SooNews.ca Flickr Group

This week's selections are up!

Kenneth Armstrong wrote:Actually I thought I'd start charging you for advertising

I have a story to let you in on about that... remind me at the bean.

I won't mention any names in case they don't want it to be known but at least one person has been contacted to provide photos based on a business seeing their pictures on SooNews.ca's Reader Photos of the Week.

So this is really doing what I hoped, giving more exposure to Sault photographers. I know a lot of us are in a slump for the winter months, but I thought this might encourage a few more people to submit.

Thanks for helping to make this successful, it wouldn't be without your submissions.

Kenneth Armstrong wrote:I won't mention any names in case they don't want it to be known but at least one person has been contacted to provide photos based on a business seeing their pictures on SooNews.ca's Reader Photos of the Week.

So this is really doing what I hoped, giving more exposure to Sault photographers. I know a lot of us are in a slump for the winter months, but I thought this might encourage a few more people to submit.

Thanks for helping to make this successful, it wouldn't be without your submissions.

To whom ever this is, cool stuff but don't let the business take advantage of you and your work. Make sure to price your shots properly and work out an ideal use/copyright situation for the both of you. Your images are worth money and remember this -- anyone who will say "we can't pay you but we'll give you a credit" is using you and your work, if they like your work enough to use it they like it enough to afford what you're worth.

I just don't like seeing us getting taken advantage of is all.

Oh I agree entirely.

Does Soonet pay the photographer if you use the image to illustrate a story?

"All photos link back to your photo on Flickr and everyone will get credit on www.SooNews.ca for their picture. We may also use your photo to illustrate a story."

I can't think of an instance where we have used one to illustrate a story, but at this moment in time no.

There is a double standard, trust me I see it as well. Personally I just got burned by a student newspaper requesting to use one of my photos from the OHL All-Star game. They couldn't pay but like an idiot I gave it to them anyway with a promise that I will be sent a clipping. First they informed me that by "accident" my name didn't get added to the byline and it's been a month and I haven't received anything... and guess who isn't answering emails? Both the student who made the request and the faculty member who is the editor to the paper.

My next email is going to request how big the image was run and what the circulation was so I can send them a bill as they didn't see fit to live up to their end of the deal.

Definitely a double standard if images are going to be used.

I realize your positive intentions Ken. But this is a prime example of why the photography industry is suffering. Companies now use unpaid non-professionals in place of the previous paid professional to save money. There is even a recognized term for such practices... "crowd sourcing". Unfortunately this may eventually replace us Ken.

Here's a link to a short article about this written by Harry Nowell.
http://www.harrynowell.com/newsletter/Value_of_Photography_article.htm

crowellphotographs wrote:Definitely a double standard if images are going to be used.

I realize your positive intentions Ken. But this is a prime example of why the photography industry is suffering. Companies now use unpaid non-professionals in place of the previous paid professional to save money. There is even a recognized term for such practices... "crowd sourcing". Unfortunately this may eventually replace us Ken.

Here's a link to a short article about this written by Harry Nowell.
http://www.harrynowell.com/newsletter/Value_of_Photography_article.htm

Good article there. Quick read and gets to the point.

I just had a similar situation. I received flickr mail from an Emma J Williams stating that one of my shots (this one: http://flickr.com/photos/coneil/1343919565/ of Old City Hall in Toronto) was short listed to appear in the Schmap Guide and I had to follow a link to say if I wanted it submitted or not. It was then followed by the canned "we aren't going to pay you but you'll get credit line":

While we offer no payment for publication, many photographers are pleased to submit their photos, as Schmap Guides give their work recognition and wide exposure, and are free of charge to readers. Photos are published at a maximum width of 150 pixels, are clearly attributed, and link to high-resolution originals at Flickr.

From just checking the site the shots are small and appear when you hover over an area on a map (almost google map like). The first time I tried to go and hover over the picture to see if it links back ads replaced that section. I had to go about it a couple of different ways to finally be able to click on the picture -- this isn't the point though -- who do you think looks at this guide then says "Hey I'm going to click on this picture and see where it takes me, whoa look at this I'm at some picture page, hey maybe I'll contact this guy and buy all his pictures" It doesn't happen. They're making money running ads from the guide and getting to use pictures for free from any number of people who think it's a benefit to them or are just happy to say "hey look my picture is here". Does 150px really do your or anyone else's picture justice?

I admit I used to be in the "hey it's exposure for me" area but I've cut that down now as I am trying to make an income off of my photography. We spend time learning the equipment, learning how to properly take shots, purchasing equipment, time to take the shot, develop the shot etc etc. All this time costs money. Unfortunately there are a lot of people out there now that do not realize this and will let their shots be used for nothing.

This is the Flickr site of the person who sent me the email: http://flickr.com/photos/schmap/542085710/ It's the only shot on the entire site and as you can see people are lining up to say "super cool for choosing me, YAY!". Basically they are casting a net to anyone who has a shot that they want, they probably sent out hundreds of emails to Toronto Old City Hall picture people and then they'll see who says they can use their picture and choose which ever one they want from there. It's just a game they are playing and clearly winning at.

We are living in the age of McPhoto (in many more ways than one).

I had somewhat the same experiance last fall. A design company contacted me through Flickr and asked if they could use some of my pictures for the AUC Viewbook. At the time I was so new to photography, and just so excited to be choosen, I said yes. I don't know that I'd do the same again without a fee. (I can admit though I still get excited when I think about it! lol.) There are just so many learning curves out there in the photography world. Oh where to begin!!

I'll post this here in case anyone missed it in the "meet-up" thread. Warning, some coarse language.

https://www.youtube.com./watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE

I'd seen that once before. Great message within that mine field of dirty words. Hilarious!
If i'm not mistaken, he brings up another valid point about the other villain of the professional. The under-cutter. OUCH!

Again, understanding Ken's honorable intentions. The reality is that the winners for each week become a free weekly article. I'm sure it receives a lot of hits and has boosted the traffic to the site. (and so it should, great pics) The flip side is that they seem to recognize the value of the photographs enough to post them, yet not enough to pay.
There are many strategies to recruit "croud sourced" images, but they are all the same in the end. Someone makes money but it isn't the guy/gal that did the footwork.
Step by step, the young 13 year old who goes out every chance he/she gets with big dreams of photographing for a living is getting further and further away from their goal, no matter how good they get. Obviously this is not only the fault of Soonews. But what really is the difference between this and any other photo contest warned about in other posts. I guess you retain ownership, but the publication is also given rights to use the image for free.

viewsthroughmylens wrote:I had somewhat the same experiance last fall. A design company contacted me through Flickr and asked if they could use some of my pictures for the AUC Viewbook. At the time I was so new to photography, and just so excited to be choosen, I said yes. I don't know that I'd do the same again without a fee. (I can admit though I still get excited when I think about it! lol.) There are just so many learning curves out there in the photography world. Oh where to begin!!

I did this before I was even in photography and apart of student council. The people who were making the calendars/planners council handed out asked for pics for the years book from around the school as they had none so we went around with a P/S and got what we could assuming we were providing pics for that years book. Up to two years later those pictures were still being reused but I had no ground to stand on as I already gave them away.

I like to believe I'm wiser now.

I can get into the pricing argument even more with other areas in specific photography concentrations but I won't bore everyone with that discussion here.

Again, I don't disagree at all. The problem is so much bigger than SooNews, though. When CNN has their "iReporters" who offer stories and video to a gigantic corporation, when the best photos I saw of the Queen Street West Toronto fire were lifted from Flickr you can see how big the problem is.

Reality is this feature may not last because of lack of participation. Often we have had to supplement my own photos just to flesh it out, which was not my original intention.

If it goes away it doesn't put a dent in the problem.

I wouldn't give up just yet because of lack of participation....it is winter after all!

There's more to it, vtml. I'll send you a personal message.

After a 1-week hiatus here is this week's selections. Thanks for looking and posting.


Link

Good choices again, Ken. Seems you can count on Ann for interesting shots, and I noticed that Brian has posted some really nice photos on his Flickr site. Your photo of the Memorial Tower is almost the same as the one I took on opening night at the Steelback. I really like how they've lit it with the spotlights and its great that they turn on the red lights on top every night.

I'd love to participate but my photos are mostly of my daughter lately. Its hard for me to get out and get some good pictures unless its summer. But I have every intention of doing it.

I agree that having the beacon on the tower turned on every night is great. I love coming across the bridge and seeing it at night.

Any time you're ready, ls.

I havn't heard anything good about flickr... and these comments arn't selling it for me. I have heard of quite a few people who have had their images stolen from there...

Nebey wrote:I havn't heard anything good about flickr... and these comments arn't selling it for me. I have heard of quite a few people who have had their images stolen from there...

It's a great tool for networking, getting your shots out in a common place, exposure etc. But like all things on the internet people abuse it and will use it for their own purposes. If you post a picture on flickr, on here, on another forum, on your own site or anywhere else online it can and may be taken by anyone for use anywhere else. That's just the way it is. The main kick against flickr is that people know that it's all pictures and can search through them and find what they want etc but the good thing is if you're good enough and have a following on flickr there's a better chance one of your friends/contacts/fans on flickr will notice the misuse of your image and contact you or the offending party.

I use flickr post to my photos, yes, but I use the website primarily for networking. I've met many great photographers through flickr. Flickr is my primary source for inspiration these days. 99% of the photographs uploaded to flickr are crap but there are some exceptional artists amid all the chaos. I also have a few obscure cameras - an Arax CM/MLU SE, a Meopta Flexaret VII, a ZeroImage 135, etc. It's hard to find other people who use these cameras but flickr is so large and so popular that there is always bound to be a small community within it dedicated to almost any uncommon camera.

I also use it as a research tool especially when buying a lens. In the fall, I was struggling to decide whether to get a Leica 35mm Summicron-ASPH or a Zeiss 35mm Biogon ZM. Using the search engine on flickr, I found close to 1400 photographs that I could look at to help me make a decision... and yes, I looked at all of them.

I have been using Deviant Art for my photos... its one of those, I used it because my friends all used it. I like it there, I have a fairly established page there...
www.deviantart.com.
If your interested in checking out the site. I do like the whole online community idea, I like the one there, I may check out flickr too, make sure I put a watermark on all my photos I guess.