Voluntarily letting everyone use your picture(s)

ColSebastianMoran said:
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.
Click to expand...



Hahahahahahhahahahaha

You didn't actually believe that when someone told you that to get free work out of you did you? Its the oldest lie in the book. Once you've given your work for free, you will NEVER, EVER get paid work from those people. EVER. You've established that your work is worth exactly nothing.
 
"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."

you make some very douche-like comments dont you...
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Hahahahahahhahahahaha

You didn't actually believe that when someone told you that to get free work out of you did you? Its the oldest lie in the book. Once you've given your work for free, you will NEVER, EVER get paid work from those people. EVER. You've established that your work is worth exactly nothing.
Click to expand...

You do realise that the OP is from Scandinavia. A superior society that does know a bit about making money. No Freddy Mac`s over there. It is a big world chris and we don`t all follow fiscal doctrine from the USA.
 
pakeha said:
You do realise that the OP is from Scandinavia. A superior society that does know a bit about making money. No Freddy Mac`s over there. It is a big world chris and we don`t all follow fiscal doctrine from the USA.
Click to expand...

That is a bit uncalled for. No, I don't think American society is perfect, from what I have observed of it from afar--not by a long shot--but the same could be said, I am sure, of Scandinavian countries, the UK, France, Canada, or even Australia. None are perfect. What I do like about RFF, though, is just how well members from so many different backgrounds and countries manage to get along with each other most of the time, IMHO it really is quite exceptional in this respect.

By all means disagree with Chris's opinions but there is no need to denigrate the country or society in which he lives, and by extension, the inhabitants thereof...
Regards,
Brett
 
Last edited:
Sarcophilus Harrisii said:
That is a bit uncalled for. No, I don't think American society is perfect, from what I have observed of it from afar--not by a long shot--but the same could be said, I am sure, of Scandinavian countries, the UK, France, Canada, or even Australia. None are perfect. What I do like about RFF, though, is just how well members from so many different backgrounds and countries manage to get along so well most of the time, IMHO it really is quite exceptional in this respect.

By all means disagree with Chris's opinions but there is no need to denigrate the country or society in which he lives, and by extension, the inhabitants thereof...
Regards,
Brett
Click to expand...
Actually Brett i think it is completely called for. Chris and a couple of others have completely turned the OP thread into `their' thread as often happens. The guy was simply sharing HIS personal ideas and experience.
Couple here got a bit precious.
regards
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I have spent enough time with editors and graphic designers and business leaders to know how they look on guys like the OP. They laugh at them and call them fools, idiots, and chumps. They do NOT appreciate the 'kindness' you think you're doing.
Click to expand...

Well, then it's a good thing that when I do it, they may benefit, but I'm definitely not doing it for them; I'm doing it for me. We all have different motivations. Money is one, but it's not the only one.

It does bring up the interesting question, though: if many people will do for free what you charge for, maybe what you're doing isn't all that special. I wonder if Salgado has the problem that clients tell him "We like what you do, but andersju does the same thing for free"?
 
Roger Hicks said:
I apologize for the intemperate language, but I'd still argue that a widespread 'free' model greatly devalues artistic endeavour.
Click to expand...

It devalues ARTISTIC endeavour? It certainly devalues COMMERCIAL endeavour, but equally certainly does not devalue artistic endeavour, IMO.
 
Roger Hicks said:
What do you do for a living?

Or are you saying that no-one should take pictures or write for reward?
Click to expand...

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I agree. He's just let others get rich off his talents while he gets nothing but worthless pats on the back. I can't do that. I've seen my son cry because we had no food in the past. I know from hard experience that we cannot live on air alone, and no one gives me free food. I have to pay for things I want and need, and if others want or need my work, they pay so my family can live.

Now, if someone wants to help a charity or their church or some other cause they believe in, that's totally alright. To give work to profitable businesses is just plain dumb. I have spent enough time with editors and graphic designers and business leaders to know how they look on guys like the OP. They laugh at them and call them fools, idiots, and chumps. They do NOT appreciate the 'kindness' you think you're doing.
Click to expand...

I think this is somewhat blown out of proportion. I never said you shouldn't take pictures or write for reward, and I certainly did not intend to advocate anything of the sort.

(For the record: at the moment I build web sites for a living; in the past I've worked as a journalist (taking pictures, too!), and I'm now getting back into journalism.)

Chris, I'm a big fan of your work and I can relate to your point of view; but I think you misunderstood me here, which is my fault, as I should have been clearer.

These were just a bunch of pictures of bands that I like that I took for fun. The pictures have little, or no, commercial value; Sonic Youth must've done >1000 shows and there are zillions of pictures online. This is just one of them, and not a particularly special one at that.

(As for undermining photojournalism: I've worked with some of the people who shoot gigs for a living in Sweden. Their pictures appear in the papers the day after, and no later than that. My pictures are completely irrelevant in that context.)

Giving free stuff to for-profit enterprises was not my intention, but if you give stuff to Wikipedia, it needs to be free (as in speech, not beer, as they say) - which includes no restrictions on commercial use. Which has the side effect that commercial entitites might use your pictures. Whether this is unfortunate or not is a matter of opinion, but in this case I feel the good outweighs the "bad" either way.
(Also note that I've never explicitly "given" anything directly to, or been in contact with, any business regarding these pictures: they have just taken them straight from Wikipedia, knowing that it's OK.)

Again, I'm not saying, and never said, that everything should be free. This is not a binary question; it's not either/or. Had it been more personal pictures, or a story I was trying to sell, I would obviously have done differently.

I also didn't do it to help the bands/artists in question; I just wanted to improve Wikipedia a tiny bit, a site that for a long time has provided me with an invaluable amount of knowledge. That's really all there's to it. :)

(Edit: I just realized that the wording of the thread title might be at fault here; perhaps a better one would be "Voluntarily letting everyone use some of your picture(s)" :))
 
pakeha said:
Actually Brett i think it is completely called for. Chris and a couple of others have completely turned the OP thread into `their' thread as often happens. The guy was simply sharing HIS personal ideas and experience.
Couple here got a bit precious.
regards
Click to expand...

Actually, I think your point regarding:
pakeha said:
....we don`t all follow fiscal doctrine from the USA.
Click to expand...
was probably well made, I am sure the rest of the world does not follow the US model of doing business in every respect and that what applies in one country; state; city; etc. can't always be assumed to be universal, can it? But we will have to agree to disagree about the rest--mutual respect, from what I have observed over the years, is one of the things that keeps us all on an even keel here. Denigrating whole societies to prove a point is spurious at best.
Regards,
Brett
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
You didn't actually believe that when someone told you that to get free work out of you did you? Its the oldest lie in the book. Once you've given your work for free, you will NEVER, EVER get paid work from those people.
Click to expand...

Chris, no, I'm not naive. When a potential client uses that as an argument, it's usually as you say and I decline.

But, the free work I give to colleagues has actually worked out very well for me. Chris, I really appreciate the free tech material you share with all of us here. That's somewhat like what I do.

Why is this thread such a hot button?
 
mdarnton said:
It devalues ARTISTIC endeavour? It certainly devalues COMMERCIAL endeavour, but equally certainly does not devalue artistic endeavour, IMO.
Click to expand...

Yes, artistic endeavour too, because it can very easily be taken to imply that all art is (a) equal and (b) worthless. But the OP's later post is less likely to press hot buttons.

Cheers,

R.
 
Wonderful Story

Wonderful Story

To the OP . . .

That is wonderful. I am glad that you are so happy with how things turned out. Making beautiful images and sharing them with many many people is an extremely rewarding experience.

I hang my pictures in coffee houses and it is VERY rewarding to think that people are enjoying them while they have coffee and chatter. I also put price tags on them. When people contact me and gush over how they love them but they are too expensive, I simply give them a free print and tell them to send any contribution they desire to any charity they desire.

"Free" is good.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Yes, artistic endeavour too, because it can very easily be taken to imply that all art is (a) equal and (b) worthless. But the OP's later post is less likely to press hot buttons.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

You bring up an interesting concern, Roger.
That art is valued more for its monetary worth than for its contributions to social or cultural cohesion is a key to the problems we face today.
 
"When you charge nothing for a photo, people will think it's worth nothing."

When you define dollars as the only way to measure value, you have already lost my respect.
 
The more that images are given away for free, the harder it is for others (professionals) to make a living as users of images have an increased pool of free items to use. I don't believe anything should be given away to any entitiy that can profit from it.

I'm an amateur photographer but a professional engineer and when I started my own firm I ran into potential clients looking for free advice, holding out the prospect of doing billable work. Starting out, and thinking this could be an entree to future work, I fell for it in once. But all it led to was attempts to get more out of me for nothing. I have since gone on to have many mutually beneficial relationships with clients, fair compenation for good professional service. I agree with Chris Crawford on this one, it is about respect.
 
You are all living in a fantasy world.

The paradigm for access and control of information, data, images, text, etc, has all changed.

You can no longer claim that "charging more for everything" makes the price of everything higher and gives it a higher worth. You can no longer protect the process.

That's the thinking of a Medieval Guild.

Technology and the world have changed. You are no longer in control. You have to define a new way to derive income from your work.

Making no sales and getting no income due to stubbornness defines you in your commercial endeavors. Your work is intrinsically worth nothing if you don't make money from it.

You have to realize that there are literally trillions of images being created every year. (and is it all being put up for grabs online) It is not the same as the previous century where photography was a "black art" and there were very few true masters who could charge top dollar for high grade photographs. Now, every goon can buy a cheap camera and turn out technically perfect images by the hundreds of thousands.

Artistically, that is another story.


I don't believe anything should be given away to any entity that can profit from it.
Click to expand...
You may not believe it, but the reality is that any entity can procure almost any image for free. There is very little that is unique, unless you are paid to exclusively create the content. Your idea that you can withhold your content for ransom is ludicrous.
 
There's a surprising amount of ignorance by some very vocal contributors to this thread about what Wikipedia is. I can only conclude they don't care to read the OP's explanations, much less go to the source and see for themselves.

Photojournalism, and indeed professional still photography as a whole, is a dead man walking. A highly skilled craft that is becoming all but obsolete due to technological progress. Much like engraving 150 years ago. There is reason to fear and lament this change, but it is inevitable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom