Last night was a historic event for two reasons: 1) It was President Bush's last State of the Union, 2) the announcement of an endorsement by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) of Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) all but trumped the President's speech.
Here is a look at how the photographers covered the event (including me), as well as some insights into the work environment and challenges we all face.
After the jump is a transcript of the entire entry, including a correction on Tim Sloan's name - Sorry Tim!
(Full post after the Jump)
TRANSCRIPT: We’re here at the Capitol in Washington DC covering the presidents historic last State of the Union address before a new administration comes in. lets go inside and see what’s going on with the different photographers covering the different angles of the State of the Union address. So when covering the state of the union there are various positions that a photographer will be assigned.
One of the primary positions is the head on position; in addition there is a left position and a right position on either side of the chamber. There are also corner positions and a rear position known as the reversal position. Now in addition one of the very unique positions that’s been added in oh the last 5 or 10 years is the floor pool position. Today’s pool position was covered by Tim Sloan from AFP. Tim was responsible for covering for all of the photographers with just one camera on the floor along with the President's photographer.
Covering the state of the union is not easy, its crowded and you really have to be on your game. You have to be able to make pictures in a really challenging environment. Lets now talk to a few folks shooting and editing today’s assignment, the presidents last state of the union address.
So David(www.DavidBurnett.com, or Contact Press Images) before we talk about your coverage of the state of the union tonight, tell me about the camera you have here.
This is a mentor reflex, which is a 4x5 reflex camera. Which means like a canon or Nikon its got a mirror inside of it, in this case a really big mirror. And the lens you focus here, I normally take the top off and look down into it and focus on the ground glass. The nice thing about it is that once you’ve got a frame that you like you can just shoot it. And it gives you a chance to shoot a little more mobile then with some large format cameras and the 4x5 negative definitely gives you a different look then what you get with digital.
Great, so how long have you used this camera? Is this the first state of the union that you’ve used it on? or have you done others with this?
This camera I’ve only had less then a year and I’ve only shot one job with it last march, I did a portrait, it was beautiful and I thought I would try and be gentle with it and take it out into the field, if you can really call this going out into the field. And its really interesting because you know, there are a lot of different ways to attack this thing, I mean I have been shooting a lot with speed graphics and they’re great for what they do but they’re a little slow, when you’re focusing on the ground glass they’re a little slow to load and be able to fire quickly and this one you can pretty much just see it then shoot it.
So were you mobile tonight or did you have a fixed position?
No I was in a fixed position tonight up at 4A3 I think, up in gallery 3, and that’s really how they do it I think, sprinkle us in amongst the real people. And you know it was good, this is about my 12th or 14th state of the union, I’m not sure exactly how many, but I did do one for Lyndon Johnson, I probably did one with Nixon but I don’t remember it, pretty sure I did Ford, and then everybody since then I’ve done at least one.
So in addition to that I see you’ve got a canon over your shoulder, were you shooting digitally to kind of augment that or just to get a different look and feel?
Well there are some things that you actually just want to try and get a shot, and that’s where the digital comes in really handy. You can actually have some insurance that you’ll get a picture. This is great when it works but the percentage of success is pretty low. So I shot 10 frames tonight, if I have 1 or 2 that are interesting, I’d consider that a big deal.
Great, so were you looking for an overall with that or were you wide or a tight thing for you? Yeah, it is a 210mm lens, which on a 4x5 is about the equivalent of a 60mm maybe a 65mm so you’re shooting an overall. But what I was trying to do was use slow shutter speeds, trying to get something with the motion of the congress when they would either applaud or stand up or sit down, to get a little movement in the picture. And you know, it’s a crapshoot; I won’t have any idea if any of this is any good until I look at the film tomorrow.
Well thanks very much David, I appreciate your time. Be careful with that camera.
Well you know this is why we have the non-digital age, to remember that sometimes its good to sweat. Amen David, thanks, I appreciate it.
So Liz (www.lizlynch.com), tell me what position you’re in tonight.
I’m in the corner position of the gallery on the senate side all the way in the back.
So Liz, what are you hoping to get tonight from your position?
Well we’re doing a photo spread, we do one every year on the state of the union, and I’m hoping to get a variety of shots, the president walking in, the various candidates that are there and everything else that’s going on.
And how long have you been covering the state of the union?
Probably for about 10 years.
And you’re goal tonight is to be making pictures that tell what story?
Well the story that s going on in the hall tonight, whatever that is, I mean it’s a presidential election year, so a lot of it I imagine will be the guests that are there, its always fun to see the democrats sitting and the republicans standing, and all that good stuff. So that’s pretty much the story I’ll be looking to tell.
Thanks very much Liz, I appreciate it.
So we’re talking to Jim Lo Scalzo about his coverage of the State of the Union. You’ve recently come out with a book called “Evidence of My Existence”, can you tell me a little bit about how the book is doing and how it feels now being a published author.
Oh you know, the books doing great, selling well, I’m glad to get it out there and have people read my story.
I mean I think it’s a remarkable story, I bought it and I’ve had a chance to read it. And it’s moving along with the Youtube video that you put out kind of preempting that. I’m going to encourage people to go check that out. We’ve put it on the blog already, I’m going to go ahead and do that some more for you. So tell me what position were you in tonight covering the state of the union?
I was front to the right, it was nice, it was kind of center and you could frame everything pretty well.
It doesn’t really matter whether you are a canon or Nikon shooter, were you primarily looking for wides or tights or what was your objective?
This is the first time I’ve left all the gimmicks at home for state of the union no squishy; you know the lens baby, no shift/tilt, no medium format. I just went with the long lens and primarily focused not on Bush but on Hilary, Barack, and Senator Kennedy.
Yeah, I noticed senator Kennedy and Barack were seated together which was a little out of protocol because Barack had come forward from his seat, he’s normally positioned a few further back from a seniority standpoint. But obviously the announcement with Senator Kennedy and Barack today is probably the reason why. So tell me what were you looking for?
What was the picture you were trying to get? If you had an image in your head, like a picture of some amazing, did you have anything in your head about it?
Oh sure there’s always a cerebral slideshow that I never achieve so I’m generally disappointed, I was trying to get any kind of interaction between Senator Clinton, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Obama and there really wasn’t very much. As well as President Bush and speaker Pelosi because there is a lot going on this week with the tax credit that they are trying to accomplish.
So how many state of the unions have you covered Jim? Is this your first or your fifth? Oh that’s a good question. I know its not your first so let me rephrase that.
Its defiantly not my first, I think its probably my 4th with President Bush, which is why I left all the gimmicks at home because I’ve tried them previously on him, and I figured we’d work for something different this year. Well great, thanks very much for your time Jim, I appreciate it.
So we’re here with H. Darr Beiser from USA today, Darr, tell me what position are you in tonight?
I will be in the House Press Gallery overlooking the House Chamber, over the President's shoulder actually facing the Senators and Congressmen.
So you have what we would refer to in common parts as a reversal.
That’s right a reverse angle.
And how long have you been doing this?
I’ve done the reverse angle a couple times, maybe 3, I’ve done the front on a couple times, but probably 5 times over the 25 years I’ve been in Washington.
So what are you hoping to get tonight? What is the optimal picture for you?
The big thing about my position is the president entering the chamber and greeting all of the senators and congressmen and that’s probably the most important thing for me.
So that s your goal tonight is getting that kind of arrival/entrance shot.
Yeah and in this instance maybe even a departure is important too because its his last state of the union, Thanks very much Dar, I appreciate your time.
So we’re here with Dennis Brack. Dennis is a Black Star photographer also, I pale in comparison to Dennis but I want to get a few words of wisdom about what he was looking for tonight and how many state of the unions you’ve covered. So tell me, how many have you covered and what were you looking for?
Well, I’ve covered about 40 of them; tonight it just depends on the client. If I was working for time I’d be looking for something different, but tonight I was working for Bloomberg so I had to get a picture that meant something out to the wires. I got it out, I was in the back position because I wanted to get the reaction, I wanted to be on the floor all the time when the senators were there before the president came in, in hopes that Hillary and Obama would get together and they did to a certain extent. There will be a lot of talk in the papers tomorrow, did Obama turn away from Hilary, and that was probably the picture of the night that you’ll see in the papers. Of course the overall pictures of the President giving the speech, shaking hands with the speaker, the first lady, the other senators reacting or not reacting. So I got all those and transmitted it and I hope worked out. Thanks very much Dennis, I appreciate your time.
So we’re here with Matt Cavanaugh editing his EPA pictures. Matt, tell me what you were looking for in your edit tonight. Well the first picture out is just a picture of Bush at the podium with Pelosi and Cheney behind him, then you get a couple out real quick and you look at them for, tonight the moment everyone was looking for was an interaction between Senator Clinton, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Obama because Senator Kennedy endorsed Senator Obama earlier today and that’s kind of a much bigger story in a way then the state of the union and it Bush’s final state of the union and its not that no one cares but its less of a story then the current presidential election. So we were looking for a picture of Kennedy and Obama and we did get a few which was of the 3 of them.
Great, so Matt, how many state of the unions have you worked? I’ve seen you side-by-side shooting state of the unions in the past, is this your first, second, third editing? Or what’s kind of your mix as far as shooting and editing are concerned?
It’s the first time I’ve edited and I’ve shot 3 of them up until now, last year I was in the center position and I kind of volunteered to edit this year because last year I got to do the primo spot so this year I was back here behind the scenes and its fun, you get to watch it on the monitor and listen, you’re kind of looking for different moments and hoping that they’re on that card you get back from the other photographers.
Thanks very much Matt, I appreciate your time.
So that about wraps it up, hopefully you’ve had a chance to garner some insights into the challenges that photographers face in covering the state of the union.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
I can't imagine that PDN, and the NGS would allow a contest that includes a blatant rights grab, but our friends over at PhotoAttorney brought to our attention this egregious contest requirement for PDN's The Great OutdoorsRights Grab Photo Contest:
Entries may be published by Sponsors and/or their designees, licensees or affiliates (the "Authorized Parties") in magazines, on websites, or in any other medium, at Authorized Parties' discretion. By participating, all entrants grant a license in the Entries to the Authorized Parties, and acknowledge that any Authorized Party may use the entries and a name credit in any media now or hereafter known, without restriction, including commercially using the entries to the fullest extent possible worldwide in perpetuity. Authorized Parties will not be required to pay any additional consideration or seek any additional approval in connection with such use.
Come on folks, what gives? PDN is such a supporter of photographers rights, and well, NGS, while certainly not interested in compensating photographers for re-use (a la Fred Ward v. NGS) aleast celebrates photography in their publications, so, I ask again - WHAT GIVES?
(Continued after the Jump)
I can only imagine that that both of them hired some contest competition company to manage/run their contest, and no one bothered (except Carolyn!) to read the small print.
Let's let PDN have a moment to re-do their rules to be more friendly. Certainly Microsoft did when called on the carpet (5/9/0 7 Microsoft's Oversight Correction), and others have returned to a position of respect for photographers rights.
So, let's see it PDN/NGS - fix the rules, and tell us how this happened in the first place. We have placed our trust in you in the past, please make this right.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Here in LA, it's a packed house - standing room only (until more chairs were brought in!) for ASMP's Strictly Business 2 seminar. Here's a short piece interviewing several photographers about their thoughts on SB2's Los Angeles stop:
(Continued, after the Jump)
Those interviewed were: Jeffery Salter -- http://www.JefferySalter.com from Miami, FL Oscar Williams -- http://www.Oscar Williams.com, from San Antonio, TX Daniel Sofer -- http://www.hermosawavephotography.com from Hermosa Beach, CA Jamie Rector -- http://www.JamieRector.com, from Mira Loma, CA Alicia Eschwege -- http://www.AliVega.com, from San Diego, CA
All were attendees, and share their thoughts and experiences about the seminar.
Future dates are: -- Atlanta: February 22-24 -- Philadephia: March 7-9 -- Chicago: April 11-13 Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
One of the things that happens often, is friends and colleagues ask what equipment we use, how we pack it, travel with it, and so forth. Further, with interns coming and going (40+, to date), it was a frequent occurrence that I was training and explaining to them what we use, and how we use it. So, during what was our slow period around the holidays, we ramped up and produced a series of videos. All together, they total 1 hour, 49 minutes, and took a month to produce, from production meetings to finishing editing - much more than I had expected to commit, but none-the-less it was a worthwhile endeavor. I've been collecting video for some time, from shoots and setup images, and so I've combined related video from those to an explaination of each case. I was inspired by Chase Jarvis' similar series, and am pleased with my results.
Below is the introduction, and I have transcribed every segment, and, on AssignmentConstruct, there are links to every piece of equipment we could find on either Adorama, Amazon, or, B&H, in case you're looking for that tool yourself. Below the video is a link to each of the segments on AssignmentConstruct. Let me know what you think!
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Crazy how the New York Times can report one thing, and Jonathan Klein, CEO of Getty Images (NYSE: GYI) can be saying something else.
Canon Professional Services (CPS) did an interview - Vision, passion and Bruce Springsteen - with Mr. Klein, and here are a few insights from that interview, apparently done in 2004.
Q: ....we often read that you have a vision for the company - what is that vision? A: Fron the outset, we had a very unusual approach in that we wanted to build a business over the very long term. There were never any plans to buy and sell or to get out of the business when a certain profit had been made...I was very lucky to find the imagery business as it has become a passion of mine and I could not imaging working in a different area or industry.
What I'd love to know is if this passion came during his time as an investment banker when he was playing around with a prosumer camera and, after a few friends said "hey, you should be a photographer..." (as so many friends of bankers, doctors, and lawyers with their weekend toys - D3/1Ds Mark III etc - say during idle dinner party conversation) and JDK decided he would just roll up the industry?
(Continued after the Jump)
Further, where's that commitment, long term? Seems a move to NYC, coupled with the NYT article suggest that maybe there's love lost, the honeymoon's over, and that ugly, no makeup face of an agency with slashed prices and a plummeting valuation he's waking up to every morning just has gotten the better of him, and maybe, just maybe, he wants to return to being a weekend photographer and uploading to iStockphoto ("...the images have just entered my DNA...") under an assumed name just so he can see his photos in print?
Q: ...what do you see the benefits of being part of the Getty stable? A: Getty Images will only be successful in the long run with mutually productive and positive relationships with photographers..."
See that, fellow photographers - you're just one of JDK's "ponies" in his stable, according to Canon. And as to Klein's sentiments? Well, with the grousing about the lack of updated gear worldwide, positive is not a word I would ascribe to GYI's relationship with photographers - theirs or any other. This leads me to the conclusion that, in part, he's right - "Getty Images will only be successful in the long run with mutually productive and positive relationships with photographers", ipso facto, Getty Images is not successful, and is being sold to a private equity fund, and the NYT suggests it may be KKR, known to collect all the cash in a business and sell off the assets, to wit:
KKR would often ensure that the target company's management retained an equity interest to create a personal financial incentive for them to approve of the takeover and work diligently towards the success of the investment.
So perhaps JDK, et al, will get that equity, and be a diligent worker for whichever private equity group comes in.
On Wall Street, buyout professionals are seen as the smart money. But their new shareholders are starting to look like the dumb money. The gilded realm of private equity — in which moguls use private money to buy stockholder-owned companies — has turned into dross for everyday investors this year...Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Company, which invented the modern buyout industry, is now struggling to get its own I.P.O. off the ground.
... when Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. partner Perry Golkin delivered the Institute of Law and Economics’ annual "Law and Entrepreneurship Lecture" in Philadelphia recently, he only described KKR investments that lost money...Although Golkin didn’t name the companies involved, the facts he presented fit KKR’s purchase of the Regal Theater Chain, in which KKR is said to have lost its entire $500 million-plus investment, and its Alea Group Holdings venture which lately has cost KKR additional capital rather than producing profits. Indeed, last August the New York Times reported that today KKR is "just one of dozens of buyout firms," and not even one of the most successful."
We have the information that should enable us to make a good decision...That, at least, is the theory. However, Golkin noted, as Warren Buffet once said, "a good management team will always lose the battle with a bad business."
The piece goes on to cite Golkin:
According to Golkin, the theater companies explained this by saying: "We overbuilt after we bought. Regal built in AMC’s territory and AMC built in Sony’s territory. We cannibalized each other. It was too easy to build...But all that, he added, "misses the most important point. What the investment firms had failed to recognize was simply that movie theaters are not a good business. A theater is a commodity.
Sound familiar? Getty Images overbought. JDK famously said "If someone’s going to cannibalize your business, better it be one of your other businesses” as we reported on (Getty's Self-Immolation, 9/12/07). Here too, what an investment firm like KKR, or any firm for that matter, fails to realize is that a stock photo agency, just like the movie theater industry, is a whimsical industry, with ups and downs that don't suit bankers' expectation of easy money and a clear path to profit.
But wait, we're a little off track - back to CPS' interview with JDK:
Q: What impact, if any, has digital photography had on your business? A: ...the development of digital cameras created a seismic change...
First, why the "if any" qualifier? Who asked these questions - someone who still shoots only film? And as to "seismic change", yes, and your validation/acquisition of the cannibalizing business that is iStockphoto, coupled with $49 images, and so forth are not just GYI-created aftershocks, but their own earthquakes in and of themselves.
Good lock Goldman Sachs, you've got an uphill battle here, with more potholes than an earth mover can fill. And, when you reach the top, it's only downhill from there, and I don't mean that in a good way. Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Often, companies that are worthwhile are fought over, or public announcements of plans to purchase by one company are made by another. It's not that often that someone says "hey, I think I'll sell my company, even though there aren't any buyers that have spoken up..."
"A sale is not assured, because the tightening of the high-yield debt markets has cut off private equity firms from the lifeblood of their business, making it harder to finance deals."
Which means that when someone offers up $1B, which would be a 2/3 valuation, in the end, that'll mean that the valuation is more along the lines of 2/3 of Friday's stock close, or about $14 a share, assuming the $1.5B valuation was calculated on that closing price. Nice price. Still too much for server rack after server rack of photos,$49 photos,$1 photos, ahem... penny-photos.
“Getty Images continues to be a company in transition, adjusting from being the leading player in an oligopolistic market to being one of many players in a highly competitive market,” Barbara Coffey, a research analyst with Kaufman Brothers, wrote in a research note earlier this month.
I guess "a company in transition" is the latest buzz-phrase for failing companies and business models. The stock already tanked below $22, when Coffey had as her target price $24. Bad call there, and why don't you just call a spade a spade and say, in the words of Gordon Gecko, "this is just another dog with fleas..."
"Still, some analysts worry that other, cheaper rivals could continue undercutting the company’s prices."
No, really? C'mon! Say it ain't so!
I suppose that this will give JDK his easy exit, either with a sale, or the reason he exited being that it didn't sell. Further, this will give Getty/Klein/et al reason to demure and otherwise be tight-lipped during their Q4 call at the end of this month. I suspect we'll hear a lot of "well, in light of our planned sale...", or some other diversionary tactic to distract everyone from the reality that it will be a worse Q4 than even their lowered expectations predicted.
Getty's failed to live up to the maxim - "buy low, sell high". Unless you have some sub-$20/share options, that is, and even then, your time is short to get out before you go underwater. -------- Note: I have not ever, do not now, and have no plans to hold GYI.
(Comments, if any, after the Jump)
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
As I was waiting for video files to render for an upcoming project, I took a few processor cycles to browse my site logs to see where traffic for the blog was coming from yesterday, and there was an uptick coming from Paul Melcher's blog, so I sauntered over to see what he'd written. Paging down aways, I did a double-take as I read what must have been sheer lunacy. A quick search and click to Daryl Lang's story on PDN - Magnum Photos Teams With OnRequest For Commercial Work (1/17/07) validated my concerns, but did not sit well with me.
Now, it is rumored that more than one Magnum photographer has on occasion been known to partake in the weed that dare not speak its name. As most drug counselors will ask you when you come in for rehab, "does your using create problems in your life in regards to work, family or friends?" It seems to me some members of this stately cooperative have been partaking enough to impair their work judgment and should reevaluate their recreational activities for the longevity of their organization. Their common sense seems to now be off the deep end, with the legendary Magnum Photos making a deal with bad business model purveyor (remember CustomStock?) David Norris.
(Continued after the Jump)
Note to Norris - nice coup, but when this falls apart, as it no doubt will, this should send you packing to some other industry, ripe for the brand of business model you propose. I suspect this will stave off the investors awhile longer before the are clamoring for better quarterly reports with "damn the photographers, profit at any price!"
Note to Magnum - really, lay off whatever has deluded you. Melcher sent you in the right direction. Here's a single link so you can read the rest of what I've written about Norris and OnRequest.
Who's responsible for this debacle at Magnum? I know it can't be Sue Brisk, if for no other reason than she's the editorial director (i.e. not responsible for commercial projects), and I found her to be a reasonable person when I had a few interactions with her during her time when she was at Sipa in NYC. Maybe it was Diane Raimondo, Magnum's Advertising/Corporate Director, who (apparently) spent time working at the United Nations Population Fund, and just might have gotten some of the UN's silly mojo about how businesses should be run? Whomever it was, Managing Director Mark Lubell had to sign off on such a sweeping deal, and he was reported in PDN to have said "OnRequest is really a support system for production," and "They have a first-class production team."
Really? Do you really think that? Did you look under the hood? "first class" is not the phrase I would use, not by a longshot.
Lubell then seems to go further down the rabbit hole, when their press release that went out over Businesswire quoted Lubell:
“We are very excited to be working with a partner that has such a deep passion for quality and respect for artists.”
What alternate universe do you live in where OnRequest has had a track record of respect for artists? What "passion for quality?" Did you not read the ASMP's Analysis of OnRequest Images 'Custom Stock' (October 2004), or their Analyzing the OnRequest assignment contract (December 2005)? Reading those would be simple due diligence, and the insights there, and from PDN (setting aside my blog, if you'd like) would preclude you from suggesting semi-superlatives like "deep passion" when referring to OnRequest.
Back in August of 2006, Mark was quoted as saying ""I think it's fair to say that Magnum was still functioning on a dying business model...". Mark, didn't you look at Norris' own statements about his failed model for CustomStock that were reported here? Are you as suceptible to the dot-com mentality now as you were back around 2001? OnRequest is not Web 2.0, they are, at best, Web 2.NO!
IF you want a first class production team, there's plenty in the NYC area that could support your talented photographers. Outsourcing your commercial production to a company headquartered in Seattle can't be sound thinking.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
In case you missed the announcement back in September, the Los Angeles Strictly Business 2 traveling seminar weekend is just one week away!
It takes place next weekend (Jan 26th-27th), and is a must-attend event. (The activities on the Friday are private consults, and an opening reception.)
Planes, trains, or automobiles - it doesn't matter how you get there, because this is worth traveling for! It is going to be a remarkable weekend that will either get you started right, or bolster your existing business skills.
Here's what I wrote back in September:
(Continued after the Jump)
After over a decade's hiatus, the Strictly Business seminar program has made its return, titled Strictly Business 2. I can look back 10+ years, to when the original series visited my area, when I didn't really have the $200 or so it cost to attend back then. I also didn't have the $150 for an hour with legendary consultant Elyse Weissberg, but I spent it, because I knew, I just knew, it would make a difference. Yet I see that experience - and it was an experience, all weekend long - as one of the cornerstone's of my success that I enjoy now. It was the foundation for the rest of my career, and it got my off on the right path, without a doubt.
As such, I consider it a privilege to have been asked to be one of the presenters, along with Blake Discher, and Leslie Burns-Dell'Acqua. Discher and I, along with current ASMP President Judy Hermann, and immediate past Presidents Clem Spaulding and Susan Carr, all chart a degree of our success to the original program, and others have testimonials worth reading.
It's got a lot of meat for the seasoned pro, however, the beginner will benefit greatly as well. In a way, it's like the Simpsons is funny - youngsters laugh at one level of humor, while adults laugh raucously at the deeper jokes in the program. So too will the seasoned pro take away a great deal of strictly business insights into the weekend.
So, where are we heading to, and where should you be making your travel plans to, if it's not in one of your hometowns?
LOS ANGELES: JANUARY 25–27
ATLANTA: FEBRUARY 22–24
PHILADELPHIA: MARCH 7–9
CHICAGO: APRIL 11–13
So, make those travel plans now. Space is limited, and last time it definately sold out fast.
Here's details from the website:
Take control of your career. Attend the American Society of Media Photographers' weekend conference series Strictly Business 2. Learn to negotiate your prices and contracts. Get answers to your marketing questions. Prepare yourself to build a successful and sustainable business. Don't miss this rare opportunity to gain first-hand experience from the experts.
ASMP’s Strictly Business 2 is a weekend conference that will teach you real-world business skills and help you thrive in our highly competitive industry. SB2 brings you consultations, lectures, video presentations, a keynote address, workshops, hands-on negotiating training, and social gatherings to share and learn from your peers. This weekend will change the way you look at your business — join us.
Who should attend? Are you struggling to put the business pieces together? Are you overwhelmed with the pace of change in the industry? Is your career meeting your creative and financial goals? Attend SB2 and get a road map of answers. Strictly Business 2 is for those starting out in the business and those needing a boost. Have you been working in retail photography and dabbling in commercial? SB2 is for you, too. Are you a student or emerging professional? Treat yourself to an intensive weekend packed with the information you need to build a career as a photographer.
The original Strictly Business series was a transforming event in the careers of many of ASMP's most prominent members. Read their testimonials. Today, Strictly Business 2 can transform your career too.
Traveling to SB2? The extra benefit of SB2 is the community it creates. By staying at the conference hotel, you receive even more opportunities to interact with fellow photographers, the educators and our sponsors. The locations offer ease of travel for those flying or driving. Use the conference hotel and take advantage of incredible ASMP secured rates. And don't forget that two meals a day and two social hours are included in your conference fee!
Click here to register.Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
At 11:16 pm EST on 1/16/07, Photo Business Forum & News' existence was pushed into the world when I shared with my friend and colleague David Hobby (Mr. Strobist) via e-mail:
David --
Ok....
deep breath here....
I've started my blog!
...My concern is that I will not be diligent about daily (or every other day) updates, which it why I was reticent to do a big e-mail/launch. However, with about two weeks under my belt, I feel a little good about it, so what the hell.
So, here goes. We'll see where this takes me, and let me know what you think.
And here we are, exactly 1 year later. We have almost four hundred posts up, and just over 100 in various forms of draft, awaiting the right moment to put up (Jess), Evergreen posts for when I'm traveling, or just a few sentences of an idea that need fleshing out, so, fortunately the concern about not being diligent wasn't a problem in the end.
I recall early on, a commenter posted his concerns that most blogs lasted only four months, and that he hoped mine did, as he appreciated what I was posting. That, however, gave me a goal - I wanted to last longer than four months, and, so, here we are, going strong 4+8 months later. Whew!
How strong? Well, we've grown steadily since David's nice mention on his blog. About 10% each month, until December, where the D3 & 1Ds Mark III blasted our views skywards. In November, we were over 60,000 readers a month, and this doesn't count all you feed-readers, figuring in over 900 feed readers, that's about 90k or so, all told. As of right now, we've had over 850,000 pageviews - not bad for a one-year-old!
How is this the case? Well, it's about and for you, dear readers. The commitment I made was to deliver news and commentary about our business, from the perspective of someone who want's to see it (and you) survive over the long term. On some controversial postings, people questioned what my agenda was, and it's been transparent all along, and is as stated above. Nothing more, nothing less. If you're an entity that's doing harm to the business or the creatives who call themselves professional photographers, expect more critical looks at what you're doing to expose the "make cash now, who cares about them later" mentality.
Thanks for reading, thanks for your private e-mails over the past year, of insights, leaks, praise & criticism. Thanks to the PR folks for the various companies that I've written about who have not taken issue with the criticism I leveled at their clients, but rather have sought to make slight technical corrections about employee titles, and so forth.
The more we share, the more we all learn, together. Yes, a rising tide does raise all ships. I'm doing what I can to swell the waters, please pay forward whatever you learn here to your friends and colleagues, and continue the wave of knowledge.
In the coming year, we'll take a look back every so often at the posts from the previous year around that time to encourage a fresh look at that material, especially content that is as on target now as it was then, but, perhaps, with far fewer readers. Hit this link to see what I was writing, in a vaccum last year, pre-launch, to get into the swing of things. Then, there's this link for material which was written around the launch.
(Comments, if any. after the Jump)
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Music Lessons - Seth Godin's look at the Music business, with interesting parallels to our own.
Photo Allies - Greg Clarke's new blog about the trials of being a student/budding photographer and getting started the right way. Greg says, of his new endeavor:
My vision for this blog is that college students and budding pros can share and support each other with the help of experienced pros. Together it is so much easier to succeed. I encourage everyone to send me valuable links that could help others out.
You Go Greg!
Now go! Check 'em out, and come back soon!Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
I've been around business for some time. One of the refrains I've heard often is to invest in what you know. Stories abound about people who invest in companies they know, and that do well. Maybe it's the consistent positive customer experience a trucker gets at a donut shop that tells them that is a company worth investing in. Maybe it's someone who knows about how a trucking school closing will impact newly minted truckers in the south that will haul fruit in the coming months, and thus, selling short Del Monte stocks. Invest in what you know is a common refrain.
Many people can tell me that the Getty Images "roll-up" is just what the stock photography industry needed. What Getty really needed to do was remain private, as Corbis has done, and not be beholden to the stock market.
(Continued after the Jump)
What I didn't expect, yesterday at the close, while preparing this post, was to see Getty (NYSE: Stock: GYI) close and hit at yet another 52-week low - this time, $23.17. So, with this in mind, I've decided to bring back my JDK Resignation Watch ticker on the right. I'll expect to see him leave shortly after GYI drops below $20, which it's bound to do soon.
While reading about Warren Buffett yesterday, I came across some other worthwhile quotes that apply here, and perhaps might be worth reading, as it pertains to Getty.
Assuming for a minute that Jonathan Klein actually is brilliant, Buffett says:
"When a management with a reputation for brilliance tackles a business with a reputation for bad economics, it is the reputation of the business that remains intact." -- W.B.
I can tell you that the stock photo business has certainly had a reputation for bad economics!
"If a business does well, the stock eventually follows." -- W.B.
That seems to be happening right now - that is, the contrary circumstances to this sentiment.
"It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently. " -- W.B.
Hello? istockphoto and $49 deal!
"Rule No.1: Never lose money. Rule No.2: Never forget rule No.1. " -- W.B.
istockphoto is losing GYI money, with losses covered by Getty Images.
"Your premium brand had better be delivering something special, or it's not going to get the business. " -- W.B.
Getty Images is not getting the business, istockphoto is. Klien's own statements have evidenced this, as well as our own research into searches like "white house" (August 4th, 2007 - I told you so? No, not really. (Well, maybe, sort of)), and so forth.
I'd guess, from these quotes, Warren would look at Getty as a "sell", and get out while he could. ---------- Disclaimer: I have not in the past, do not now, and have no plans in the future, to hold GYI. Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
So true, and so wise, and we have Warren Buffett to thank for this sentiment.
We deliver valuable photography. It's valuable because it meets a need. It's valuable because it's one-of-a-kind. It's valuable because we see things that our clients don't see.
(Continued after the Jump)
Your work is valuable. It has value. Yet, all to often, you, dear reader, sell yourself short. How do I know? Because I too have done it.
Remember the value you bring to the next assignment you complete, and realize that they are, more than likely, paying such a small price for such a remarkable value - yours.
Warren has countless other quotes worth pondering. Here are a few:
"Chains of habit are too light to be felt until they are too heavy to be broken."
"It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is better than yours and you'll drift in that direction."
"Your premium brand had better be delivering something special, or it's not going to get the business."
Go Warren!
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
What's remarkable is just how two-faced microstock photographers can be. The refrain that is laughable on it's face and just plain insulting when contemplated even for a minute, is the notion that microstock photographers don't do it for the money, they make pictures so they can see their work in print, and maybe their name as a photo credit, but now they're complaining because prices are getting too low. (as if $0.20 net per image isn't already too low!)
Idiots.
(Continued after the Jump)
Torrens' article is insightful, and talks about petitions being signed by some microstockers to opt out of the models that microstock agencies have turned to - subscription models, because they wanted to differentiate themselves. What used to be $1 per image, can now be silly prices like $150/month for "all you can eat" use, meaning those earning $0.20 per image are now maybe earning a few pennies.
And I am supposed to feel bad about it? Not likely.
Torrens makes the point that silly petitions won't make a difference, and he's right.
In the end, differentiating yourself as a photographer from the rest of the pack is going to win you more clients, more repeat business, and insulate you from the "everyday photographer" and their downward spiral.
Torrens does make one flawed argument, with bad numbers:
If you're in the business of selling photos, you'll be equally happy with an agency that sells 50 photos for $100 as one which sells 300 photos for $100.
However, if you're in the business of improving the industry for the benefit of your fellow photographer, that's very noble of you. You'll likely drop the second agency as they're not paying you as much per sale - they're not paying 'fair' prices. But will this help your cause? Not likely. One of the other 29,999 microstock contributors will get your sales.
The problem here, is that where images are priced at either $2, or $0.33 per image, it's not about the $100, it's about the fact that the license that both models promote is an extensive rights package for next to nothing per image. I'd much rather license one image for $100 than even 20 for $5 because I know that, over time, I will earn more per image because the person who licensed one once will need to come back again for a license to extend or expand the license.
That discrepancy aside, I enjoyed his piece. In fact, I enjoyed even more hearing whiners complaining about prices getting too low. Next they will be called pennystock, because you'll be first able to get an all rights package for $0.05, then $0.01. Next up will be agencies thinking that if they can get images "placed" in certain places, they will pay for that opportunity.
What then, about side deals? Consider you have great pictures of people using bicycles. It would be really easy for someone from say, Schwinn, or Huffy, to locate all their bicycles in an agency, and then offer a placement deal to the agency where by, whenever those images get used, the bicycle manufacturer pays the agency a placement fee. In turn, the agency offers to incentivize possible clients to use the photos, so any search for bike/bicycle returns these images to the top, offering them for, say $0.01 when the standard price is $1. The fee the microstocker gets is 1/20th of a penny, because they are only entitled to their percentage of the license. The fee that the bicycle manufacturer pays the agency is not a part of what the photographer gets.
Movie companies have done this forever, with proactive product placements. How likely is it that there are, say, coke cans in photos? Coke could cut a deal to get those images placed higher up, and thus, placed more. This could be done with logos on shirts for Nike, Adidas, and so forth - any branding opportunity could benefit the agency and not the photographer, and the photographer not only would not be entitled to a piece of the deal, but they would never know about it!
Enjoy continuing to be taken advantage of microstockers. Don't bother to read your contracts, they're non-negotiable, and however they read, those who own the servers where your images reside will do everything they can to preclude you from profiting from your efforts.
Happy Shooting! Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
PhotoShelter, who committed over $1M in advertising for 2008 when they launched The PhotoShelter Collection has begun placing their ads. With ads on MediaBistro (check here) as seen on the right. In a remarkably ballsy (but certainly appropriate) move, they call out Getty (NYSE: GYI) with what is apparently a quite legal call-out (see here as to how), saying "Stock Photos You Won't Find Through Getty".
But it doesn't end there.
(Continued after the Jump)
Smaller ads run with the tag line "PhotoShelter: 1000s of stock photos you won't find through Getty. Find a new vision daily", like the one at left. These ads are appearing on sites that use the The Deck advertising network, on designer-frequented sites like A List Apart, and Icon buffet, among others.
Similarly, if you hit refresh enough times, you'll cycle through the ads, you'll run across the one at right, for Digital Railroad.
I think that pointing out the obvious - that PS is offering images that aren't available on Getty is a smart move on their part, and with PS having over 8,000 photographers signed on, and adding over 3,000 images a day, in just under a year, they will be over half-way to Getty's library of content (Dan Heller suggests they have 2M images on his blog here), however you can expect that the PS offering will be much more fresh. This is, of course, if PS maintains their current pace, which you can almost be sure will increase, as compared to Getty's 2M, PS is heading full steam ahead at Getty, with creatives' best interests at heart. Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Yesterday, rounds of meetings took place in Digital Railroads' offices with staff who were to be kept having early meetings (and they then departed the office) and staff to be laid off went into meetings where they were told, en masse, that they were being laid off. Charles Mauzy, the CEO, writes in a letter "DRR is in the process of re-structuring our company and the team along with all of our employees want to make sure we keep key partners/associations/press informed of the changes taking place. "
Layoffs are reported to be between 22 people and up to 1/2 of the Digital Railroad staff, even while sales staff recently hired for the LA office are still being trained. Some uncertainty remains about the actual number of employees laid off though, as some who remain are contractors and technically not staff. Digital Railroad would not confirm the percentage of staffers or even the total number of staffers laid off. Mauzy notes in his letter, of those departing "The friends and colleagues that we say farewell to today have laid the foundation for our mutual success now and in the future."
(Full post after the Jump)
Indications in December were such that, internally, it was determined that if significant changes were not made by December 31st, the company, reportedly strapped for cash and with a high burn rate, would be in serious jeopardy. Outreach to their current investors saved them from a third round of funding, which is always a risky maneuver. Their last round, reportedly $10M (PopPhoto - 2/5/07 - Digital Railroad Receives Fresh Funds) almost a year ago, infused them with significant resources to move forward. Much of their initial investments came from Morgenthaler Ventures and Venrock Associates. With an additional infusion from them, coupled with a Series B investment round led by London-based venture firm DN Capital, Digital Railroad was set to move forward.
Mauzy writes in the letter “While change is always difficult we are confident that the change we make today will allow us to have long term success. Our investors have tremendous confidence in our leadership team, our strategy and have renewed their financial support with additional investments in capital this month." He then goes on to say "With the support of our investors, founders, board of directors and most importantly our employees, we are necessarily reducing costs not directly related to growth of Marketplace including a reduction in force." This does make sense. However, there were significant departures in their support department, which, hopefully, is because more and more people are becoming familiar with how to use the service, from both a buyers and sellers end, and a reduced call volume was an indicator that cuts could be made there. It should be hoped that these weren't cut because it was easy to reduce customer service. This is doubtful, but possible.
Debate about their major expansion and push into the Research Network, which has been flooded with requests of late from major corporations, the National Geographic, and many others and seems to be poised to do well (as indicated by recent sales department hires being trained as laid off staffers were packing their things), suggest that perhaps Digital Railroad may have expanded more than it was capable of doing. An email sent 2 days ago noted "...we've got over 130 open requests looking for ship point-of-views, local scenics, people, architecture, and more from every corner of Europe."
Mauzy goes on to say "In 2008 our goal is to build on this success and fulfill our mission to drive significantly greater revenue to our members through image licensing in Marketplace. In order to achieve this objective, we are focusing 100% of our resources to attracting top creative professionals—both buyers and photographers—to Digital Railroad and growing sales in Marketplace...[o]ur key leadership team including our newly appointed CEO, Charles Mauzy, Maris Berzins, Mark Ippolito, Andy Parsons and Tom Tinervin all remain with Digital Railroad and have collaborated closely on setting our strategy for 2008 and beyond."
I believe (with a degree of hope) that this will make Digital Railroad leaner and meaner for their "fight" with Getty, et al. There are formidable forces looking to derail them. In 8 months, they have amassed over 2,000,000 images, and those numbers continue to grow and accelerate. I for one have thousands of images there, and use it to serve client assignment imagery, alongside my use of PhotoShelter's Personal Archive solution.
Let's wait and see. More updates as we get them.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Check out The Washington Post's article - "Hey, Isn't That . . .People Are Doing Double-Takes, And Taking Action, As Web Snapshots Are Nabbed for Commercial Uses" article , where, apparently, some unlucky citizen had their web snapshot stolen from her blog and used in a NFL playoffs game broadcast. Examples continue regarding the Virgin Mobile ad in Australia, and so on.
Seems that when it comes to the citizenry, TWP cares. When it comes to ensuring the longevity of the craft of photography by paying a fair rate (read sustaining) to their freelancers, well then, who cares?
(Comments, if any, after the Jump)
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
UPDATE: As of noon today, it was down another 4% or so, to a new low midday of $24.17. Hopefully those referenced below as getting out without losing their shirts got out whist still in their pajamas this morning.
What a difference a day makes! When I'd written just yesterday (Getty Images (GYI) Hits 52-Week Low (again)) "When will the next 52 week low hit? Could be tomorrow..." that was hyperbole more than anything else - not that it doesn't actually belong below 20 (because it does) - but I didn't actually think it would be the next day!
That said, I did write in a responsive comment "What goes around comes around, and it's coming around at a high speed", and so, here it is, comin' around.
Thusly, Getty Images (NYSE: GYI) tanks almost 4% in a single day. Heck, that's about double the DOW and the S&P 500 losses for the day, so not all the blame goes to the market, Getty would have still lost enough, even if GYI doesn't/hadn't trended with the market, to have hit another 52-week low all by it's lonesome.
(Continued after the Jump)
Why is this? Well, Getty has been surprisingly quiet since their earnings call back in November. Oh, except where, as Daryl Lang over at PDN reports, in "Getty Offers 15% Off Everything All Year" Getty still hasn't found the bottom price point for their images yet. Further, Lang did some stellar research to determine that, in fact, while Getty was proposing that that discount was just for political campaigns, Daryl actually demonstrates that it works for all imagery from Getty, probably that $49 web price too! As was reported here (The 'Virus' is Spreading, Aug 30, 2007) "...Bruce Livingstone... has succeeded in bumping Getty's web guru as SVP of Technology Linda Ranz just weeks before the new site launch so that he is now SVP of Technology...", which followed that same day with "Oh, wait, this is our fault...." about the crash of the iStockphoto site, the preceeding six days on August 24th with : "Getty Site - Site Down as Stock Is Down?" I guess that's what you get when you have a self-described "true example of success born from failure", as we cited him quoted in Design Mentor Training, where they report that Bruce Livingstone, SVP of Technology started iStockphoto "...After deciding he was not going to make it in the traditional stock photography business." Wait, in order for you, as a self-described "failure" as a photographer, to evidence the resulting "success born from" in iStockphoto, you have to actually demonstrate that success over time, and the bankers just aren't seeing it that way. Is this what you get when a "failure" is the SVP of Technology, overseeing the proper programming of the site? Is this just one more in a string of his failures?
Could it be that Getty's stock price drops the day that istockphoto's prices were to increase, as Paul Melcher reported (back in December - It's Rising, December 7, 2007) they would?
How about, then, the heavy-handed tactics of Getty vis-a-vis their iStockphoto contributors with their do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do approach to stock photography? PDNPulse also reported last week "No More NASA At iStockphoto", which begs the question - why? I didn't check the flight manifest, but I don't think that NASA had a Getty Images photographer on the October 28th flight, as shown here, where the image is being licensed by Getty, but is listed "Copyright: 2007 NASA", and the credit reads "Photo by NASA via Getty Images".
What gives Getty the right to license this image to the general public, when it's owned by the general public? They'll tell you they keyworded it, and otherwise enhanced the images, and that they've registered the images. What they've most likely done, as Corbis has done, is register the image as part of "compilation", a category that the Copyright Office allows you to do, and that the registration is an update to their collection of images that has previously been registered. The title of the work they're registering that will include that image will likely be something like "Getty Digital Online October 2007 & Automated Database", and will then be listed on the Copyright Form VA as something like "Updates from October 1-October 31, 2007 (Updated Monthly)" or something whereby they are able to skirt the Copyright Office's assertions that a registration of this sort is "deminimus", and thus not elligible for Copyright protection. This is a common ploy that is not unique to Getty, but places a "fragile" sticker on registrations done in this manner. A query for "NASA" in the "photographer" field at Getty lists over 1,700 images under the "Getty Images News" brand alone.
Thus, Getty is telling iStockphoto contributors they can't put up images that are in the public domain and earn $0.20 or so off of it, like one iStockphoto contributor has done here of this image: Because, dear reader, Getty wants to preserve their ability to license to you the same image on the Getty site: As noted below, they'd lose what could be several thousands of dollars for one ad license, see below: Why is it that what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander? Why does Getty get to make thousands off of public domain LICENSES to images yet their iStockphoto contributors can't do the same?
But this isn't limited to NASA alone. Searches for U.S. Navy yields over 2,900 results, over 300 for Air Force, and over 400 for Army when the search is done using the "photographer" or "By:" field search. I guess it's just easier to search the acronym NASA in both Getty and iStock archives, as the first tier of clearing iStockphoto of images that are hurting the Getty sales where duplicative, but I would be concerned about the legality of Getty licensing public domain images. What will happen when someone who licenses the images from Getty then refuses to pay?
Don't worry, there's still time to get out with your shirt. There was a nominal spike in after-hours trading, so you could still get out, because I can't see an end in sight to their plummet, can you? Note: I do not now, nor have I, nor do I plan to have any stock market investments in GYI. Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
As expected, Getty Images (Stock: GYI) plummets to (as of this writing: $26.10) for a low, before hopping back up above today's open.
When will the next 52 week low hit? Could be tomorrow, could be next week. (It actually spiked downward again while I was writing this from 26:22 to a intra-day low of $26.10.) One thing to count on, is that it will continue to take a dive - certainly as long as it's current leadership is in place, and they continue to compete on price and not quality.
(Comments, if any, after the Jump)
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Seth Resnick, a longtime friend of mine not only took time out of his hectic schedule to talk about Adobe's Lightroom, and made an amazing offer to PBN readers. See below the video for the offer!For readers of Photo Business News wishing to attend the highly regarded D-65 "Digital Workflow, Not "Workslow " series, January 11-14, 2008 (Friday - Monday) *class runs from 9:00 am -5:30pm daily, visit this link to register, and note that you read it here, for a 10% discount on the seminar - that's over $100 in savings!
(Alternate version, and comments after the Jump)
Here's the Brightcove Version:
If you can't see either, click here for Brightcove, and here for YouTube. Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
I looked with pleasant surprise at my iPhone stock tracker, and noted that Getty Images (Details: GYI) is just $0.10 shy of hitting another 52-week low at Friday's close, from when we reported their previous plummet back on September 18, 2007 ("Getty (GYI) Hit New 52 Week low"), and we've certainly not at a loss for writings of a critical nature about Getty. But, they are deserving of criticism, 'else we wouldn't be writing as such.
We wrote back on December 21st ("It's Not Your Copy Right, it's Mine") about the concept of Creative Commons. But there was some digging that I hadn't done that's worth noting.
(Continued after the Jump)
Dan Heller, in his intermittent (yet insightful) postings on his blog, this past Thursday wrote "The Creative Commons and Photography", a seeming treatise on Creative Commons. I strongly encourage you to read through the entire thing. I'll draw out one point (for now), that's may be a reason that the stock market is looking over their horn-rimmed glasses and out from under their green eyeshades at GYI:
"As of December 31, 2007, Flickr's 21 million users uploaded over 2 billions photos. Of those, 56,415,212 (or 2.8%) are tagged as having one of the Creative Commons licenses. For comparison, Getty Images is purported to have about 2 million photos... we can observe longer-term trends and fill in the blanks: year over year revenue at Getty has been declining in close parity with the growth of photo-sharing sites like Flickr."
Yoink! 56 million with CC tags! No doubt a large quantity of those require attribution only, and no compensation!
Heller goes on to make a number of highly insightful statements and suggestions worth pondering, in depth. What remains though, for the sake of reviewing Getty's prospects, is that their future doesn't look so bright. In fact, the future's so dim that the only people wearing shades are the accountants trying to justify the company's diminished valuation. (Note - the dim/shades reference is for your old-timers who remember the Timbuk3 1980's song by a similar name). The only thing Getty can hope for is that their keywording (and thus, search results) are better than the collective mass of images that's free on Fickr.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Competing on price is a losing proposition. When you try to do it for the pathetic figure that is $1, someone will come in and do it for free - and has, en masse. Next up? Creatives paying for placement in publications.
Oh wait, when it costs you more to produce the work than you're selling it for, that's essentially the same thing. Guess that's already (indirectly) happening. Here's to hoping for an opening bell Monday that looks dim for Getty's future. Once they've been relegated to the proverbial 8-track heap of history, those of us who actually value the images we produce, and compete on quality and not price will be in a far better position. _________ DISCLAIMER: I have not, do not, nor plan to hold GYI, or any stock which would benefit from a GYI decline.Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
2 ... 2 ...
”, can you tell me a little bit about how the book is doing and how it feels now being a published author. 
I can't imagine that PDN, and the NGS would allow a contest that includes a blatant rights grab, but our friends over at 
Crazy how the New York Times can report one thing, and Jonathan Klein, CEO of Getty Images (NYSE: 
In case you missed the announcement back in September, the Los Angeles Strictly Business 2 traveling seminar weekend is just one week away! 
At 11:16 pm EST on 1/16/07, Photo Business Forum & News' existence was pushed into the world when I shared with my friend and colleague David Hobby (Mr. Strobist) via e-mail:
Today's Speedlinks.
As expected, Getty Images (Stock: