Jump to content

How do you find pictures that have been licensed


Recommended Posts

I'm hoping some people can give me some tips, as I am having issues finding my images that have been licenced. I have tried Google searches using a combination of my name and the agency name .eg ALamy to little effect. Similarly I have tried similar searches on Amazon, and have found a few things. Is there anything else I should e doing? Keyword combinations etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A short while ago it was easier to find images using Google Images and perhaps the Chrome plugin that made it really easy. But recently many magazines and newspapers are hiding the images behind supscription barriers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do a couple of things:

 

Google Images: type in your pseudonym in quotes. For example, I put "julian elliott". To get rid of nonsensical stuff for example images on art.com I add -art.com

Google Books: as above. Just found two books I didn't know about :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting!     I had a sale of  DX5PFF,  which I had already spotted in Mail on Line.

 

This MOL sale was reported yesterday.    Searching on Google images reveals usages on three other sites:

 

Affordable Holiday Deals

UK Newsday

usa.onlinenigeria

 

Of course I could start chasing them for payment, but copyright theft is a fact, and I feel that life is just too short to bother.

 

What, if  anything would you do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting!     I had a sale of  DX5PFF,  which I had already spotted in Mail on Line.

 

This MOL sale was reported yesterday.    Searching on Google images reveals usages on three other sites:

 

Affordable Holiday Deals

UK Newsday

usa.onlinenigeria

 

Of course I could start chasing them for payment, but copyright theft is a fact, and I feel that life is just too short to bother.

 

What, if  anything would you do?

 

Welcome in the club. This is the main reason for my thoughts about leaving the newspaper deal. I have mostly given up chasing the illegal usages you describe, often some are copying the whole article and leaving no way of contact. If you chase the URL and find the owner they claim that they are not responsible for the various uploaders' contents, they kind of sell the space. I don't think this holds legally in the end.  But unless it is a decent site with contact possibilities and a reasonable chance of getting paid I am usually not wasting my time. It should not be like this, and it often results in more uses which are difficult to chase. Yesterday I was credited usd 3.28 net for a newspaper use like this. It is not worth it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niels,

 

I am glad that I opted into the newspaper scheme.   In sales number terms they are about 22% of my total.   The prices for use in the print newspaper (as opposed to editorial website) are reasonable, the last two were $65 gross each and the previous few were $22.    What does pay consistently badly, and is more open to theft, is the on-line-only usage or "Editorial Website" they usually are between $4 and $7 gross.   Even so, a five minute shoot of a local public building three years ago, has yielded 26 sales aggregating $274.

 

The copyright infringements that I mentioned would, I think, only yield small payments, certainly not worth the bother.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The copyright infringements that I mentioned would, I think, only yield small payments, certainly not worth the bother.  

It's only worthwhile in the UK now you can threaten them with the new small claims procedure.

Elsewhere if they're not English speaking or if there's no email address I don't even bother.

Mail Online is particularly prolifically ripped off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always been in the newspaper scheme and whereas a lot of images go to the mail online or the guardian online for single figure prices, last month I had an image licensed to a British newspaper for $107 gross, (I think it might have been the Sun as it had a 5m print run), so reasonable prices can still be had despite being in the scheme.

 

I agree also with those above when they say that sometimes the guardian and the mail will use the same images time and time again and the income increases...

 

Kumar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • 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.