Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The BBC are asking photographers to submit photos to England's Big Picture, with the promise that the best ones will be pubished on the BBC website. However, their largesse does not extend to their terms and conditions.

 

“In contributing to England's Big Picture you agree to grant us a royalty-free, non-exclusive licence to publish and otherwise use the material in any way that we want, and in any media worldwide. It's important to note, however, that you still own the copyright to everything you contribute to England's Big Picture, and that if your image is accepted, we will publish your name alongside”…

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr Standfast said:

Fond as I am of the BBC I feel this offer is for someone else.

That's my point (I didn't post as a recommendation).  😎

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Morrison said:

That's my point (I didn't post as a recommendation).  😎

 

 

For sure.  Never any doubt!  I was just looking for the most polite way to direct the Beeb to the Oscar Foxtrot depatment.  😇

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tell them to go forth and multiply.

 

Allan

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My last sale was for $1.50, RM editorial in perpetuity whatever that means. I might as well give it away. And it was not an easy picture to take - i.e. it took photographic knowledge and skill as well as a steep walk. 

 

No doubt there will be thousands of people happy to give away their images to the BBC and many of them will have been taken on smartphones and be of excellent quality. The times have changed people. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, MDM said:

My last sale was for $1.50, RM editorial in perpetuity whatever that means. I might as well give it away. And it was not an easy picture to take - i.e. it took photographic knowledge and skill as well as a steep walk. 

 

No doubt there will be thousands of people happy to give away their images to the BBC and many of them will have been taken on smartphones and be of excellent quality. The times have changed people. 

The reason why there is no longer any good money in stock photography, and there are many people that are more than happy just to have a credit line for their work.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Liam Bunce said:

The reason why there is no longer any good money in stock photography, and there are many people that are more than happy just to have a credit line for their work.

 

More so with local than national press, but mainly the race to the bottom fuelled by MS agencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't intending yet another rant about microstock. We all know about that and it is not the only reason for the enormous decline in publication fees for images. 

 

One point I was trying to make was that photography is much more accessible to everyone nowadays than ever before. You don't need professional equipment or even a real camera to take a great picture, as the quality of smartphone images is perfectly good enough for most online uses. 

 

Given that Alamy are now selling some images at the rock bottom level, would it be better if the BBC offered a pittance (say 50 pence) per image used? No that would be even more insulting than asking for people to submit images for fun? 

 

That is what England's Big Picture is about it seems to me - fun and enjoyment of photography- it is not about sourcing professional images for the BBC to use and make money from. The terms and conditions are similar to Instagram (and Facebook) except that the last time I looked I think they could actually sublicense any images uploaded for any purpose? Those who use Instagram professionally are well aware that it is a marketing tool and have to weigh up the positives against the negatives.  Uploading images to England's Big Picture is no different really than uploading to social media.

 

The times have changed and we are never going back to the good old days. So perhaps the old tenet of never providing images for publication for free has changed as well. The fact that we are selling some images here for almost nothing at the moment and it appears the situation may be declining rapidly as the race towards the bottom continues, then perhaps it is time for a rethink, at least in relation to marketing oneself. 

Edited by MDM
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

 

The terms and conditions are similar to Instagram (and Facebook) except that the last time I looked I think they could actually sublicense any images uploaded for any purpose?

Facebook certainly don't claim to own, have any rights to, or even choose to use your images for their own business, but they need your permission to post them on their platform, on 'your' page.

Edited by mickfly
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mickfly said:

Facebook certainly don't claim to own, have any rights to, or even choose to use your images for their own business, but they need your permission to post them on their platform, on 'your' page.

 

Maybe it is never used but In Paragraph 4 of Section 3 of Section 3 of Facebook's Terms of Service (The permissions you give us), it does actually say you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty free bla bla bla ...in relation to content posted on Facebook. I did wonder if this affected exclusivity on Alamy a few years back but James Allsworth posted something on the forum saying that social media usage did not mean images could not be marked exclusive.

 

More relevant to what I was saying above is this article on the BBC website this evening. There is one professional image and a couple of shots by a local enthusiast called Villager Jim. I wonder if he got paid anything. In any case, his images are not as sharp as the pro one but would be more than adequate to illustrate the event.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/08/2021 at 21:30, MDM said:

 

Maybe it is never used but In Paragraph 4 of Section 3 of Section 3 of Facebook's Terms of Service (The permissions you give us), it does actually say you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty free bla bla bla ...in relation to content posted on Facebook. I did wonder if this affected exclusivity on Alamy a few years back but James Allsworth posted something on the forum saying that social media usage did not mean images could not be marked exclusive.

 

More relevant to what I was saying above is this article on the BBC website this evening. There is one professional image and a couple of shots by a local enthusiast called Villager Jim. I wonder if he got paid anything. In any case, his images are not as sharp as the pro one but would be more than adequate to illustrate the event.

Villager Jim is more than a local enthusiast, he has 330,000 followers and would have provided the images himself, no doubt for payment.
he has a website and shop... and may even be on Alamy!
The shots look like video screen captures, but he has a massive library of good pictures.
As far as I'm aware facebook can't supply it's users posted images to the media and all use is based on the users own privacy settings whilst using the platform. Any licence (even if it's neccesary for them to be able to serve you your own images on their platform finishes when you delete your account, and media is deleted from their servers within 90 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mickfly said:

Villager Jim is more than a local enthusiast, he has 330,000 followers and would have provided the images himself, no doubt for payment.
he has a website and shop... and may even be on Alamy!
The shots look like video screen captures, but he has a massive library of good pictures.
 

 

Interesting about Villager Jim. It just goes to show one shouldn't judge a book by its cover. Presumably he used a drone judging by the angle of the shots. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/08/2021 at 23:25, MDM said:

 

Interesting about Villager Jim. It just goes to show one shouldn't judge a book by its cover. Presumably he used a drone judging by the angle of the shots. 

I'm not sure he would have been flying a drone when Helicopters are in the air, so probably a long lens and, maybe a video frame capture.
My RX10 mk4 produces some acceptable video caps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.