[STOCKPHOTO] 060616 Plus Coalition
Pete Jenkins
I already published this on other lists that I am a member of, so
apologies if you have received this more than once, but as it is such an
important thing I feel it makes sense to share it with all photographers.
It is a bit long for some – my apologies in advance.
Kind regards
Pete J
Pete Jenkins
http://www.petejenkins.co.uk/
Meeting with Jeff Sedlik to discuss the Plus Initiative (Coalition)
Picture Licensing Universal System
Report by Pete Jenkins www.petejenkins.co.uk <http://www.petejenkins.co.uk/>
Meeting at Headland House 16th June 2006 2.00pm
Attendees:
Jeff Sedlik (PLUS www.usePLUS.org <http://www.useplus.org/> ),
Mike Laye (Visual Creators Index – VCI - http://www.vci-uk.com/white/vci.PDF
<http://www.vci-uk.com/white/vci.PDF> )
Chris Elsdale (Secretary Stock Artists Alliance – UK, SAA-UK,
www.StockArtistsAlliance.com <http://www.stockartistsalliance.com/> )
Pamela Morton (Assistant Freelance Organiser – National Union of
Journalists, NUJ)
John Toner (Freelance Organiser – National Union of Journalists, NUJ)
Pete Jenkins (Vice Chair Photographers Sub-Committee - National Union of
Journalists)
Andrew Wiard (Association of Photographers and Editorial Photographers – UK)
Martin Beckett (Pyramide - http://www.the-aop.org/home.htm
<http://www.the-aop.org/home.htm> )
Derek Brazell (Association of Illustrators http://www.theaoi.com/)
Jeff Sedlik arrived well in advance of the meetings start and I was able to
talk to him about his ideas. Jeff is a successful photographer, President
of his own company Sedlik Photography http://www.sedlik.com/, past president
of the Advertising Photographers of America and is currently the chief
Advisor on Licensing and Business Standards for the APA. His business is
based in Los Angeles and New York.
Background, and some of the problems.
The PLUS Coalition has arisen against a background of change in the
photographic industry. With the advent of affordable Digital Imaging there
have been many changes, one of these has been in the way stock photography
is dealt with. Traditional stock agencies handled transparencies and prints
on behalf of their photographers and licensed the reproduction of those
images in a number of ways according to size of reproduction, position of
reproduction, type of product etc. During the 1990’s as more an more
photographers were able to supply digitally – initially through scanning
their own images and latterly by sourcing their own digital images, clients
themselves started to prefer digital submissions rather than conventional
hard copy, which of course saved their own scanning costs (amongst other
things). All of a sudden it was possible to sell a high quality image to
many clients at the same time, without the need for copies, many of which
were I fact quite poor, and also expensive (relatively) to produce. A
CD-ROM of one hundred images could be reproduced many times over for a unit
cost of pence. This new availability was soon exploited, and we started to
see CD-ROMs of imagery being made available for little more than the cost of
one conventional magazine reproduction. These images were sold on a
‘Royalty Free’ basis, which in these early cases quite often meant that once
bought the images could be used for anything the purchaser required. The
limitation being only the physical file size, which would limit reproduction
in some instances. Art desks could assemble whole libraries of images for
merely hundreds of pounds, each of which could be reused infinitum.
The refinement of this has been what we now call ‘Royalty Free’
imagery where images are sold on a ‘physical size’ basis, rather than a use
basis and depending on the licensing agent the image can be used several
times within a publication, or eve a publishing house, or sometimes with
even less restriction. Not all images are suitable for sale as Royalty Free
and most Publishing houses still prefer conventional licensing, because for
a one of use it is usually less expensive and provides more uniqueness.
Magazines would not want to be in the position where there is likelihood
that they and their rivals would share the same image at the same time as a
front cover (for instance). There has also been borne of the RF disc
phenomenon a new type of exploitative agency commonly referred to as ‘Micro
stock’. This agency, probably better referred to as a portal, sells stock
imagery for a cut down price to the client, often as little as one or two US
Dollars, on a total RF basis, no further questions asked. The photographer
getting a 20% cut of this – as little as 20 cents. The agency operates
totally online, with an automated process and survives (very well indeed) by
selling in bulk. As some photographers are able to earn $1000 US plus every
month with these agencies it can be seen how lucrative it is for the
agency/portal, and of course how exploitative. A photographer earning $1000
(selling say 5000 images) has earned the agent/portal $4000 at the same
time. Whilst many of the suppliers of this type of operation are uninformed
amateurs happy to have some pennies back every month against their hobby
investment, there are actually a number of professionals who get sucked into
this kind of operation because of the quick returns possible. Indeed as you
can imagine anyone producing professional quality imagery at these sorts of
prices will of course sell lots of it, but the long-term prognosis is not
good.
The further problem that has come about as a result of digital
imaging is that of ‘orphan works’. During the process of digital imaging a
good professional photographer will encode relevant date such as contact
details, copyright details, caption etc in the IPTC/metadata fields provided
within the software when the image is edited, in applications such as Adobe
Photoshop. Unfortunately, for the professional photographer the ignorant
and/or the unscrupulous can just as easily remove all this data. As a
result there are now millions of images sitting I computers, which through
no fault of the photographer have no contact details or identification of
any kind. And this pre-supposes that publications would not just use an
image and sit back and wait for a photographer to invoice rather than do the
honest thing and contact the supplier in advance and negotiate use and cost
beforehand. Every now and again we come across examples that prove that
these scenarios are very real and very commonplace.
The purpose of the PLUS initiative is to try and rectify the problems
outlined, and to do it in such a way that it becomes as important for the
user, and the agent to become involved as the photographer. Imagine a
system that enables a publishing house in Croatia to purchase a photograph
from a photographer in Nottingham without having to struggle through the
process of translation? Imagine also the scenario where the corporate
department in down town New York can instantly check the license status of
any image on they have on file without having to worry about whether using
it will invite their corporation to be sued because it has exceeded its
agreed license. PLUS is aimed at fulfilling all these roles.
PLUS UK.
Whilst PLUS itself has been initiated in the United States of America, and
up until now the movers and shakers have all been American, it has been
realised that the initiative will have no value unless Europeans and indeed
the rest of the world are involved as equal partners. This is the reason
for Jeff visiting the NUJ to introduce himself and his project and build on
the talks he has already had with other individual organisations.
Already PLUS has a glossary (of thousands) of terms which ca be used by all
in the industry and eve if this was all that was achieved would be a
worthwhile goal in itself.
Currently, PLUS is working on a licensing software system (Media Matrix)
that will incorporate all the various International requirements, that would
help cross not only the language barriers of say UK English-US English, but
also US English – French, and Spanish – Hindu for example. It is also
intended to cross the borders of different business practices and other
national/regional requirements. The software that does this will be freely
available to all. It will not actually sort out the price to charge, nor
replace negociations, but should lead to a seamless way of entering that
negociations and also an easier licensing system, which will include
multi-use, something that has proved difficult in the past (which has
frequently led to rights encroachments).
All the key photographic and other licensing organisations and groups are
encouraged to join PLUS as this unity will give the coalition strength. It
isn’t just Photographers and illustrators who will gain from this. Clients
will also find it extremely helpful, and indeed they have been consulted
frequently to ensure that this Media Matrix will give them as much as it
gives the originator, especially with regard to licensing clarity.
Apart from the licensing matrix, PLUS also wants to provide a system of
identification. This is still under evaluation but will probably include a
regionally based catalogue/storage system where a copy of each and every
image will be stored. It is felt at this time that a system similar to the
‘Picscout’ http://www.picscout.com/ one will be used, every publication will
be scanned in addition to software trawling the World Wide Web.
PLUS is also negotiating with Software Companies such as ADOBE
http://www.picscout.com/ to improve images metadata and to find a way of
permanently marking each image (fingerprinting) automatically via the
software used for editing, or directly from the camera.
Industry Involvement.
Corbis, Getty and Jupiter the biggest stock suppliers have made available
their licensing software so that comparisons ca be made and a ‘super’
licensing Media Matrix constructed that can be universal and used by clients
and suppliers.
Adobe, the software giant that produces much of the imaging software used
today is on board because it wants to become a ‘player’ with regard to stock
photography. When Adobe introduced its new Bridge facility one of its new
items was ‘Adobe Stock Photos’
http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/adobestockphotos/ .The idea
being to give creative tuypes (designers etc) access to imagery directly
through the Adobe softaware. This means hundreds of thousands of images can
be obtained whilst in the programme. Clearly as only certain agency’
s/portals will have their images on ‘Adobe Stock Photos’, there may well be
other business implications. To date only RF imagery can be obtained via
‘Adobe Stock Photos’. Adobe would like to have included Rights Managed
Imagery (RM) but the lack of cosistency through licensing models has
prevented this. PLUS could change this.
Microsoft, have an interest in PLUS. They have new imaging software due to
be released in the future, and see the value of the PLUS initiave.
Newspaper Publishers Association. The NPA and other similar organisations
are being approached by PLUS. They are an important part of our industry,
and even if we do not always see eye to eye with them, having end users
involved in the colaiution must benefit all involved.
Conclusions.
I believe it absolutely imperative that as a Union we suport this
initiative. As photographers, we are under more pressure as suppliers than
ever before, with higher costs and overheads. Anything that enables us to
deal better with our clients and agents, and helps promote sales and makes
sales easier has to be good. Anything that helps protect our rights, our
copyright and our product equally must be supported.
PLUS have asked that the NUJ become full members of the coalition at a cost
of two hundred pounds, but if this is all that we do, in my opinion it will
be the best spent two hundred pound of the year. For this contribution we
will be involved in all decIsion making and can help steer the initiative.
This is not just about stock imagery. It will be important in day to day
licensig of images, and how work is handled both before, during and after
commissions are undertaken. If a central library of created works is kept
and the proposed actions taken, then orphans will be a thing of the past and
all creators should be paid for all uses of all images. Something which
today we hardly aspire to, let alone can expect.
“The PLUS Picture Licensing Glossary
It’s free. It;’s online. And it puts into standard language over 1000
licensing terms, definitions and uses, all mutually agreed upon by the
widest and most diverse coalition of organisations and industry
professionals ever assembled.
The Media Matrix
Media selection will be quick and easy with internationally uniform media
categories organised by types and identified by universal billing codes.
The License Format
Take the elements of a license you already use, put them in a standardised
order, fill in standardised information (from the Glossary and Media Matrix)
and you’ve got a flexible system that embeds the information into the images
forever. Computers can read it and anyone, anywhere can use it to describe,
track, store, and analyse licenses.”
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STOCKPHOTO/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STOCKPHOTO-...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Dean
Jenkins <pe...@petejenkins.co.uk> writes
>Hi Folks,
>
> I already published this on other lists that I am a member of, so
>apologies if you have received this more than once,
>
>Meeting with Jeff Sedlik to discuss the Plus Initiative (Coalition)
>
>
>Picture Licensing Universal System
>
Pete
As this is currently the only photo list i read thanks for the report
here.
Tracking was mentioned. Was there any discussion about how that would be
done in practice from within a single orphan ? In other words was there
talk for example of the use of an embedded URL link that could go to a
central managed rights database? This is already possible from within
file info as we all know. All that would be needed would be to agree to
use that URL field for this purpose. A central rights database accessed
from within any image or orphan would enable much greater efficiency in
managed rights between multiple distributors.
Was there discussion about how VCI and PLUS can mesh together to achieve
a great deal of the above?
Thanks again and all the best
Pete
--
Agripicture Images TEL +44(0)1398 331598
Stock Library Shelagh Dean http://www.agripicture.com
Agriculture stock and assignments by Peter Dean
Pete Jenkins
>As this is currently the only photo list i read thanks for the report
>here.
>Tracking was mentioned. Was there any discussion about how that would be
>done in practice from within a single orphan ? In other words was there
>talk for example of the use of an embedded URL link that could go to a
>central managed rights database? This is already possible from within
>file info as we all know. All that would be needed would be to agree to
>use that URL field for this purpose. A central rights database accessed
>from within any image or orphan would enable much greater efficiency in
>managed rights between multiple distributors.
>Was there discussion about how VCI and PLUS can mesh together to achieve
>a great deal of the above?
Hi Pete,
Long-term aims are two fold, in this area attacking the problem
from both ends. There would ideally be a world/regional database where
images were logged and kept and from there uses from the net and hard copy
would be compared o a daily basis, and unauthorised uses flagged. The
second attack would be embedded data. Adobe is working on (as I understood
it) a way of permanently embedding data, and also there is the pixel
fingerprint thing - I don't know enough about that yet, but apparently Adobe
are keen on that too as are the camera manufacturers as I understand it.
Not sure about embedded URLs that wasn't mentioned but one could always ask.
There was discussion about how VCI and PLUS could work together, and Jeff
Sedlik and Mike Laye which is now ongoing, but from the meeting seemed
encouraging.
Kind regards
Pete J
Pete Jenkins
http://www.petejenkins.co.uk/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Dean
Jenkins <pe...@petejenkins.co.uk> writes
>
>
>from both ends. There would ideally be a world/regional database where
>images were logged and kept and from there uses from the net and hard copy
>would be compared o a daily basis, and unauthorised uses flagged. The
>second attack would be embedded data. Adobe is working on (as I understood
>it) a way of permanently embedding data, and also there is the pixel
>fingerprint thing - I don't know enough about that yet, but apparently Adobe
>are keen on that too as are the camera manufacturers as I understand it.
>
>Not sure about embedded URLs that wasn't mentioned but one could always ask.
Hi Pete
Thanks for your reply
The URL thing is available now. The problem as you highlighted is that
it can be stripped out.
In case you don't get what i am talking about, in true Blue Peter
fashion here is one i did earlier (much earlier in fact; i uploaded this
test image many moons ago but now using it again with fresh data added
today accessed from within file info; see for yourself)
First download the rather boring image of feed pellets
Http://www.agripicture.com/client/rmtest/1234567.jpg
Then open in Photoshop and "go to URL" in file info.
This image or its meta data have not been altered for maybe over a year.
Many copies could be available all over the globe but with the URL fresh
information can be accessed online. I am just making the point how
useful this could be when multiple distributors are making managed
rights sales in any one image.
>
>There was discussion about how VCI and PLUS could work together, and Jeff
>Sedlik and Mike Laye which is now ongoing, but from the meeting seemed
>encouraging.
I was just wondering if the concept above (or something similar? Maybe
with any new technology) was discussed and if so do you know where Adobe
have got to in making the embedded URL permanent no matter how its been
altered or saved in whatever software?
If the URL in file info were permanent no matter what it would open some
interesting doors for managed rights irrespective of any other
initiatives. What concerns me about Adobe is that rather than do
something useful we can all benefit from they are more likely to try to
control and earn a percentage or fee from the distribution chain in some
way.
If a VCI database using PLUS language could be accessed from a permanent
URL in the image that in itself would be a huge step forward toward a
sustainable useful universal system for managed rights sales when
multiple distributors are involved.
All the best
Pete
--
Agripicture Images TEL +44(0)1398 331598
Stock Library Shelagh Dean http://www.agripicture.com
Agriculture stock and assignments by Peter Dean
Pete Jenkins
Hi Pete,
Everyone in the room was aware of matters as you have outlined.
Adobe (initially) are being advised that 'indelible' IPTC is
what is required. They are currently working on IPTC that brings up a
warning that says if you wipe me you could be committing an offence (or
something of that sort). They know that we don't think that that is enough.
We shall see.
Rest assured everyone I spoke to at the meeting was on the same
wavelength as your self on this one.
There is nothing to stop you dropping a line to Jeff - I put his
e-mail on that report
I am (as always) happy to collate data and opinions and pass
them on, this thing is bigger than the NUJ, so no one will get pissy if you
aren't a member.
Kind regards
Pete J
Pete Jenkins
http://www.petejenkins.co.uk/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Riecks
> Adobe (initially) are being advised that 'indelible' IPTC is
>what is required. They are currently working on IPTC that brings up a
>warning that says if you wipe me you could be committing an offence (or
>something of that sort). They know that we don't think that that is enough.
>We shall see.
Pete:
This is just one of many items that the Stock Artists Alliance's
Imaging Technology Standards committee is suggesting in the "Metadata
Manifesto" that was distributed in Redmond, Washington last week at
the Microsoft Pro Photo Summit.
For those that didn't get a copy, the PDF is available from a
companion blog, http://MetadataManifesto.blogspot.com/ and soon from
the SAA website. This is a fairly short document (about 6 pages of
text, one of which is an addendum for technology developers).
That report makes recommendations on what can be done right now by
photographers, image users, distributors and technology providers to
make the use of metadata more accepted and transparent for all involved.
In addition, having been part of the IPTC4XMP working group, I can
tell you that this issue of making any metadata "indelible" is a
thorny issue. The first step the Working Group took was outlining in
the Users's Guide and other technical documents the concept of having
a number of fields be treated as if they were "write-once/read-only"
fields. At this point in time, this is what can be done. More is
better, but so long as there are applications that are using only
legacy IPTC metadata (the image resource block variety), or
applications that on purpose or inadvertently remove (wipe) all
metadata (or all "header" information) there will be a problem.
The PLUS/VCI registry initiative is a step in the right direction as
it will provide for a means to verify the information in the file
itself, for all involved in the licensing process.
Hope that helps.
David
----
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
http://www.riecks.com , Chicago Midwest ASMP member
See the Universal Photographic Digital Imaging Guidelines at
http://www.updig.org
Chairman, SAA Imaging Technology Standards Committee
Creating an image database? visit (http://ControlledVocabulary.com/)
and join the discussion.
David Riecks
>I was just wondering if the concept above (or something similar? Maybe
>with any new technology) was discussed and if so do you know where Adobe
>have got to in making the embedded URL permanent no matter how its been
>altered or saved in whatever software?
Pete:
As I mentioned in my reply to the other Pete, this is not something
that Adobe can solve on their own, at least not without creating an
entirely new file format.
There is a problem even if Adobe provides a warning or a 'lock' for
certain metadata fields. So long as other applications can open the
same file and allow you to overwrite, change, or wholesale "wipe"
metadata it doesn't matter what provisions Adobe provides. In order
to be effective you need ALL the imaging application providers, image
databases, etc. that allow the modification of metadata to work in
the same fashion.
Given that we can't even get camera manufacturers to agree on a
universal RAW format, I don't think that is going to happen immediately.
Steps such as the PLUS/VCI registry, as well as the use of the IPTC
"Rights Usage Terms" fields (and perhaps other future metdata fields)
are ones in the right direction.
The real issue is keeping pressure on all of those involved in the
creation and management of metadata to understand that permanent and
pervasive metadata is something that we as creators demand in their
products. Securing their commitment to the three major principles
proposed in the Metadata Manifesto is a start. For those who haven't
read that document, those principles are:
Metadata is essential to identify and track digital images.
Ownership metadata must never be removed.
Metadata must be written in formats that are understood by all.
For the full document see the http://MetadataManifesto.blogspot.com blog.
David
--
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
Chairman, SAA Imaging Technology Standards Committee
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Jenkins
Are these initiatives talking to each other or are you all going
off in your own directions?
We aren't going to get another Betamax v VHS scenario are we?
KR
Pete J
Pete Jenkins
http://www.petejenkins.co.uk/
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Riecks
> Are these initiatives talking to each other or are you all going
>off in your own directions?
Pete:
No, this is not another direction, this proposal
is an attempt to rally all groups to working
together. Please read/re-read the "Metadata
Manifesto, especially the set of points for what
"you can do today." The first set of those are
directed towards our "Industry Leaders" and include:
• Work with other groups to encourage the
adoption of metadata standards that address
the needs of a broad constituency of metadata users.
• Get involved or support standards bodies and
joint efforts such as IPTC, PLUS, UPDIG,
Dublin Core or PRISM/DIM2.
In addition at the bottom of page 3, are these three paragraphs....
In order for metadata to be effective, it must be
incorporated into the workflow at all phases of
image production, distribution and use.
Significant efforts are being made to increase awareness
and proper use of metadata from a number of
standards bodies and industry coalitions—such as
IPTC, UPDIG and PLUS—along with trade
organizations and product developers. Their work is
making a difference and setting up models for moving forward.
We need a coordinated industry wide commitment to
fully recognize metadata as an
effective solution. Together, we need to embrace
a set of guiding principles for metadata
use, and then put these principles into practice.
Imagine a world where metadata is ubiquitous.
It’s a world where images can be easily located
and identified by anyone, anywhere. Creators can
transmit their images to distributors and users,
who instantly integrate these into their systems.
Image users can track their digital assets using
fully automated systems. A registry—now in
development by the Picture Licensing Universal
System (PLUS)—will link every image to current
information about its source and owner.
FYI, I happen to be the technology advisor to the
PLUS coalition and one of the founders of the
Universal Photographic Digital Imaging Guidelines
(UPDIG), as well as serving on a number of
working groups including two with the IDEAlliance
as well as the IPTC4XMP. Part of my role, as I
see it, is to keep all of these groups aware of
what is going on in the others, and to reduce or
prevent duplication of effort whenever possible.
Sincerely yours,
David
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
PLUS development team -- http://www.usePLUS.org
Pete Jenkins
No, this is not another direction, this proposal
is an attempt to rally all groups to working
together. Please read/re-read the "Metadata
Manifesto, especially the set of points for what
"you can do today." The first set of those are
directed towards our "Industry Leaders" and include:
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_J_e_f_f__S_e_d_l_i_k_
<<Are these initiatives talking to each other or are you all going
off in your own directions?>>
Hello Pete
I enjoyed our meeting in London last month and appreciate your report to
this forum.
PLUS is in communication with many other standards initiatives such as IPTC,
DOI, idealliance, UPDIG and is actively cooperating with those initiatives
and others to ensure that the PLUS standards are not just interoperable, but
will enhance the value of other standards to users. A potential
collaboration between VCI and PLUS, discussed in our meeting last month in
London, is a great example. PLUS has a very narrow mission: to simplify and
facilitate the licensing of images. Specifically, the PLUS standards will
significantly reduce the confusion and liability associated with the process
of licensing and using rights managed works.
To accomplish our mission we invited all organizations and stakeholders to
work together cooperatively to standardize rights-associated metadata and to
work with industry to develop systems to support the use of that metadata.
We planned an October 2005 publication of version 1.0 of the first standard,
the PLUS Licensing Glossary, and we met that deadline. We planned a November
2006 publication of the second two standards, the Media Matrix and the
License Data Format, and intend to hit that deadline as well, with an
industry review process beginning next month.
These are incredibly complex undertakings and involve significant commitment
by hundreds of participants worldwide. It should be noted that many industry
standards involve 7 to 10 years (or more) of development. PLUS formed as a
non-profit association in November 2004, published its initial standard in
October 2005 and will publish two additional standards in November 2006. We
are working at an accelerated pace while following duly diligent protocols.
To succeed, a standard must achieve acceptance by presenting value to all
users. The PLUS Coalition includes both licensors and licensees, and
maintains an open-door policy, inviting participation by all. We are
fortunate to have widespread support from all industry sectors.
PLUS is an international initiative. The success of PLUS in each region
worldwide is dependent on the willingness of stakeholders in each region to
step up to the plate and participate in ensuring that the PLUS standards are
best designed to suit regional licensing practices and workflow. PLUS-UK,
now forming, is an example of regional stakeholders forming a working group
for just that purpose.
While PLUS is actively working on the standards, you can follow latest
developments and activities here:
http://www.useplus.com/news.asp
Recent press coverage here:
http://www.commarts.com/ca/colfree/marp_306.html
http://www.imaginginfo.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=3&id=1677
http://www.photomediagroup.com/archive/2006-summer/poty.html
I would be glad to address any questions about PLUS, and would of course
welcome associations, organizations and individuals to join the PLUS
Coalition, as we rely entirely on member support to create these standards.
Thanks
Jeff Sedlik
President & CEO, PLUS Coalition
www.useplus.org
Stockphoto Seller
working its criminal way through the legislative
process, there develops a greater, dire need to have
some metadata locked into image files no matter what
software is used on them and no matter how they are
altered, processed, sized, or whatever.
Carl May/BPS
--- Peter Dean <pe...@AGRIPICTURE.COM> wrote:
> Hi Pete
> Thanks for your reply
> The URL thing is available now. The problem as you
> highlighted is that
> it can be stripped out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stockphoto Seller
We need an independent metadata system free of
dominance by Adobe or any other corporation, one that
can be implemented equally as easily and as readily by
the smallest software provider as well as by the
largest. Adobe is part of the problem as long as
everything is discussed in light of its (sometimes not
very good) software.
Carl May
Stockphoto Seller
I realize it would not provide a repository for images
from which sales may be made, but doesn't some of the
PLUS intention to provide a universal methodology for
tracking image uses get into several of the notions
behind The System?
Carl May
Valerie Henschel
David handed out his "white paper", and the collective "voice" of the photographers in the meeting backed him up.
Thank you, David (and all you others who devoted much effort to the presentation). Thank you for saying out loud what many of us are thinking and wishing for. And thank you for staying one step ahead, and leading the way for those of us who are less computer literate. Keep it up!
Valerie Henschel
Regional Photo
hens...@tenforward.com
----- Original Message -----
From: David Riecks
To: STOCK...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 2:41 PM
Subject: RE: [STOCKPHOTO] 060616 Plus Coalition
At 02:10 PM 7/8/2006, Pete Jenkins wrote:
> Are these initiatives talking to each other or are you all going
>off in your own directions?
Pete:
No, this is not another direction, this proposal
is an attempt to rally all groups to working
together. Please read/re-read the "Metadata
Manifesto, especially the set of points for what
"you can do today." The first set of those are
directed towards our "Industry Leaders" and include:
. Work with other groups to encourage the
adoption of metadata standards that address
the needs of a broad constituency of metadata users.
. Get involved or support standards bodies and
joint efforts such as IPTC, PLUS, UPDIG,
Dublin Core or PRISM/DIM2.
In addition at the bottom of page 3, are these three paragraphs....
In order for metadata to be effective, it must be
incorporated into the workflow at all phases of
image production, distribution and use.
Significant efforts are being made to increase awareness
and proper use of metadata from a number of
standards bodies and industry coalitions-such as
IPTC, UPDIG and PLUS-along with trade
organizations and product developers. Their work is
making a difference and setting up models for moving forward.
We need a coordinated industry wide commitment to
fully recognize metadata as an
effective solution. Together, we need to embrace
a set of guiding principles for metadata
use, and then put these principles into practice.
Imagine a world where metadata is ubiquitous.
It's a world where images can be easily located
and identified by anyone, anywhere. Creators can
transmit their images to distributors and users,
who instantly integrate these into their systems.
Image users can track their digital assets using
fully automated systems. A registry-now in
development by the Picture Licensing Universal
System (PLUS)-will link every image to current
information about its source and owner.
FYI, I happen to be the technology advisor to the
PLUS coalition and one of the founders of the
Universal Photographic Digital Imaging Guidelines
(UPDIG), as well as serving on a number of
working groups including two with the IDEAlliance
as well as the IPTC4XMP. Part of my role, as I
see it, is to keep all of these groups aware of
what is going on in the others, and to reduce or
prevent duplication of effort whenever possible.
Sincerely yours,
David
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
PLUS development team -- http://www.usePLUS.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Dean
Stockphoto Seller <bpsli...@pacbell.net> writes
>Pete Dean,
>
>I realize it would not provide a repository for images
>from which sales may be made, but doesn't some of the
>PLUS intention to provide a universal methodology for
>tracking image uses get into several of the notions
>behind The System?
>
>
The System is simply an attempt to begin to visualise the whole. To
begin to articulate an ideal. That would be an efficient industry system
which benefits both the distributors and the creators for managed rights
in 21C. But how complicated does an industry system need to be before it
can be useful? I would suggest a lot less complicated and a lot less
automated to begin with.
Managed rights need management irrespective of any exclusive licenses
sold. Knowing an image history will be the uniqueness managed images
need in the market to compete. If the URL in file info were linked to a
central database which ideally had updated sales information then every
image sat on distributor hard drives could be MANAGED much more
efficiently. I can see how this could be done sooner rather than later
with a VCI database using PLUS terminology perhaps even manually
updating information to begin with before a more automated process could
be adopted or afforded. The question is how can you pump prime organic
growth in the adoption of an ideal way for us all to work together?
While permanence is the absolute ideal for meta data that permanence is
not required for industry professionals to begin to use that URL to
manage image rights if images had their own unique identifier attached
to them.
Permanence in meta data may take years but both photographers and
distributors could begin to work more efficiently without that ideal in
place? Couldn't they?
Cheers
Pete
--
Agripicture Images http://www.agripicture.com
Library sales contact Shelagh Dean
Agriculture stock and assignments by Peter Dean
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Dean
Riecks <da...@riecks.com> writes
>Image users can track their digital assets using
>fully automated systems. A registry—now in
>development by the Picture Licensing Universal
>System (PLUS)—will link every image to current
>information about its source and owner.
>
Thanks for the usual high level of input.
If you see my other reply i am suggesting to imagine for a moment what
can be done without full automation or fully permanent meta data. Sooner
rather than later. I am interested in practical measures to implement
now and not just technical wish lists no matter how desirable in the
future.
What COULD we all do and HOW can we all work together for managed rights
once a central registry is in place? From what i can see probably quite
a lot to improve efficiency between photographers and distributors
without full automation. That goes for buyers too if we can teach them
how to leave meta data intact.
It seems to me that full automation as an ideal is sought by those with
large businesses and deep pockets who can afford such automated systems.
I wonder if to some extent we should also be looking at the problem from
the bottom up and not always the top down fully automated direction?
How to remove some of the obstacles to wide adoption? The answer may be
not to worry (but not forget) about some of them to begin ?
Thanks again for all your input
Pete
--
Agripicture Images http://www.agripicture.com
Library sales contact Shelagh Dean
Agriculture stock and assignments by Peter Dean
Peter Dean
_J_e_f_f__S_e_d_l_i_k_ <sedlik-ya...@spamarrest.com> writes
>I would be glad to address any questions about PLUS, and would of course
>welcome associations, organizations and individuals to join the PLUS
>Coalition, as we rely entirely on member support to create these standards.
>
I went to the PLUS site and under membership i see a discount for
individuals if a member of a trade org. I did not see any UK orgs unless
i missed something? I am a member of BAPLA. Which if any UK orgs have
signed up so far?
All the best and many thanks for all your work!
Pete Dean
--
Agripicture Images http://www.agripicture.com
Library sales contact Shelagh Dean
Agriculture stock and assignments by Peter Dean
Pete Jenkins
>individuals if a member of a trade org. I did not see any UK orgs unless
>i missed something? I am a member of BAPLA. Which if any UK orgs have
>signed up so far?
If I have anything to do with it, the National Union of Journalists is about
to join.
Kind regards
Pete J
Pete Jenkins
http://www.petejenkins.co.uk/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_J_e_f_f__S_e_d_l_i_k_
<< I went to the PLUS site and under membership i see a discount for
individuals if a member of a trade org. I did not see any UK orgs unless
i missed something? I am a member of BAPLA. Which if any UK orgs have
signed up so far?>>
Hello Peter, and thanks for your message.
Short Answer:
Trade associations may participate on the PLUS Advisory Council for free,
and several UK associations have been on that Council and actively
participating in PLUS from the outset. PLUS also requests that trade
associations consider supporting PLUS with nominal membership dues, thus
becoming a member and owner of the Coalition. Membership is optional. When
an association joins PLUS as a member, all of that association's members
receive a 40% discount on PLUS membership, and will be provided with a
listing in the PLUS Showcase. As soon as AOP, NUJ, BAPLA, AOI, RPS,
Pyramide, VCI, DACS, BIPP, EP-UK and other associations join PLUS as
members, those organizations will appear on our on-line membership form,
thus affording their members with a 40% discount on PLUS membership. We
received very positive indications after our recent meeting in London, and
hope to see all of the above as members in the near future. Until then, all
may participate on our Advisory Council.
More detail, for those who are interested:
In accordance with the open door policy of the PLUS Coalition, we have
endeavored to invite all UK photography and illustration associations to
participate in the Coalition, both on the Advisory Council (which is free)
and as PLUS members (which involves nominal dues, scaled to fit the budget
of the association). The first to respond was Gwen Thomas (who has been
wonderful) on behalf of AOP and Pyramide, accepting our invitation to
participate on the PLUS Advisory Council. Then in June of 2004, BAPLA agreed
to participate on the Advisory Council, with Linda Royles leading the way.
CEPIC, which includes many UK picture agencies among its membership, has
been on the Advisory Council (thanks to Sylvie Fodor) since 2004 as well. We
have also been very fortunate to have the participation of a good number of
members of this forum. Invitations were also sent or communicated to other
UK associations, either by Gwen or directly by PLUS. A strong contingent of
UK photographers and stock agencies contributed to the development of the
PLUS Glossary.
Early on, PLUS existed a Development Committee of concerned professionals,
engaged in laying a solid foundation for the organization and its standards.
We welcomed all associations to participate on our Advisory Council, but we
could not accept funds. Upon incorporation as a non-profit, and upon
founding our balanced Board of Directors with one seat for each industry
sector, we opened for membership and began to accept dues and sustaining
contributions from trade associations and stakeholders. Payment of dues is
not required for trade association participation on the Advisory Council,
but is required for membership. While membership affords the opportunity to
participate on working groups and to vote on matters put to the general
membership, most join to support the development and propagation of the
standards. PLUS relies entirely on membership dues and sustaining
contributions, without which the standards will not be created.
Thanks
Jeff Sedlik
Fred
file formats and meta data since TIFF was an unkown and it is my
opinion that there is simply no way to embed meta data in an image
file and have it non-removable, except by watermarking it into the
actual image data (pixels), where it is very difficult to remove.
If you are succesful in creating a standard that makes a particular
field indelible, there will always be ways around it. Excluding
Adobe, the current bottleneck through which most all images flow,
would only make a non-removable data field harder to achieve, for
obvious reasons.
That's not to say that these issues are not worth working on but
everyone needs to understand the limitations and who the players are.
Personal animosities will only derail success. The system would be
voluntary, for the most part but as the music industry has seen time
and time again, most recently with the success of iTunes, people will
use a sytem and pay for the use of IP, if the system is a good one
that balances the needs of the consumer with the needs of the
industry and is easy and transparent in use.
Fred Voetsch
ACCLAIM IMAGES
http://www.acclaimimages.com/
_J_e_f_f__S_e_d_l_i_k_
development of TIFF during the mid-80’s. Not surprisingly, digital rights
management was not on their radar at the time. TIFF was created more than 20
years ago. Similarly, work on JPEG (or what would become JPEG) began circa
1983 -- more than 23 years ago.
As a point of reference, in 1983 the dawn of JPEG, Apple had yet to release
the Macintosh. You could buy DOS 2.0, but Windows 1.0 would not be released
until the following year. Michael Jackson won a Grammy for Thriller, and
people lined up to see Flashdance. Most people had yet to hear the word
“fax,” let alone own a machine. Though these file formats have been improved
over time, we need to look beyond the 80s. We need to stop trying to shove a
square peg into a round hole, and encourage development of new file formats
designed from the ground up with DRM in mind.
Photographers should accept that there will be no perfect DRM solution –
there are honest people and dishonest people, and dishonest people will
always find a way to use photographs without permission or payment, no
matter what the file format. Most customers using photographs commercially
have good intentions and would abide by their licenses if licenses were easy
to understand and track.
Rather than building a system to address the dishonest minority, we would be
far better off dedicating ourselves to building a system that discourages
abuse while making it easier for good customers to license images and to
abide by those licenses.
We need to leave the DOS, Flashdance and Thriller era behind, and fix our
gaze on the horizon. Every other industry has standards. We are surrounded
by bar codes, ISBN numbers, etc.. And yet there is no universal means of
identifying a licensor, a license or an image, and there are no standards
that would allow for machine readable image licenses.
We need to work together now to prepare to leverage all of the existing and
developing technologies. Before we can leverage technologies to protect our
rights, we first need to create standards for expressing, storing and
retrieving those rights from our digital image assets. We need to create a
universal licensing language, standardize the fields and values used in
expressing licenses, and codify the entire system, making in multilingual
and interoperable with applications for image capture, image editing,
e-commerce, DAM, DRM and other systems.
Trade associations and stakeholders in the image licensing industries
worldwide have formed the PLUS Coalition for this express purpose.
Asking certain software companies to “lock” metadata fields in their
software for currently available image file formats is a futile venture. The
software companies know that if they block access to certain metadata, their
customers will simply use competing software that allows access and editing
of metadata. The organizations of PLUS have proposed to Adobe and others
that warnings be displayed regarding removal and alteration of
rights-associated metadata.
It should be noted that a great measure of DRM can be achieved by the use of
a license reference code embedded in an image file, resolving to a remotely
stored copy of the license. This can only occur if licenses are stated in a
standardized, machine readable format, with standardized values (PLUS).
Licensors and licensees in any country can agree upon contractual terms
establishing that license IDs and other metadata will not be removed or
altered. The DMCA (and its equivalents in other regions) make it illegal to
remove or alter copyright management information from digital image files
without the rights owner’s permission, and provide for statutory damages and
attorney’s fees remedies even if a copyright has never been registered.
If a system does not meet the needs of image users, market forces will drive
the supply side to bypass the system and offer alternatives to meet demand.
For this reason and others, the system must be designed to benefit image
users, and image users must be involved in development and implementation.
Jeff Sedlik
Joseph Pobereskin
<< I went to the PLUS site and under membership i see a discount for
individuals if a member of a trade org. I did not see any UK orgs unless
i missed something? I am a member of BAPLA. Which if any UK orgs have
signed up so far?>>
Jeff Sedlik wrote:
<< When an association joins PLUS as a member, all of that association's
membersreceive a 40% discount on PLUS membership, and will be
provided with a
listing in the PLUS Showcase. As soon as AOP, NUJ, BAPLA, AOI, RPS,
Pyramide, VCI, DACS, BIPP, EP-UK and other associations join PLUS as
members, those organizations will appear on our on-line membership form,
thus affording their members with a 40% discount on PLUS membership. We
received very positive indications after our recent meeting in
London, and
hope to see all of the above as members in the near future. Until
then, all
may participate on our Advisory Council. >>
Jeff,
Doesn't Pete qualify for a discount as a member of SAA? He's been an
SAA member from its inception.
Joe Pobereskin
=======================================================================
Joseph Pobereskin Photography http://www.pobereskin.com
Maplewood, New Jersey USA
Member - ASMP http://www.asmp.org
(973) 313-0799 President - ASMP NJ http://www.asmp-nj.org
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*Need a light snack? "Eat At Joe's"... http://cafejoetogo.blogspot.com
=======================================================================
xyz.abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw
Joseph Pobereskin
> Now that PLUS is a trade org where do you see it headed in the future
> after the work of standardisation is all but complete except for
> maintenance?
Pete,
One need only look to history for the answer to that question:
vigilance. Someone must continue to keep watch.
Sixty years ago ASMP was founded, in part, because photographers were
constantly asked to shoot on speculation. Having done away with the
practice (which is rather like having done away with smallpox) we see
its ugly head reared once again forty years later... and this time
it's not our clientele who seek to have us shoot on spec, it's one of
our "partners" ...witness the advent of OnRequest Stock.
[What puzzles me is that photographers flock to companies like this
and what puzzles me even more is that my own ASMP has done nothing
more than issue a statement, and SAA has done nothing more than issue
a statement, and APA has done nothing, and PPA has done nothing, AOP
has done nothing, BAPLA has done nothing. Where are all the
activists????
There ought to be an ad campaign running in all professional and
amateur photography magazines (lets photographers, *all*
photographers, know that this is an unacceptable practice), in
advertising and design magazines (lets our clients know that this is
a despicable practice), google ads that pop-up every time "OnRequest"
is searched. Photographers need to know, our clients need to know,
and OnRequest (and their ilk and imitators) need to know that they
are not welcome. That's just one of my pet peeves.]
Yes, once the standard language is established there will need to be
a watchdog on guard 24/7 to see that its implementation is complete
and ongoing as there's always as chance to backslide. The continuing
existence of PLUS is both necessary and warranted.
My 2¢,
Jeff Greenberg
constantly asked to shoot on speculation. Having done away with the
practice (which is rather like having done away with smallpox) we see
its ugly head reared once again forty years later...
=====
Shooting on spec has always been, & continues to be, a successful
marketing tool for those who have learned how to use it in a way that
guarantees generous additional income. jeffgreenberg
Paul Aparycki
I would give you $0.02, but you would probably spend it on something worthless.
Paul Aparycki
> Sixty years ago ASMP was founded, in part, because photographers were
constantly asked to shoot on speculation. Having done away with the
practice (which is rather like having done away with smallpox) we see
its ugly head reared once again forty years later...
> Joe Pobereskin
=====
Shooting on spec has always been, & continues to be, a successful
marketing tool for those who have learned how to use it in a way that
guarantees generous additional income. jeffgreenberg
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Valerie Henschel
Valerie Henschel
Jeff Sedlik
<<MARKETING pieces done on spec allow you to focus your talents on what you
can do to fill the client's needs, rather than rely on what some past
customer has hired you to do. It is still a good, if not the best way to
show your stuff.>>
Hi Valerie
Can you expand on that?
Under what specific circumstances do you believe that it *is* in a
photographer's best interests to shoot on spec?
Under what specific circumstances do you believe that it is *not* in a
photographer's best interests to shoot on spec?
Thanks
Jeff Sedlik
Sean McCormick
> Under what specific circumstances do you believe that it *is* in a
> photographer's best interests to shoot on spec?
>
wanted me to travel to a location where another photographer had made an
image of a lake and duplicate it as closely as possible for them. All
this without a contract and on my own dime, with the promise that
*maybe* they would license the image from me if it met their needs.
I politely told them that:
a) I don't work on spec, and
b) I won't be party to copyright infringement, and
c) they should license the original image since it obviously meets their
needs.
That's the last I heard from that customer (thankfully).
Sean McCormick
--
www.digiteyesed.com
Valerie Henschel
In the realm of self marketing, having examples of your work on your promotional material is essential to convince your customers that you are worthy of their money. To get the best images for your promotional material, you may choose to shoot some images on spec rather than show what you have done for a past client.
What the customer buys is not always what is in the promo material, but the promo material gets them in the door. If they see something that impresses them, or is of the style or subject that they want, then they make contact, leading to new paid work.
In stock, self promo materials shows what you have to offer, by subject or style, or other feature, and can be targeted to those you want to have as clients, even if you have never sold to that market before. Most of my stock is from figuring out what my target clients are going to want before they know they need it. That is true spec, and definitely can pay off.
It works when your cost of spec shooting is less than the new client revenue that comes in the door as a result of your efforts. It does not work if it does not generate sufficient new revenue from the target buyers.
Example: Many RV's travel to and through scenic locations where I live. I decide to target users of stock of RVs in scenic locations for editorial and commercial usages. I take an evening or morning or two, hit those scenic roads and shoot some images, getting model releases when appropriate. For commercial usage, I may contact the manufacturer for potential sales, but definitely for property releases. I then do a promo with a selection of the images to either mail or otherwise distribute to my potential buyers. All this is done before I see a single penny of revenue. Hence the speculation that I will benefit from my efforts.
If I do it correctly, and if I do assignment work, I would attract RV manufacturers, RV campgrounds, RV magazines, RV sales & repair shops, travel/tourism publications, travel writers, and others to look over my available images or hire me to create specific images for their own usage. If I drop the ball, read the market wrong, put out poor product, or otherwise screw up...I do not hit the jackpot, and am out the money. Like any investment- one has to weigh the risks and the potential.
Is that expanded enough? ;-)
Valerie Henschel
Regional Photo
hens...@tenforward.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Sedlik
To: STOCK...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 9:28 AM
Subject: [STOCKPHOTO] Shooting On Spec
Valerie wrote:
<<MARKETING pieces done on spec allow you to focus your talents on what you
can do to fill the client's needs, rather than rely on what some past
customer has hired you to do. It is still a good, if not the best way to
show your stuff.>>
Hi Valerie
Can you expand on that?
Under what specific circumstances do you believe that it *is* in a
photographer's best interests to shoot on spec?
Under what specific circumstances do you believe that it is *not* in a
photographer's best interests to shoot on spec?
Thanks
Jeff Sedlik
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Sedlik
creating images outside of the context of a commission from a client can be
speculative by nature, the term "spec" is not used to refer to the creation
of images for personal projects, self promotion or stock. Our industry now
has a universal definition for the term "spec," approved by photographers,
illustrators, art buyers, designers, publishers, stock agencies and their
trade associations is here:
http://www.useplus.com/glossary_term.asp?tmid=16020000
Jeff Sedlik
.
<http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714&grpId=282207&grpspId=1600019181&msgId=
35539&stime=1152746154>
Jeff Greenberg
> Jeff Sedlik
=====
My career is semantically & spiritually disconnected from your herd
of vocabulary-approving "industry" photographers.
To successfully shoot on speculation one must know one's client or
genre of clients well enough to know that as long as one performs up
to or greater than client expectations, one will achieve or exceed
one's own financial expectations in each speculative situation.
I am talking about moneymaking assignment situations that also
generate future stock income. Ironically, by shooting on speculation
combined with guaranteed satisfaction & no obligations, buyers not
only often exceed their intended budget -- they sometimes double or
triple it after reviewing results!
Also, I do not have to worry much about competition because all the
competition is following your vocabulary-approving industry herd.
jeffgreenberg, successful marketing rebel
Jeff Sedlik
<<Also, I do not have to worry much about competition because all the
competition is following your vocabulary-approving industry herd.>>
Hi Jeff (G)
Every photographer, every stock agency, every rep handles their licensing
transactions in a different way. In that sense, you are the status quo. You
are one rebel in an entire industry full of rebels, with each player
rebelling against the next. Intense competition among vendors catalyzes
diversity and will typically drive quality up and/or prices down. This can
be great for customers. But, under certain circumstances, a marketplace of
rebels can result in a race to the bottom, especially when competition
drives vendors towards offerings that decrease the customers' perceived
value of goods or services in the marketplace. In addition, a diverse array
of business practices among vendors, with each vendor using different
terminology can and does make transactions confusing for customers. This has
a pronounced effect on their buying behaviors.
The existence of a licensing glossary with standardized definitions for
words used in licensing will not hamper or inhibit competition and
diversity. The licensing glossary and other PLUS standards will serve to
make the RM licensing process easier for customers, and to help licensors to
avoid misunderstandings with licensees in an increasingly global
marketplace. The diversity in the marketplace will continue, and market
forces will reign, but we will all have standardized definitions for
licensing terms, and our customers will benefit from embedded, machine
readable license metadata allowing them to easily track the rights
associated with any image.
I have not criticized your business practices, and have no comment on them.
I wish you the best in your rebel endeavors.
Jeff Sedlik
Stockphoto Seller
images available for whatever price a customer cares
to pay become a rebel activity? Seems to me that is
all the rage with the unwashed masses eager to have
their pictures appear by whatever route possible.
Among the benefits of the PLUS standards will be the
clarity and efficiency they will lend to our RM
business transactions, reducing a mish-mash of
misunderstood terms and allowing photo users to
compare apples to apples when it comes to pricing. It
will become more difficult for the junk stock peddlers
attempting to undercut legitimate stock in their race
to the bottom to mischaracterize RM.
Carl May/BPS
--- Jeff Sedlik <sedlik-ya...@spamarrest.com>
wrote:
Fred
<JeffGreenberg@...> wrote:
>...
> To successfully shoot on speculation one must know one's client or
> genre of clients well enough to know that as long as one performs
up
> to or greater than client expectations, one will achieve or exceed
> one's own financial expectations in each speculative situation.
>
> I am talking about moneymaking assignment situations that also
> generate future stock income. Ironically, by shooting on
speculation
> combined with guaranteed satisfaction & no obligations, buyers not
> only often exceed their intended budget -- they sometimes double or
> triple it after reviewing results!
This is an interesting topic and is, IMO, the most important change
going on in stock photography today.
It seems obvious to me that the differences between 'stock
photography', assignment, and most kinds of 'service photography' are
becoming more and more blurred with each passing day.
We are just now moving into the realm of 'real' stock photo agenies
and it is fascinating to see the real differences between just having
a stock photography web site and actually serving the industry.
The real buyers who buy images on a daily basis seem much more
willing to pay top-doller for an image but they not only expect that
image to have a certain level of exclusivity, which is why micro-
stock is not of much interest in many cases, but they expect to be
serviced; you have to have a huge number of images available, in
stock, and then be willing to find or generate the photo needed, if
you don't already have it.
These buyers are not going to continue to pay top-dollar from Getty
Images, Indexstock, et al unless they provide such services, and as I
see it, and as Getty has already defined it, assignment stock is the
coming evolution and it is the future of stock.
How to deal with such changes? Jupiter Images tries to create
everything-house and completely take the photographer out of the
loop. That seems like a losing proposition, in the long term.
Getty Images, industry leader, has bought enough images to satisy
most demand, and, as I understand, has an assignment type of system
in operation. But, they seem to look upon photographers as a labor
pool to be squeezed as needed to satisy customer and shareholder
demand.
It seems to me that the best approach, long term, is to create a
marketing force that works with photographers and lets them have as
much freedom and creativity as possible while providing photographers
greater incentive than the measly 20% offered by our esteemed
industry leader but it is obvious to me that to be that marketing
force you would have to have something other than promises to offer
to get photographers to jump ship at Getty Images and go elsewhere.
Fred Voetsch
ACCLAIM IMAGES
http://www.acclaimimages.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------