February 28, 2007 by pmelcher.

No one is safe. No one. The latest news is that Getty might be responsible for this. News is that they were trying to gobble up yet another agency and ended up in the wrong place.

While they might have done a controlled leak regarding the purchase of Jupiter Media, so that everyone would be looking the other way, they are putting into motion exactly what they said they would. Jonathan Klein did say at the shareholders meeting that they had acquisitions in the works for 2007. With Mediavast, and now Michaels Ochs, they are aggressively trying to corner the celebrity market. Faithful to their philosophy, they acquire what they cannot destroy.

Everyone was caught by surprise. We all thought, me included, that the aggressive acquisition phase was over and that they would grow from within. We all got it wrong. They even managed, once again, to outsmart the sleeping giant and closest competitor, Corbis. One wonders sometimes if there is any senior management at Corbis, or have they all gone on vacation. Where were they when all these simultaneous negotiations were going on ? investigating new locations to “store” (read “bury”) images. Was I wrong ? Is that sinkhole a work of Corbis preservation team ?

If Getty acquires an agency or collection, people are scared. If Corbis does the same, people are happy. That means no more competition, the images will officially be retired from the market and never be seen again.

What does the recent acquisitions mean for the marketplace ? If Getty aggressively exercise its monopoly by quickly increasing prices, image buyers will get upset as quickly. If they do it in a very subtle way, which I think they will, no one will complain. After all, images buyers have always looked for a central location for all their image needs.

What will be left for all the other agencies, then?

One way to beat the beast would be to combine forces. 2007 should be the year of the portals. If PACA members had some sense of survival, they would create a portal which would make image buyers’ life much easier.

Same goes for the smaller celebrity photo agencies and other niche news agencies. In France, using an application called PIXPALACE, the majority of agencies have been able to sustained their growth by combining their forces. It has been done in Germany with APIS and PictureMaxx, in England, less successfully, with IDS.

In the US, independent photographers are able to do it with systems like Photoshelter and DigitalRailroad. Agencies can use an image depot, a consignment portal called Newscom. But their business model is antiquated and out of touch with the marketplace.

It will really be no surprise me if we start seeing aggregated image marketplaces pop up. Their real challenge will be to become competitive against such an powerful offering as Getty in front of them. The answer lies where it has always been : Content. You have compelling content, you have clients. Getty or no Getty.

On another note:

I read this article today and I still cannot make any sense out of it, so I will share with you: Paris the Thought: A.P. Says Au Revoir to Hilton Hottie

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

February 26, 2007 by pmelcher.

Tired of going to multiple websites to find your photo industry news ? Well, playing around with RSS feeds, I was able to combine a few in the Photo Industry News Portal. (warning: hosting site subject to sudden burn outs)
Unfortunately, some of the other photo sites do not know about RSS feeds, therefore cannot be included. Of course, I am open to any addition. The link will also remain available on the top left, along with the search engine.
let me know.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

February 25, 2007 by pmelcher.

Our civilization has not changed that much, has it? The show can now be watched from anywhere in the world, and the gladiators are not strong professional trained men but young fragile mothers. They are celebrities, like the ancient gladiators were, superstars actually, pushed inside an arena surrounded by an endless cheering and chanting crowd that demands more acts of heroism. More actions, more drama, more, more. Trapped in a media bowl, these celebrities seem to run like chickens with no heads. One day, trying to appease the angry and demanding mob, and at other times, trying to escape, with no chance of success. They cannot escape, the world is the arena. The more they stumble and fall, the more we laugh.
As I watch the drama unfolding before our eyes of the very well photographed downfall of superstar Britney Spears, I cannot prevent myself from thinking about Rome and the Colosseum.
It seems that we have the same angry crowds, cheering for more blood, more drama, laughing and joking about the miseries of others as to better forget their own. They are willing to put their heroes of yesterday to death, as long as they can watch along the way. And for some reason, those celebrities make no effort to flee the arena, but rather, instead, bump off the walls of the arena, from one Los Angeles club to another.
Every generation lifts a human to the firmament of stardom only to crush them later, as they grow older. The previous generation had Michael Jackson, this one has Britney Spears.
Photographers are the happy participants of this self flagellation broadcasted worldwide as we go about our daily lives. No need to buy tickets and sit in an enclosed stadium to watch. We all have prime seats. As others photographs US soldiers being shot down in the dirty suburbs of Babylonia by 21 st century barbarians, those photographers offer us the griming details of psychological downfall.
We love to see our idols fall as we cheer for more. We love to rip them apart, slowly taking out their flesh and watching their sufferings. We seem to never be satisfied.
Like the lady Diana drama, we will be swift and fast to blame the photographers when things go sour. But there are only the conduits of our insatiable need to watch and see for ourselves. They will have done nothing more then their job of reporting what we demand to see, to satisfy the crowds’ hunger for tragedy and despair.
If the Romans had photographers, they would have photographed the gladiators’ struggle for survival. No one would have blamed them for the death of a hero. Today, we have no Colosseum. The media have replaced that. We do not stage fights, we photograph the real ones and bring them into our houses.
We have no need to send lions into an arena with defenseless slaves, we are the lions.
Today, we even ask for the public to participate, as they brandish their ever so shinny mega pixeled cell phones in the face of the dead and dying. If they are lucky, they will even get a piece of the revenues generated by the show.
Seems the games never stopped and probably never will. Seems that photographers both in Iraq or in Los Angeles are the happy addition to the show. Seems we will all continue to watch it through a distant prism and get really offended when that prism shows us too many details. Seems that we will continue to do absolutely nothing to change it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

February 24, 2007 by pmelcher.

It’s award season, even in the photography world. The “Picture of the Year International” is in progress and a lot of the winners have been already announced. While it boasts itself as being international, this competition is very American centric, thus very focused on the “one image” concept. Furthermore, it only covers news and sports stories that address US sensibilities.

However, always a pleasure to browse through the results and see some great, and not so great, images. A lot a familiar names this year as well as too much black and white.

I’ll let you be the judge and see for yourself : POYI

Posted in newspaper, photojournalism, editorial, news | Print | No Comments »

February 23, 2007 by pmelcher.

Hey, I wasn’t too far off the other day when I wrote, in one of my recent entries, that the Apocalypse is near. We’ve been hit by a smooth criminal. People in this industry will remember this day like other people remember where they were when they heard the news that President Kennedy had been shot. Some others, tired of throwing their arms up in the air, are packing and moving west..Ooops, that’s the great depression. We are not there yet.

After receiving emails, phone calls, IM’s, telegrams, knocks on my door, Skypes, rss feeds, press releases, warnings, pages, rings, pings and other dings about the big Acquisition of 2007, I can now quietly write down my thoughts.

The first element to consider in the short term is that nothing will change. It seems that Getty will keep the brands separated, at least for a while. This is NOT going to be a fast and smooth integration, but if Getty proceeds unit by unit, it should be completed by a year’s time . They have already somewhat announced that Contour’s images will be available within their “Exclusive” collection. Their Sports and RM collection should follow very quickly. However, Getty practically now has a full monopoly on sports coverage in the US as Wireimage has exclusive agreements with the leagues that Getty doesn’t have. Expect some loud noises coming from there, both on the shooting side but also from image buyers.

On the event entertainment side, things will be much more complicated. Wireimage is a celebrity event photo factory. They cover practically all celebrity red carpet, parties and other PR organized celebrity gatherings on the planet. They also edit very loosely, posting hundreds, if not thousands of images per event. Not really compatible with the tight edits of a Getty wire service. Furthermore, the celebrity media, worldwide, have been dropping “official” celebrity event imagery for the more exciting, more revealing behind the bushes paparazzi images. Wireimage, as well as Getty, being friends of the celebrities, their cranky agents and publicists, cannot produce those kind of images. Let’s just say, you cannot license the official images of Angelina Jolie’s baby and the next day, pictures of her kissing a man other than Brad Pitt.

Maybe this is where we have an answer to one of the most frequently asked questions. Why did Mediavast sell? After all, they recently raised another $15 million . You usually do not raise money, if you have decided to sell your company. Could it be that Mediavast was hurting ? Probably. The type of coverage Wireimage is supplying is very expensive as it requires a lot of hands. And quite frankly, besides a few exclusives here and there, most of these events are covered by other agencies or independent photographers. There is a saturation of “red carpet” images worldwide and the price per image is very low.

So what now, you ask. Well, if Getty manages to consolidate all the offerings , it is very good news. Getty will have enough fire power to permit an increase in price per image. That means other agencies, if they are smart, should follow. Furthermore, because all the images will be in one place, image buyers will have more time to visit other sites. Finally, when they do consolidate, there will be less photographers on the red carpet. After all, I doubt that Getty will pay to have 5 or 6 photographers for one movie premiere. (A lot of Wireimage’s photographers are staff and are paid a flat salary, like Getty’s).

It is also good news because some image buyers will have a such repulsion towards this giant photo shopping center, that they will start brokering deals with smaller, boutique size , family friendly operations. And finally, but certainly not the least important point, the content creators will become extremely prudent.

Who are the content creators? Not the photographers. They only photograph what is in demand. The content creators are the TV and Movie studios. They are the ones who bring value to these celebrity images by creating the stars. Once they figure out that someone else is cashing big bucks on their investment, they will do something about it.

Already NBC Universal, the ever forward thinking television network, has its own photo agency. After trying the existing agencies route, they have brought back everything in house. Result : They create a hot new TV show, they license the images too. No more middle man.

That is something to ponder about for the rest of the photo industry. What if everything needed a model or property release? Some architects are already doing this. In France you already need a model release, even for editorial use. What would happen to photography, mostly stock photography, if this became a universal law? But oops, I am digressing.

Let’s just say that this is a great time to be in this industry. While some doors seem to be closing, others are opening, powers are shifting and only the best surfers will remain on the waves. It’s painfully delightful…

Posted in editorial, getty | Print | No Comments »

February 22, 2007 by pmelcher.

From the press release:

Getty Images Agrees to Acquire WireImage, a Renowned Brand in Entertainment, Event and Celebrity Imagery

Move Boosts Company’s Capabilities in Fast-Growing Category

SEATTLE - February 22, 2007 - It’s no secret. Now, more than ever, the world is fascinated with images of celebrities, entertainers and athletes. So much so, in fact, that it’s become one of the fastest growing categories in the visual content business. Today, Getty Images, Inc. (NYSE: GYI), the world’s leading creator and distributor of visual content, is announcing an acquisition that will support the company’s stated strategy of accelerating the growth of its editorial imagery business.

Getty Images announced that it has entered into an agreement to purchase WireImage, one of the leading creators of entertainment and event imagery, for approximately $200 million in cash. The deal also will include MediaVast, Inc. the owner of WireImage, and sub-brands FilmMagic and Contour Photos. The acquisition is subject to regulatory review and other customary closing conditions.

“The demand for entertainment, event and celebrity imagery is growing exponentially, and Getty Images has determined that there are great growth opportunities in the category,” said Jonathan Klein, co-founder and CEO of Getty Images. “A key focus for us in the last several years has been to grow our editorial imagery business, particularly in international markets. The proposed acquisition of WireImage will enable us to develop new products and services, including podcasts, editorial video, multimedia, mobile, consumer offerings and exclusive imagery. We are confident that the proposed acquisition will help us expand our global entertainment and celebrity imagery business, allowing us to satisfy growing customer demand in the U.S. and abroad.”

Under the agreement, WireImage’s founding photographers and key executives have signed long term agreements to remain with WireImage and Getty Images following the acquisition.

The acquisition will bring together two leading innovators within the entertainment imagery category. Getty Images has made entertainment and celebrity imagery accessible to a growing global entertainment marketplace through its industry-leading Web site, featuring search in local languages and purchase in local currencies, and leads the industry in delivery speed, service and international distribution. WireImage has built a reputation for depth and breadth of entertainment coverage and has an innovative and customer-friendly Web site.

Several of the companies’ product offerings complement each other. For example, Getty Images’ Exclusive by Getty Images offering, launched in 2006, and MediaVast’s Contour Photos will combine to give customers unprecedented access to celebrity portraiture and compelling editorial features.

The business of entertainment imagery has grown significantly in recent years, and like the many other players in the space, Getty Images has benefited. The company has targeted this category for continued growth, especially in non-English speaking countries, and the acquisition of WireImage is expected to help the company expand the entertainment and celebrity imagery segment.

Getty Images plans to maintain MediaVast’s three brands: WireImage, FilmMagic, and Contour Photos, and its Web sites. WireImage’s team and Getty Images will continue to generate new imagery for their respective collections and make it available for online distribution, both in the U.S. and globally.

“We are very excited to be joining Getty Images,” said Jason Nevader, co-founder and CEO of MediaVast. “Under the Getty Images umbrella our customers will be able to take advantage of Getty Images’ global, localized e-commerce platform. Getty Images’ breadth of products and services, including their vast archival collections, will give our customers more choice and richer, more accessible content.”

The company estimates, on a preliminary basis, that the acquisition will be neutral to earnings per share, excluding amortization, in 2007 and accretive to earnings per share on a GAAP basis in 2008. WireImage’s portfolio includes an online archive of over 8.5 million images. The company has about 230 employees and offices in New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Atlanta, Las Vegas, London, Hamburg, Tokyo, Shanghai, Sydney, Madrid, and Amsterdam.

About Getty Images

Getty Images is the world’s leading creator and distributor of visual content and the first place creative professionals turn to discover, purchase and manage imagery. The company’s award-winning photographers and imagery help customers create inspiring work which appears every day in the world’s most influential newspapers, magazines, advertising campaigns, films, television programs, books and Web sites. Headquartered in Seattle, WA and serving customers in more than 100 countries, Getty Images believes in the power of imagery to drive positive change, educate, inform, and entertain. Visit Getty Images at http://gettyimages.com.

Some of the statements in this press release may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based on management’s expectations, assumptions and projections about Getty Images and its industry as of the time the statements are made. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from our past performance and our current expectations, assumptions and projections. Differences may result from actions taken by the company as well as from risks and uncertainties beyond the company’s control. These risks and uncertainties include, among others, risks associated with the regulatory review of the proposed acquisition, the risk that the proposed acquisition may not be consummated in a timely manner, or at all, the risks associated with currency fluctuations, changes
in the economic, political, competitive and technological environments, and the risks associated with system security, upgrades, updates and service interruptions. The foregoing list of risks and uncertainties is illustrative, but by no means exhaustive. For more information on factors that may affect future performance, please review the reports filed by Getty Images with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in particular our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 and Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005. Except as required by law, Getty Images does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

February 22, 2007 by pmelcher.

I have read many blogs and news snippets about Getty Images buying Jupiter Images for an obscene amount of US issued dollars. After what I have read and heard about royalty free microstock and looking at that space, if I was Alan Meckler, I would also quickly get out of that market before it collapses. I am actually surprised that Getty would even be remotely interested in purchasing a dying, over priced royalty free collection. I would rather try and purchase Fotolia, or Dreamstime if I were them and merge them…

However, while the whole industry was getting over-heated with over-priced stocks, I have discovered one of the coolest application of social networking: 3 D by accident

I was waiting for something like this for a long time. In the hands of professionals, that would be an extremely powerful tool….

Posted in getty, Royalty free, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

February 21, 2007 by pmelcher.

Social networking, aggregated marketplace, Web 2.0, my friends are your friends so we should share them, quantity brings quality, a whole lot of Kabula is going on in the photography world right now.

Some call it “The End’, others, a “New Beginning”, there are screams of imminent apocalypse as arms are dropped to the ground and hair pulled out while others smoke cigars in lounge chairs in obvious signs of victory.

A new kid has stepped in the playground, at least new to me. kumara.com. They took an ad in the previously protected hunting grounds of both digitalrailroad and photoshelter, Lighstalkers. They are from Switzerland. They are about a community, a photo community. They license images, RM and RF, and take NO commissions. They have a low rate of $21/ a month, unlimited space and bandwidth. Let’s just say, they appear competitive.

The reason I bring this up is that more and more photo sharing, community friendly, price sensitive photo buckets are springing to life. Let the “community” do the work, we’ll just sit back and cash in.

For one thing, there is no photo community. They are many photo communities. Not only in styles of photography ( photo j, nature, commercial stock, sports…) but geographically. At least in the professional world. They just do not speak the same language. A sports photographer cannot talk to a still life photographer, especially if they live in different countries. Nor do they really want to talk to each other.

I have never heard so much about community since my college days when, as a true French student, we would go on strike because the sky had been gray for too long, or that our cafeteria didn’t not serve Chinese dumplings in the desperate hope of reviving the fame spirit of student uprising of 1968. Besides being beaten with big sticks by the French anti riot force, let’s just say we didn’t achieve anything, besides all getting our degrees and getting on with our lives.

Professionals know this. They will seek seek out the tools that will make them stand out and reach their clients. And that is what serious platforms like Digitalrailroad, IPN or Photoshelter offer them. They certainly do not want their images pilled up underneath garbage taken by week end photographers ( try a search on the word ‘Blue” for example on Kumara.com). Lets face it, I need my doctor or dentist to remain as such. Do I go around pulling teeth out ?

Volume does not make quality. There is a saying that says that if you let a monkey or computer, enough time, they will write a William Shakespeare play. That is what we see happening on Flickr and others, “I’ll take your your five best images”, websites. Volume is the new catalysis for quality. And most of us, if we try hard enough, will maybe take a Henri Cartier Bresson picture once or twice in our life. That is not a photography career, that is playing the odds. Exactly the business model of lotteries.

Really, who makes the money on these sites? the photographers? no. The owner of the sites do. Did Istockphoto owners redistribute to the photographers the $50 million they made by selling their technology and content to Getty ? Of course not.

Someone is getting ripped off here, big time. No ones ever works for the community. The community is stupid, ignorant, plebeian, instinctive and highly susceptible to trends. The exact opposites of a professional photographer.

I cannot disagree with Getty and others to take advantage of this, as they are a business, not a friendly home for lost souls . I cannot even blame the microstock companies to become extremely wealthy. Good for them. But I think that professional photographers should stand their ground. Let the amateurs continue to take close ups of tomatoes or other computer keyboards. But, I would like to see sites like lightstaklers help their members by not accepting ads from obviously dishonest companies, or at least have a real review. I am strong believer that quality will prevail, whatever business model is out there. But I would like also to see some efforts by the professional photographers to help new incoming young photographers make the right decisions before being destroyed by internet sharks. There are bad kids in the park, let’s kick them out.
On a site note, you have to see one of Brian Storm’s latest production in association with National Geographic : Ivory Wars: Last Stand in Zakouma

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

February 17, 2007 by pmelcher.

So the Corbis Corporation posted their revenue and claim $251 million for 2006. I say, “prove it”. Corbis should start behaving like an adult company and show its real face. How much did Corbis spend to get to that number ? $500 million ? And what is their level of profit, or loss ? That is the only real indicator of a company’s health.
Maybe it is only me, but haven’t you noticed that Corbis always, always announces their revenue after Getty, even when Getty reports them late, like this year. It seems to me that Corbis’ numbers are always a percentage of Getty’s revenue. If Getty had a bad year, Corbis had a bad year. If Getty had a great year Corbis had a great year. It’s the “Hey, me too” syndrome.

I took the numbers posted on the State of the Art blog and ran a little analysis. Over the last 5 years, Corbis has regularly posted revenues about 30 % of Getty’s:

Corbis Getty
2006 $251.00 $807.00 31%
2005 $228.00 $733.70 31%
2004 $170.40 $622.40 27%
2003 $140.00 $523.20 27%
2002 $463.00 N/A
2001 $128.00 $451.00 28%
2001 $135.00 $484.00 28%

(there is twice the year 2001. This is how it was posted on State Of The Art)

Corbis fired a bunch of people again at the end of 2006, in the traditional end of the year Corbis management reconfiguration. At this rate, by then end of this decade, Corbis will have employed all of the US population.
And now they cry high and loud that they will enter Microstock. Can they mess that too? It is going to be another funny example of an US corporation at its worse. After literally destroying some of the most prestigious collections of images by applying their ridiculous rules of management, they will now attempt to destroy the microstock world.

Maybe Corbis genius idea will be to price all their current images at $1 a piece? Or purchase one of the existing companies for an excessive amount of Bill Gates retirement savings, fire everyone, replace them with incompetent MBA’s, add layers and layers of red tape, and wonder why they are not making any money. After a while, they will get bored and buy a new toy. Corbis is like the big fat dumb rich kid at school that everyone likes to pick on. Besides offering temporary shelter for people in search of a real job, Corbis has yet to enter the photography market seriously and professionally.

Come on, now. Any other photo agency would have been profitable by now with the images that Corbis currently represent. How do they do it ?