMP a bit of a steep climb at first because there is a hack that makes it a much more comfortable transition for users used to Photoshop. Gimpshop basically makes the user interface of GIMP much more friendly for anyone used to photo editing in Photoshop. If you're familiar with photoshop and want a fairly painless (saving hundreds of dollars helps with a little discomfort) transition Gimpshop is the way to go.

These are my presonal recommendations for use as photo editors. Paint and GIMP are also great for graphics work but there are others worth considering for this too. I've no doubt there are other extremely good alternatives for photo editing too that I haven't noticed or fully appreciated. One area I haven't touched on in this post is the increasingly good options available from web based editing applications. If you think I've missed something feel free to add suggestions in the comments.

Getty Images opens the flickr front door

I don't envy the picture editors at Getty. The news that they are opening up the Getty Flickr collection for anyone to submit a test batch of ten images to is like opening the flickrgates holding back a deluge of literally millions of images. Already the call for artists pool is overflowing with images, many of which you have to wonder why the contributors imagine Getty might be interested in. The people wrapping their eyeballs around the inevitatble influx of images are going to have a lot on after this announcement.

However, this news goes beyond provoking sympathy for Getty Images' soon to be overworked picture editors. It is pretty revolutionary. Getty used to be akin to the wholly grail of stock agencies. Being a Getty shooter was something to aspire towards; an achievement that meant you were producing work of quality and distinction. A commensurately impressive remuneration usually followed. Now anyone with a Flickr account can throw their hat into the ring.

A lot of long standing Getty photographers understandably lament the passing of the old days when they enjoyed their elite status but you have to hand it to Getty for not restng on their laurels. They've evolved with the changing market place by gobbling up istockphoto and partnering with Flickr to tap into the biggest collection of creative imagery online. As soon as Getty got in the commercialisation of Flickr was ineviatble. This latest move will effectively create a new stock collection cherry picked from the endless supply uploaded to Flickr.

Getty and Flickr have effectively democratised stock photography. Getting into Getty has gone from being the preserve of a relatively few invited high end professionals to an open door 'show us what you've got' policy. There has been the pay to get in Photographers Choice for some time, but that was $50 an image and required high end cameras. The Flickr collection requires a minimum of 3MP! Your phone could quite possibly be adequate to get you images into Getty. Seriously, most microstock sites have tougher technical entry requirements.

This is because Getty are responding to market demand for images that have a feeling of real life and this demand is often coming from market sectors that don't need huge files. Its more about the image being right emotionally, not technically. The defunct photoshelter collection was thinking along these lines; they were on to something but didn't last long enough to make it happen. Getty saw this, and crucially realised Flickr was the quick way to build this new collection.

So, should we all be Getty Photographers now? Check out this thread on the call for artists group and you'll see not everyone wants to jump into bed with Getty. Personally I hate the 20% royalty to photographers, but then you come around to the old chestnut 20% of a big pie is often better than 50% of a small pie. Getty's pie is undeniably large; their credits are easily found and they dominate many markets through sheer size. I'm undecided at the moment but will probably upload some more images to Flickr with a view to putting in my ten to apply. There is no obligation to accept any offer Getty make, and if I decided to knock an acceptance back I could at least brag I turned Getty down. Thing is, I'm not sure "Getty Shooter" will carry the status it currently does for much longer.

What do you think?

Photographers defend your copyright

Copyright is essential for creative activity. Without its protection both the quantity, and more importantly quality of work created would fall as the ability and incentive to be rewarded for creative work diminished.

There are moves underway in the UK to amend the current copyright laws to an extent that could leave photographers with far fewer rights and in a position of easy exploitation. In the fast evolving digital era we live in it is not unreasonable to reconsider exisiting legislation and rights. Indeed in a world of social networking, file sharing and viral marketing the current notion of copyright in the law does seem out of step with the reality of how images, and other creative work, are now used and consumed. However the amendments proposed appear to offer little protection or status to the photographer as a producer of creative works.

If you're a UK resident or citizen you can do your bit to defend copyright by signing this petition.

This isn't a national issue though. Its the old chestnut of what happens in the US (remember the orphan works bill) makes its way over to the UK a few years later, then its Europe, Australia. We live in a global marketplace for media stored on file servers; we need a global standard that will protect creators rights to control the use of their work, and profit from it if they choose, while facilitating the willing market to enjoy and use it appropriately. With the existance and popularity of creative commons licences there is plenty of work already available that can be legitimately used without the need to erode the rights of those who choose to retain their copyright.

Your photographers gear lust demon.

If you're a photographer you have one of these. Its like a little guy who sits on your shoulder and ooohhs and aaggghhs about photo gear he knows you really need to make better pictures. He used to be a sucker for megapixels but is kind of over that now, to an extent. Wait though, there's full frame sensors, lower noise, HD videos, there's always something. He's still very susceptible to advertising, to buzz, to beautiful design. Sometimes he'll even drool a little with desire, which naturally makes you irrational about purchase decisions. If he's really excited he jumps up and down so much you actually need that new DSLR body and lense to hang off the other shoulder to even things up a bit.

Ok, maybe your guy is a little different, maybe she's a demoness, maybe she's more subtle. But you have one, trust me. Read the rest of this post at fstop57.com

Stock photo ideas are everywhere

Sometimes it can be a struggle to come up with new ideas and concepts to shoot for stock photography. Yes, that's me scratching my head trying to come up with my next (who am I kidding?) big idea.

Doing a bit of self portrait modelling for yourself can be uncomfortably introspective sometimes. I don't see the back of my head that often. On this occassion it prompted some unforeseen keywording to take in that worryingly thin area that seems to be developing. Dare I say balding? Well for keywording, at least, I have.

The good news is the photo has sold on Alamy. So at least I can afford to try my luck with whatever magical solution Shane Warne is pushing at the moment. Or I might just thin out gracefully. There could be potential for a series of photos perhaps. Always look on the bright side, silver linings and all that.

Future prospects in microstock

Following on from my previous post on the current opportunities to make money selling photos through microstock agencies here are a couple of observations that I think are worth both new and exisitng contributors pondering.

A few years ago early adopters of the microstock model could pretty much throw their shovel in the air, dig where it landed and make some money. You could shoot anything and everything, upload and see some downloads. That approach will not work now with photography, the market is saturated with enough general imagery that anything new that isn't different and/or exceptional in some way will have, at best, only modest success. A more targeted approach is required, to use an internet business buzz word, you need a niche.

A niche may be subject matter, a particular style of photography, a unique take you have on your subject, or a combination of these things. For many photographers this is not necessarily an easy thing to find or develop; I know I haven't developed one and I probably need to if I'm going to improve my microstock returns. The first step I have at least taken; realisation that it would be a good idea to think about this and work a bit smarter! If you're thinking along these lines too take a look at picniche and see if any areas you might be able to shoot jump out!

Of course there are always exceptions and new opportunities. Many of the microstock agencies now accept video footage in addition to photos and vectors. Where any given subject or category will have many many thousands of images there will be far fewer footage clips currently available. Video could well be the new frontier and there is still time to get in early! With the release of the D90 Nikon opened up the possibility of creating high quality footage without needing too much extra gear so many microstockers already have the tools to shoot video. There is no doubt extra work, time, bandwith etc etc when working with video but to balance this licence fees are significantly higher and the competition is currently much less formidable!

Is the gold rush over in microstock photography?

Let me start by making it clear it has never been easy to make any significant money in microstock photography. The contributors making good money have worked hard to build successful collections over time that bring them the rewards for their efforts. However, a few years ago it was realistic for many "Mom and Pop" point and shoot snappers to upload their photos and earn some cash on the side. Some of these discovered they had real talent, saw the potential and went on with work and perseverance to become the people who now make significant income.



The question now is whether it is still possible for a new contributor to start from zero and build a portfolio in the microstock industry that will make them a reasonable return, at least, for their efforts. My short answer is a qualified yes; it can still be done but it is a lot harder with the level of competition now in terms of both quantity and quality of images continually being added. A talented contributor prepared to put in sustained effort could still build an asset - a portfolio - of images that will earn them residual income and possibly develop a career shooting for stock if desired. However the days of submitting snapshots from compact cameras and making a little second income, I think, are pretty much over. Any new contributor needs to being going into this with a high level of skill, good gear and the stamina for the long haul.

Kind of ironic in a way. The barriers to entry into the microstock business have started to rise! There is an interesting discussion on this going on over at the shutterstock forums which is worth a read for anyone considering their next move in microstock. A lot of valuable insight from experienced contributors is being shared in addition to some inspiring examples of what can be achieved.

Selling stock photos in the blogosphere

Is the blogosphere the next big battleground in stock photography?

Newspapers and print media are like walking wounded staggering from the cruel sucker punch the global financial crisis has dealt them. Old media companies that survive will look a lot different in whatever guise they manage to make work and there will be far fewer printing presses rolling out fresh pages. The action is online now, and this has implications for photographers who are finding traditional markets are using fewer images and/or paying less and less for the rights to publish.



Increasingly the demand for images is online and every agency from Getty on down is doing something to promote their content for web use. Where it gets particularly interesting is in the potentially massive but hard to sell to micropublishing world that the Internet has facilitated. The blogosphere is the biggest and most obvious part of this. There are a lot of blogs, I've no idea how many, lets say 3 twillion for the sake of argument, which is academic anyway as the number will have grown exponentially by some dizzying factor by the time I finish this riduculously longwinded sentence. Where were we?

Yes, how to get bloggers to buy images? Pretty tricky given the presumption of "free" amongst many web users and the availabilty of creative commons content on flickr. Alamy, to their credit, are thinking about this, but their novel use scheme wasn't too well received amongst contributors. I have a feeling they and the rest of the 'traditional' agencies better get some sort of working plan together quickly as the microstock agencies are looking to tap into this market and have the ready advantage that their pricing is already very affordable.

The microstockplugin for wordpress bloggers uses images from fotolia, which have to be purchased for use. Its a clever development which in theory may offer users a win win situation by allowing potential affiliate links back to earn them what they spend on photos for their blog. It also opens up the fotolia stock photography collection to a potentially huge new market.

Crestock has taken a different approach with freebieimages.com by attempting to tap into the potential for free advertising the blogosphere could offer. Freebieimages is also a wordpress plugin, the difference being users get to blog images from the crestock collection for free but they will be watermarked.

Both approaches seem to have potential to me, indeed I fully expect one, both or another will soon be available that offers bloggers the choice of a free watermarked image or a blog ready unbranded one for a few dollars more. Any bets which agency gets there first?

Deciding where to market and sell your photos

If there is one thing that is tempting about exclusivity it is the simplicity it would introduce into my workflow if I only had one outlet for my images to consider. While I don't personally think being exclusive to one agency is the right thing for me I can see it does work for some photographers. Only working with one agency obviously is a great time saver when it comes to submitting images. It doesn't stop there though as each agency has their own slightly different way of doing things so often optimising submissions for each one can be a time consuming task before submission begins.



Before that there are of course all sorts of decisions that often have to pondered; will it be RM or RF, Traditional or push it through the micros? This is one reason I like images like the one here of a competitor in the recent Tour of Tasmania cycling event. These guys often manage to have more branding on them than Picadilly Circus and move way too fast to grab a model release. So, despite the emrgence of editorial on some microstock agencies, I consider this an RM (rights managed or L on Alamy) photo and don't spend any time thinking about how or where to try and sell it; It'll go up on Alamy, and perhaps gekkoimages seeing as its Australian content.

Many stock images aren't as clear a decision though. I don't like the idea of putting the same images with agencies working at different price points so I often do have to decide where each image will try and earn me some crust. I think this is an interesting process we have to go through as stock photographers and will be analysing some choices I make in future posts.