News
Getty opens new tap for images with “Lifesize” collection
In keeping with CEO Jonathan Klein's promise to open the taps to allow more images to flow into Getty's archives, the company has invited any photographer, -- "professionals and amateurs alike," according to a press-release -- to submit images for inclusion into a new collection. Getty calls that collection "Lifesize" and will license images from it under the Rights-Ready model.
The company's press release goes on to state the following terms for images accepted by its editors for Lifesize: "Photographers contracted for Lifesize will initially be allowed to submit up to 40 images per year, paying a $50 placement fee for each image accepted. As an early incentive, photographers will be charged an introductory fee of $25 for each of their first 10 placements. A flat 30 percent royalty rate will be paid for each license issued through the Lifesize collection."
"The digital revolution has enabled a new breed of photographic talent to capture and share their vision with the world," said Andy Saunders, vice president of Creative Imagery at Getty Images. "By tapping into this fresh supply of creativity, we're better equipped to meet customer demand for a broader and deeper selection of imagery."
Photographers interested in submitting images to Lifesize should visit www.gettyimages.com/contributors and click on the "work with us" link.
The company also announced plans to further expand the image choices available under the Rights-Ready umbrella. Soon, the company will place selected images from its Photographers Choice collection and from two image partner collections, Panoramic Images and StockFood, under Rights-Ready licensing model.
Click here to view the original press release.
Posted in: News, Photographers, Stock Photo Companies
Comments(1)
post a comment »Tim McGuire, November 20, 2006 [#]
In reponse to a photographers question I recently read online asking “Is Getty Worth it” I replied as follows. I thought is was relevant to your article and thought I’d post it here as well. The question was aske3d in the context of a discussion about Getty’s latest offerings to photographers.
Is Getty Worth it?
I’d say in the short term Getty could be a profitable option should you submit good licensable images… THE PROBLEM with supporting Getty is that it sets a bad precedent in supporting a company that keeps on taking and taking from photographers as a group in order to give and give to it’s stock holders, mainly the Getty family and some top executives at Getty. It also sets a precedent that photographers will give up 60-70% of the revenue stream (and often times much more for “out of territory” licenses) generated by their photographs AND they will also pay for that privilege (sarcasm intended). IMHO “Pay to Play” as Getty has established with their Photographers Choice and now with their new “Open” scheme is a bad road to go down for photographers, especially in light of the large % of revenues taken by Getty already. The pay to play scheme might help to keep non professionals out of the business but in order for me to “pay to play” the revenue split would have to be much better than that which Getty now offers or perhaps they could do away with the foreign office (out of territory) charges. Then I’d be happy to pay a fair amount to cover upload and keywording costs.
Most keywording companies I’ve looked at will keyword an image for $3/image or less depending on your volume. What inefficiencies at Getty make it cost $50-$75 per image to get an image online? Alamy does it for free and they split the revenues at a far more generous % than does Getty. Is Getty just greedy? Maybe Alamy is far more efficient than Getty?? Maybe Getty is turning photographers into a source of revenue… I don’t know but I have to wonder and it really doesn’t make me want to support such a company with my images.
Why not support some other more photography friendly distributor that doesn’t make you pay to place your images with them? Why not think long term about how our individual actions as photographers and independent business owners affect the larger industry? Why not help other distributors give Getty more competition so Getty cannot dictate the terms of business to photographers?
Remember catalog fees by the “agencies” of the 1990’s. Well Getty is bringing them back and calling them placement fees. Photographers let this happen once before. Let’s not let it happen to us again especially in light of the ever decreasing revenue splits for photographers. Pay to Play is a bad deal for photographers!
My 2 cents.
Cheers,
Tim McGuire
x-getty (fpg), corbis, wbs/jupiter, alamy