pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What are good ideas for photo contests and prizes?  (Read 11329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2008, 00:13 »
0
These are my thoughts on the subject.
I like the Dreamstime type where you have a certain theme.
A month is long enough for a deadline.
 I would rather receive money a prize than a prize that you might not even want or need.
Just the winner to have  prize with a few token prizes for the runners up.
The community should never be the judges, it is too open to abuse.

« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2008, 15:06 »
0
i dont submit to most contests anymore -- before digital i did send to various magazine, calendar, etc contests in both photo and recipes  [recipe contests were lucrative, my best win was a trip to NY to meet paul newman at the finals for his newman's own line - prize for the 6 finalists included $10K to your favorite charity - but few MS sites are going to be able to match that]

right now, i submit to the JPG magazine themes contests - they pay $100 and the process is simple & quick

http://www.jpgmag.com/photos/1026769

JPG isnt selling images tho, but MS has the additional advantage that the secondary prizes could be postings in a hall of fame [like editors picks], so the images would continue to get exposure

« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2008, 22:08 »
0
Photographers are obsessed with gadgets.  Light meters, Wacom tablets, portable storage devices, a 16 or 32 gig memory card, lensbaby, calibrator, printers, photobooks, canvas stretch prints.   Some we can't live without.

If you demand exclusivity of submissions, let it expire in 12 months and you will have a lot more entrants.

« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2008, 23:22 »
0
"I'm open to any ideas and interested to see what people like."

Contests that aren't just a scheme to get rights to use your images.

« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2008, 01:15 »
0
"I'm open to any ideas and interested to see what people like."

Contests that aren't just a scheme to get rights to use your images.

Right on. Read the rules very carefully because they often bury the words 'all rights' in the small print. Even the biggest companies do this. Nikon whipped up a storm of protest a year or so ago when they ran a contest taking 'all rights' to the entries. Avoid these contests like the plague as you're giving away your copyright.

Cash prizes are the best as far as I'm concerned. Couldn't care less about meeting some 'celebrity' or getting a bit of equipment I've no use for. An associated exhibition of the winners, or other publicity, is a bonus.

« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2008, 02:27 »
0
Watch out for competitions run by the BBC in the UK. They nearly always want to retain the rights.
We are all doing this for the money (aren't we?). Unless the first prize is a super camera, I would prefer a cash prize.

« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2008, 03:02 »
0

Watch out for competitions run by the BBC in the UK. They nearly always want to retain the rights.


Watch out when sending any photograph to the BBC. They don't pay, no matter how newsworthy it is. They seem to regard the glory of having your photograph displayed by the BBC as payment enough.

« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2008, 16:11 »
0
We had a thread about this some time ago, hadn't we? 

National Geographic Society also retains rights over images submitted to them, even if not published.  They don't ask for copyright, but for the lifetime right to use the images in whatever way they want, editorially or commercially (if I remember it right, on a non-exclusive basis).  I think it could be a good deal if the image is published - after all, that would be being published in National Geographic magazine, website or merchandise.  Possibly only published images are in fact used by them in the end, but the terms are abusive to me the way they are.

Regards,
Adelaide


« Reply #10 on: October 10, 2008, 16:01 »
0
getting 'stuff' you might get a deal from a photography store if you toot their name around the competition - letting you give away bigger prizes.  I would rather win a $2000 camera than $1000 cash.

Crestock had a really fancy competition giving away a Canon 1DS mark II, some apple computers and other fancy gear.  I think also, gear sounds more exciting that cash.  $1500 doesn't neccesarliy sounds like tons of $$, but if you say the new 30" apple monitor, or some other item that people have been dreaming about the last couple of year, you might get more of a reaction and buzz...

but i don't really know ;)  just hypothesizing

« Reply #11 on: October 10, 2008, 17:24 »
0

National Geographic Society also retains rights over images submitted to them, even if not published.  They don't ask for copyright, but for the lifetime right to use the images in whatever way they want, editorially or commercially


Do they pay anything?

« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2008, 07:26 »
0
Just some thoughts...

- For a prize, cash is "King".  As some have stated, it allows the winner(s) to purchase what they need (whether it is photography equipment or food).

- Judging is the single biggest issue with contests (of any sort).  There are always problems with contests because of the judging.  All you have to do is watch some of the TV "contests" to see this in action (e.g., American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, etc).  Many times, the most skilled contestant doesn't win, but the most popular.

If you leave it up to the audience, then it will be a matter of who can gather the most votes.  There have been many times that I have seen people ask (or beg) that people vote for them in a contest.  Depending on the contest, you might also get "phantom" votes (i.e., votes from people that create multiple accounts and vote many times).

If you leave it up to the judges, then their idiosyncrasies might skew the results.  Judges have favorites (whether it is a certain artist or style).

Of the two (community vs a panel of judges), I would prefer a panel of judges, but I would make sure that the images that they are judging would be "blind".  That is, the judges should only be able to see the image and nothing else (such as the artist's name, description, etc.).  After all, it is the image that should be judged, and not the person, how well it is described, the keywords, etc.

- There should also be a limit on the number of entries that a contestant can submit.  This way, a contestant can't just submit 100 images to increase their chances.

- As far as websites are concerned, DPChallenge (http://www.dpchallenge.com/) seems to do a good job.

- Finally, make sure that the rules are VERY clear.  There are many times when there are ambiguous rules and they can be interpreted in a lot of different ways.

For example, I once did a photo contest that was titled "Liquids".  Basically, entries had to contain a liquid as a major theme in the image.  But then it became clear that the term "liquid" was not enough, because questions arose as to whether images of glass (which is considered a liquid by many) would be valid.  There were also questions on whether Photoshop plugins that create water/liquid were allowable.  Those questions (and many more) needed to be ironed out before the contest started.

I hope that helps and good luck.

« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2008, 12:58 »
0

National Geographic Society also retains rights over images submitted to them, even if not published.  They don't ask for copyright, but for the lifetime right to use the images in whatever way they want, editorially or commercially

Do they pay anything?

Possibly in contests, yes, either cash or prize (could check).  But for the "Your shot" section in NGM and NG website, no.

Regards,
Adelaide


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2294 Views
Last post April 17, 2007, 07:30
by steve-oh
15 Replies
2352 Views
Last post October 01, 2013, 22:07
by DF_Studios
0 Replies
1332 Views
Last post October 08, 2014, 08:10
by charged
3 Replies
1599 Views
Last post August 15, 2016, 18:04
by cascoly
2 Replies
1384 Views
Last post October 22, 2016, 00:51
by Zero Talent

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results