MicrostockGroup

I am traveling for an extended period of time and have taken bunches of pictures (needless to say) everywhere I went (currently southern India).  None of the people pictures have a MR and so I was wondering what to do with them - if anything - with regards to microstock.  Is it worth my time and the effort to upload them as editorial only and if so where?  I have tried with a few that I took during carneval in Mexico and they haven't exactly sold like crazy (very seasonal topic, I realize, but still).

Any suggestions, experiences to share.

Thanks,

Tina

Go to Alamy and Photoshelter... Forget all about submiting editorial to micros, it is a waste of time, they will not sell enough to even cover the bandwith used to upload them. 

Thanks for the input.  I'll try photoshelter - just signed up recently but haven't done much there yet as my Internet connection is slow and intermittent at best.

To your point, Adelaide, I think the opposite is true: especially here in Kerala people have been delighted to have their picture taken and I make a big effort to get them a copy even if it means to spend hours editing pictures that I will never use anywhere or for anything and I believe it is much more ethical to take a picture of a person who consented to having it taken and make a few bucks off of it then take pictures of unsuspecting passers-by.   Just my opinion.

Tina

One thing is to take people's photos - yes, most people in remote or poor areas are pleased to pose to us, even if we don't promise to send them a copy - another thing to me is to sell these photos.  We are using their image to make money, and they did not know about this, or may not have an idea of what it really meant.

I would not sell an image of a person when the person is the main subject, unless I know exactly what kind of use the image will have - which is more than just setting for editorial or RM (and in stock websites it's unlikely that I will be consulted).

For instance, I have images of kids in a refugee village in Botswana. I think it's ok to have that in an article about refugees, but not in an article about homeless children (which they are not) or AIDS (I don't know if they have it or not) or infant prostitution (which hopefully is not part of their lives).

In a way the editorial license may be more stringent (I haven't read their terms though) than general RM, as I believe the license limits the use of the image to what it really shows.  So, in the case above, if I say these are refugees, I suppose that under editorial terms it can not be used in homeless/AIDS/prostitution stories.  But I don't know.

Regards,
Adelaide

I do OK with travel editorial sales on SS and now DT.  I mostly get pics of festivals or parades.  I think the colorful nature of the images stand out, and I have no ethical issues with editorial images of people litterally putting themselves on parade - it's a public performance.

I guess I'm too shy to pose people for images, so I don't really have a take on that.

You should explore and read more about licences, since I perceive you still have to refine your understanding about them.  You can and should use RM licences for non released material.  It is by restrictions that you make them Editorial.  I would advice you to avoid the micros RF Editorial model for two main reasons:  the first one is that you don´t control usage by any means (even worst, image history is very unlikely to be available) and that is a potential liability.  The second reason is that at best, an editorial shot will we sold very few times so you would like those images to earn you the most money per sale.  At micros they sell a few times, making you a couple of dollars and that's it.  I consider the Editorial incursion by micros a great lie to new photographers, they will collect the money by volume, photographers won´t see much out from it.

I have no objections on making money from travel shots, even with people.  All my unreleased material is labeled Editorial and in certain cases I have set usage restrictions for sensitive matters with the released material.

PD:  people shots with RF licences at micros are very good candidates for some kinds of problems. Imagine you convince your fiance or wife to pose for some shots and they end up used in a national herpes campaign... You wouldn´t be able to do anything at all.  It happened in the past with a photographers father, he was used in a comp staring at stripper dancers and despite his protests IStock did nothing at all... Imagine telling that to your father... His image all around the web... It is very sensitive and that is why I usually avoid using people shots at micros.  Mine are all with releases and restrictions of usage, according with each specific case.