|
|
 My friend and colleague, Chase Jarvis, wrote on his blog, and article titled Free Photos and Artistic Vision, and, it's worth a read. However, where he posits the notion for pondering that, possibly: The future of earning a living as a photographer lies not in your old pictures, but your next pictures. Sure, one-of-a-kind historical, documentary pictures will always have their earning potential, but the successful professional of the future -- just like the successful professional of today -- will make their money getting hired to deliver their commissioned, artistic vision for the newest product, trend, or photo of the moment, NOT to deliver the ones and zeros from yesterday's digital file. He is promoting the 'sell once and forget it' approach. In other words, get as much for it now as you can, and don't plan to, or choose the option that allows you to monetize that asset over time. At first blush, that seems fine, however, there's a problem with that idea. (Continued after the Jump)
It suggests the conveyance to the client of all rights so as to eliminate your ability to earn more on those images from that client. There are a number of issues with that:- The clients will seek lower and lower figures for these all rights packages. They already are getting them now, for pennies of what they are reasonably valued at.
- You'll get the client who hires you for a brochure, and then uses the images in a national ad campaign. Happens now all the time by unsuspecting photographers who buy the "we're only going to use it in a small print-run brochure..." line, and then signs away all rights.
- You'll get the client who hires you once for $10k, and then, when they would have had to pay you another, say, $8k the next year to re-use the images, or perhaps another $10k shoot instead, decides they'll re-use the images under the proposed model, and would not have to pay the $8k, nor commission the new $10k. This will have a trickle-down effect.
- These clients may, in turn, re-license them through a stock portal themselves.
There are, of course, other problems, with the all-you-can-eat buffet approach to photography.
I recently had a prospective client (a purported magazine) call me to photograph 60 portraits - individual portraits around DC. They wanted to pay $1k per portrait. At first blush, this seemed like a boon. Upon reading their contract, they took all rights, including reprints. I did a little research, and found that these portraits - of lawyers - were being done and then the lawyers, because they were featured in this "magazine" which was a "special edition" titled "Washington's Best Lawyers" and moreover, each firm could (read, was asked to) advertise in the publication, and then they sold reprints for $3k for an inside piece, and more if the cover was "redone" for the lawyer or firm. In essence, it was a disguised brochure, and I was the $1k guy that would have turned over all that income to the "magazine". Further, the firm could - for a fee - get the digital file for their own uses. There was no movement on the price, or a renegotiation on the reprints issue, and when I noted that they were charging for the reprints of my work and thus, earning a substantial income from essentially reselling my work, and I queried further "is that your business model", they said it was, and they were doing it all over the country.
While I know that Chase has a true and nearly as complete as possible understanding of the value of the images he produces, I submit that, to the vast majority of photographers who don't get signed contracts from clients before beginning work, roll over on rights grabs without additional compensation, and have no idea what their CODB is, letting the levy breach whereby "all rights forever" and WMFH are allowed to roam free and fester in the land of acceptable business models for freelancers, is a recipe for disaster.
Chase does put forth the question "IF (capitalized for emphasis) this is the case," and so, I think he may well disagree with this notion, but he puts it forth, and ends with "Scary to some, exciting to others. You just need to decide on which side of that fence you're going to sit." I submit that that last word has a misspelling. It needs an "h" between the "s" and the "i".
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.
 There are lots of topics on the subjects of rights I could discuss, though this wouldn't normally be one. But as it deals with the business of being a photographer, it deserves our attention. It's when a photographer is alleged to have violated the human rights of someone else. What's that you say? Aren't we supposed to be the defender of the downtrodden, the under-served, the discriminated against? Yes, one photographer has been taken to task for alledgedly discriminating against the rights of another, a prospective client, for religious reasons - the photographer's religious reasons. (Continued after the Jump)
The Washington Times reported (Artist hit for refusal on beliefs, 2/25/08) that an evangelical Christian photographer is being charged with violating the rights of a lesbian couple who wanted to have Elaine Huguenin, who is based in New Mexico, photograph their commitment ceremony.
Now, before I continue, let me say one thing - at no time in this article am I (nor should you) going to take a position on the issue of Huguenin's religious beliefs, nor on the couple's ceremony. If you decide to make this about that in the comments, not only are you missing the point of this piece, you're comments will be subject to deletion. I was going to turn on moderation of comments, but thought better of that.
Had the photographer - who is in the business of providing photographic services to couples - simply decided, in her own mind, that she objected to these specific types of ceremonies, simply said "I don't think I would be a good fit for your ceremony", or even said she had other obligations, that would have been the end of it. Instead, the photographer opted to leave a paper trail, of sorts, in the form of an email to the prospective clients, regarding her religious objections to a same-sex ceremony, and thus, indicated that her intention to not provide professional services to this couple was based upon this position. A statement that, in many jurisdictions, can be interpreted (and has successfully been, in courts-of-law) as discriminatory.
Are there many, many other photographers in the Albuquerque area that could provide as good as, if not better, services than Huguenin? Surely that's the case. Why did this couple decide to bring this case before a state tribunal? Because refusal of service could very well be discriminatory, when made by the owner of a business.
Yes, you're a business, just like the malt shops who wouldn't serve blacks in the 60's - they were in the wrong. You're a business, just like those that might refuse an interracial couple from enjoying a romantic dinner in their restaurant. Those that would do so would be found to be in the wrong. You're a business, just like those that would refuse a muslim service after 9/11, they were found to be in the wrong. Federal laws have jurisdiction over civil/human rights issues, where people are discriminated on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, and sexual orientation.
The defense's position, according to the Times, is that "Elane Photography is basically a husband-and-wife small, little commercial photography business" run by "devout Christians who have a variety of things they don't want to take pictures of." This is acceptable where, say, they don't want to do boudoir photography. Or, perhaps, produce pictures which depict a burning cross, and so forth. But is it, in this case? The defense goes on to suggest "...'the First Amendment protects artists like Mrs. Huguenin from being compelled by the state to engage in expression that violates their religious convictions.' The First Amendment 'is pretty clear that Christians should not be penalized for abiding by their beliefs,'...", and so, an interesting twist is added when we begin to discuss the compelling of an artist to make expressions that they believe violates their religious convictions.
This isn't, in the end, the same as the sale of a tangible product like a chocolate malt, or an appetizer and main course.
Remember - you are a business. And, your business falls under anti-discrimination laws just as any other "small, little commercial photography business" falls under laws that preclude the dumping of film chemicals down the drain into city water, or handicap-access to your storefront studio in that quaint downtown shopping district in Anytown USA.
Does the state have a case? Maybe, with the laws written as they are, and precedents set where other businesses have been found liable for discriminating. If the state's position is that refusal of service is comparable when made on racial grounds, as it is when made against a homosexual couple, then it's not a maybe-they-have-a-case, then they do. And it's one which will drag out in the courts for years, or get settled for a significant dollar figure. Will this photographer spend a great deal of time defending her religious position? Yes. In the end, will the photographer prevail? I don't know.
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 was the day I had been waiting for for months years (well, 18 months to be exact). It was finally time to upgrade my Macbook Pro, as Apple finally delivered their overdue refresh of the product line. I'd done some shopping around, and the price for the one I wanted - 17", 250GB HD 7200rpm, 2GB ram, 2.6Ghz processor, was $3,199. No problem, I could swing a sweet deal and pay just $2,943 - a $256 savings, through my connections. (Note, it says "order subtotal" on the savings section, and "cart subtotal" when I was doing my research.) A little-known secret - when you buy a screen with a CPU (and a laptop qualifies as a CPU, even though it has a screen) that screen is covered by Applecare. Buy it a day later, and it's not. So, I added in a 30" monitor. Add in the Aperture 2 upgrade, a Time Capsule, AppleCare, and Microsoft Office 2008 (another secret - its cheaper to buy Office with a CPU than standalone), and I would have been paying $6,815.53, but with my connections, I saved $650.10, and am paying only $6,165.43. Sweet! You too can have these connections - mine comes from my membership in ASMP, which was more than paid for for a year - almost two, with this one purchase alone, and they have countless other benefits and discounts, to see the benefits, click here, and to join for this, and many many other reasons, click here! (Continued 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.
I spent a good portion of yesterday, the day that the Getty Images (NYSE: GYI) sale to Hellman & Friedman was announced, contemplating the ramifications. In between assignments, I fielded (and made) a number of calls about the aquisition. My first inclination was "oh, they'll break up the company", and then, I started doing some serious thinking. Daryl Lang disclosed/revealed (PDNOnline: Getty Images Board OKs Private Equity Sale, 2/25/08) H&F are part owners of their parent company, AND, several respected advertising agencies and media properties. Thus, these people know the value of visual assets. Prior to reading this revelation, I reached a similar conclusion to Daryl's - taking the company private would diminish the bean counters' grip on it's quarterly performance. I can only surmise that some degree of the decisions that were made about pricing models and so forth were done to prop up ailing bottom lines to hit Wall Street expectations. It has long been known that the bean counters are a poison pill for the creative community, looking to squeeze in places that are detrimental. While surely H&F will want quality performance and revenues (more on that in a minute), there will be much less pressure to perform like a circus monkey to make the traders happy and entertained. I expect that JDK will remain on board for the short term, and then leave when H&F feels they have taken the reins, in a smooth transition. He's surely made more than his fair share of bad decisions, highlighted by the bright light that is required of publicly traded companies, and I was (and where applicable, will continue to be) highly critical whenever they are bad for the long term good of the creative community. So, what changes might we see? More than one person I spoke with concurred that the Getty "wire service" is ripe for the chopping block, which was my thinking as well. One need only look at the history of United Press International, the once famed photo wire, and compare it to where it is today. The Associated Press' photo wire service, over the years, has had it's struggles, and, as a standalone entity not been viable, but, bolstered by the combination of text and photos, has survived, in large part, because it is a co-operative, owned essentially by it's member papers. Last May Reuters reported on it's own sale to Thomson ( Thomson, Reuters to forge global info leader) for 17.2B. Getty's "always gotta be there" mentality may be stretching this underperforming department thin. With WireImage's acquisition, they have made covering celebrity events profitable (to a degree), where the $100 an event schmucks that turn up with their consumer-level equipment with pop-up flashes and 24-300mm f4.5-f8 zooms have had a detrimental effect on celebrity coverage. When WireImage can charge, say, a perfume company $5,000+ to cover an event in NYC, pay the photographer $250, own all the rights, sell the images worldwide, and reap the profits from what used to be images that were handed out freely, that's a profitable paradigm. If only those photographers would take the $250 as a guarantee against future sales, and be a party to that income stream, or, get more of the $5k that WireImage is charging (and make no mistake about that, that IS a real figure) for these types of events, that would be fair. Getty has also secured profitable arrangements with sports leagues, and while not wholly journalistic in nature (i.e. looking for images that put a league in a dim/bad light, like fights, and you find slim pickings), they (the new buyers, who own a few ad agencies) also know that providing services to advertising clients with discriminating tastes and demands ( read: profitable) is where the money is. So, I'd look at their wire-service like coverage and staffing to be under a serious microscope in the coming year. As an interesting anecdote, taking the 70 million image that Getty reportedly has in it's collections, and doing some simple math, you arrive at $34.29 per image for a $2.4B acquisition, valued at $34 a share. Coincidence? Yes, but an interesting observation none-the-less. They jury is still out on this, and I look with a questionable eye at many of the decisions that Getty has made over the past few years. However, this may well be a new beginning. I'm not holding my breath, but I am holding out hope that it could be a good thing. (Comments, 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.
Sometimes, it's worth looking back and reminding folks of the great content that is on this blog that you, dear reader, may have missed because you weren't reading, say, last January!
At least the Hypocrite Knows Right from WrongI have a great regard for photojournalist P.F. Bentley. Back in 1989, when I was a young, inexperienced buck, I ran across P.F. in San Francisco while I was covering the San Francisco Earthquake and he and I talked for awhile. We looked on with amazement as another photojournalist took some "police line do not cross" yellow tape and moved it so it looked better in her photo. We both shook our heads at this ethical breach, yet I was probably more shaking my head because PF was, not because I disagreed, but because, I was taking a que from him, as he affirmed what I knew to be wrong.
PF was celebrated by the President of Time in this article, which reads, in part, "...Gingrich's heady first 100 days were documented close-up by TIME's prizewinning photographer P.F. Bentley. "P.F.'s passion is recording history as it happens," says picture editor Michele Stephenson. "He has great instincts, and he gets rare access because his subjects trust him."
Yet, this trust seemed to actually not carry much weight with the folks at Time, when they devolved their contract with onerous additional rights demands without increasing compensation to their contributors several years back.....CONTINUE READING! Teachable MomentsThere are times where you are more susceptible to learning-and retaining-knowledge than others. Take the proverbial parent who said to me once "Johnny, don't touch that hotplate, it's hot. That's what cooks the pancakes." and what did I do? Defiantly looked at my mother square in the eyes, and put my hand on it. Lesson learned.
It's when you sign a contract with bad terms in it that you learn not to do it again. It's when you estimate an assignment for a portrait that is outdoors and that you will be using a large softbox on it, and you don't include an assistant to keep hold of the soon-to-be airborne softbox, lightstand, and flash head, that you learn to always book atleast one assistant for an outdoor assignment. It's a costly mistake to repair that head, one that you cannot pass on to the client and must now absorb.....CONTINUE READING! Wise Words for your Client Dialog - When there's a problem or QuestionWoe be the photographer who does not respect the value of customer service as a key to their longevity in the business. Your choice of words can make a big difference when dealing with clients and ensure that you keep them coming back....CONTINUE READING! Now, go check them out, and don't forget, there's over a year's worth of insights (and a few rants!) that are worth reading! (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.
I've been in the "website game" since about 1995, with my first website on my Compuserve webspace. My second website is still floating around the internet, housed on AOL's servers. I recall switching between NCSA Mosaic and NetManage's Chameleon. Each year, the web expanded, and I endeavored to keep up. Pre-Google, the game in town was Yahoo, Altavista, and the like. Staying abreast of everything took a great deal of effort, but being online, bleeding edge, has been profitable for me as a photographer. A few years ago, I was finally able to place my trust in someone to do re-do my entire site, with a critical concern being to remain in my current positions for the various search terms that were important to me. At the time, there were no effective turnkey solutions, and moreover, because of the 100+ pages of pricing and other information, only a custom solution would work for me. Since then, a field that was limited, at best, has grown. Anyone with Dreamweaver now calls themselves a website designer, and anyone with Google's ADD URL url calls themselves a search engine optimizer. Moreover, if you can compartmentalize your flash/javascript with a few variables, and tweak an e-commerce backend, you will call yourself a website service provider. Below are links to several really amazing studies and other click-able insights. (Continued after the Jump)
Some of these purveyors have built something, and they're being used, and they're not SEO optimized, nor really easy to use. It's like the programmer built it, sold it, and continues to sell it, without significant interest in additional revisions, with the "if it ain't broke, don't revise it..." mentality.
Yet one service - liveBooks, continues a commitment to excellence, and has now come on board as an advertiser here. I've meet with these folks over the past year on a variety of issues. At first, I was skeptical, for SEO reasons. They established, and have revised, their HTML/SEO-friendly shadow pages. They're made much of their client commitment doing everything they can to make it easy for their customers' sites to be found.
Rob Haggert, known better to most as A Photo Editor, wrote:Livebooks: I’ve said it before, “I love livebooks.” They revolutionized the online portfolio. Big, vibrant photos and not much else. I’m not shillin’ for them at all and I can honestly say photographers have risen a notch in my book by switching to their product. Contributor Terence Patrick coined it “the black leather portfolio book of the web.” That’s how I feel about it as well. If you can’t beat it, don’t bother. Yup, and I still have some of those black leather portfolios in my office from my analog days.
Last November, during a trip to San Francisco, I stopped in to liveBooks' offices, met their team of people - your potential team of people - and talked about all things web. From SEO, to functionality, update-ability, and so forth, we covered everything.
Think that liveBooks sites can't rank on SEO? Think again. I did a little research about how well they are doing on that front. Check the following sites where liveBooks sites are ranking extremely well (click the ranking link to see the position for yourself) :
One very valuable insight is this article, from awhile ago, about search position versus click-throughs, and just how where you fall is critical. They also did an "EyeTracker study" which is absolutely worth reading, and shows just how much attention there is on the first page. It's extremely insightful.
The one - and there's only one, really - concern I hear from people who've done some of their research into website options and liveBooks - and that is one of cost. It's just over $3k for their full package. Once those people have actually completed their research, they realize that it's atleast that much for a well designed site, if not more. Further, the update-ability of their new custom site isn't easy - certainly not as easy as liveBooks. And, there's no team of people that remains, on the backend, looking for ways to improve a product you've already purchased. Many site designers have moved on to their next project, and requests for updates/fixes take a back seat.
So, please join me in welcoming liveBooks as an advertiser here.
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.
 If you're reading this blog, you should be there! The second of what will be a total of four stops takes place starting this Friday, February 22, in Atlanta. If you missed LA, I did a video report on it ( here) and it has been widely reviewed as a success, with people traveling to LA from as far away as Alaska and Florida. So, this isn't something that you should be saying "oh, it's not near me, I'm not going." 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. At this program you won't learn lighting, or video, or any other skill-set except how to run your business better and more efficiently. Beginners have come away with massive amounts of information and exceptional resources, while long-time photographers have taken away new tools and refined their current business practices to be better and more efficient in how they run their existing businesses. Need to know about marketing? ASMP has brought in Leslie Burns Dell'Acqua to give you real tools to use to begin to market yourself, or to evolve how you marketing into the new era that is e-mail and the latest in marketing trends, helping you to reach your intended audience. Blake Discher is also on hand to discuss the great unknown that is client negotiations and gets you thinking in the right direction about how to price your work so you stay in business. Don't know how to store, archive, and deliver your work safely? ASMP's President, Judy Herrmann will set you straight about how to protect yourself from the inevitable hard drive crash, and deliver clients images when they want, and how they want them. Judy knows a great deal on the subject, and listening to her is like pouring pure octane into your gas tank - you're getting so much fast-burn information, every tidbit is valuable. Further, and what is the starting point, Richard Kelly and Susan Carr start off with the basics, and make sure we're all on the same page, establishing baselines and foundations so we all are on the same bus together. (Continued after the Jump)
Oh, and I'm also there talking about the critical tools for your photography business. It's like this blog, come to life, with a bit more restraint and carefully chosen words than you might find here, except the information I'll be presenting is, as it's titled, critical to your business, including copyright registration, dealing with contracts (both yours and the clients), and so forth. As I said before, if you're reading this blog, you should be there.
But it doesn't stop there, because that was just DAY ONE!
Ready for day 2? We spend the morning training you to negotiate better. We show you how we do it in several situations, role-playing, and then we break up into small groups, and guide these groups of 15 or so through the process, pausing and refining, and everyone else gets to chime in - it's all very interactive.
After lunch (included, on both days!), there are smaller workshops, delivering more details and specifics on Marketing to Move Your Business Forward; Business Workflow to Bring You Profits; Taking Control of Your Career; and Is Your Website Doing All It Can to Get You Work?. Don't worry though, they are repeated, so you can take two of the four.
Not enough? You're crazy then, but, well, ok - how about we have Sean Kearnan give the keynote on Saturday night, before the free Digital Railroad reception that's included? Kearnan gave the keynote in LA, and it was a not-to-be-missed experience (literally!)
Register now, figure out how you'll get there next!
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 many problems for photographers is how those who couldn't care less about the business of photography do damage to the business of photography. Often, these are people who have other jobs that pay the bills, and they look to photo credit to give them pleasure, acclaim, and notoriety, getting their satisfaction at the expense -- literally -- of those who earn a living making pictures. Many times, these are "moms with cameras", or MWCs. What I'd like to highlight today is something different. It's a MWC who is endeavoring to do things right. She is writing a blog, titled " Hey Girl, Nice Shot - It takes more than a camera to go pro." She's got several posts I'd like to highlight, and encourage you to read. They are: (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.
 For seven or eight years, one of the things I've looked forward to each March, is the NPPA's annual Northern Short Course in Photojournalism. I get the pleasure of going because I've been speaking there that long, refining and updating my presentations as time, and technology evolve. One of the amazing things about the NSC, is the number of photo editors that come, from newspapers large and small, to critique your portfolio during the portfolio review sessions. I know more than one NSC attendee that, as the result of a portfolio review, is now working as a photographer for the paper that the photo editor who reviewed them edits for. You'll get an amazing amount of insight into your portfolio and how it can be better, during these reviews. It's like a job interview without the pressure of not being able to pay the bills if it goes poorly. But, it won't go poorly, because you get to talk to the editor, and ask them questions you never would during that interview. They are actually there to help you! Beyond that, which would be worth the price of admission in and of itself, you get a ton of lectures, on multiple tracks. Don't know Photoshop CS3, or why you should update? The classes on CS3 ( Basic Photoshop CS3; Photoshop CS3 - Color Correction; Advanced Photoshop CS3) will not only teach you the application, but also why it's a must-have upgrade that will save you time and money. How about studio lighting ( Studio Lighting) in the real world? Need to learn Final Cut Pro ( Final Cut Pro Tips & tricks; Introduction to Video; Advanced Video), Soundslides ( Soundslides and Multimedia Storytelling), or audio capture techniques ( Intro to Audio; Advanced Audio) to evolve yourself into the 21st century? Presenters are on hand to teach you all of that as well. In fact, if I wasn't presenting my own Business Practices workshop on Thursday, 3/13 at 1pm, I'd be in Regina McCombs' on Advanced Video seminar. Maybe I can get a private tutorial or, at least a few tips that evening? (Continued after the Jump) Discussions on the ethics of photography, and web marketing with Bill Foster are also well worth attending. When you're able to get onto the first page (or first listing!) for phrases like "Sacramento editorial photographer" (see his placement here), or "Sacramento corporate photographer" (see his placement here) you know you're listening to a guy who knows how to leverage his website into more work. And, to top it off, he's the official photographer for Gov. Schwarzenegger as well.
Not enough? Well, even though it should be more than enough, already, to convince you, how about we throw in in-depth lectures from Gregory Heisler, Chris Usher, and Al Bello on Saturday, among several other notables? Oh, and there's an NSC contest too, (deadline, 2/25!) so you could leave with a few feathers in your cap if you enter and win!
Register now, it's going to be a great time, I promise! (deadline for the discounted hotel rate is this Tuesday, 2/19!)
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.
If you've ever watched someone really boring give a presentation, Donnie Hoye will teach you Photoshop techniques WHILE you're laughing hysterically. Over a million people have watched his videos, so what you learn will be ingrained into your brain because it will be memorable! Below are links to three of them, he's done atleast a half-dozen. All really do teach you something worth knowing, but just try watching them and not laughing uproariously! (Nominally NSFW)       (Comments, 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.
I've been doing some watching lately, and it's become interesting to see Microsoft come late (atleast publically) to the photography bandwagon. I'm not referring to things like Corbis, or PhotoSynth, and so forth. I'm referring to things like their Microsoft Pro Photographer's Summit, and, more importantly, the campaign they launched two days ago. Information Week has a great article on it, which is essentially, to teach the teens of today (who will be the lawyers, judges, and lawmakers of tomorrow) about the value of intellectual property, and about the importance of respecting copyright. (Continued after the Jump)
Interestingly enough, (and with a major sigh of relief), it appears to be the case that the youth of today see the stick that is jailtime and fines, sufficient to warrant a curtailing of this unlawful behavior. To back this up, Microsoft released an indepth and throughly produced survey.
Significant among their findings:- 49% of teens said they are not familiar with the rules and guidelines for downloading content from the Internet.
- Only 11% understood the rules well
- of the 11%, 82% said downloading content illegally merits punishment
- Of those that are unfamiliar with the laws, 57% supported punishment for intellectual property violations.
- 41% of teens believe the cost to download a song should be between $.50 and $1.00
- 26% of those surveyed said digital songs should be less than $.50
- 21% said music that's online should be free.
This portends well, as a starting point. In other words, we're not at a 1% position, with 99% to go, but rather, we are further up the field than many thought. But Microsoft wants to do more, and is putting the money behind it do reverse the trend of a lack of respect for IP. So, they've got seveal initiatives "Intellectual Property Rights Education" for middle school and high school teachers, and MyBytes, where students can share their own content, learn it's values, and respect others copyrights.
So far, so good Microsoft. We are pleased you've come to the photo party on these issues, even if some may feel you're a bit late. On these issues, it's surely better late than never, and we could sure use your muscle and clout to make all of this happen sooner rather than later. We don't need teens who have little respect for copyright becoming the congressional staffers, legislators, and lawyers of tomorrow without a firm grasp of copyright and IP!
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.
Rumors fly left and right. Google is buying the AOL news division once Time Warner does it's little breakup. Microsoft is buying Yahoo, or, post-no-go, now, it's Apple is buying Yahoo. Lots of rumors. How do these things potentially impact photographers? Well, let's look at what will probably happen - Microsoft and Yahoo will come to a figure in the middle of their price-points, and thus, become one, and still be dwarfed by Google, so there will be little anti-trust issues there. Assuming this happens, I (and Seeking Alpha) will expect that Microsoft's new Flickr will grow, and Microsoft will harvest that content for all it's worth, and then some. Further, the untapped advertising potential of Flickr is exponential, and you can expect that the ad execs who are selling eyeballs on MSN.com/et al will be chomping at the bit to monetize Flickr in ways we can't even image now. (Continued after the Jump)
Further, Microsoft's PhotoSynth will have unrestricted access to all of the visual content of Flickr, which makes the Getty Images Library look like a mom-and-pop corner store against Wal-Mart. With all of the spare processor cycles, aggregating the data from Flickr, with virtual tags like date/time/caption/location, building up the monolith of data will be an amazing resource, like MicroStrategy was in Web 1.0's heyday, but with staying power like only Microsoft has. Seeking Alpha seems to think this content could go to Microsoft's HD View project, and that may be the case, but I think that PhoyoSynth is the greater likelihood of use for that data, since it doesn't lend itself to the use that PhotoSynth does.
Microsoft could also engage the top producers of content on Flickr and entice them into actually generating revenue beyond the RF/microstock model, and offer auto-tagging based upon their aggregated visual data. What would the platform to deliver that out in a controlled way? Why, the acquisition of Digital Railroad or PhotoShelter. What's $50M (give or take) or so when you've just spent upwards of $50B on Yahoo?
Further, and I'm not too up to speed on this, but Microsoft has been touting, and then rebranding, their JPEGXR/JPEGHD/etc from what seemed like a proprietary format to what should be some form of open-source/fully documented solution like DNG is. The use of Flickr could be one platform to stringboard their promotion of JPEG HD. One word of advice on DNG - if you're not using DNG, you're missing out. And, what little I've seen of JPEG HD, it looks to be promising. Here's to hoping that Microsoft doesn't try to control it. If they do, I have one word for you: Betamax. I do recall, at one time, an attempt to promote JPEG 2000, which seemed to fall flat. So, be careful on JPEG HD!
I'll be curious, when this goes through, to see how Google responds. I'll expect they will pick up something like Zuula, which, if you've not looked at it, is very cool. It's a search aggregator. Check out the "Images" tab, and then the sub-tabs for all the search engines. This search for "house" returns interesting image results, with the best returns being from Yahoo and Flickr (unless you're a fan of the TV show House).
Stay tuned on this one. These mega-mergers will impact our lives as photographers, and hopefully 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.
 I read with great interest about Canon's new patent whereby their camera will actually take a retinal scan of your iris, and produce a biometric signature that the camera will then embed into the photographs, authenticating the images as yours, and aiding in locating who the person is that took the photograph via some form of steganography. Of course, that image, above, of Sen. Obama campaigning, is a nice photo-illustration of the concept, and not how your actual image would look! I've gone through and dissected their patent application after the jump, and discussed some of the interesting findings. (Continued after the Jump)
 First things first, patent application reading is not for the faint of heart, and it does require some creative thinking when it comes to envisioning how a bunch of lawyers are depicting their new (and supposedly valuable) idea.
I've gone through, and pulled out graphics and text that I think do a good job of making it easier to understand (and get excited about!)
Canon posted this patent application on January 31st, and have proposed some very interesting ideas to help us cure the age-old question of "who took this picture?"
The patent application reads:FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0001] This invention relates to an imaging apparatus for electrically taking the image of a subject. More particularly,
the invention relates to an imaging apparatus with which it is possible to protect the copyright of the photographer.
[0004] Against this background, the necessity for imaging apparatus such as digital still cameras and digital video cameras has grown explosively. The application goes on to say why this is necessary: [0005] The widespread use of personal computers and the like has made the copying of digital data easier and less expensive. In addition, easier access to the Internet has facilitated and lowered the cost of distributing digital data. As a consequence, even ordinary individuals can now create and distribute copies of digital images easily and inexpensively for purposes beyond private use. Accordingly, though the handling ofdigital images does not pose a major problem so long as it involves photography for personal enjoyment, the fact that such image data can be copied and distributed easily by unauthorized individuals has not gone unnoticed by those who circulate digital images as a business.
[0006] Thus, a problem which arises is that protection of the copyright of photographers, ctc., is not satisfactory. Means for protecting copyright is strongly desired for digital image data obtained by photography.
[0007] A technique referred to as an "electronic watermark" has undergone extensive research for the purpose of realizing copyright protection of digital image data. This technique is one in which a portion of the data in digital image data or digital audio data is embedded with separate information by superposition in such a manner that the information is rendered insensible or intentionally sensible to a human being, depending upon the particular purpose. When necessary, only a user having the right or qualifications can extract or remove the embedded separate information. Below, you'll see just where the iris scan hardware would be placed - tucked right at the top of the viewfinder:
Above, is a graphical representation of the interaction between the iris sensor and the camera's CPU. (note, the correlation between the item identified as "113" in both graphics.
Here's how the application describes it:[0056] An iris sensor 113, which employs an image sensing device such as a CCD, is placed so as to become the conjugate ofthe pupil 216 ofthe photographer's eye situated at a prescribed position in relation to a light-receiving lens 211. Infrared light-emitting diodes 213a, 213b illuminate the vicinity ofthe photographer's pupil. An LCD 214 inside the viewfinder, which is placed at a position where it can be observed by the photographer at the same time that the photographer observes the finder image, displays various settings information, etc. A high-luminance light-emitting diode 215 illuminates a prescribed area on the focusing plate 206.
[0057] Light from the iris of the photographer is reflected by the spectroscope 210a and has its image formed by the light-receiving lens 211 on the iris sensor 113, whereby the iris image is obtained. Below is the flowchart for how the camera would scan your iris, while you looked through the viewfinder.
The application includes this description of the process:
[0023] First, the eyeball image of the person is acquired by controlling illumination and focus (1101). When the eyeball image is obtained, the eyelid and eyelash are detected, the pupil-iris boundary 21 and outer boundary 22 of the iris are detected, as shown in FIG. 12, and a coordinate system is set up upon dividing the eyeball into areas 23 referred to as analysis bands (1102).
[0024] Next, image analysis (1103), which mainly entails extracting a change in shading of the analysis bands, is performed, and coding is performed based upon the result of analysis (1104). The personal authentication code generated by coding is expressed by a fixed-length array of bits indicated by "l ?s and "O"s. The patent goes on to say that you can register up to five iris scans, so you, and four other people can use the same camera and simply select which person is using the camera, or, and it's not clear, perhaps it would actually scan your eye and identify you.
Below, is one of the ways that the biometric information is written to the image. While this one illustrates registration selection and biometric data being written to the file when the card is removed, there are other variations, like when you power off (as it does cleaning the sensor now). Canon's concern was the delay in the data write if this biometric data was applied when the files were being written, as that could delay capture times and buffer issues. With camera buffer acceleration, in the future when this becomes real, I'd expect CPU power to be such that it could/would write when the image was captured, but for now, these are the ways - essentially when the camera is idle - when the information is written.
In response to concerns about processing power, and other potential interference with "at the moment of capture" iris scanning, the application states:[0028] In accordance with this method, an iris pattern or retinal pattern is extracted from an eyeball image acquired at substantially the same time the image of a subject is taken, and the extracted pattern is embedded in the photographic image. As a result, the photographic image and the photographer information are placed in one-to-one correspondence and there is no way for a third party to intervene. This method is effective in that it affords a high reliability as far as copyright information is concerned.
[0029] However, the above method necessitates the task of acquiring the eyeball image at approximately the same time
that the image of the subject is taken. There are also caseswhere the method necessitates the additional task of extracting
the iris pattern or retinal pattern from the eyeball image and converting this pattern to a personal authentication code
by coding means that relies upon image processing. In a digital image sensing device such as a digital still camera, such a task coincides, sequentially speaking, with the timing at which maximum load is imposed upon processing of the subject image at the time of photography. When eyeball image processing is executed along with subject-image processing, therefore, the overall processing requires a great amount oftime. This means that the photographer must wait a while before the next photo can be taken, resulting in possible loss of photographic opportunities.
[0030] The imposition of a heavy processing load in this fashion is not limited to a personal authentication method that uses an iris or retinal pattern but is a common problem also in other biometric personal authentication methods that subject personal biological differences to authentication coding by image processing or the like.
[0031] When the eyeball image of a photographer is acquired every time an image is taken, the photographer's eye may be closed at the moment of acquisition or an eyelash or strand of hair may interfere. In view of the fact that this can happen frequently, the eyeball image may not always be acquired properly. Furthermore, since the pupil of the photographer's eye opens when an image is taken under low illumination, as is the case indoors, the area of the iris pattern becomes comparatively small and it may not be possible to convert the pattern to an accurate personal authentication code. Below, is where it gets even more interesting:
Instead of using the biometric information from your iris, you could, instead, if you were concerned about image degradation for some reason (i.e. you were seeing degradation, because, from a steganographic standpoint, you should not see the watermark) encode a personal authentication code.
The application states:[0016] The watermarking technique according to the above description is advantageous in that (1) the embedded data cannot be extracted without the key information used at the time of embedding; (2) since the embed component in the key information is created based upon a random number, the component is not fixed, thereby making it difficult to decode the embedded data; (3) by specially adapting the embed component, data can be embedded so as not to be sensible by a human being; and (4) the degree to which image quality declines can be controlled by changing the amount of alteration.
[0017] An "invisible-data embedding" method through which embedded data is rendered invisible to a human being has been described. As mentioned earlier, however, a "visible-data embedding" method also is available. According to this method, information such as copyright information is embedded in an original image with the intention of being made visible to a human being. This has the effect ofcausing a third party to abandon the idea of utilizing an image unjustly. For details relating to a visible-data watermarking technique, see the specification of u.s. Pat. No. 5,530,759 (Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 8-241403).
[0018] Techniques for authenticating specific individuals are being researched extensively from the standpoint of protecting privacy and providing security.
[0019] A number of methods have generally been employed for authenticating individuals. Examples are a method through which only a specific person is verified by a key, card or seal in his or her possession, and a method through which only a specific person is verified by entry of a password or secret code number known only by the person. A fundamental problem with this method is that it is comparatively easy for another person to pose as the specific person by way of theft, counterfeiting or leakage of information, etc.
[0020] Accordingly, a method that has become the focus of attention as an alternative to the above method is a biometric personal authentication method that employs a physical characteristic of a specific person to undergo authentication. This is very cool because, the PLUS Coalition is working on an artist ID/registry, whereby people could attempt to locate you if an image with your ID/biometric scan was in an image, they could go to this central repository, and find you, thus, no more Orphaned images! While this wouldn't solve old-image issues, it would be an exceptional solution moving forward!
Here's some information about the registry:
The PLUS Registry is a joint effort by and for all industries and communities engaged in creating, distributing, using and preserving images. The Registry is operated cooperatively by a worldwide coalition of organizations representing the interests of photographers, illustrators,artist representatives, stock agencies, ad agencies, designers, magazine publishers, newspaper publishers, web publishers, book publishers, museums, libraries educational institutions and others. While the organization includes all of the major photography associations in the US and many others across 30 countries, PLUS represents all industries. Within this diverse body are organizations with conflicting viewpoints on the proposed orphan works legislation. However, they have joined forces within PLUS to provide a non-partisan solution to the orphan works challenge. While the PLUS Coalition and the PLUS standards provide benefits far exceeding the scope of the orphan works challenge, the standards and in particular the Registry system provide a global, industry-neutral vehicle for the prevention of orphan works, and for connecting potential licensees with rights holders.
The Registry is operated by a non-profit, neutral organization, on a non-profit basis. It is a modular system, initially with three component registries:
Artist & Licensor RegistryFree registration to all artists, copyright owners, licensors. PLUS membership not required. PLUS-ID optional. Look up by name, company name, or PLUS ID number. Note that this is not a portfolio site or marketing vehicle for artists. This is a single, centralized location not operated by any one industry trade association, where people of all industries may search for and locate the contact information for a rights holder or authorized licensor. License RegistryRegistration and lookup of image licenses via license-ID. Allows external,centralized storage of public and private license metadata. Permissions based access to private information. Open public access to information deemed public by licensor. Licensor enters license information directly into registry or via PLUS compliant software, or via ingestion of metadata embedded in image. Licensor is issued a unique identifier. That identifier is added to the metadata of images distributed by licensor. Anyone encountering that image may then access current rights and attribution for that image via a registry lookup, again, either directly from the registry or via PLUS compliant applications. Accommodates license updates. Prevents unauthorized license metadata tampering and avoids unsynchronized embedded license information. License ID may also be embedded via Digimarc watermark as a 2nd level of protection. Image RegistryRegistration and lookup of images via image ID and/or image recognition. Users upload low resolution images and receive unique identifiers, linked to their myPLUS account. Other users may lookup the rights holder and authorized licensors for any image via image-ID lookup. For those images lacking image IDs, image recognition capability will be offered, providing a licensor/rights holder name when a low resolution copy is uploaded by a searcher. Importantly, the Image Registry does not allow the browsing of images. Any image may be looked up, but there is no browsing the registry. Also, this is not a registry of potentially orphaned works. The latter type of registry will be a magnet for persons seeking to harvest free images that are already tagged as potential orphan works. it will be the worst scenario for rights holders, and should be discouraged. Further, any such registry is very inefficient for small business owners, as it is entirely impractical to monitor such a registry.
Also note that security measures are implemented across all registries to prevent the harvesting of email addresses and contact information by third parties. Also the registry is hosted on geographically separated redundant mirrored servers to maximize uptime.
Timeline for the registry:
The Artist & Licensor Registry is built and will be enter beta testing shortly. The License registry functionality is developed and will be integrated after an appropriate period of testing of the A&L Registry, and after that registry is populated by opt-in ingestion of trade associations members and non-members. The Image registry will be the last component, and will be tested shortly after the activation of the License registry.
Timeline for the camera?
Who knows, but it's an amazing technological advance!
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.
Last night, my assignment took me to Alexandria Virginia to cover Sen. McCain's expected win of the "Potomac Primaries", also referred to as the "Chesapeake Primaries". Early there was concern that Gov. Huckabee might win, but, in the end, it was a McCain sweep. While there, I decided to put together a piece I've called "Moving Pictures", a little play on words. For those on the inside, you know that the act of shooting and then digitally transmitting these images is called "moving pictures", but since I didn't shoot any video, these still images in this piece are, in effect, moving. So, here are several interviews of my colleagues and their approaches to the assignment, as well as images of them at work. (Comments 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.
 Where do I start? Or, better yet, when will it end? Getty Images(NYSE: GYI)has lost Genevieve Harley ( LinkedIn profile), just shy of a 5 year stint at Getty Images doing market development, to take on the title of Director of Sales at PhotoShelter. Clearly, the ink isn't even dry on this deal, as her LinkedIn profile still lists her at Getty. Evidence of a further commitment to getting their name (and your images' visibility) out is their landing former American Express Senior Product Manager Andrew Fingerman to be PhotoShelter's new vice president of marketing. (Continued after the Jump)
What I'll be curious about is Genevieve's historical approach to working in the Royalty Free market (she was at DigitalVision, an early RF company that Getty acquired early on), and how that will jibe with working alongside/on behalf of many photographers who hold their rights (and the control thereof) dear. Further, one thing she does bring is relationships with entertainment clients and the red carpet needs they have, and, I understand, that is/was a springboard into her work with other genre of clientèle. How far she dove into that realm was, no doubt, a query the good folks at PhotoShelter looked into before bringing her on board. Hopefully, Genevieve will spread her wings even further than what was, no doubt, a clipped-wing situation over at Getty.
 Does this signify the beginning of an exodus from Getty of some of their talent? We previously reported of the expected departure of the well known Jeff Kravitz (9/21/07 - Three Free Men - Getty Images on Lockdown) yet, somehow, Getty placated Kravitz enough to stay (or, perhaps, threatened him with a non-compete, who knows). Firings Departures of previous people on the eve of their new website launch (8/30/07, the 'virus' is spreading, & 8/24/07 Getty Site - Site Down as Stock Is Down?) as well as JDK's status change from Upper Northwester to New Yorker, could symbolize a further downward trend in Getty's talent pool.
A few weeks ago, I wrote (1/2208, JDK - Getty Images' CEO and KKR's Track Record - History Repeats Itself?) about a Q&A JDK had with a Canon Europe website:
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.
I wonder if his staff has now been disillusioned with the reality of a lack of viable buyers for GYI, and further, the revelation that they all weren't working for some Koom bay ya organization, but rather, as the tools of an industry roll-up?
What of Andrew Fingerman? HE has updated his LinkedIn profile, and while that's about all I know about him, I wish I'd known him while he was still at AmEx, since maybe he could have located my "lost in the mail" Centurion card. I do think that it's a good sign that PhotoShelter is looking to those outside the photo community for their team to make strategically sound moves as our industry evolves.
Let's see what the future portends for Getty moving forward. I think the future is bright for the good folks at PhotoShelter, and the now streamlined Digital Railroad. (DRR blog update, 2/11/08, worth a read!)
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.
 Say you're a couple of guys who pride themselves on phrases in their bio's like "He cut his teeth at Web 0.1 companies like HotWired and Electric Minds, but didn’t learn" ( Derek Powazek, Official Title: Chief Idea Guy and “Wouldn't it be cool if…” Officer), or a coder who clearly had too much time on his hands, and when some genius missing a genetic pair said "hey, let's give away fun prizes for photo assignments", Mr. Dan Hodos, earned the title "Chief Code Guy and “Yeah, we can do that” Officer. Who gave these guys VC money? The same thoughtful folks who gave David "that model was interesting, but didn't pan out" Norris (7/12/07, OnRequest - Realizing the Obvious)? Oh, I see, it appears that among them is Kim Garretson, Founder of Realist Venture Capital & Advisory Services, who lists in his profile that he's the "Embarrassed owner of LivingHome.com."Who are these people? They're beginning to sound like castaways on the island of misfit toys! (Continued after the Jump)
Garretson, seemingly too lazy to dump more money in what he writes "As the site owner I've gotten lazy and too focused on helping other Web consumer media sites/companies...I think I want to go all-visual for the new LH and just invite communities like Pixish to contribute what they want." Wow. Way to go "all-visual!" What, pray tell, do I earn, if you choose my images? You get: "Once a month we will award a vintage rock photo from the about to launch BackstageGallery.com."
Wow, let's see, a round-about site promotion - languishing LivingHome.com (which now just points to an empty blog) posts from Realist VC needs on Pixish, which, in turn, gives away photos from an as-yet-un-launched "vintage" rock-and-roll backstage gallery. Is this what happens when people get their hands on URLs with complete words (or hip-sounding, a la Pixish) in them? Crazy though, when you Google "Realist Venture Capital", the only entry that comes up is Garretson's entry on Pixish! Drilling down, you see Garretson's entry on LinkedIn, where we learn that his specialty is "Positioning early stage companies for raising money and getting customers and distribution agreements." Yet, the sites his lists on his profile are all no-entry blogs, or single splash pages. He highlights " Founder of a a micro-venture capital fund looking at consumer lifestyle media, marketing and e-commerce deals."
Wait, is is April 1st? Come on, my calendar program must be off about 45 days, it must be. Is this a joke?
These round-robin sites must be the dot-bombs of Web 2.0, ripe to fail and wipe VC funds, right? Powazek outlines how Pixish came to be here, on his blog. We have the guy that gave Pixish.com to Powazek to fault for this silly flight of fancy.
Here are a sampling of the requests:- Fray's Geek Issue - Derek Powazek - Winners will be published in Fray issue 2. Winners will get a few copies of the book, credit and promotion on the website, and our eternal thanks.
- A Leaf in the River Tattoo - Derek Powazek - The Details - I want your work on my body - I will paypal the winner $100 and email them a photo of their work on my arm upon completion.
- Visual identity for a film weblog - James McNally - It's a Wordpress blog with a custom header that's ok but I'm hoping to have someone develop a better visual identity for the site. Winner: I'm willing to pay but am not sure what's fair. I could also provide some DVDs of films that I've reviewed and no longer need. Wow, used DVD's! Nice!
- Design my blog header! - Heather Powazek Champ (that looks like a relation to Derek!) - winner gets 1 35mm Vivitar Utra Wide & Slim camera + 3 rolls of film..
- Hmmm, sounds like someone couldn't get a taker on eBay and decided to give away their (used?) camera and some film!
I could go on, and on, and on. Instead, here are a few of the "prizes" listed for various items:
8 - "The winner will get a hearty pat on the back"; 9 - "The prize is priceless: My love and admiration. ... as soon as I have them printed up, I'll send you an Ant's Eye View t-shirt. They'll be way cool. But really, do prizes and goodies drive your craft? Are you in this game because you love to see a grown man smile?"; 11 - "You'll bring serenity, hope and joy to people who really need it. Isn't it great?"
Ok, where's Aston Kutcher?!? I must be getting Punk'd here.
I don't know that I'd even have seen this, if it hadn't been for fellow blogger Photopreneur's entry on them.
Next up? Pixish OnRequest, or Pixish CustomStock! Quick! Someone squat on those URL's! Yesterday Powazek was busy in NYC giving a talk, in part, about "Too many people see crowdsourcing as shorthand for “cheap, plentiful content.” It’s not—managing a community can be expensive and time-consuming." So, let's see, we'll pay them with our smiles-from-grown-men; love-and-admiration;t-shirts; used DVD's; and antiquated film consumer film cameras! It'll be like throwing peanuts to the zoo monkeys!
Somebody, stop the insanity!
Yes, Forrest, stupid is, as stupid does.
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.
 When we last discussed Getty Images (NYSE: GYI) we were predicting lots of "oh, we can't discuss that" responses when the notion of a sale was brought up. True to form, JDK said just about that, when asked by the analysts, and it was a nice distraction from the otherwise mediocre-at-best news out of their Q4 call. Had there not been this false excitement created over "strategic alternatives", the stock might well have continued to be pummeled to new lows, every day. Now, with the NYT reporting that (surprise, surprise) Getty didn't get any viable offers at their otherwise inflated market cap of $1.6B, now today, they plummet by $2.45 in one day, almost a 10% drop. You can expect more blood-letting tomorrow. Daryl Lang, over at PDN, penned a nice piece - Report: Getty Images Unlikely To Be Sold , that sums things up pretty well. (Continued after the Jump)
What part of "our core stock photography business has stopped growing, in fact, it's declining" don't people get when he says something like that? (Jonathan Klein, as reported here on 9/20/07, from the Goldman Sachs 2007 Communacopia Conference). Someone needs to send his actuaries back to remedial Accounting 101 to properly value devalue the company to it's proper worth.
I will repeat what I've said before - look to a sub-$20/share figure to be the catalyst for calls for JDK to make his departure. The writing is on the wall, sub-$20 or not, that his time is over, and they just need to find a graceful way for him to exit. Nice that GYI moved him to NYC to attend the social circuit and talk up his company for a possible sale, but now that that's over and done with, he can check off "live in the upper Northwest" from his life plan, and remain in NYC looking for his next paycheck. No doubt, he'll have enough bonuses from his stellar performance at the helm of GYI to pay his bills on the backs of an industry his decisions and ideas devastated, that he won't need an immediate new job until the memory of the creative ruin he's left in his wake has become one sad, distant memory.
----
Note: I have not in the past, do not now, not do I have any plans to hold or otherwise invest 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.
I take solace in the fact that I am an accredited photojournalist, and I carry press credentials to that effect. Among those I carry are the bonafide offical press identification cards issued to be by the ASMP (American Society of Media Photographers), WHNPA (White House News Photographer's Association), and NPPA (National Press Photographer's Association), and PPA (Professional Photographers of America). These professional organizations are out there looking out for your interests in more than one way. Here's one which could save you from jail: (Continued after the Jump)
Gizmodo reports, in Photographer Mistaken for Gunman, about a photographer wandering with a tripod, and mistaken for carrying a gun. I've watched as federal and state law enforcement have tensed up, or placed their hands on their automatic weapons, as I have walked towards them with my camera equipment, or a tripod over my shoulder. I make sure to identify myself, be conversational/greet them, and not make any sudden moves, as I know I am under close scrutiny. I am always certain to have my press identification out in the open and visible. Among those on my lanyard around my neck are my ASMP and NPPA cards.
The last thing we need, what with all the restrictions already upon us as photographers, is to have a photographer thought of as threatening because it looks like they're carrying a weapon, or worse yet, as challenged as a true threat. I, and friends, have been unlawfully detained by police during protests, and I get very upset when this happens.
One example that, while I hadn't planned on outling in this piece, but which just became a natural fit, is the case of the Associated Press' Bilal Hussein, who too is an accredited photojournalist, but who has been unlawfully detained by the military because they consider him a spy, threat, or otherwise someone working against the US. Now, everyone under the sun that I know places great creedence in the word of the Associated Press, and if the AP says he's not what they are suggesting he is, then he's not. Period.
In the end, it's imperative that we carry ourselves above reproach, and make sure we have proper identification at all times identifying us as esteemed members of the Fourth Estate.
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.
 Back in September, I approached the booth at Photoshop World where the Drobo was humming along quietly. I was interested in the box, and thought it might be a solution. I asked a few questions of the booth attendant, and she just didn't know the answers, and the guy that did was talking to the person next to me about all sorts of non-Drobo things, as far as I could tell. After about 10 minutes waiting, I decided that I would do my research online instead. What did I find? Beware the results. (Continued after the Jump)
The immediate deal-breaker for me is it's proprietary file system, and I couldn't find anywhere that gave a justification for this, in fact, it seemed to be glossed over.
What is a proprietary file system? Well, back in the days of VHS vs. Betamax, VHS was an open system, that anyone could use, hence the broad adoption of VHS. Sony, on the other hand, developed Betamax, a proprietary way of playing tapes, and no one else could use it. So, Betamax died. Just as with this, if you have a drive on one computer, you can unplug it, or take it out if it's an internal drive, and plug it into another brand of computer, and the drive will work. With Drobo, if you're not plugging your drive into another Drobo, the data is just plain inaccessible. For me (and many others), that's just a deal-breaker.
There are, as you probably know, two types of people in this world - those that have had a hard drive fail, and those that will. If the you're the former, you'll question seriously a proprietary file system. If you're the latter, you'll be taking risks for which you don't know the consequences, until you have had a failure, and then you'll get religion.
But what other problems are there?
ZDNet did an interesting review, but they say "Another consumer friendly innovation is that the Drobo doesn’t require the user to pick up a screw driver to put the hard drive in to a carriage bay." Sorry, this isn't a selling point for me, in fact, owning professional drive systems from places like Wiebetech, OWC, and so forth, not to mention Apple's expensive RAID solutions, require that users can wield a screwdriver.
The review correctly criticizes the speed, at between 11 and 16 mb/sec. So, when you shoot 500 images on an assignment with a D2X/Mark II or better, be prepared to wait a long time just to copy your files over, open and update raw files with camera raw, and write them back. A FW800, GigE or SCSI connection will serve you much better.
What surprised me is that the reviewer says:We can build a server that supports this configuration with gigabit throughput for about $600 including shipping and that lets you serve data on the network at 70 MB/sec or more out of a single Gigabit Ethernet adapter which can be shared by all the PCs on the network. That does however require some skill or at least willingness to learn how to build a PC. But this isn’t the market that Data Robotics is targeting; they’re after Photographers or other professionals that just want something to work out of the box without having to mess with all these settings let alone build something. Those people lose money by the hour and they can’t afford to waste time building or learning about this stuff. The reality is, with the S L O W throughout, you'll be losing money by the minute as you wait for massive amounts of images to be copied to and fro, and this will add up - I promise you.
Photographer Doug Plummer reported on his problematic experiences with the Drobo and the good folks over at Luminous Landscape are (and have been) debating this for awhile too.
Don't trick yourself into thinking there is an easy path to effective storage, where you don't need to understand the behind-the -scenes issues at hand. You had to learn things like depth of field relative to focal length, and flash duration. So too, do you need to understand how to do effective image archiving and storage, and why the Drobo, as a turnkey solution (or any solution) just is not a good choice, in it's current incarnation.
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 ...
