around the net, volume 13, getty and flickr partner
July 11, 2008 – 1:30 amOne of my favorite websites is A Photo Editor, written by photo editor Rob Haggart. Rob’s business is to constantly review the work of photographers so he frequently highlights new and cool photography on the site. I really enjoyed his post linking to a site with samples shot from what seems like a hundred “crappy cameras”, comparing the effects from each. I could get lost in there.
Rob also reveals the ins and outs of the editorial photo business, passing on valuable info to photographers marketing their work. The really cool thing is that he’s a true advocate for photographers and photography and we can use all of those that we can get.
The biggest photo news this week, by far, is the announcement that Flickr is granting Getty access to their members in order to monetize some of the images on Flickr. Lee at Microstock Diaries has a host of info here. This is interesting for a number of reasons.
Getty runs traditional stock photography outlets where professional photographers have paid hard dues to get accepted into the fold. In return, they get paid pretty well for stock sales and are given a contract rate.
Getty also owns iStockphoto, the largest microstock agency. Any photographer can submit photos to microstock agencies and this has encouraged amateurs to enter the stock photography market. All submitted photos must adhere to strict submission guidelines, though, and photographers are rewarded for learning to “color within the (guide) lines”. Pay is low per image so the goal is to sell in larger volumes.
Now, by partnering with Flickr, Getty seeks work with what it calls “more authenticity”. It will pay selected Flickr photographers the higher contract photographer rates for selected images.
As Jonathan Klein, co-founder and CEO of Getty Images tells The New York Times in this story, “Getty also runs a site called iStockPhoto, where amateurs contribute photos that the company markets at lower rates. The photos on Flickr are of sufficient quality to demand higher prices, Mr. Klein said.”
I don’t think that statement made it through the p.r. department. Soooo, you get photographers to jump through hoops in order to get images accepted on iStockphoto for lower rates and then you blanket label the images on Flickr as being “of sufficient quality to demand higher prices”?
I hope he was misquoted. The only thing I know for sure is that the playing field will continue to change, Getty now has more new product to offer buyers (there are literally billions of photos to choose from on Flickr) and some photographers will feel like winners and some will feel like losers. And then it will completely change again a year from now.
But how will this change Flickr? Now that photos will be selectively monetized is it still an “open photo community”? I’d enjoy hearing your thoughts.
Some people are really into the features of blogs while others just like to browse and go (and either is fine). If you’re reading this on the website and are curious about what other prophotolife readers are up to, take a look at the right sidebar and find the “top commentators” box. There you’ll find names of active commentators and their names serve as links to their own websites (there are some really talented commentators, btw). Comment enough times and you’ll end up in the box.
I don’t usually recommend reading unless it’s something educational, that’s just the way it seems to go. But if you’re planning to hit the beach or camp sometime this summer and you’re looking for backpack reading, I recommend taking along The Short Story and Photography, 1880’s-1980’s
That’s it for this week. We’re halfway through 2008…wow. Enjoy the weekend and we’ll pick it back up on Monday with another informative lighting video!
- Jim T.
You might enjoy these related posts:
If this article was helpful then please consider subscribing to pro photo life by email or full feed RSS.
12 Responses to “around the net, volume 13, getty and flickr partner”
One thing that we need to keep in mind is that this is just announcement. Schedules, pricing models, etc. are still unknown. To quote flickr’s FAQ about getty deal:
When will the Flickr Collection on Getty Images launch?
“Soon.” If you’ve been a member for some years, you’ll know that we’re rather “mum” on information about when new features will launch. Soon can mean tomorrow, next month or even two years from now. We’re hoping that the Flickr Collection on Getty Images will debut later this year.
The announcement of the Flickr Collection on Getty Images is just the first step. There’s a lot to do before we launch. We’ll share more information via FlickrBlog and hear your feedback via the Help Forum as this new collaboration between Flickr and Getty Images evolves.
http://www.flickr.com/help/gettyimages/
By Juha Ylitalo on Jul 11, 2008
I’ve been meaning to comment on this all week; you finally spurred me into action
Here’s my full analysis; in summary it’s good news for Flickr and Getty, a little bonus for casual photographers, but not much for growing or established professionals who want to earn real microstock money.
Microstock Diaries provides great insights on this market; how do Jim and the other established professionals view it as a part of their business strategy?
By Matthew Botos on Jul 11, 2008
The news of Flickr teaming up with Getty Images doesn’t really change my perception of Flickr or my use of it now. It may down the road, as my photos get better. I think for a lot of people it will just be business as usual.
That’s just my perception though. I’ve only been using Flickr for a few months.
By John Brainard on Jul 11, 2008
Hey Jim,
I know you are a Linux user at home so you might be interested in photo software for Ubuntu. Here is a link to an article that I found on slashdot.org
http://www.ubuntuproductivity.com/journal/ubuntu/07/2008/ubuntu-photo-manager-experiment/
The free HDR software looks interesting, perhaps an alternative for Photomatix and it works on PC, Mac, and Ubuntu.
By Mike C on Jul 11, 2008
I’m not sure where I stand on this concept. On the one hand I think it’s great that Getty is actively seeking out talent to fill their library. Possibly a lot of unknown talent as well. On the other hand, I really liked that flickr has been letting photographers set their own boundaries using creative commons licensing. Bringing Getty into the mix I feel muddies the waters somewhat. I’ve also seen what stringent guidelines Getty sets for their image submissions and wonder how those will apply to flickr images.
On a more personal side of things what I’ve always liked best about flickr is the stream of consciousness aspect of it. I’ve got a portfolio site, so my flickr is where a decent number of “oops” shots, experiments and set-ups go just for giggles. This amusement factor is what I like best about it. I can browse any given photographers stream just for fun and interesting shots. I’d hate to think that some people will start to restrict themselves more just because they think an editor from Getty might be browsing their profile. I just don’t want people to feel like the teacher’s on the playground and now everyone has to behave.
On a logistical note, I wonder how Getty is going to comb through flickr. Keywording?
Just my $0.02
By Noah on Jul 11, 2008
I hope he was misquoted too. I am an iStock contributor and certainly didn’t like those words. Nothing to take to the photographer that upload their work to flickr to showcase it but disregardful to the “amateurs” that have made of iStock the no. 1 royalty-free stock site.
By Debora on Jul 11, 2008
John, I think you’re right: for most flickr members it will be “business as usual”.
I’ve looked long and hard at the various possibilities in stock photography and decided that, as an established commercial photographer, my energies are best spent trying to get new commercial clients and keeping present clients happy. The stock market seems especially competitive right now and I really don’t know what I could personally add to it. I used to co-own a small regional stock agency and really do love the thought of doing stock photography again, though.
The biggest thing about the Getty / flickr merger, from my viewpoint, is a new influx of stock images will be coming from photographers not necessarily trying to market their work. Will flickr become a vehicle for people to market their work (as Noah has asked)? Or will photographers abandon traditional marketing methods and just hope that Getty discovers them on flickr? It’s very interesting from a marketing standpoint.
As you’ve written, Matthew, it’s a bonus for casual photographers but the merger is of little benefit to established professionals. As I say from time to time, “it’s easier than ever to make money in photography but getting harder to make a living from it”. The sands keep shifting in the world of stock photography.
By Jim Talkington on Jul 11, 2008
I think that it is a sign of how things are changing. It is an interesting approach to try to get some “fresh” imagery into Getty’s portfolio. There certainly are some very good photographers on Flickr that could add some value to Getty.
However, getting into Getty’s Flickr collection will be somewhat hit-or-miss. Without the submission system, photographers hoping to use Flickr as a marketting tool to get to Flickr might not get the feedback from Getty that they are looking for. It will be interesting to see how this works and what sorts of problems come poking out from behind the curtain. I wonder if we will see similar stock / gallery site partnerships in the future.
By Craig Lee on Jul 11, 2008
This is fascinating.
I too wonder how Getty will pick the images they want? Will their editors just do a flickr search for keywords they need that day, or will there be more automation involved?
I used to make money in stock, back in the day… it is a beautiful way to earn if you can make it work.
By Bill Rhodes on Jul 13, 2008
In my opinion Getty scored big on this one. The motivation behind this move was the same as what drove Getty to buy iStockphoto. If Flicker somehow was able to do this themselves, it would have become a major pain to Getty. Getty was willing to spend $50 mil on iStockphoto to control the competition. This seems like a sweet deal for them. As long as they control the commercial licensing of Flicker images they can keep millions of images out of the marketplace while cherry picking only a few. I don’t know all of the details yet, so I’m not sure if this prevents Flicker users from licensing on there own (not CC licenses). They get to have their cake and eat it too.
By Phil Nealey on Jul 14, 2008
I feel like trying to figure out the value of stock photography right now seems like trying to balance a scale with three stages. Getty has all of these way-different monetization models, they’re just throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. And since they’re getting close to owning everything it’s pretty easy for them to do.
I think this move is brilliant for Flickr, with billions of photos in the library they have surely labored over how to monetize the collective. As providers of an “open community” I think it would be sticky for them to get into monetization, though. With this partnership it seems like they’re both endorsing Getty and maintaining a distance, clearly separating their roles.
By Jim Talkington on Jul 14, 2008