Vanity Publishing

Anouilh

The temptation to share photos with a wide audience led me to join this site:

http://jpgmag.com/people/Anouilh

The licence involves allowing one's photos to be used on the JPG magazine site, but, if you change your mind, deleting the photos means that permission no longer applies.

Do many others here find vanity publishing alluring?

smelltheglove

No the way I see it is if a paper wants a picture badly enough they will pay a photographer to take it, if they print my free picture than I am in effect taking the business away from another photographer.

When it comes to free newspapers that do not have photographers maybe, if in community interest. Also if it is a website that will not otherwise be paying maybe but definitely not any paper that profits from content.

DaireQuinlan

I think jpg is a bit differant though. It was set up by the flickr guys, its a sorta community which produces a monthly magazine from submitted content. You can subscribe to the print version, or you can just download a full PDF version if you like for free. My problem with it is that, much like flickr, 99% of the content is complete trash. But its turgid verbose trash so it's much harder to wade through the garbage to find the good stuff.

charybdis

smelltheglove wrote: »

No the way I see it is if a paper wants a picture badly enough they will pay a photographer to take it, if they print my free picture than I am in effect taking the business away from another photographer.

In the same way driving someone to the airport is taking the business away from taxi drivers?

In the same way preventing physical harm being visited upon someone is taking the business away from hospitals?

Paulw

charybdis wrote: »

In the same way driving someone to the airport is taking the business away from taxi drivers?

In the same way preventing physical harm being visited upon someone is taking the business away from hospitals?

To the 1st part - No. Taxi drivers are already saying there are too many other taxi drivers out there doing them out of business, so you driving someone to the airport isn't really going to make it worse.

To the 2nd part - hospitals are a cost to the state, so doing them out of business is good for the economy, so you're only helping.

Next rediculous rebuttal?

Giving away your images for free seldom does anyone any good, and even devalues your own work.

DotOrg

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

You can subscribe to the print version, or you can just download a full PDF version if you like for free.

the print version closed down at the end of last year due to finances and lots of people like me who had a subscription, never got a refund

charybdis

Paulw wrote: »

To the 1st part - No. Taxi drivers are already saying there are too many other taxi drivers out there doing them out of business, so you driving someone to the airport isn't really going to make it worse.

To the 2nd part - hospitals are a cost to the state, so doing them out of business is good for the economy, so you're only helping.

Next rediculous rebuttal?

You have not addressed the point I was making. I could just as easily say: "Photographers are already saying there are too free images out there doing them out of business, so you offering yours for free isn't really going to make it worse", not all medical care is state-funded, and I'd be interested in hearing why you think providing the government with additional revenue is "good for the economy".

Paulw wrote: »

Giving away your images for free seldom does anyone any good, and even devalues your own work.

It sounds like you're saying giving your work away for free seldom does people who are offering similar services for pay any good. I'm also interested as to how you arrived at an objective idea of "value".

Anouilh

Rather than get stuck between Scylla and Charybdis, it might be worth considering how publishing is gradually changing:

http://www.futureofthebook.org/blog/archives/tags/lulu/

Anybody can now make a book and the idea of presenting family and friends with a limited print edition as a gift has been taken up by many.

Allowing others to use one's photo can lead to lack of control, however.

I like "Picture This", http://picturethis.channel4.com/profile/77969956@N00,
but since the licence is very open I have not rushed to add many photos there.

Borderfox

Depending on the contract with a client I sometimes release pictures to press at no cost to increase publicity for the client/event, I have been already paid for my work and if I get paid by the publication then that is a bonus (90% do pay)

smash

Does anyone know of any good syndication agencies that will distribute photos for you then? and what their rates are like...

Anouilh

steve06 wrote: »

Does anyone know of any good syndication agencies that will distribute photos for you then? and what their rates are like...

Alamy seems to be big in Europe.

This is a useful interview, even though it applies to the U.S.

http://www.photosecrets.com/tips.postcard.jb4.html

I think that, like with so many businesses, having a manager for sales would be essential, as photography itself is so time consuming.

For hobbyists, Utata is a really good site, I think.
There are many essays on technique and challenges on different themes:

http://www.utata.org/members/anouilh/

There was a thread some time back here about agencies and selling photos online. I'll try to find it.

Borderfox

For some of the jobs I do having somebody on the ground sending shots as they are taken would be ideal but most times funds dont allow that. I must look into some other agencies as I am the only person covering Tattersalls Ireland

Anouilh

This

http://www.ppai.ie/photographer/Matt-Kavanagh/47/

might be helpful for ideas and links.


The ppai has so many members and their work is very varied.

Anouilh

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I think jpg is a bit differant though. It was set up by the flickr guys, its a sorta community which produces a monthly magazine from submitted content. You can subscribe to the print version, or you can just download a full PDF version if you like for free. My problem with it is that, much like flickr, 99% of the content is complete trash. But its turgid verbose trash so it's much harder to wade through the garbage to find the good stuff.

This

http://www.utata.org/ink/2006/37658.php

explains the history of JPG magazine.

The advantage of Flickr, from the viewer's point of view, is that it is very easy to skim over dull images. Usually I find the best work by looking in well run groups which keep a standard up.