I've just been pointed at this site http://www.picturenation.co.uk/, I've never seen it before and I thought I'd sign up and check it out. But being a little new still I thought I'd ask opinions as the T&C confuses me.

This part

By submitting the photograph to picturenation, being the sole author of the photograph, waive absolutely your moral rights arising under Chapter 4 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and, so far as is legally possible, any broadly equivalent rights you may have in any territory of the world. (this refers to picturenation using your member name to publicise your photo)

confuses me as I'm not 100% sure of all the act and despite further down it states that you retain copyright.

I'm just a little blonde and unsure of some of the parts that look a little suspicious so I'll be grateful for the opinions of people here who know much more than me and can save me signing up somewhere that isn't going to be good for myself.

Thanks in advance.

Quote from the website:
# You can have 5 images live on the picturenation site for no charge.
# If you have 5 images live on the site, you can upgrade to a PN Pro Account for just �10 annually, and upload as many images as you like. Images still have to be approved by the picturenation team.

Pay to have pictures online in a new agency without track record?
No, thanks.

Ok so the moral rights bit isn't as scary as I thought. I know it's only five images but I figured that having a few there would let me get a foot in with a few ok shots and see how it goes, with todays market I doubt they can afford to keep it with fees for long.

The site does have a lot of flaws though after more investigation, huge amounts of properties including a pizza hut and no sign of a property release, with the T&C too it looks like they would throw the photographer to the dogs if they got caught out. I haven't checked the model release side of things yet.

Picture Nation is now two years old. Not a "new" site! I have 1000 photos there and have made some good sales. Comission is 40%and you get �30 for a high res sale (they are not microstock). The flaws you refer to are not. They accept editorial photos such as high street shops, famous celebrities etc which do not require property or model releases. Their customers include newspaper groups and the BBC! The �10 fee is in fact new and most of us have paid it as it is a good site. I am just amazed it hasn't been mentioned on this site before. Totally recommend them. Hope this helps. Regards, David

Quote from: Einochi on January 09, 2009, 13:20

Ok so the moral rights bit isn't as scary as I thought. I know it's only five images but I figured that having a few there would let me get a foot in with a few ok shots and see how it goes, with todays market I doubt they can afford to keep it with fees for long.

The site does have a lot of flaws though after more investigation, huge amounts of properties including a pizza hut and no sign of a property release, with the T&C too it looks like they would throw the photographer to the dogs if they got caught out. I haven't checked the model release side of things yet.

Picture Nation is now two years old. Not a "new" site! I have 1000 photos there and have made some good sales. Comission is 40%and you get �30 for a high res sale (they are not microstock). The flaws you refer to are not. They accept editorial photos such as high street shops, famous celebrities etc which do not require property or model releases. Their customers include newspaper groups and the BBC! The �10 fee is in fact new and most of us have paid it as it is a good site. I am just amazed it hasn't been mentioned on this site before. Totally recommend them. Hope this helps. Regards, David

Welcome representative of Picture Nation. You're doing a fine job. Now, can we can have the real truth and nothing but the truth from someone else please.

Welcome representative of Picture Nation. You're doing a fine job. Now, can we can have the real truth and nothing but the truth from someone else please.

That seems very harsh just based on what the poster said - that PN is not new, that it accepts images for editorial use as well as RF stock and that he has good sales there.

I am not a "representative" of Picture Nation either. I do know the founder, Jane-Louise Green and I have sometimes contributed bits of legal advice. I also have a small portfolio there. NewsFocus1 is correct. The site has been active for more than two years, and it was a considerable time in preparation and planning before that. It is not brand new and the payment has only just been introduced - it isn't some kind of scam. There is an open discussion, including complaints, about the introduction of the annual fee on the PN forums. People who already have a portfolio there will only be required to pay the fee if they upload more images, so no-one is being forced to pay. And no, I am not successful there. I have a relatively small number of images and my earnings are next to nothing, but clearly some contributors are doing very well. I hope the site weathers the current economic storms because I know how hard the founder and her team have worked, not because I am earning loads of money there, or have any financial interest in its success.

Moral rights under the CDPA include the right to be attributed as creator of the work, the right to object to derogatory treatment of your work and the right not to have someone else's work falsely attributed to you.
The first two would not be consistent with selling images as RF stock, hence the waiver. The copyright remains with you, however.

Yes, and for those interested here is the law itself: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_4

There is an open discussion, including complaints, about the introduction of the annual fee on the PN forums.

A parking fee is quite unusual in microstock. On the other hand, it would prevent a massive sign-up of beginners with glorified snapshots. Anybody having done review work knows what I mean by that. It would only attract people that are confident about their port.
PN looks like a niche site for travel/editorial. I have no idea whether the "traditional" recent stock imagery with isolated models and staged scenes/emotions would be successful there. PN is certainly not for illustrations and vectors.

The site is a bit intriguing and I had a look at the images. View counts are decent. Content, well, there is room for improvement certainly. Perhaps Jane-Louise Green could pass by here and explain what kind of pictures PN is looking for, with its customer base in mind.

PN looks like a niche site for travel/editorial.

Ah, it seems I should go take a look there!

Regards,
Adelaide