Author Topic: iStockphoto to offer "Editorial Use" license (Read 31028 times)

Sean Locke Photography · « **on:** December 13, 2010, 12:19 »

rubyroo · « **Reply #1 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:27 »

Ah so this is the big 'Monday news' everyone's been on tenterhooks about.

Funny coincidence given the other discussion here that's going on today.

lisafx · « **Reply #2 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:46 »

Oh good. Another big announcement that is supposed to "benefit contributors" but doesn't put one thin dime in my pocket.

gaja · « **Reply #3 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:46 »

I haven't really read Happy Announcements posts in the Istock forum before, I thought you were kidding about the wooyays and stuff. But there are actually people there crying Hallelujah for something several other microstock sites have offered for years. They are being sarcastic, right?

ichiro17 · « **Reply #4 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:49 »

its about time...this is going to create an inspection queue mess though

cthoman · « **Reply #5 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:50 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 13, 2010, 12:46

Oh good. Another big announcement that is supposed to "benefit contributors" but doesn't put one thin dime in my pocket.

Seems like a good announcement, but it doesn't really affect me either.

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #6 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:52 »

No they really are that happy over this. At least until IS decides to limit it to exclusives only or announce that it will be supplemented with images already owned by Getty. Interesting that they don't want any celebrity or sports images. That's ok, other sites are happy to have my shots of Ice-T, Pamela Anderson, Andre Tippin, Doug Flutie and Duff Goldman (to name a few).

Can someone link me to the "other conversation"? I must have missed that one.

lisafx · « **Reply #7 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:57 »

Admins have referenced the need to "caption" editorial images a couple of times. I can't seem to find what that means. Anybody know?

Wonder what the pricing structure will be for editorial images. It might be worth trying out after all...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #8 on:** December 13, 2010, 12:58 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 13, 2010, 12:57

Admins have referenced the need to "caption" editorial images a couple of times. I can't seem to find what that means. Anybody know?

Wonder what the pricing structure will be for editorial images. It might be worth trying out after all...

A two sentence description of the image content.

Pricing is same as regular collection pricing.

rubyroo · « **Reply #9 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:00 »

@ Sean

I see someone asked you why you don't go 'wild with joy for once'.

Made me laugh, anyway

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:00 »

Until about two years ago I was shouting for this. Now, I'm not so sure. This now means I have to make decisions (Almy or iStock) for each of my images, whereas ATM, editorial is clearly 'for Alamy'. I still think most of the editorial images I shoot are of limited end-use, so not great for Micro. It will be interesting to see what sort of Editorial sells well enough on iStock to make it work well.

ShadySue · « **Reply #11 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:05 »

I see they are requiring releases signed by parents for images of minors. I wonder if there will be an 'editorial-use-only' release for that purpose.

Ploink · « **Reply #12 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:06 »

This would have been good news for me, if they hadn't excluded news, sports and celebreties...

But, no, there's way for me right there: "Again, Getty Images are the experts in these fields and we encourage people interested in news, sport and entertainment to work with them." My short career as Getty photographer would probably look something like this:

Me: "Hi, this is Ploink, could you please tell me on which FTP-server I can submit my news, sports and entertainment photos?"

Getty: "What gives you the idea that we are interested in those photos?"

Me: "The good people at IstockPhoto encouraged me to work with you..."

Getty: "Yeah, right..." - click

ShadySue · « **Reply #13 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:09 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 13, 2010, 12:57

Admins have referenced the need to "caption" editorial images a couple of times. I can't seem to find what that means. Anybody know?

Most of the details are spelled out here:
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=939#3

Although they have a tight close up of a man and woman through a window, and say :
"A good caption:
Istanbul Turkey - November, 2009:
A man and woman ride a tram on İstiklal Caddesi, a busy pedestrian shopping street leading to Taksim Square in Istanbul."
Despite the fact that you can hardly tell it's a tram window, and the location is totally invisible in the image.
I'm confused - but can't post on the forum for a better explanation.

ShadySue · « **Reply #14 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:11 »

They say, "• In most places police and emergency crews will require that photographers have press accreditation to shoot accident scenes or similar sites. You must show us that you have the necessary permission to upload any images of this kind of thing."
This is not a requirement in the UK, certainly not in Scotland. Will the inspectors know which countries need this and which don't?

ShadySue · « **Reply #15 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:14 »

They also say that they won't take, for example, 'improved' skin - an example is shown. Given that many iStockers have been doing this invisibly (unlike the rough and ready improvement in the example) for years, how would the inspectors know it had been done?
Of course, they're relying on the photographer's honesty, but they have rather put themselves on the spot (pun unintended) by saying that.

lisafx · « **Reply #16 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:25 »

Thanks Sean and Sue, for answering my question about captions. I skimmed the article, but must have skimmed over that part.

Releases for minors? That leaves out quite a bit of travel and lifestyle editorial stuff.

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #17 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:28 »

It's RF editorial so the same release you always use should cover it.

@Lisa Captions contain the pertinent information about the image. Ask yourself, "What point does the image have?" and then write the answer. It usually also contains information about the date and the location depicted.

IS is requiring a date, country and description. If your image is product related (ie cell phone on white) then you need to list the exact product name and manufacturer.

There is an accepted format for captions but I don't know if IS will have us do the formatting or just have us put in the information like on other sites.

ShadySue · « **Reply #18 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:31 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on December 13, 2010, 13:28

It's RF editorial so the same release you always use should cover it.

I've never been able to find an editorial release, and I've asked at least three times in the past for a link to one (though for RM).

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #19 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:43 »

Editorial by definition doesn't need a release. Editorial is "newsworthy" images. IS is the only site that requires an MR for editorial images be released. Any MR that IS accepts now should work for the editorial images.

Pixart · « **Reply #20 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:50 »

Question - could exclusives distribute RF Editorial elsewhere in the past? Was just wondering if now they have to be editorial exclusive also?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #21 on:** December 13, 2010, 13:53 »

Quote from: Pixart on December 13, 2010, 13:50

Question - could exclusives distribute RF Editorial elsewhere in the past? Was just wondering if now they have to be editorial exclusive also?

No. Exclusivity covers all RF.

lisafx · « **Reply #22 on:** December 13, 2010, 14:00 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on December 13, 2010, 13:28

@Lisa Captions contain the pertinent information about the image. Ask yourself, "What point does the image have?" and then write the answer. It usually also contains information about the date and the location depicted.

IS is requiring a date, country and description. If your image is product related (ie cell phone on white) then you need to list the exact product name and manufacturer.

There is an accepted format for captions but I don't know if IS will have us do the formatting or just have us put in the information like on other sites.

Thanks Nancy. Seems like the "captions" fill the same function as "description" currently fills, except with specific details required.

vonkara · « **Reply #23 on:** December 13, 2010, 14:00 »

For me it's the deliverance of cloning logos and people off my photographs. And that was 70% of my tasks. Omg I'm happy, even though there will be gray areas, it's a real deliverance

ShadySue · « **Reply #24 on:** December 13, 2010, 14:04 »

I know that one of the reasons textbook manufacturers haven't used iStock (and presumably the others) in the past was that they didn't know if the images were unaltered.
I hope there will be some way of indicating that our images are unaltered (to editorial standards, i.e. a bit of levels etc, but that's all) even if they don't need to be designated as 'editorial'. E.g. unaltered wildlife.
I have always indicated this in my description if I've altered a wildlife pic., but it's never been a requirement.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: iStockphoto to offer "Editorial Use" license (Read 31028 times)

Sean Locke Photography

rubyroo

lisafx

gaja

ichiro17

cthoman

NancyCWalker

lisafx

Sean Locke Photography

rubyroo

ShadySue

ShadySue

Ploink

ShadySue

ShadySue

ShadySue

lisafx

NancyCWalker

ShadySue

NancyCWalker

Pixart

Sean Locke Photography

lisafx

vonkara

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors