April 29, 2010 by pmelcher.

What is new is not always good. While everyone is trying to figure out where the world of licensed photography is going to, others are taking advantage of the void by figuring out parasitical way to profit from it.

We already do know that Google has figured out how to make money, and huge sums of it, by cashing in on others creative content. By slapping ads on the creation of others, they are the ultimate business parasite. At least, with Adsense, they have offered the creators a share of the income generated. Typical of a long tail type of business, they are, however, the only ones to really profit from it.

With a company called Pixazza, they have figured out how to feed upon the photography world. If you are not aware of it, Pixazza offers website the ability to attached on any image they publish, a pop up window that invites you to purchase the same clothes as the ones wore by the celebs in the images.

Websites that participate get a commission on every sale of clothes that is generated from their site. The photographers who took the images? nothing. Pixazza actually uses the image as a selling tool yet gives nothing back to the photogrpahers, only to the publishers. In theory, and maybe in practice, a publisher could easily purchase a license for an image and make a profit from it. Interesting no. Sure, it is not much different then what is going on in magazine or more traditional ads on website. After all, it is the business model for editorial publication to make a profit from ads attached to their articles and layouts. But in this case, instead of being a generic ad, it is actually 100 % dependent on the photograph and its content.

So now, on top of publishers making money on your images, there is this new company, who have done nothing more than create a piece of code. Do photographers see their income grow too from this added value ? nope.  Does Pixazza care? Certainly not.

It doesn’t seem like much right now for those not shooting celebrities, but it will very soon . They have just extended their offering to travel and sports images. And that is only the begging. Soon, any image will have this parasite on it. The near future, if all goes well ?

Well, why do you think Google invested in this company? Because it fits perfectly its business model. the parasite kind: Attach an ad to everything on the internet. The next step ? Well Google might decide to purchase Getty, make all the images available for free to everyone, as long as Pixazza is attached to them. Can you imagine the revenue they would get ? And the damage they would do to the photo industry?

However, they don’t even have to go that far. If Pixazza is succesful in implanting themselves on every website, they could make a huge fortune without ever paying a dime to photographers. Ever. Your images would become ad platform without you ever seeing a penny from it. Pretty cool, no ?

There is no reason for this to stop currently, as none of the photo agencies or photographers seem to mind. Some seem to think this is really great because it’s new and its Google powered, at least financially. Once they see their images licensed for editorial use hijacked into  a commercial , it is doubtful they will still be smiling . But it will be too late.

It’s not new, it’s just evil.

Posted in copyright, license, celebrity, technology, commercial stock, keyword, google, editorial, transaction, finance, filter, getty | Print | 3 Comments »

April 12, 2010 by pmelcher.

The acquisition of Plink by Google marks the debut of a potent revolution for the photo world. Not because Plink is a special company, nor that Google really cares about the photo world, but for the technical implication that it implies.

As it is frequent with Google, it is not the company they purchase, but the talent.  Plink, if you do not know, is a company that does  ( did ?) visual search. Take a picture of a painting and it will find the original along with the information. All from your cell phone. Nothing really new : LTU Technology has such such for the Iphone and Idee or Picsout could easily replicate same in ten minutes if they were not so busy trying to find a sustainable business model.

No, what is interesting is the what they how Google intends to expand this technology and use the migrating talents. They will integrate with Google Goggles , their project of photographing with your cell phone a place, object etc and returning a search result.Thus eliminating text based queries. The smarts ones here can see where we are going with this

For that to happen, Google needs to improve object recognition technology. If anyone can do it, and do it well, they can.  There will now be a thousand companies competing in that field, if only to  be  hopefully acquire by Google ( which is a more popular exit strategy then doing an IPO, these days). So what does it mean for the photo world?  Well, at first , the end of manually entered text keywords. With this, an image can be scanned and all content automatically identified and added to the keyword list. Goodbye to the thousands ( mostly in India), that currently provide this process manually. The hard, if not very hard part, will be the conceptual keywords.

What is fresh ? what is happy ? what is “in love”  ? Computers will have a very hard time to decipher human emotions and concepts. It’s not impossible, just very hard. However, 90% of the process will be done already.

It will place Google in a very advance part of the search technology as it will not be easy and simple to replicate. It will accelerate the camera to desktop cycle for photo agencies that use it well, it will make Microstock even more automated and cheaper to process.

So, while you think on how and what to invest in your keywording  work flow, think about what is just around the corner and about to make your competition more cost effective than you. Think about how to reduce manual labor in favor of automated processes. Think about abandoning those endless discussion about how to handle your keywords because so, it will not be an issue. Finally, if you are a company making revenue solely or primarily on providing keywording, the time to change is now.

More on Plink acquisition here.

Posted in Search, commercial stock, keyword, google, prosumer, web 2.0, Microstock | Print | 1 Comment »

April 7, 2010 by pmelcher.

American Society of Media Photographers, the Graphic Artists Guild, the Picture Archive Council of America, the North American Nature Photography Association, Professional Photographers of America, photographers Leif Skoogfors, Al Satterwhite, Morton Beebe, Ed Kashi and illustrators John Schmelzer and Simms Taback  have filed a class action suite against Google, not only for their rights Grabbing Google project but also for other of Google’s mistreatment of photography’s right. This is great news a first worldwide.

The “do no evil” company has been scanning millions of books and magazine to repurchase them for online usage ( including paid) without even asking for copyright clearance from photogrpaher over content. Millions of images are thus available or will be available online without anyone paying an additional license fee, required for such usage.

This class action will reopen the doors to the fame  11 year long legal action of  Greenberg VS National Geographic that terminated when the Supreme Court denied Greenberg’s petition for a writ of certiorari, which lets stand the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision holding that the National Geographic Society – and by extension, other publishers – have the right to reproduce their magazines’ archive in digital format without paying any additional royalties to freelance photographers.

Certainly this judgment will be used by Google to obtain clearance to  continue their trampling of copyright, thus they are not the original publishers.

Obviously, nothing will be resolved quickly but it is the right step in the right direction. One question is, will this group have enough money to pursue this legal battle ? Will this push publishers to use more Royalty Free image as to avoid such issue? Will this impact what publishers are currently doing with reproducing their print publication for Ipad without paying any additional license fees?

More details on the legal move here.

Posted in copyright, magazine, technology, google, web 2.0, law, finance, Uncategorized | Print | 1 Comment »

April 5, 2010 by pmelcher.

The surf wizard. the Photo bot. Give a keyword to a bot, it comes back with the image. Better, enter a concept, or a description. it will then surf the whole wide web and return with an image. Whether from an amateur or pro, it won’t matter. Because the image matters. Like information, the image will come to you, instead of you having to got to the image. That is the future of image search.

If you are not in a rush, it could scout for days, weeks, waiting for the perfect image. It could even us knowledge base intelligence to return the exact photograph, based on thousands, millions, gazillions of queries and rejects/approvals.   It would be hard not to find the right image anymore, extremely hard.

Sure, it could use similar search, as well of graphical input. The technology exists already, it just has not been out in place.  The reason is that technology would not be profitable for anyone but a geek who could care about revenue.

Just imagine : You send a email with a photo description, and like a dog, it comes back with the right image. All you would have to do is license it properly and your done. No more webs browsing in multiple password protected photo collection, no more spending hours on Flickr, Google images or others looking at irrelevant images. You would continue your work as the bot would do the search for you.

It shouldn’t be long before we see this, or very similar product.

Posted in license, focus, technology, commercial stock, Search, keyword, filter, flickr, google, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

March 16, 2010 by pmelcher.

Dear Copyright Advocates,

The Obama Administration is asking to hear from YOU, the creative backbone of our country, about how intellectual property infringement affects YOUR livelihood. The Administration is also seeking advice on what the government could be doing to better protect the rights of artists and creators in our country.

  HERE’S A CHANCE FOR YOU TO BE HEARD!

BACKGROUND:

Last year President Obama appointed and the U.S. Senate confirmed Victoria Espinel to be the first U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator. Her job is “to help protect the creativity of the American public” by coordinating with all the federal agencies that fight the infringement of intellectual property, which includes creating and selling counterfeit goods; pirating video games, music, and books; and infringing upon the many other creative works that are produced by artists in this country.

As you know, the unauthorized copying, sale, and distribution of artists’ intellectual property directly impacts the ability of artists and creators to control the use of their own creativity, not to mention their ability to receive income they have earned from their labor. This impacts U.S. employment and the economy, and our ability to globally compete.

As required by an Act of Congress (The PRO‐IP Act of 2008), Ms. Espinel and her White House team are preparing a Joint Strategic Plan that will include YOUR FEEDBACK on the costs and risks that intellectual property infringement has on the American public.

Here’s how to make yourself heard!

1. Send an email to Ms. Espinel and the Obama Administration: intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov and copy the Copyright Alliance on your email: info@copyrightalliance.org

2. Begin your letter with “The Copyright Alliance has informed me of this welcome invitation from the Obama Administration to share my thoughts on my rights as a creator.”

3. Include in your email: your story, why intellectual property rights are important to you, how piracy and infringement affect you, and what the U.S. government can do to better protect the rights of creative Americans.

4. Also include in your email: your name, city, state, and what type of artist you are 5. DO NOT include any personal or private information as all comments will be posted publically

on the White House website. All comments must be submitted by Wednesday, March 24 by 5:00 p.m. EST.

Don’t be shy! Take two minutes today to make your voice heard, and don’t forget to spread the word to everyone you know. Forward this notice using this short URL ‐ http://bit.ly/cjDZJt ‐ by email, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, and more!

Best,

Lucinda Dugger

Posted in license, copyright, technology, google, web 2.0, news, law, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

January 11, 2010 by pmelcher.

Photography should be a revolutionary act. It should be a kick in the establishment, the common, the mundane. It has to be an act of revolt against banality and conformity, a powerful explosion of new ideas. It should be as violent to the mind as a thousand thunderstorms. It should rip apart the accepted social fabric . It should denounce, point, accuse and solve. In one frame. It should be a declaration of war to everything we take for granted and accept as obvious.

It should incessantly question reality with the passion of a martyr. A constant question mark, it should make our leaders fear it, and our priest denounce it. It should know no frontiers, no borders, no cultural identity. It should have the same impact East of Bangkok and South of Lima.

Photography should be lifted high and proud by those who request to change the world as a constant demand for reform and social changes. It should beg for perfection, over and over, pointing at all the little details of injustice, abuse, destruction and greed. It should rattle every misconception until they break into a pathetic silence.

Too much of what we see today in photography ( thank you, commercial stock) is a sea of banality, of repetition, of dullness. It is status quo and no more. A long straight road of  boring pre digested concept. Like a TV dinner : Please reheat and serve hot. Millions upon millions of images that rote just a few days after being exposed, so much full of artifice they are. A constant stream of annoying visual buzz that we hardly notice anymore.

Photography should shove you out of your chair, make you react, force you to rethink everything you ever took for granted. It should stop you dead in your track and make you want to change your whole life, and the ones of those around you. It should haunt you  in your sleep, follow you all day and make you feel naked. It should empower you to make that change you had in you. It should break the heavy top that sat on top of  that lava revolt you have in you. Break the ice of indifference you so conveniently ignore.  It should not be a warm cosy blanket that keep you warm in the middle of a cold winter night but rather the violent act of removing it and exposing you to the freezing winds. A window blasted open.

Some aspects of photography are dying because too many have forgotten the revolutionary roots of photography, its iconoclastic heritage. As it becomes more common it also becomes more dull. Slowly, the reign of the medium is taking over. Medium quality, medium content, medium effect. Photography is becoming pretty, useful, a business. It’s an industry of expectedness, where chance and luck disappears in favor of technocrats shooting bullet points.

It should never live in a sales channel or exposed to RPI’s. It should never suffer the humiliation of being included in a compilation or a theme. It should never be treated as something you search for in a immense repository of banality. Finally, it should never suffer the assassination of being sold via a subscription.

Posted in google, license, celebrity, commercial stock, web 2.0, prosumer, news, editorial, photojournalism, Royalty free | Print | No Comments »

December 10, 2009 by pmelcher.

It is just a question of time. Not years but probably months. Already a lot of desktop consumer based application are offering a glimpse of its power : Image recognition. Google has recently taken it a step further. Search with Image recognition.

“The concept of Google Goggles is dead simple- a user snaps a photo of an object around them, be it a book, building, text or any other object, and the app will return a search result tailored to for that object” explains mobilemarketingwatch.com.

Say you walk in front of a building and would like more info, just snap a picture of it, submit to Google Goggles and voila. Same goes for CD’s , Books, paintings and maybe photographs too. Still in its infancy, Google Goggles , when launched live, will mark the debut of image recognition  as a replacement of text search. For now, the Goggles project is limited to objects. Soon, once the Google lawyers can figure how to get around privacy laws, it will also work with people too. Meet someone new. Take a snap and in 5 seconds, you will know there whole history. Well, at least the one available online.

What does it mean to the photo industry ? Many, many changes. First, a new way to search. All database will soon be able to also offer such a search to their clients. Google tends to create standards. It is nit a bad thing, except for the technophiles out there. Just imagine: Your metadata could be incorrect and image would still be found.  A few companies already offer this technology but not as deep as Google. LTU tech or Idee, for example, will do image matching . That is, if images look similar, regardless of what is in the image. Goggles recognizes what is in the image and looks for that, and not similar images.

Google new visual search will mainly be a huge help for image key wording. Since its inception, it has been notorious for offering free API’s ( that’s a little backdoor that lets two applications talk together) to its technologies. That will allow savvy programmers to tie an image database to Goggles and have all its image indexed automatically. Those microstock will be all over this technology.  While certainly incapable to add emotion or concepts, it will however facilitate a lot of the tedious work of recognizing content.

Companies like Imense who is currently offering similar technology will certainly take a huge hit. Same goes with Idee and its CD or book Iphone apps.

While there is nothing dramatically new in this technology, it is the shear power of Google already indexed document that will make this a success. They will be hardly any images that will not return a result, besides maybe those “artistic” ones.

If you have an android phone, you can try it now : Google Goggles.

Posted in idee, technology, commercial stock, celebrity, keyword, web 2.0, google, editorial | Print | No Comments »

November 24, 2009 by pmelcher.

For those who still think that Google Images is a great tool to find images and that it is somewhat the savior photography, I suggest they perform a simple search for “Michelle Obama“, the first lady of the United States, and apply a “face” filter.

This is what you get on the first page:

regardless of your political opinions, this is a revolting and pathetic search result for images. When confronted about this, Google hides behind its sanctified algorithms and claim innocence.  I am the first to praise the ability for technology to make our lives easier. However, technology without morality is violently dangerous and destructive for any society.

Freedom of speech, sure, as long as it doesn’t become freedom of insult. Robots, bots, algorithm to find the right images, sure, as long as the results are pertinent to the search. This is a good example of a world without photo editors. This is your images on Google.

UPDATE : Google refuses to acknowledge failure of it search algorithm. In an article published in the Los Angeles Times today, Google Inc. spokesman Scott Rubin said  :”It’s offensive to many people, but that alone is not a reason to remove it from our search index. We have, in general, a bias toward free speech.”.

While it is commendable for Google to support free speech, this is not the reason people are upset. The issue here is how an obviously inappropriate image of the first lady of America ends up on as the top result on a search for her name.  This is a complete failure of their search algorithm. Obviously, someone typing “Michelle Obama” and using the “Face only” filter is looking for a head shot of her, not a cruelly photo shopped image. If this type of result was offered on professional image licensing platform, like Getty, Vorbis or Alamy, clients would never come back.

Google, of course, cannot admit publicly that his search algorithm is a failure. That would send it’s stock price in the abyss as it is the core of their business. May this be a warning for those who still see Google and its image search as the perfect tool for photography.

Update 2:  Here is Google version of free speech ( apparently, its all relative) :

Posted in Search, celebrity, technology, No sense, keyword, photoshop, filter, google, news | Print | No Comments »

November 23, 2009 by pmelcher.

There is more to the story than just numbers. Much, much more. And the official media ignores it. But what the photo industry is currently experiencing is much, much more than just a few layoff.

What we are seeing is the disappearance of  knowledge. Most of the photo editors being let go from magazines, newspapers, websites are those who have spent many years building the foundations of our industry withtalent. They are the ones who knew a great image from a bad one, who could spot a talented photographer from the masses of mediums ones. They are the ones who created “names” by publishing their work. They are the ones who did look at photo books,  went out to exhibits and photo festivals, no only to see and discover new talents but to personally connect with those they already knew.

Those “numbers” that  appear almost daily on the sheets of bored journalist where passionate about their jobs and about photography. They still are, they just can’t find jobs anymore. And the more the talented, the more experience, the more chances they have to be fired. Why ? Because they cost the most. When companies look to cut cost, they always go for the highest salary, which usually means for those who have the most experience. And when companies hire, they look for the cheapest, even if they have no or little knowledge.

The positions of the talented photo editors are now being handle by  Art Directors, who perceive photography as a “block” that needs to fit in a layout, or to young, inexperience professionals that are given the task of finding the cheapest art, regardless of quality.

In the case of art directors, they probably always felt that the position of photo editor should have never existed and rather be a subset of their duties. Because their title contains the word “art”, they just feel it demeaning to have to talk money with suppliers.

Other replacement of the experience photo editors are the young, entry level professionals. Raised on Flickr, microstock and Google Image, they are immediately given the task to find the cheapest photography as possible. They hardly know anyone, or anything, about photogrpahy, nor do they care. They probably spend more time on Facebook and Twitter than any photography website and feel that they could, should be doing something more important in their lives.They are being paid low salaries as to reinforce the idea that finding and picking images for a website, or a magazine is as degrading as service hamburgers at the local McDonald’s.

No wonder then that prices are dropping like dead flies.  The current and new crop of image buyers see absolutely no value in photography besides being a huge boring time waster. It is incredibly difficult to explain  photography to someone who doesn’t care. Especially when they see it as a job (in the worst way) rather than a passion.

There is not much the photo industry can do to revert this trend. We cannot convince publishers to spend more money and hire experience photo editors . They do not see the value. They do not beleive that great photography will bring more readership, thus more advertising. They are in survival mode right now, just trying to weather the storm. We cannot explain photogrpahy to young bored professionals because their passion is elsewhere and they couldn’t care less.

All that remains to do is quietly put our heads in our hands and cry.

Posted in license, magazine, technology, Search, google, editorial, photojournalism, flickr, Microstock | Print | 2 Comments »

November 18, 2009 by pmelcher.

We often hire photographers at PictureGroup for shoots all over the United States. In order to find the appropriate ones, we use a combination of tools. Our number one remains recommendations. To us, there is nothing more valuable then when an editor, or another photographer that we like and trust recommends another photographer. There is not only a certain guarantee of quality but also very important, a guarantee of professionalism and business knowledge. Because, regardless of quality, if a photographer doesn’t deliver the proper files at the right place at the right time, than it is useless. It might sound ridiculous in the XXI century but there are still many photographers who hardly know how to properly FTP images.

Regardless, our second tool for hiring photographer is the almighty web. Contrary to what many would like you to think, we try to avoid Google. Why ? Because the results are very of poor quality. The photographers that surface to the top in a Google search are not the best, the most talented or the most relevant to what you are looking for but those who have spend many hours on building a SEO. And the most talented in this are the Commercial/ Wedding photographers. They are also helped by the fact that Google will advantage them because they are the most searched for. Google has recently added most click results after a search in their ranking. Nothing against these, but they are certainly not the type we are looking for. So, based on our experience, here are the do and don’t does of a photographer if they want to be found and hired on the web.

1. No Music. I have music in my office, thank you, and I really do not need you to supply yours. It is very annoying, especially if you are trying to browse in a public place and suddenly your computer starts playing some crappy RF song. I am here to find a good photographer, not a radio station.

2. Keep the flash and slideshow at a minimum. I have nothing against flash but when a whole site is just flash based, I move on. Although I have a very fast connection, I really don’t have the time to wait for some flash animation to load. You are not the first or the last website I will visit so please help me in my job. If you slow me down, I will hate you forever. Also, thanks for the slideshows but I prefer navigating at my own pace. Some images, I would like to study more, others, I couldn’t care less. I am an adult and know how to click.

3. Make it simple. I love cool sites for what they are : Cool sites. But when I am looking to hire a photographer, I have neither the time nor the will to try and figure out riddle navigation. It is distracting and not useful. I just want to see images, not great navigation tools.

4. Portfolio : Have many for your different interests. I don’t mind if a photographer has a people, architecture and animal portfolio for example. I will look at the one that interests me and not the others. Just don’t mix everything into one.

5. List your  clients. Very, very important. That will tell me that you have done work for similar clients and it will boost my confidence in your ability to deliver by 100%.  Please don’t lie.

6. Contact info. It should not be an afterthought. Put it in a very obvious place where I can easily copy and paste it. I understand you are afraid of spammers, but I am not one. If you make it impossible for me to add your contact info into my system, I will get frustrated and that is not what you want. I don’t mind if there is a few phone numbers and one email, as long as any of those allows me to reach you immediately. All our jobs are rush and I need to know if your available or not. If I can’t reach you, I will move on.

7. Be everywhere. Don’t stop at just your website. We use Photoshelter, Sportshooter, Photoserve, Lightstalker, Blackbook, WorldAssignment and other database to find our photographers. You should too. Google is neither the beginning nor the end of a search. Be where your clients are. Most of these sites are inexpensive or free so why not post some of your best images there and linked them back to your site ? Help yourself be found.

8. Location. For us as well as many other people looking to hire you, location is one of the first search terms. With these crunch time, we , like many others, need to find a photographer in a particular city because we have no travel budget. So the city where you work must be very clearly visible . It is your second most important asset after your photography skills.

9. Bio. I like to know who I am dealing with. No, not your personal life and religious affiliations, but a short, well written bio that speaks of your photographic direction. Make it so I can feel that we have briefly met and you seem like a nice person to talk too.

10. Update it. Please, please. Don’t build a website and leave it orphan. If the latest picture on there is a bad scan from something you shot in the 80’s, however great it is, that is a complete turn off. You are only as good as your last three jobs. It can be six months old, that is fine, but not 6 years. Same goes if you have a blog. So many times I see blogs with three sparse entries a few years old. If you can’t update it than please don’t have a blog. It is not are requirement. No blog is much better than an unmaintained blog.

Hope these tips help a little. Of course not everyone looking for a photographer online will have the same requirements but these are certainly very, very common. Remember, you website should be like a seductive introduction to yourself, a bit like a speed dating exercise where you are not aloud to talk.

Posted in celebrity, magazine, technology, commercial stock, Search, google, editorial, slideshow, photojournalism, web 2.0, news | Print | 3 Comments »