Author Topic: where are you submitting your Editorial work? (when outside micro) (Read 14372 times)

luissantos84 · « **on:** March 08, 2013, 17:09 »

Hi everybody, I am thinking about where I should upload the editorial work I have been doing lately, SS rejected a test picture I sent due to Trademark (the fact is that they won't have any online but all other agencies DT, IS, 123RF have), that said I have emailed SS to ask for more explanations, will see about that...

If your work isn't allowed in microstock where would you submit it? RM? Alamy? other?

Thank in advance for all advices and hope this will be useful for other having similar questions too

tickstock · « **Reply #1 on:** March 08, 2013, 17:16 »

luissantos84 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 08, 2013, 17:25 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:16

Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?

interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc

tickstock · « **Reply #3 on:** March 08, 2013, 17:35 »

luissantos84 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 08, 2013, 17:44 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:35

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:25
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:16
Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?

interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc
Places where photography is not allowed?

of course it is allowed, do you want to reply seriously or joke around?

tickstock · « **Reply #5 on:** March 08, 2013, 18:03 »

ShadySue · « **Reply #6 on:** March 08, 2013, 18:13 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:44

Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:35
Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:25
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:16
Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?

interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc
Places where photography is not allowed?

of course it is allowed, do you want to reply seriously or joke around?

Normally you need permission for any of these even for editorial use. IME, they let me take photos, but would not allow stock use, as they couldn't control where they would be used; but if I was using them, for example, to illustrate articles in magazines, they'd consider it on a case by case basis (apparently depending on the actual publication).

Ed · « **Reply #7 on:** March 08, 2013, 18:52 »

Luis, most "macro" agencies will accept editorial work relating to editorial newsworthy and travel.

Galleries, Museums, and Music Gigs - maybe the outside of the gallery, the outside of the museum (I have many of these). Music gigs - not unless you have press credentials (and I'm being serious).

Put those images up on Fine Art America - you can sell prints of these images, but for editorial, you're pushing the limits and most agencies won't accept them even if photography is allowed.

Here, the local art Museum allows photography in certain areas of the museum...most agencies reject the images anyway.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 08, 2013, 18:54 »

I had the feeling this would go this way, too bad really but sometimes its better to step aside because people looooooove to joke around and talk without reading before

I will repeat myself, the last place I took pictures is shoot everyday by millions of persons, there isn't any issue, tons of pictures at IS, DT, 123RF and actually some even at SS

forget the all microstock, what do your guys do with editorial in general? if it is to joke around or say the obvious please move along

luissantos84 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 08, 2013, 19:02 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 18:03

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:44
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:35
Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:25
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:16
Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?

interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc

Places where photography is not allowed?

of course it is allowed, do you want to reply seriously or joke around?

I don't think that it is a joke. Those places are normally privately owned and limit who is allowed to take photos inside the venue. Without permission I know Istock would not accept images from any of those locations and wouldn't allow images of art unless it was in the public domain. There have been numerous discussions on here about music venues limiting who is allowed to take photos. A lot of museums and galleries forbid photography as well.
Here is what MoMA says: http://www.moma.org/visit/plan/guidelines
If you want help you have to be willing to listen.

I am willing to listen but you may read a little before too, if there is a SIGN saying I cannot shoot of course I won't shoot... oh please

Phil · « **Reply #10 on:** March 08, 2013, 19:08 »

just alamy at this stage, would like to explore some other places but haven't as yet.

tickstock · « **Reply #11 on:** March 08, 2013, 19:49 »

Ed · « **Reply #12 on:** March 08, 2013, 20:45 »

Good thing I don't submit to Getty LOL

All I will say is check with other macro based agencies. The last time I listed an agency, I got penalized...and am still being penalized. Images which once took about a month to get reviewed and keyworded are now taking 5 months...and they implemented a submission restriction because folks decided to "crowd source" it. LOL.

I've learned my lesson. $:-\$

gillian vann · « **Reply #13 on:** March 09, 2013, 04:51 »

DT is my current first choice for editorial, last time I submitted 6 pics from our January floods and I got a $5 "newsworthy bonus" per image. Given only one has sold so far I'm pretty happy with that arrangement. The other sites are just a pain with this type of thing (I seem to fail the iS captioning rules every time), so I give to DT as exclusive.

Oldhand · « **Reply #14 on:** March 09, 2013, 09:02 »

Hi there - many places is the honest answer...There are plenty of agencies out there, plus I supply certain media directly. To give you an example Sipa Press used to represent all my editorial images in France, I used to upload directly to them to file in their archives. I got a monthly sales report, sent off my invoice and got paid. I give this example as Sipa are no more, they went under last year.

These type of outlets don't have the same "visibility" as the micro ones there are no sites listing good and bad agents in the same way as Micro. It took me a long time to find and build up my images with good agents.

I've around a dozen decent outlets in addition to Micro and Alamy. I'm afraid I can't be candid about which ones, but I know you post on here a lot Louis, so I've answered as best I can.

stocked · « **Reply #15 on:** March 09, 2013, 16:58 »

Alamy is great for editorial the only problem is that editorial itself isn't really great (saleswise).
But I had some very good sales (even in the four digit range) of non-released pictures at Alamy.
Just don't expect miracles but I can't think and don't know of a better place for editorial than Alamy.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #16 on:** March 09, 2013, 19:05 »

Quote from: stocked on March 09, 2013, 16:58

Alamy is great for editorial the only problem is that editorial itself isn't really great (saleswise).
But I had some very good sales (even in the four digit range) of non-released pictures at Alamy.
Just don't expect miracles but I can't think and don't know of a better place for editorial than Alamy.

RM?

ShadySue · « **Reply #17 on:** March 09, 2013, 19:31 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 09, 2013, 19:05

Quote from: stocked on March 09, 2013, 16:58
Alamy is great for editorial the only problem is that editorial itself isn't really great (saleswise).
But I had some very good sales (even in the four digit range) of non-released pictures at Alamy.
Just don't expect miracles but I can't think and don't know of a better place for editorial than Alamy.

RM?

If non-released it must be RM, though some seem to slip through.

stocked · « **Reply #18 on:** March 10, 2013, 14:48 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 09, 2013, 19:31

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 09, 2013, 19:05
Quote from: stocked on March 09, 2013, 16:58
Alamy is great for editorial the only problem is that editorial itself isn't really great (saleswise).
But I had some very good sales (even in the four digit range) of non-released pictures at Alamy.
Just don't expect miracles but I can't think and don't know of a better place for editorial than Alamy.

RM?
If non-released it must be RM, though some seem to slip through.

Exactly, of course RM, Alamy rules are very clear in this regard

luissantos84 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 10, 2013, 14:59 »

there is option for RM exclusivity, shall I hunt RM agencies or try exclusive?

ShadySue · « **Reply #20 on:** March 10, 2013, 16:15 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 10, 2013, 14:59

there is option for RM exclusivity, shall I hunt RM agencies or try exclusive?

That's image exclusive, meaning it's only there and has never sold elsewhere. (I'm not sure about their position on similars/sisters). It means in the rare event where someone wants some sort of exclusive use, they have all the data about the image's previous uses at their fingertips and don't have to contact you first.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 10, 2013, 16:41 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 10, 2013, 16:15

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 10, 2013, 14:59
there is option for RM exclusivity, shall I hunt RM agencies or try exclusive?
That's image exclusive, meaning it's only there and has never sold elsewhere. (I'm not sure about their position on similars/sisters). It means in the rare event where someone wants some sort of exclusive use, they have all the data about the image's previous uses at their ringertips and don't have to contact you first.

right, makes total sense, cheers Sue

brmonico · « **Reply #22 on:** March 13, 2013, 18:20 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 18:03

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:44
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:35
Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:25
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:16
Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?

interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc

Places where photography is not allowed?

of course it is allowed, do you want to reply seriously or joke around?

I don't think that it is a joke. Those places are normally privately owned and limit who is allowed to take photos inside the venue. Without permission I know Istock would not accept images from any of those locations and wouldn't allow images of art unless it was in the public domain. There have been numerous discussions on here about music venues limiting who is allowed to take photos. A lot of museums and galleries forbid photography as well.
Here is what MoMA says: http://www.moma.org/visit/plan/guidelines
If you want help you have to be willing to listen.

You are both right. We can´t take images from a painting if we take the image in a correct angle to reproduce the painting as an image "ready to print", pictures of a public museum or gallerie can be allowed in they are wide angle views and not details, also depends the museum and the art objects in there.
Now to Luis, the best thing to get permission for these is work like a press member with press identification. This is valid for news usage images and editorial work. Again , work as a press member will force a valid press ID and a press code work ,. Photo journalists don´t take details of art , they take news/editorial usage images and provide their ID in the museum....They take images for publications and many times this interest to galleries too because they receive the publicity and the credits in the article.

Is different when someone ask permission to shoot saying "this is for me and to sell in stock agencies" or saying " This for news articles with the credit to your gallerie. Can you provide me a text to illustrate the image?" ... this is press work ! The text you use to illustrate the image can be the difference between get the image accept or not in editorial agencies.

For me the best and more dedicated agency for that, with a simple process to accept contributors is Alamy. They have the news section too, you can see their how contributors write texts for news images.

www.alamy.com/news/

This is a very complex matter.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #23 on:** March 13, 2013, 20:13 »

Quote from: brmonico on March 13, 2013, 18:20

Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 18:03
Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:44
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:35
Quote from: luissantos84 on March 08, 2013, 17:25
Quote from: tickstock on March 08, 2013, 17:16
Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?

interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc

Places where photography is not allowed?

of course it is allowed, do you want to reply seriously or joke around?

I don't think that it is a joke. Those places are normally privately owned and limit who is allowed to take photos inside the venue. Without permission I know Istock would not accept images from any of those locations and wouldn't allow images of art unless it was in the public domain. There have been numerous discussions on here about music venues limiting who is allowed to take photos. A lot of museums and galleries forbid photography as well.
Here is what MoMA says: http://www.moma.org/visit/plan/guidelines
If you want help you have to be willing to listen.

You are both right. We can´t take images from a painting if we take the image in a correct angle to reproduce the painting as an image "ready to print", pictures of a public museum or gallerie can be allowed in they are wide angle views and not details, also depends the museum and the art objects in there.
Now to Luis, the best thing to get permission for these is work like a press member with press identification. This is valid for news usage images and editorial work. Again , work as a press member will force a valid press ID and a press code work ,. Photo journalists don´t take details of art , they take news/editorial usage images and provide their ID in the museum....They take images for publications and many times this interest to galleries too because they receive the publicity and the credits in the article.

Is different when someone ask permission to shoot saying "this is for me and to sell in stock agencies" or saying " This for news articles with the credit to your gallerie. Can you provide me a text to illustrate the image?" ... this is press work ! The text you use to illustrate the image can be the difference between get the image accept or not in editorial agencies.

For me the best and more dedicated agency for that, with a simple process to accept contributors is Alamy. They have the news section too, you can see their how contributors write texts for news images.

www.alamy.com/news/

This is a very complex matter.

I have decided to go with Alamy a few days ago, don't worry coz I will handle the very complex matter

brmonico · « **Reply #24 on:** March 14, 2013, 06:58 »

I am not saying this complex for you !!

I am saying editorial concept is complex. An editorial file could be different for a news worth file and the description of a news file must be done almost as a little journalist text . I am sure you can do it right .

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: where are you submitting your Editorial work? (when outside micro) (Read 14372 times)

luissantos84

tickstock

luissantos84

tickstock

luissantos84

tickstock

ShadySue

Ed

luissantos84

luissantos84

Phil

tickstock

Ed

gillian vann

Oldhand

stocked

luissantos84

ShadySue

stocked

luissantos84

ShadySue

luissantos84

brmonico

luissantos84

brmonico

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors