Macro Stock / Midstock > General Macrostock
RM - which agency?
onepointfour:
I have bunch of RM images sitting around and still not sure what to do with them. I'm not motivated to upload to Alamy. Any recommendation which RM agency I can consider?
I'm looking at Blend Images. But I don't have 1000 images to qualify for their 50% royalty rate so I have to be content with 20%. Also, anyone has any idea what are they royalty rates like through their partner program? As an example, if an image licensed through Getty as partner, does that mean Getty will be paying them 30% and 20% of this amount will go to the photographer?
cuppacoffee:
What is the difference between an RM vs a RF image these days? I know how these 2 types of images were different in the past (I used to purchase RF images for advertising many years ago) but isn't the only dif now what an agency considers them to be? RF used to be images of a specialized subject but I see all subjects being sold as RF these days. RF used to mean that the price was negotiable and could only be sold for a specific use for a specific time. How does one determine if an image is RF worthy? And more important, how does one convince any agency that an image should only be sold as RF? Just asking because I'd really like to know what the determining factors are today other than exclusive use of an image that isn't spread around everywhere (which so many subjects are these days).
onepointfour:
Well, I always keep work that can't be replicated easily as RM. I don't mean my works is out of this world until it can't be replicated, but it takes a lot more effort to be replicated. The rest go to my RF bin.
From my previous experience with RM licensing, another thing I noticed that the company that purchased want to make sure the same photo is not being used by their competitor.
ShadySue:
--- Quote from: cuppacoffee on April 28, 2014, 06:20 ---What is the difference between an RM vs a RF image these days? I know how these 2 types of images were different in the past (I used to purchase RF images for advertising many years ago) but isn't the only dif now what an agency considers them to be?
RF used to be images of a specialized subject but I see all subjects being sold as RF these days. RF used to mean that the price was negotiable and could only be sold for a specific use for a specific time. How does one determine if an image is RF worthy? And more important, how does one convince any agency that an image should only be sold as RF? Just asking because I'd really like to know what the determining factors are today other than exclusive use of an image that isn't spread around everywhere (which so many subjects are these days).
--- End quote ---
I'm really confused. What you're saying about RF is/was usually said about RM.
shudderstok:
what amazes me is how far too many photographers in the microstock crowd do not know the difference. i have had this "discussion" on these forums before.
http://asmp.org/articles/rights-managed-stock-vs-royalty-free-stock.html#.U18AVYGSySo
http://asmp.org/tutorials/licensing-guide.html#.U18BboGSySp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_photography
at one point in time this was all just so common sense.
RF has it's place as does RM.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version