Here's my Corbis conundrum:

I have a wide array of editorial photos from mid-20th century (politicians, artists, actors, etc.). Started digitizing them a year ago, and putting them on Corbis, had some modest success. I specifically avoided Getty because I had heard bad things about them in terms of pricing stuff so cheaply that contributors make very little. Corbis seemed to treat contributors pretty well, and had respect for them.

The current scenario is that Corbis contributors *might* get invited to migrate to Getty. Assuming that invitation comes my way, I want to gather some information.

The only other place where this collection would seem to be a good fit would be Alamy. There's a lot I don't know, so maybe there are other agencies. Long gone are the days of Peter Arnold, The Stock Market, and other small teams that specialized in editorial stuff.

So, I want to find out if Getty is really that bad, as compared to refusing to join Getty and using Alamy or other small-fry places that might work.

Thoughts?

Hate to say it but getty is probably the natural home for that kind of thing. They kind of have the market wrapped up. In fact I wouldn't be suprised if the weird setup of the Corbis aquisition through a third party was something to do with avoiding antitrust scrutiny.