| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Need some free photo content for your blog?
David Harpe, Photographer
 |
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 11:10 PM on 12.07.08 |
->> http://www.picapp.com/
Interesting approach. They apparently are trying to support the licensing fees with advertising embedded with the photographs.
It's pretty current stuff. They have images from the Dallas / Pittsburgh game up already. |
|
Khai Le, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Riverside | CA | USA | Posted: 1:16 AM on 12.08.08 |
->> The flash image viewer was stuck on loading when I tried visiting some blogs using it.
http://www.photrade.com does a similar thing.
It is an interesting idea though. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 9:37 AM on 12.08.08 |
| ->> I think what amazed me about this site is you can get nearly realtime content from Corbis, Getty, Newscom, etc. all completely free, all completely unwatermarked aside from their tiny ad at the bottom. That can't be cheap, so I'm surprised they can support it with simple adwords revenue. |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 5:24 PM on 08.01.09 |
->> PicApp has partnered with quite a few big name wires and they claim that the ad revenue is shared between themselves and content owners, which I assume is us, the copyright owners.
I did a quick search on PicApp and saw several SS.com members images on there. Has anyone earned a dime from PicApp or is it just the wires and PicApp that are profiting from our images? If so, how can that be? |
|
Curtis Clegg, Photographer
|
Sycamore | IL | USA | Posted: 7:10 PM on 08.01.09 |
| ->> I clicked on the Photrade link... its services have been discontinued already. |
|
Jeff Fusco, Photographer
|
Philadelphia | PA | USA | Posted: 7:46 PM on 08.01.09 |
| ->> Well It is certainly has up to date content. I just sent my self an image I took last night for a wire service. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 12:01 AM on 08.02.09 |
->> Umm...PIcapp is the DEVIL. I would be interested to see if anyone has ever received money of an appreciable amount from them. Yes, you can get "free" content for your blog. Guess what, websites can also get "free" editorial content. So when photographers or smaller wire services / photo agencies (THAT'S ME) try to market to them they hear, "Well, why should we pay for $25 for an image when we can get it for free from Picapp and let them take care of paying the photographer?"
The existence of this business model is a crushing blow for us who work in the middle. Getty, MCT, Corbis and the like filter images that way because they already have the volume, maybe it adds a little extra to someone's paycheck somewhere, but it doesn't help anyone but them.
It is probably the common thread on here...and Marshall McLuhan hit on it first...the homogenization of the media. OK, maybe it wasn't exactly McLuhan, but close enough.
In the end small newspapers, small wire services and the individual photographers will go the way of the corner grocery store and the 5 and Dime. Instead of McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy's, it will be Getty, AP and whoever survives between AFP, EPA, MCT, Corbis and the rest. And some of these folks already share images.
We railed on the $30 magzine cover. This is just as bad, if not worse. It is everyday life for free. |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 6:33 PM on 08.02.09 |
| ->> Thank you Scott. It seems that if your wire service partners with Newscom, then your images will appear on PicApp - free to anyone who wants them. Sadly I found over 200 of my images on there (which infuriates me). I am completely up in arms about this and can't believe there isn't more reaction to this. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington | IL | United States | Posted: 7:00 PM on 08.02.09 |
| ->> This is really interesting. I have a large number of images out there I found searching on just one term. All are credited to Newscom. I've not seen a dime - at least that I'm aware of, but maybe no one has actually licensed one to use. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 9:31 AM on 08.03.09 |
->> This is all a very strange arena now. Newscom is kind of a necessary evil. So many of these smaller websites or "blog-houses" have contracts for unlimited photos per month from Newscom. So, you can't approach places like B5 Media individually, you will never get in the door. Also, Newscom services places I would never think of hitting up to run images - Wall Street Journal and Christian Science Monitor for horse racing photos comes to mind.
Now we have Picapp. Ugh. So in the business model that exists, we shoot it, we cross-post to Newcom, then they give it to Picapp, who might get it placed, but Picapp doesn't pay Newcom until they have the "impressions", and then Newscom doesn't give us our 50% until, well, you get the idea.
Not good. Not good at all. And even if you do get something, it is likely to be so watered down by takeout that you are getting 20-25% of the original price. Lets be real he, this arrangement didn't come into existence to make photographers more money. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington | IL | United States | Posted: 9:51 PM on 09.01.09 |
->> Just checked back on this issue. I had forwarded a question to the only place I figured mine could have come from. They told me they had already requested that they all be removed and my question prompted a repeat of that request.
I just looked and mine are all removed. Hopefully others had similar luck. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|