MicrostockGroup

We've long been waiting to see if flickr are going to all users to sell their photos... its still not going to happen directly on flickr but a post on flickrs blog makes for interesting reading,

http://blog.flickr.net/en/2008/07/08/the-flickr-collection-on-getty-images/

i wrote my two cents worth on my blog
http://microstockinsider.com/news/getty-make-a-flickr-collection

it seems that now more than ever flickr is somewhere where you should be posting your best photos even if you can't sell them on there its a good place to let people see your work.

I wonder how many images on flickr will meet the getty QC standards?  Will they use istock as well?

from what I understand it's a very clever move from Getty. but it surely will result in more competition to  both micro and macro stockers imo.

I just posted these comments on another site:

Looks like a great idea for Getty to pick and choose from over 2 billion images, and get them exclusively with very little investment. A good deal also for Flickr users in that they'll see it as a painless way to make a few bucks. A good deal for image users that already use Getty adding lots more variety. Maybe not such a good idea for micro contributors in that the pool of images goes way up and dilutes sales potential away from micro sites. Probably also a bad deal for micro sites for all the above reasons including the smaller, newer micro sites that are having to fight for contributors.

I wonder also if Flickr will become a new micro site -- inviting us micro contributors aboard. It would be a nice new revenue stream for them. Plus a great new time-waster for micro contributors to upload to a new site (Flickr) with the promise that maybe sometime on the off-chance that an image of theirs will be chosen from the 2 billion by a Getty reviewer.

A great way for Getty to develop a "farm team" of contributors. Thousands of new shooters with a desire to be seen. Fertile fields for them. Pretty * smart.

Love to hear other opinions on this development.

Nah, most of Flickr pics are crap. Sorry but I don't understand the concept here

There's maybe 70% of landscapes in the Flickr collection. And 20% are wildlife pics. In that 20% there's 60% of these that are pictures of herons LOL

This and other moves dispell the myth that there are thousands of "Good Photographers" to fill any gaps.

Reading this means don't panic, Getty will not be selling Flickr images, they are just looking to cream off a few photographers to refresh thier own collection, and using Flickr to find the right photographers.

As with PhotoShelters up and coming "School of Stock" and "Shoot the Day", they are looking as well to getting existing Photographers to take another look at what they are shooting, and PhotoShelter would be hoping to pick up some exciting new Photographers of thier own, introduce them to stock and licencing to expand the collection as well.

But Getty will not be selling Flickr images, they likely would not accept anything that has been on Flickr for a while, but they will be inviting some Photographers from flickr to take "New Exclusive Images just for the Getty Collection and display them on Flickr", apart from the exclusive bit that's the same as what PhotoShelter is doing with it's own promotions.

So both are looking for new photographers and fresh content, that should be a wakeup call to all existing photographers to look at what they are shooting and uploading.

But as the Images will be on Flickr with a link to Getty, it will also be interesting to see what they do about the flickr feed Blogs and the RSS feeds wich ignore the licence preferences of users via the flickr API.

Another Link: http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003825626

I do love this quote: Srivastava (Flickr): "We range all the way from that kind of professional photographer with years of experience to my mom, who is just getting started with professional photography."

Seems that every mom with a camera is a professional.

Oh yeah all the Flickr images may look great on flickr but getty have a list of cameras they will accept images from and that does not include Mom's P&S

Have a look at the number of Images from Canon Cameras on Flickr, then there are only a few "DSLR" camera models that Getty will accept, so this will reduce the number of good images and photographers that will be of interest, but it is good PR for Getty and Flickr.

http://www.flickr.com/cameras/canon/?s=type#models

Then there are the property and model releases, exclusivity clauses etc:

David 

just checked the list but you can see on the list over 10million item(photos) taken with canon 5d,6,5 million with 40d,nearly 14million with 30d roughly 1million items for each 1D series,so all the cameras on Getty's list I don't think equipment should be big problem and imagine a rebel  xt owner receives a request from Getty it shouldn't be too hard for them to upgrade to a 30d or 40d if not 5d  so I think it will eventually bring more competition in stockphoto world and it'll be the agencies and buyers benefiting from it.

Look what Getty have to say about Istock contributors

"Getty also runs a site called iStockPhoto, where amateurs contribute photos that the company markets at lower rates. The photos on Flickr are of sufficent quality to demand higher prices, Mr. Klein said."

Also we make non-authentic photographs

“We believe that Flickr will be an important addition to the mix that we have,” said Jonathan Klein, co-founder and chief executive of Getty Images. Mr. Klein said Flickr photographers will increase the depth of Getty’s catalog on certain subjects and certain regions of the world. And they will be bringing an element that professional photography often lacks, he said. “Because the imagery is not shot for commercial services, there is more authenticity,” Mr. Klein said. “Advertisers are looking for authenticity

Ok then can I start sending all my snapshots again!?!

These two taken from the Istock forum here: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=72812&page=3

I am not surprised at what he said. The pasture is only greener on the other side. It certainly does not encourage me to go exclusive with IS.

So it's purely perception? Kind of like the buyer that will snub their nose at a $30 designer shirt at Costco and pay $80 for the same shirt at Nordstroms just because it's Nordstroms?

I agree with Mr. Klein here it's not that black-and-white but in general yes. Therefore i don't think the flickr-deal will hurt Microstock at all.If it will hurt something it's the HighEnd-Stock.

The best of Flickr equal in most cases: Too much saturated, too much sharpenned, full of noise or artifacts when viewed at full size.

It's sure that on a 1000 pixels image it's look great, but don't think that these files were photoshoped a complete hour with care.

People on Flickr upload like crazy and photoshop maximum 12 minutes by adjusting the curves and don't even know when to stop adding saturation or sharpness to an image.

I don't want to be compared to the guys I see at the photography store, looking for somebody to look at his "best shot" to receive approbation from others. Flickr is based on this.

There might be 2 billion images on Flickr but I bet that all but a few hundred thousand (at most) are useless for stock, either because of technical problems or because of the lack of consumer driven concepts.

On a side not regarding Getty, for a long time I desperately wanted to be a “Getty” photographer. I knew a few Getty photographers and they made huge amounts of money, one guy $250,000 a year from around 500 images. Initially, a few years ago they rejected me, recently I paid for placement in their Lifesize collection. Of the 10 images I initially submitted, I made six sales in the first three months. These were mediocre images, lifestyle but no real production quality to speak of. So I thought that was a pretty good indication of Getty’s potential, two sales a month from ten images out of all of Getty’s two million or so images. So I paid to place nine more. Just around the same time I sent the new images Getty did away with their Lifesize collection and those images were assimilated into their photographer’s choice collection. No new sales since then, and that was three months ago. Coincidence? So I’m currently out $400.00 bucks just to have images with Getty. But to make matters worse, all the similar images from those shoots are useless now. Getty won’t accept them because of their sistering policy; you have to submit all similars at the same time. Now initially this policy was only for RM images, however, at some later time (after I uploaded my initial 10 images) they changed the policy of sistering to include RR images. But with Lifesize you initially had to license RR. This really screwed me up because that initial 10 was a test go for Getty, I had dozens more from the same shoot that would have been great on Getty as RR or RF. So my images that are with Getty, and all the similars, are tied up for two years, and they pay a measly 20%. Man I was duped and dumb.

So screw Getty, really, don’t worry about them, don’t scramble to get images on Flickr just hoping to get into Getty. Don’t tie your images up for two years for only 20%, not worth it anymore, Getty is (hopefully) on the way out and most old time pros will tell you that they are the worst thing that ever happened to photographers in spite of the money they make. I make most of my stock income from the micros, Alamy is OK but I’m really excited about Photoshelter. I like their pay structure, their web site is great. I hope these guys take over the stock world.