Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ohkphoto" data-source="post: 240480" data-attributes="member: 1573">Like Jack said, only you can decide if it feels right.&nbsp; I'll just give you my thoughts:1.&nbsp;&nbsp; This is what Getty counts on . . . an &quot;invitation&quot; from a big name to make the photographer feel &quot;special&quot; . .&nbsp; .2.&nbsp;&nbsp; Unless I can earn thousands through Getty (which is not the case), I see no value.&nbsp; They're like this big grinder that just gobbles up photos for the sake of having a vast assortment&nbsp; for clients to select through and give the photographer pittance.&nbsp; And their reputation is declining so there's little value to saying &quot;My work was picked up by Getty&quot; . . . EVERYBODY's work is picked up by Getty . . . they deal in quantity.&nbsp;&nbsp; I choose not to support such an enterprise.3.&nbsp;&nbsp; Once you license your photos through Getty, if after some time they don't sell, Getty puts it in the &quot;free pool&quot; and you get nothing.&nbsp; Talk about devaluing your work!4.&nbsp; I work very hard at my photography and don't want my work in some pool with millions of others.&nbsp; Because of that I do NOT post to Flickr (Yahoo is connected to Flickr . . . I think they own it (???)&nbsp; . . . big photo monopoly Yahoo/Flickr/Getty, and remember that it was the CEO of Yahoo who said that there's no such thing as a &quot;professional photographer.&quot;) . . . plus outright theft.5.&nbsp; If you do go that route, you need to read that license very carefully.&nbsp; They &quot;share&quot; your copyright . . . this is why you see &quot;their&quot; images copyright&nbsp; &quot;Getty/photographer name&quot; . . . and notice whose name is first.&nbsp; How much &quot;future Licensing rights are you giving up?&nbsp; e.g.&nbsp; if a local magazine wants to license your photo (that is now licensed through Getty) to use in a promotional ad, what kind of hoops do you have to jump through with them to get that to happen?&nbsp; They have the big bucks to hire copyright attorneys . . . remember that.6.&nbsp; To me, any kind of deal that is a &quot;shared&quot; copyright is a red flag.&nbsp; It's MY photo, I did the work, it's my vision.&nbsp; Getty's name does not deserve to be on it.So, that's my opinion . . . and why I think Getty is still the devil.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ohkphoto, post: 240480, member: 1573"] Like Jack said, only you can decide if it feels right. I'll just give you my thoughts: 1. This is what Getty counts on . . . an "invitation" from a big name to make the photographer feel "special" . . . 2. Unless I can earn thousands through Getty (which is not the case), I see no value. They're like this big grinder that just gobbles up photos for the sake of having a vast assortment for clients to select through and give the photographer pittance. And their reputation is declining so there's little value to saying "My work was picked up by Getty" . . . EVERYBODY's work is picked up by Getty . . . they deal in quantity. I choose not to support such an enterprise. 3. Once you license your photos through Getty, if after some time they don't sell, Getty puts it in the "free pool" and you get nothing. Talk about devaluing your work! 4. I work very hard at my photography and don't want my work in some pool with millions of others. Because of that I do NOT post to Flickr (Yahoo is connected to Flickr . . . I think they own it (???) . . . big photo monopoly Yahoo/Flickr/Getty, and remember that it was the CEO of Yahoo who said that there's no such thing as a "professional photographer.") . . . plus outright theft. 5. If you do go that route, you need to read that license very carefully. They "share" your copyright . . . this is why you see "their" images copyright "Getty/photographer name" . . . and notice whose name is first. How much "future Licensing rights are you giving up? e.g. if a local magazine wants to license your photo (that is now licensed through Getty) to use in a promotional ad, what kind of hoops do you have to jump through with them to get that to happen? They have the big bucks to hire copyright attorneys . . . remember that. 6. To me, any kind of deal that is a "shared" copyright is a red flag. It's MY photo, I did the work, it's my vision. Getty's name does not deserve to be on it. So, that's my opinion . . . and why I think Getty is still the devil. [/QUOTE]

Verification