curious about istock... - DPChallenge Forums

01/22/2006 06:17:08 PM · #1

Can I purchase a low-res image from istock and use it to promote my photography?

For example get a shot of some weddings and print them and send them to potential wedding customers?

Just curious...I don't necessarily agree with that, but heck 10 cents is cheaper than going out and taking a photo so I just may do it...royalty free is royalty free, right?

EDIT: heck, if dell can buy a photo, put it in a pamphlet and sell computers, I see no reason why I can't do it.

Message edited by author 2006-01-22 18:20:58.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/22/2006 06:20:23 PM · #2

oh...anyone want to make $.10 off this endeavor...link me to your istock photo so you can get your dime...hehe

JoshuaM

Canon EOS-50D

01/22/2006 06:21:23 PM · #3

Im pretty sure that you can. I read a thread about it a few days ago. You may want to look it up to be sure. My istock referral link is in my sig.

nova

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM

01/22/2006 06:22:30 PM · #4

HERE you go, David :)

(oh, and thanks!)

Message edited by author 2006-01-22 20:20:06.

GinaRothfels

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

01/22/2006 06:41:03 PM · #5

I doubt there's anything in iStock's terms of service to stop you doing it, but I don't think it's very ethical towards your prospective customers.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/22/2006 06:44:42 PM · #6

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

I doubt there's anything in iStock's terms of service to stop you doing it, but I don't think it's very ethical towards your prospective customers.

Well, that's your opinion...you'd probably think that Coors light promoting beer in the bar by half-naked women isn't very ethical either...it happens.

I'm not going to get into who I think it's 'unethical' towards.

I'm gonna look around later. any more links to some galleries, let me know.

eslaydog

Canon EOS-5D

01/22/2006 06:50:19 PM · #7

Just make sure you state to your potential customers that the photos aren't actually a sample of your work, but a sample of other peoples talent.

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

01/22/2006 06:52:50 PM · #8

Originally posted by eslaydog:

Just make sure you state to your potential customers that the photos aren't actually a sample of your work, but a sample of other peoples talent.

Why would I hate to state that...I purchased the rights to print or reproduce the photo to promote a product or service. I am under no obligation to say it is or isn't my work. If asked, I suppose I'd say I can't remember...if you don't agree with it, just don't sell royalty free for pennies.

melking

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III

01/22/2006 07:07:15 PM · #9

why not just use your own photos?

faidoi

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

01/22/2006 07:26:14 PM · #10

Originally posted by melking:

why not just use your own photos?

I agree. If you have a photography business I would use my own photos. I would upload it to a stock site and then buy it :)

fotomann_forever

01/22/2006 07:33:18 PM · #11

Woudln't be hard at all to get a few FREE models. Also, not hard at all the get free wedding gowns either. Bartering for models and props/waredrobe is both fun and profitable ;-)

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/22/2006 08:02:59 PM · #12

All the ethical stuff aside.....

Apart from a potential PR issue if clients found out, I cannot see what is stopping people doing this -> I would assume it is happening at some level; probably small (and would be surprised if it was not in fact).

In studios with multi photographers, something similar occurs as the sample portfolios are from various photg rather than the one you hire anyway, in some ways it's just an extension of that.

I think if they specifically asked, you might need to indicate that the particular shot is not yours (to cover your self from future law-suites) but I would doubt you need to say it's a stock photo from somebody you don't know.

pcody

Canon PowerShot G6

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8

01/22/2006 08:29:09 PM · #13

I think you need to read the terms of use. No matter which site you purchase from, the photographer owns the rights to the picture. By saying they are yours, you are breaking the terms. However you can put a disclaimer somewhere that they are stock pictures and you'd be home free. But then again, who would hire a photographer that couldn't take pictures for his own marketing?

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/22/2006 09:20:20 PM · #14

Originally posted by pcody:

I don't have to openly tell anyone who took any photos or that I didn't take them. Look at pamphlets and web sites where people have obvious stock photos -- there are no mention that the photos were 'stock' and not taken by the company that is selling a product or service...

And to answer your question about who would hire a photographer that can't take pictures for his own marketing....

A) I can, I am just choosing to use the system as it was intended and gain royalty free rights to someone else's work while they can make their dime.

B) I am perfectly capable of taking a well-executed, properly exposed photograph, I am just lacking the motivation and tools (models, outfits, etc) to go out and take exactly what I need.

--

What's the problem with it, honestly? When I buy royalty free rights to an image, I can use it in the way I've outlined above...I checked with istock and their agreement, and it's fine.

Is the problem with the amount the photographer is getting paid? 10 cents -- that's not worth it? How about if I offered to pay you $500...$1000 for royalty free rights to use one of your photographs to promote my service or product that I would be selling -- would it be okay then? Royalty free rights are royalty free rights...whether a person paid $.50 for those rights or $10,000.00 for those rights.

--

If you have a problem with what has been discussed here, then your problem, in all actuality, is not with me. Your problem should be with istock or shutterstock or other microstock sites out there -- because this is the type of thing that happens every day of the week there...

comments welcome...

Message edited by author 2006-01-22 21:21:54.

zerocusa

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

01/22/2006 09:26:35 PM · #15

LOL, dpaull is using reverse psychology to make a point! :P

bravo!

pcody

Canon PowerShot G6

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8

01/22/2006 09:26:37 PM · #16

Ummm. I do think I said "no matter which site you purchased from". Do you want to make this an istock issue only? OK. It's your dime.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8

01/22/2006 09:38:59 PM · #17

Originally posted by pcody:

Ummm. I do think I said "no matter which site you purchased from". Do you want to make this an istock issue only? OK. It's your dime.

It's not an istock only issue -- I can buy from istock, shutterstock, or another microstock site -- for the most part, royalty free is royalty free, and the photos can be used as described above.

--

Congrats to zerocusa for being a detective.

No, in all actuality, I do not plan to do this...I'm not surprised that with so many people here that want to make that powerful dime, that there wasn't many links to their portfolios -- I am curious as to why...those images are up there for sale and can be purchased at any time for useages just like this.

--

Some people may be considering withdrawling their images from istock -- I had a few up from when I first learned about it and made a few bucks...well shortly thereafter, I pulled the photos and was left with a small amount of money in my account...so what do I do with that money?

I can't let it sit there because then istock wins. I can't use it to buy photos from other people, because then I'll just be promoting those people to keep their photos on there...so what should I do with my money at iStock?

I have 16 credits currently sitting, rotting away, being spent by some owner of istock to buy himself a new five thousand dollar watch or a new sports car or SUV...16 credits times $.10 equals a dollar sixty...well I suppose I can distribute it evenly amongst a few people who would have likely gotten a lot of downloads anyway by downloading their images...but then what should I do with the photos? I mean to really exploit the system, I'd have to do something with the photos (within their useage rights) in order to really make out...so anyway, I'm not sure what I'm going to do, but I'm working on it...

pcody

Canon PowerShot G6

01/22/2006 09:46:51 PM · #18

So only micro stock sites offer rf? News to me. Last time I looked, the big boys offered rf also. Ahh. I know I'm really stupid, so I just assumed all the agencies offered rf. But you are so smart, you know that none of the macro sites offer rf. I certainly appreciate the education you can offer us poor dumb idiots.

01/22/2006 09:50:05 PM · #19

Originally posted by pcody:

lol...if you would read the thread in its entirety, instead of skimming through, you will see that I mentioned other possibilities for buying RF images. Heck, 60% of the stock photography market (based on dollar amount) sold today in the USA is RF images...

My point, as was mentioned above, was if someone wasn't excited of the idea based on the fact that the photographer is only getting a dime for the rights...I then asked if they would be happier with $500, or $1000 for the royalty free rights (because then, at that point -- $1000 for a photo, I'm not sure anyone would care how the photo was going to be used)...

Leave your sarcasm at the door, please...I'm trying to have a mature conversation here, and you're just degrading the quality of that conversation with your rude comments.

fotomann_forever

01/22/2006 10:01:37 PM · #20

Interesting way to broach the subject... I must applaud you on that.

Here's my take on microstock. Generally, and I believe a lot of photographer's would agree, photogs don't upload thier best shots to microstock agencies. I know I don't. The photos I have on istockphoto and 123RoyaltyFree are mostly images I shot for the specific purpose of being on the stock sites or are files that would have stayed in archives on CD's and never used again.

I'm not saying that you are wrong. But, sometimes a dime is a dime. Much rather make a dime or two on some photos than to have then sit on CD's collecting dust.

Message edited by author 2006-01-22 22:02:40.