Author Topic: Flickr Launches New Commercial Licensing Platform / Martketplace (Read 22404 times)

bunhill · « **on:** July 29, 2014, 10:35 »

http://petapixel.com/2014/07/29/flickr-takes-on-500px-and-getty-with-new-commercial-licensing-platform/

Most people here will know that the flickr - Getty partnership ended some while ago.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #1 on:** July 29, 2014, 15:19 »

cheers bunhill, i m with Flickr, so this is something to check in.
really appreciate it when one of u do the footwork 4 me, as i m pretty much old-school and quite the dummy with low IQ for www.
any help like this is super .

this +1 for u here will make up for the -1 i gave u re Stocksy,

cobalt · « **Reply #2 on:** July 29, 2014, 15:37 »

Interesting. At least there is serious financial muscle behind flickr.

So many new start ups, all calling themselves a marketplace. There is indeed a need for a large marketplace. Looks like the race is on.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #3 on:** July 29, 2014, 16:27 »

Should we all hurry to upload to Flickr Now? They gonna have watermarks and start to check for releases? What about stolen or unlicense content? They get these issues under control?

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #4 on:** July 29, 2014, 16:31 »

Quote from: cobalt on July 29, 2014, 15:37

Interesting. At least there is serious financial muscle behind flickr.

So many new start ups, all calling themselves a marketplace. There is indeed a need for a large marketplace. Looks like the race is on.

+1
and Flickr has a large inventory of "players" and clients (commercial entities that uses Flickr themselves).
so there is already a market and supplier . i have not read the link which bunhill provided by
both contributors (supplier) and clients (user) are all in the same "building" (Flickr).
definitely a real marketplace with proven history, no vapor ware for sure.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #5 on:** July 29, 2014, 16:34 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on July 29, 2014, 16:27

Should we all hurry to upload to Flickr Now? They gonna have watermarks and start to check for releases? What about stolen or unlicense content? They get these issues under control?

i do not upload 4-16MP to Flickr. i just give them my 600*900 at the most. and i do not allow downloads. anyone who sees my work will know the quality from them, and if Flickr tells me there is a client, i will upload the 4MP-16MP accordingly.
presently i use Flickr just to show my potential clients my work. and if they like what they see, they hire me locally.
but i welcome a global network , and Flickr is just the sort of middle man i welcome.

definitely, i will also like to see watermarks as well. as for releases, i only use flickr for editorials not requiring credentials , so i am not sure about MR or IPR. but i too will expect them to deal with this accordingly.

EmberMike · « **Reply #6 on:** July 29, 2014, 18:48 »

At the bottom of the Yahoo announcement it says that it was written by curator and content manager Liz Lapp, as in, Liz Lapp the former curator for Shutterstock. And looking at her LinkedIn profile it looks like her days at Shutterstock ended as soon as her Yahoo/Flickr gig started, so I'm assuming she left Shutterstock for this new job. Interesting that they brought over a former Shutterstock person for this, and even more so that they seem to have maybe recruited her.

I think this will be interesting, and more or less so depending on how things shape up and this all comes online. Will they deal in illustrations or only photos? I think that's an underrepresented area of some of these other high-end curated collections. What will the licensing look like? Price points? Royalties? Lots of questions to be answered...

Could be cool, though. We'll see.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #7 on:** July 29, 2014, 20:42 »

Interesting times with all of the sites jumping in. 500PX, FAA, and now Yahoo.

I remember reading that Flickr has been unprofitable with no direction. Now that it can make them money hopefully they'll see it as a core part of their business and focus on it.

And hopefully they come up with a reasonable model that will balance sales volume with a reasonable contributor percentage. If they just copy Getty's 20%-ish model I think they'll get a lot of angry responses.

ShadySue · « **Reply #8 on:** July 29, 2014, 21:20 »

Quote from: EmberMike on July 29, 2014, 18:48

At the bottom of the Yahoo announcement it says that it was written by curator and content manager Liz Lapp, as in, Liz Lapp the former curator for Shutterstock. And looking at her LinkedIn profile it looks like her days at Shutterstock ended as soon as her Yahoo/Flickr gig started, so I'm assuming she left Shutterstock for this new job. Interesting that they brought over a former Shutterstock person for this, and even more so that they seem to have maybe recruited her.

And interesting that they're "taking on 500px and Getty", but not SS. Hmmm.

onepointfour · « **Reply #9 on:** July 29, 2014, 22:18 »

They can't be taking on Getty, they are partnering with Getty. In Getty's forum, 30 days ago there was an announcement Flickr will renew the relationship with Getty. Flickr will now be referred as Getty's Image Partner just like Blend Images or Nat Geo.

But I'm surprised Flickr didn't mention Getty in their announcement.

Update! Opps they did mention here https://www.flickr.com/marketplace/
"Get connected to opportunities to license your work to
photo editors, designers, and agencies including Getty Images"

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #10 on:** July 30, 2014, 01:00 »

Quote from: onepointfour on July 29, 2014, 22:18

They can't be taking on Getty, they are partnering with Getty.

Stock is, and has been for a long time, a small, incestuous pack.

Petr Toman · « **Reply #11 on:** July 30, 2014, 05:39 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on July 29, 2014, 20:42

Interesting times with all of the sites jumping in. 500PX, FAA, and now Yahoo.

I remember reading that Flickr has been unprofitable with no direction. Now that it can make them money hopefully they'll see it as a core part of their business and focus on it.

And hopefully they come up with a reasonable model that will balance sales volume with a reasonable contributor percentage. If they just copy Getty's 20%-ish model I think they'll get a lot of angry responses.

I guess that the last piece missing is google. And then we will see

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #12 on:** July 30, 2014, 11:08 »

Quote from: onepointfour on July 29, 2014, 22:18

They can't be taking on Getty, they are partnering with Getty. In Getty's forum, 30 days ago there was an announcement Flickr will renew the relationship with Getty. Flickr will now be referred as Getty's Image Partner just like Blend Images or Nat Geo.

But I'm surprised Flickr didn't mention Getty in their announcement.

Update! Opps they did mention here https://www.flickr.com/marketplace/
"Get connected to opportunities to license your work to
photo editors, designers, and agencies including Getty Images"

so what is it?
are they taking on Getty or are they still part of Getty?
as Paulie says, "interesting times".
as with Zeus "an incestuous pack".
this is as interesting as an enema

onepointfour · « **Reply #13 on:** July 30, 2014, 20:48 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 30, 2014, 11:08

Quote from: onepointfour on July 29, 2014, 22:18
They can't be taking on Getty, they are partnering with Getty. In Getty's forum, 30 days ago there was an announcement Flickr will renew the relationship with Getty. Flickr will now be referred as Getty's Image Partner just like Blend Images or Nat Geo.

But I'm surprised Flickr didn't mention Getty in their announcement.

Update! Opps they did mention here https://www.flickr.com/marketplace/
"Get connected to opportunities to license your work to
photo editors, designers, and agencies including Getty Images"

so what is it?
are they taking on Getty or are they still part of Getty?
as Paulie says, "interesting times".
as with Zeus "an incestuous pack".
this is as interesting as an enema

Previouly Flickr Getty collection is considered as "in-house" collection. Those Flickr folks who got through previous program is now under in-house Moment collection. They are getting 20% (for RF). For this new partnership, Flickr collection will be considered as partner, not in-house. So they will be sharing the pie with Flickr. I'm not sure how much Getty pays their partners. Contributors will share their Getty income with Flickr.

ijansempoi · « **Reply #14 on:** August 16, 2014, 11:07 »

it will be interesting to see flickr's competition with previous getty coorporation

Hobostocker · « **Reply #15 on:** August 16, 2014, 22:50 »

this is a GOOD news from any perspective because finally these companies are realizing they can monetize images instead of giving them away for free as they did in the last decade.

and this will further educate the average users and freetards that nothing is free in this world, only snapshots and selfies will remain free, no matter if flickr prices will be cheaper than microstock, what matters is the fact that you have to pay and therefore the image has a value.

hopefully by domino effect all the other major photo sharing sites will follow suit and when that happens the freetards and the spongers will have nowhere to hide, either they pay or they steal, no other options.

i would not be the least scared by the immense competition and oversupply that could happen on Flickr, as always the Pro will deal with it accordingly.

what really matters is : are there enough serious buyers on sites like Flickr ? i've quite mixed feelings about it, if we take the example of 500px or FAA i'm not impressed so far, they're a good niche for what they do but still a niche, Flickr could turn to be a different beast considering how many users they have but there are all freeloaders as far as we know, how many will become buyers ? and once they're buyers what kind of incentives will they get to stick with Flickr rather than other stock agencies ?

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #16 on:** August 19, 2014, 16:06 »

Quote from: Hobostocker on August 16, 2014, 22:50

this is a GOOD news from any perspective because finally these companies are realizing they can monetize images instead of giving them away for free as they did in the last decade.

and this will further educate the average users and freetards that nothing is free in this world, only snapshots and selfies will remain free, no matter if flickr prices will be cheaper than microstock, what matters is the fact that you have to pay and therefore the image has a value.

hopefully by domino effect all the other major photo sharing sites will follow suit and when that happens the freetards and the spongers will have nowhere to hide, either they pay or they steal, no other options.

i would not be the least scared by the immense competition and oversupply that could happen on Flickr, as always the Pro will deal with it accordingly.

what really matters is : are there enough serious buyers on sites like Flickr ? i've quite mixed feelings about it, if we take the example of 500px or FAA i'm not impressed so far, they're a good niche for what they do but still a niche, Flickr could turn to be a different beast considering how many users they have but there are all freeloaders as far as we know, how many will become buyers ? and once they're buyers what kind of incentives will they get to stick with Flickr rather than other stock agencies ?

+1 to = 4 for hobo
. response in pursant to bolden text of your comment.
hobo, i think the problem is market perception.
as a contributor to something like 500px, flickr,etc even i as a photographer dislike the LIKE, LOVE, whatever there is in an agency which does not know what it is they want.
are you interested in traffic, with 90% of photog coming in daily to "heart" other portfolio with "um, check out my photos!" and other such drivel.

as ms contributors i am sure are not interested in gathering "hearts and flowers", they , hopefully,
want only to see downloads and $ cents. at least i am !

so , imagine if i as a photog feel this way, how many clients will think the same, and say, "naaa,
this is just another social media. just a bunch of nice oversharpened over saturated pictures with banding and noise and fringes,etc". (italics not meant to be blatant, just realistic).

the problem is just this. in my tuppence worth. what do u think?

Hobostocker · « **Reply #17 on:** August 20, 2014, 04:31 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on August 19, 2014, 16:06

the problem is just this. in my tuppence worth. what do u think?

i think the market for stock images has no reason to expend further at this point.

for all we know flickr selling stock images could be yet another total fiasco, or slowly they could create some new demand from scratch, but it's hard to imagine that suddenly their users start buying in droves.

if they ever buy it will be for stuff like print on demand and fine art in my opinion, so you can expect a similar customer base to 500px or FAA, which is not bad but it's no big deal.

the market can get bigger if they find a way to sell to poor countries but to achieve this there's a long list of issues to resolve, first of all regarding online payments, secondly about pricing, you can't expect to sell for the same prices as in the West in countries where a photographers is making 200$ per month.

besides, in these countries piracy is totally legit in many cases, music for instance but also videos and movies, you can see entire dvd shops with 100% pirated content, photocopied covers and all, they'll also give you a receipt.

there's a total lack of culture regarding copyright and good luck sueing somebody in a third world country for IP infringement ...

China is potentially a booming factor for the future but why should they leave such a business to us, if they ever start paying for stock images they will soon use chinese providers, also because of keywording and also because it's harder and harder for foreigners to set up business in mainland china nowadays.

so, all things considered Flickr will probably make some money with this but they're not making any radical change in the bigger scenario of the stock industry, and pirates will always find a way to get stuff for free, no matter what.

bunhill · « **Reply #18 on:** August 20, 2014, 05:29 »

Quote from: Hobostocker on August 20, 2014, 04:31

pirates will always find a way to get stuff for free, no matter what.

They won't need to find a way - because pirates are users - and are therefore assumed to represent a potential market. If they won't pay then they will increasingly be given the content via bundling deals etc - such that it ends up being free to the users. The theory used to be that one day they might pay directly. But now it is also about the deals which can be made around content - and the money which can be made (or might be made one day) simply from keeping people engaged. It's genius that people who will never spend anything are now viewed as valuable customers.

It will suit the stockholders and investors who put non profit growth ahead of $. But it won't make photographers happy unless they own stock.

Microstock is going to end up paying at about the same rate as other user content - including the comments under click-bait articles etc.

ShadySue · « **Reply #19 on:** August 20, 2014, 06:47 »

Unbelievably, this morning an email dropped in from a woman in a design studio referencing three images I have on Flickr, and saying she couldn't find them in my ports on iS, Getty or Alamy (which I mention on my Flickr profile) and would I sell them directly.
As it happens, I can't (Commonwealth Games Opening Ceremony, only accredited togs can sell, but I can share on social media as per my Clyde-sider contract), but these are all phone pics taken in poor lighting at night, from way up in the seated area where I was working. Even sized down to 720px wide for Facebook then copied to Flickr, they are definitely 'mushy', so even if allowed, I wouldn't have thought of submitting them anywhere, and am astonished anyone would think of buying them.
So who knows what the market might be?

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #20 on:** August 20, 2014, 10:46 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 20, 2014, 06:47

Even sized down to 720px wide for Facebook then copied to Flickr, they are definitely 'mushy', so even if allowed, I wouldn't have thought of submitting them anywhere, and am astonished anyone would think of buying them.
So who knows what the market might be?

interesting ! so in a way Yuri was right ! the mobile phone is going 2b the new DSLR.
so why is Shitterstock lifting the bar so high up when their sales are down and potential buyers like this at Flickr is only looking at content ?
that's really something , who knows

p.s.
with more proof of mushy stuffs being used. has anyone seen yahoo's ad "we're big!!!"
sunrise and tons of noise and all sorts of things none of us would dare submit to any site, not just ss or is

ShadySue · « **Reply #21 on:** August 20, 2014, 11:58 »

The phone takes pretty good pics in good daylight, but the ceremony used strong spotlights at night, even the 5D2 would have required a LOT of work to be acceptable. I'm still waiting for the manufacturers to realise that what we really need (inasmuch as we need anything new) is wider exposure range recording.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Flickr Launches New Commercial Licensing Platform / Martketplace (Read 22404 times)

bunhill

etudiante_rapide

cobalt

PixelBytes

etudiante_rapide

etudiante_rapide

EmberMike

PaulieWalnuts

ShadySue

onepointfour

PeterChigmaroff

Petr Toman

etudiante_rapide

onepointfour

ijansempoi

Hobostocker

etudiante_rapide

Hobostocker

bunhill

ShadySue

etudiante_rapide

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors