� The main photo on the web page promoting the Canadian Periodicals Fund, which gives financial assistance to magazines and journals, depicts a stack of magazines. It was shot by Danish photographer Morten Olsen.

 

It's true that generic images from wherever can probably get the job done. For me, the issue here is the irony that a Canadian government department supposedly tasked with fostering and promoting Canadian cultural industries is too cheap and/or lazy to make sure they buy Canadian pictures or, heaven forbid, actually commission a Canadian photographer to take the pictures.

I guess it's as one of the comments below the story noted: "Why should the government pay massive amounts of money for "Canadian arts" when stock images are available, cheap, and 99.999% of people can't tell the difference? It is like buying no-name toilet paper vs. the fancy stuff."

Not that they'd be likely to pay "massive amounts of money" in any case.

Does it matter though where the photographer is from? Is it not about subject matter? I mean how do you find a photo of a pile of magazines photographed by a Canadian photog?

It's political optics. It's seen as a government that can't take the time to promote its own artists.

I agree with that, but for sake of argument, lets say you dont want or cant spend money on a Canadian tog, how do you find stock images shot by a Canadian photographer? I think on IS the country of the photographer is mentioned? On Shutterstock it is. So you need to search for the image you want and then check every photographer's profile to find one from Canada. Seems cumbersome.

Yes, it would take some effort. I think they ought to make the effort, given their mandate. Really, how much work would it take to identify a group of Canadian photographers whose images they like? A low-level staffer could probably do it with a couple of days work. Once they do this, they can go back to these portfolios when they need more work. They could even ask those photographers to produce specific stock images that would meet their needs.

I'm also very skeptical that they don't have enough money to hire a few Canadian photographers from time to time. It would be peanuts compared to some of the other things they spend money on. They're just taking the cheap and easy path because they can.

Here is a point that keywords and descriptions should have location information, even for a stack of magazines. Even a studio shot that is isolated on white. Contributors should include them and agencies should not edit them out.

You would get an incredible amount of spam. Searching for Canada or Canadian and get every single image in the library with that keyword. Buyers would not be amused. IMO

They can take the cost of a photographer directly out of my tax payments. 

Quote from: Semmick Photo on January 06, 2015, 13:50

I agree with that, but for sake of argument, lets say you dont want or cant spend money on a Canadian tog, how do you find stock images shot by a Canadian photographer?

Just ask?
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=61661&page=1

Hah! Even easier than I thought.