Voluntarily letting everyone use your picture(s)

[batterytypehah!]

Read the OP.

Then read it again.

Then explain to me how a business gets "rich" on something they in turn must share with everybody, just like the original creator did.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Wikipedia is not a business.

Perhaps not -- though given their revenue stream from donations, I stress 'perhaps' -- but Chris's point that the pictures are also used by for-profit organizations is unanswerable.

Cheers,

R.

 

[intheviewfinder]

The other problem with Creative Commons, suppose some organization with a political or philosophical slant which you disagree with uses your photo in a campaign. Guess what? You have no recourse as long as they credited you. Oh yeah they credited you, now folks think you believe that stuff too.

 

[I Love Film]

Have you ever travelled overseas or spent any time outside of a few States in the USA? Ever been a few years in Asia or even New York City? Ever worked as a commercial photographer for months on a contract or doing a big project for a publisher? Ever been paid more than $50,000 for a job?

Please post again after you've gained actual experience.

They're seen as such by the people they give the stuff to. I've been told this many, many times over the years by my clients. Those people appreciated my gift. Businesses do not, they look down on you for it.

 

[batterytypehah!]

Perhaps not -- though given their revenue stream from donations, I stress 'perhaps' -- but Chris's point that the pictures are also used by for-profit organizations is unanswerable.

Cheers,

R.

I find I just did answer that one, although probably while you were typing.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I know dozens of publishers, photographers, businesspeople.

They are not all thieving conspirers who laugh at the poor starving artists. That is a sophomoric perception.

I too know dozens of publishers, photographers, businesspeople. In fact, I probably know more professional photographers and publishers than you do, given what I do for a living. Some of them are, in fact, thieving conspirators, and the higher you go up the financial tree, the more this is the case. The ones highest up the financial tree are the ones who set the policy.

Yes, we all do things for nothing for friends. But the idea that everything should be free, or even that it can be, is worse than sophomoric. It is cretinous. It means that ALL art, writing, etc., is valued at nothing, because that is the price at which people with well-paying jobs value their hobby output, regardless of whether it is good or bad (and it's usually bad, unlike the OP's images).

Are you a professional photographer or writer?

Cheers,

R.

 

[I Love Film]

Writer, former photographer and editor too. I now no longer write for magazines, I am an advertising copywriter for worldwide marketing campaigns.

I never said anything which implied that ALL work should be for free. I don't know where you read that in.

Obviously, I don't believe that at all.

 

[n5jrn]

I agree with Roger and Chris. I think it's totally appropriate to give one's work to worthy non-profit causes. But as soon as someone wants to make money with one of my images, I am going to demand that s/he share some of that money with me.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Writer, former photographer and editor too. I now no longer write for magazines, I am an advertising copywriter for worldwide marketing campaigns.

I never said anything which implied that ALL work should be for free. I don't know where you read that in.

Obviously, I don't believe that at all.

I apologize for the intemperate language, but I'd still argue that a widespread 'free' model greatly devalues artistic endeavour, by encouraging suits to get whatever they can, for nothing.

Copywriting is always commissioned, and is always an interesting topic. Some point to the great skill it often requires. Others call it prostitution. Both, of course, can be right, and both can be wrong. But I'd dispute that it has a great deal to do with the vast majority of paid-for writing or photography.

Cheers,

R.

 

[I Love Film]

Please inform all of us when that happens.

But as soon as someone wants to make money with one of my images, I am going to demand that s/he share some of that money with me.

 

[I Love Film]

Prostitution pays very well, if you're good at it. The more I'm prostituted, the better.

The only thing that pays better is a good book or screenplay, where I also have had some success.

(I didn't compare it to any paid-for photography. You asked me what I did, and I told you)

Copywriting is always commissioned, and is always an interesting topic. Some point to the great skill it often requires. Others call it prostitution. Both, of course, can be right, and both can be wrong. But I'd dispute that it has a great deal to do with the vast majority of paid-for writing or photography.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Prostitution pays very well, if you're good at it. The more I'm prostituted, the better.

The only thing that pays better is a good book or screenplay, where I also have had some success.

(I didn't compare it to any paid-for photography. You asked me what I did, and I told you)

Fair enough.

Cheers,

R.

 

[n5jrn]

Please inform all of us when that happens.

Frankly, I'd rather have this never happen, then have my work be used for gain (for a purpose which I despise), and receive nothing in return.

 

[Jack Conrad]

You might also think of it as free advertising.

Photo's 1, 2, and 3 are awesome. Thanks.

Now, I'm not gonna write another word til I get paid. Lol...

 

[isoterica]

Adding up the numbers, I realized this old picture must have been viewed more than four million times by now. (And that's not counting the dozen or so non-English Wikipedias where it's also used. The online Encyclopædia Britannica uses it too - not that anyone cares anymore 😉)

Thanks to the license, I've seen the pictures and my name in all kinds of places - personal blogs, major music sites, magazines, YouTube videos, .. - and I receive emails every now and then. It's like I've set them free: they no longer belong to me, but to everyone, and were I to disappear tomorrow the pictures will survive and keep being used as long as people still care about them. Just a nice feeling, is all.

This is amazing and good for you! In doing a good deed for a band that you liked your photos are now all over.. this is a great story, thank you for sharing it.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

He DOES get a benefit! But, even if not...

He DOES get a benefit! But, even if not...

Dear Chris,

Maybe I wouldn't be quite as harsh as that.

Or maybe, on second thoughts, I would.

Wait a minute, guys!

Anders does get a commercial benefit out of this. His photo is seen by millions with his name attached. This is a time-tested personal professional promotion tactic: Provide free samples so people know your work. In this case, he has figured out a way to do so at a scale of millions of viewers. I think this is a good story.

In my professional field (not photography), as I grow older, I have started doing things like this. In particular, I have done several things to teach young people to do the work I do. This has been personally rewarding, created some wonderful relationships, and has brought me business over time.

But, even if he didn't get a commercial benefit, and he just wants to do this for the personal sense of accomplishment, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Although the economic system is visible every day, every time you visit a museum you notice that the world doesn't turn just on economic transactions.

And, Anders, I really like your images. I really like your story.

 

[kevin_v]

The OP shared his under the creative commons variation "Attribution-ShareAlike." For those who are opposed to commercial use, I'd like to point out there is the variation "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike."

 

[Pablito]

Ever been paid more than $50,000 for a job?

Actually, yes. Quite a bit more than that.

Not to mention the issue of control over how the images are used, which I don't give up lightly.

 

[Pablito]

Wait a minute, guys!

Anders does get a commercial benefit out of this. His photo is seen by millions with his name attached. This is a time-tested personal professional promotion tactic: Provide free samples so people know your work. In this case, he has figured out a way to do so at a scale of millions of viewers. I think this is a good story.

It is a time tested way of destroying the field of professional photojournalism.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Have you ever travelled overseas or spent any time outside of a few States in the USA? Ever been a few years in Asia or even New York City? Ever worked as a commercial photographer for months on a contract or doing a big project for a publisher? Ever been paid more than $50,000 for a job?

Please post again after you've gained actual experience.

Given that you've given ZERO evidence that you've done anything, even for $5, its hard to see you as anything but an internet pissant. As the KIng of Spain said to Hugo Chavez: "¿Por que no te callas?" (why don't you shut up?).