Comments on: How Getty Is Killing the Stock Photo Industry

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:50:32 +0000

One big wake-up call that is in the making is the enormous wave of excellent photography from up-and-coming photographers who are quite happy to sell photos at a reasonable rate, and, most importantly: royalty free. Apart from the cream-of-the-crop photographers and the few extraordinary photographs: the whole “rights-managed” scheme is a utter sham and absurd and out of control. When a small business owner looks to buy a professional shot of a cityscape for his company’s website and companies such as Getty et al are asking US$5000 for one photo that has a time limit for use, well, simply put, the market will adjust to fill this need for quality at a reasonable price. This has happened and is happening in many industries, especially the arts; logo artists in the UK are now forced to compete with reasonably priced logo artists from Brazil and the Balkans, etc. And business owners are getting wise. Greedy agents and photographers take note: you will be drowned in a sea of quality photography from around the world that is priced reasonably and without draconian RM. RM is unsustainable and a disgrace. The bottom line: While Photoshelter is trying to woo photographers by promising riches — buyers won’t be buying, instead, they’ll be consuming less and running in the opposite direction to find reasonably priced RF alternatives. They won’t have to run far as these alternatives are popping up everywhere. And not a minute too soon — sorry boys the party’s over.

By: laptop622

laptop622 — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:33:00 +0000

MC said :"I'm also curious to see how they are going to do when their buyers realize that half of the pictures they selected already sold as RF for $1 at other micro sites". http://www.laptopbatteryclub.com/

By: Stock photo agency

Stock photo agency — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:35:51 +0000

Being new to the stock photography world,In my opinion, I think is a marketing thing to get flickr photographers subscribe to Getty.

By: Zyra

Zyra — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:17:55 +0000

Let’s AVOID Getty Images. In my opinion, their recent campaign to extract money from people by threats, and their buying-up of free photo sites in order to use the photo stock as “bait” with which to trap, catch, and persecute individuals and small companies, is an atrocity which folks should give the big thumbs-down to. I have warned about this at http://www.zyra.info/getstu.htm , and I suggest we not only boycott Getty Images, but also lobby companies using them to Avoid. Getty Images will not get my permission to use any of my images, unless they clean up their act, issue an apology, and put right the wrongs they have done. Doing various searches, it is amazing what an astonishing groundswell of opinion there is condemning Getty Images, and I am not surprised to hear stockmarket pundits claiming that Getty Images stock is at a multi-year low. If they go bankrupt, it will be a cause for celebration. That’s my opinion on the matter. Zyra http://www.zyra.org.uk

By: FOTOKMYST

FOTOKMYST — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:43:36 +0000

Here’s something I read in another forum which was discussing micro sites going pro active for disallowing to opt-out on subscriptions. I think it ‘s appropriate for this topic too: QUOTE——- Whatever happens, I hope this will work out for all contributors. I am sure the last thing we all want is a new definition to add to the disambiguation thesarus: LAUGHING STOCK = “buyers pay next to nothing for photos, contrinutors get even less. but big business for micro sites”. ——-END OF QUOTE

By: mateo

mateo — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:44:02 +0000

MC said :”I’m also curious to see how they are going to do when their buyers realize that half of the pictures they selected already sold as RF for $1 at other micro sites”. that sums it up so well, i needed to copy / paste it as my comment.

By: anj abril

anj abril — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:23:46 +0000

I suspected something was going on when some of my friends who were long time flickr people tried to add their microsites affliation logos, or put some links to their port of micros on flickr, only to be blocked by them. So now, it’s so obvious they’re up to something, get flickr ppl to give away their photos for free or next to nothing. Has anyone seen the Weather sites with flickr photos? I wonder if any of the photographer know their photos are being used, FOR FREE.

By: Juan S

Juan S — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:50:54 +0000

This is nothing but free market strategy :)

By: Darrell Young

Darrell Young — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 01:42:26 +0000

I just came back to read this for the third time, and liked it even better! I joined the stinky microstocks after Getty made me feel like an abject amateur. Had Getty been open to *unknown* photographers I wouldn't have contributed to the downfall of photography for the time that I was foolishly submitting to the micros. As I watched my images selling thousands of times, I knew they must have value, but I surely wasn't getting much money. I tried Getty again, to see if anything had changed. Nope! They only offered me the micro they owned, or the marvelous (for them) deal of submitting images for a $50 fee each. Then I read about Photoshelter on a stock forum. Let me tell you, I rejoiced! Here is an RM agency actually seeking new photographers. I pulled out of the micros in record time, and started submitting newly shot RM images here. I was so tickled that I wrote this little article: Then There Was Photoshelter http://www.youngimaging.com/Article-ThenThereWasPhotoshelter.asp Like many others, I have found a home at PSC. As I watch the photography market self-destruct around me, mostly due to the micros and the short-sightedness of trad/macro agencies, I see PSC as a near future leader in photography sales. I feel that PSC might just hold the line against photographic pricing destruction. Some won't agree with me, I am sure, however, I am willing to go the distance with PSC, and encourage others to do the same. - Darrell Young

By: Derek Dysart

Derek Dysart — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:14:26 +0000

Allen. All I can add is a hearty thanks to you and Grover. When I met you two at the Chicago Town Hall last year, I knew I wanted to be a part of this. The last few paragraphs of your post here re-affirms my decision.