Jump to content

- - - - -

free images in reverse

  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 gorantrener



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 December 2012 - 03:58 AM

hello every1,
i found it very interesting reading opinions from fellow photographers about giving away images for free. i am not a pro photog, so my opinion is not so important at this point, but must say that i totaly understand and appreciate many statements about NOT giving free images.
just for a quick introduction, i am general editor of croatian scubadiving magazine.it is rather small bussiness oriented only on ex-yougoslavia region, some 10000 copies, published quaterly. infact my second bussines, because im running dive center in area.
so, what we do in magazine is that in each issue (10 so far) we publish portfolio of more less famous uw photogs worldwide, consisting of 5 images chosen by author, one more image of author himself, and textual part usually written by author, (or by me in some cases).
we do it on "non payment" basics, so we do not compensate authors with any financial arrangement. of course, most important is that we do have permit of each author, and infact me personally contact with each, discussing about images, choosing them etc. so, no any copyright violation whatsoever.
so i would like to hear opinions of photogs about my philosophy of this arrangements, where we as the publishers clearly benefit with attractive material to publish, but also think that author also benefits with promotion and "penetration" to our, though small, part of worlds market. ( i found here on forum clear statements that only benefit for some photogs is the benefit in the bank account, and i must say i agree with that policy)
but, in this case, what do you say, is it "fair game"? do both sides benefit equally? thanks in advance for opinions

#2 dragan



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 41 posts

Posted 26 December 2012 - 12:40 AM

Maybe you could send a copy of your mag to every wetpixel member? That would be very good promotion.

#3 Aquapaul


    Eagle Ray

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ludington, Michigan
  • Interests:Photography above and below the waves.

Posted 26 December 2012 - 05:44 AM

Sounds like something for nothing to me..
Paul Chase

----}<))))"> ----------}<))))'>

#4 decosnapper


    Manta Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 446 posts

Posted 26 December 2012 - 10:10 AM

For the very few 'promotion' type freebies I have allowed to be used, I think precisely zero additional income can be attributed to the decision to give work away in this manner.

Its an activity that strokes the ego of the photographer. The higher profile the magazine, the more the ego is stroked...but never beyond that. In my experience at least. My ego likes a positive bank balance.
Simon Brown


#5 JackConnick



  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Interests:Sailing, diving, women, cats

Posted 26 December 2012 - 10:32 AM

I think this is an editorial use that promotes the photographer - not so much the shot. If done with permission, it's a nice bit of free advertising. It's up to the individuals whether it's of value.


Jack Connick
Optical Ocean Sales.com

Nauticam, Subal, Sea & Sea, Olympus, Seacam, Gates, Ikelite, Zen, Fix, 10Bar, Kraken, Light & Motion, iTorch/I-DAS & Fantasea Line
Cameras, Housings, Strobes, Arms, Trays & Accessories. System Packages. Photo Expeditions.

Blog & Gallery: Optical Ocean Sales Blog - Flickr Galleries: Optical Ocean on Flickr

#6 newmanl


    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Location:Port Coquitlam, BC

Posted 26 December 2012 - 12:49 PM

I haven't seen the magazine, but if you are selling advertising space, then I'd agree - it is a case of something for nothing. Unless you're producing the magazine "out of pocket", you're not on a level playing field with the folks that are supplying the content. I'd argue, if you are selling ad space, then you should be paying for content. Otherwise, you're taking income from the people you rely on to be able to produce something advertisers want to spend their money on.

I also get the fact that a lot aspiring photographers want/like to see their work in-print, and there will always be some willing to take "exposure" over cash. I guess in the end, Jack is right - individuals can decide for themselves what's fair trade for their work.


#7 gorantrener



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 January 2013 - 12:13 PM

thanks every1 for the feedback. i appreciate it, and it certainly helped to clear some points. (my points of view)
hope we can conclude it with Jack saying "individuals can decide for themselves whats fair trade"

#8 JimSwims


    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 697 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mornington Peninsula, Australia.

Posted 13 January 2013 - 02:14 AM

So would this be the publication in question?- http://www.scubalife.hr/index.php

I've seen smaller publications make the exchange between contributor and publisher go beyond just attribution, even if it was only
a modest payment. Do contributors that write articles receive more of an exchange than their name as the author? If so then why not
an image contributor? Images in a publication, unless of course bad, can only enhance a publication and are equally as important
as the written word. It is after all a visual medium.

The publication does seem to have advertising and product/service reviews. So would be generating some income. My personal view
is I'd never contribute for free to an endeavour that creates revenue, Unless it was a strictly Not For Profit organization and working
towards something I personally valued.


Underwater Images   My portfolio on Redbubble   Topside Nature Images

In between housings. Nikon 60mm, 105mm, 10-24mm, 18-55mm, Tokina 10-17mm, Kenko 1.4 TC, SubSee +5 & +10 magnifiers & Inon Z240 strobes.

#9 gorantrener



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 January 2013 - 03:57 AM

yep, that is the magazine. and yep, we generate some income. (allthough peanuts compared to western publishers, but thats not the issue here)
i am pro diver (not pro photographer) and also running the magazine. So not strictly publisher in bussiness sense from my point. With that i wanted to say
that im in favour of divers-photographers, and care about their opinion. That is the reason i raised the question, and the answers certainly helped me to
clear things, and change the approach. therefore, all the views stated here are very appreaciated. Thanks guys