Relocating

September 7, 2011 by pmelcher.

“Thoughts of ” is relocating or expanding :

On Facebook :  Thoughts of a Bohemian page  for the daily snippets

On La Lettre de la Photographie for 2 columns a week. One column is dedicated on the best there is to discover about photography on the web while the other, brand new, is about the world of photojournalism and photo agencies. You can read it and subscribe, for free, here : La Lettre de la Photographie.

what about about the typos ? they will follow me everywhere I go…

Obviously this blog will remain open, while quite not as often,  for longer thoughts and  hair raising revelations

Posted in magazine, celebrity, license, multimedia, Plus, technology, Corpocrates, Good Enough, Waste of time, Social Media, Search, No sense, finance, transaction, editorial, news, wire service, photojournalism, keyword, web 2.0, prosumer, getty | Print | No Comments »

Share This

July 10, 2011 by pmelcher.

Let’s face it, you are waging a losing battle. In fact, it’s not even a battle because one side has won already. Every time you sign up for a social network, be it Facebook, Twitter or Google +, you are faced with TOS ( Terms of Service) that are pure rights grabbing, making it a very dangerous proposition for you to share your images. Yet, everyone tells you that the only path to success is to have your images on these sites.

So, here are three core facts that you need to know about Social Networks:

- There is still no such thing as a free lunch. If someone offers you something for free, it is only because they get some kind of benefit out of it. You can be sure they will find a way to monetize your images.

- If you use a service for free, you become the product : what do you think Facebook, Twitter or Google + sell ? You. Your interaction on their sites is what they in turn sell to advertisers. That includes your pictures.

- They need the legal right to share your images. In order to show the images you post on their site to your friends and family, they need the legal right to do so. Since there is no way for them to know who are your friends, family or others ( nor do they care) , they make you agree to a blanket agreement stating that they can share them with everyone.

So, if you think you can sign up for a social network site that will protect your intellectual property, you are sticking your big left toe in your eye. It is just not and never going to happen. The answer ? Deal with it.

Accept the fact that if you post your images on a social network site, there is a 110 % chance that you could loose complete control of that image. Play along . If you post pictures of your 3 years old nephew at your cousin’s barbeque party, you have not much to worry about. Besides a few polite likes from your relatives, not much will happen to that image and it will soon be forgotten along with the other 10 million images uploaded to Facebook in a month. However, if you post the only image of a plane crash landing on the Hudson river, well, get ready for it to be grabbed and spread around.

Here is the irony. Photographers or photo agencies will post their images on social network sites in order for them to be seen, appreciated and dare we say it, shared ( ouch). Isn’t it the intended purpose of posting these images that they will end up in front of the eyes of a wealthy photo editor who will either purchase it or hire you ? And since you do not know him yet, the only path is via friends of friends re-posting it ? Should they all ask you for permission and pay you a license fee every time they do ? In other words, you give them something to share but you don’t want them to share.

Well then, quite a paradox . Ownership of an image doesn’t lie solely in managing its usage. It is also embedded in it. If you have a style, a talent, a point of view and an identity, your image will always speak your name, credit or no credit. Better yet, people who see your images will want to track you down in order to find out who is the talent behind those photograph. If they don’t, well, that’s because you failed as a photographer.

So what should you do with all these rights grabbing, soulless TOS that you keep on facing every day? Adapt.

They are not going to change because they are at the core of how these social networks make money. Not so much by licensing your images, obviously ( everyone knows there is no money there), but by using them to grow their network and thus selling more people to advertisers. And for that, they need the right to do what they damn well like with your images. Forever.

Keep that in mind next time you post images on any of these sites ( and others).  Your choices :

- Do not upload images

- Watermark your images

- Upload only images you are ready to give away

Either way, stop bitching and moaning about a new TOS like there was anything you could do about it. Although it might feel like it sometimes, it is not your platform, it’s theirs. They will do whatever they think is appropriate to generate revenue from it . They don’t owe you anything, you do.

So stop wasting your energy and time . Get back on your saddle and figure out  how you too can benefit from their services intelligently without loosing your pants and shoes ( and your sanity). Eventually the ecosystem will find a balance.

Posted in technology, Tweet, Social Media, Waste of time, digg, license, flickr, prosumer, web 2.0, transaction | Print | 1 Comment »

Photo Ghetto

March 15, 2011 by pmelcher.

It used to be that photojournalism could be done by everyone. Lately, this seem to have shifted.

When Bob Capa decided to go cover the Spanish civil war, he took with him ( or was it the opposite ?), photographer Gerda Taro. Probably because she died much earlier than Capa ( in 1937), her work is less extensive and much lesser known.

When Margaret Bourke - White photographed the Death Camps at the end of World War II for Life magazine, no one cared if she was a woman or not. Her images told the story and that was that.

Today, more and more, it seems that photojournalism wants to define itself by its gender. More and more, do you see cooperative, workshop, panels, etc for women photographers only. As if your gender was  influential in your photo-journalistic process . Who are we trying to fool ?

I have worked with many, many women photojournalist and I can tell you that if i hadn’t known, I would have never been able to tell the gender by just looking at the images. There is the same talent, or lack of, whether you wear a skirt or not .

It seems that political correctness has now started to reach the shores of the previously sexless island of photography. It appears that some people, with a highly develop social conscience, want you to know what sex was that photographer whose picture you admire. As if it made any difference.

Readers hardly read a photo credit, so why would they care ? Photo editors, the talented ones at least, a gender blind as long as the story is perfectly visually told. So who is behind this and why ?

And if was this was such an issue, why not create a group for black photographers, Jewish photographers, Muslim photographers, gay photographers, or left handed photographers ?

It is bad enough that photographers find the need to categorize themselves in one activity ( Sports, fashion, news, celebrity, etc..) but now they will also have to pick an appropriate social group ?

Why ?

To protect their photographer group against other photographer groups ? Or to make some kind of stupid statement that women photographers are better than men photojournalist ? or have more sensibility ? or are more tuned in other people misery ? Or is it to influence women photo editors to hire women photographers first because of gender wars ?

This self segregation of an already endangered species of artisan is not only ridiculous but pointless and harmful. It will only lead to creating a unnecessary distraction to those who only want to create, publish or view great images.

Posted in magazine, Waste of time, celebrity, No sense, editorial, photojournalism, news | Print | 1 Comment »

$ 4 easy steps to become a paparazzi $

December 24, 2010 by pmelcher.

So you lost your job at a fancy newspaper and wedding photography is not you thing. Or you spend years behind a photo desk editing others’ pictures and you want in on the action. War is too far and too dangerous. Studio is expensive and tedious. Microstock is just that : micro. what’s left ? Well you heard over and over that the big dough is in celebrity so why not try that. Well, here is a little “how to become a paparazzi” DIY kit.

First, head on to California, where most of the celebrities live, at least the most notorious ones. Once you are settle, book a tour with ” Rolling With the Paparazzi”

as the website says :

Individuals have the opportunity to run with, rather than from the paparazzi, and see celebrities they otherwise wouldn’t have access to.  The new Rolling with the Paparazzi Tour takes you all around the city by car, so that as the tips come in, you can get there much faster than by running.

In the Rolling With the Paparazzi Tour, up to three people are teamed up with Rick Mendoza, a real-life paparazzi, for the Hollywood experience of a lifetime.

 “Rolling with the Paparazzi is available as a stand-alone tour for $150 per person for up to two people and $400 for three.The Rolling with the Paparazzi Tour is offered daily, with three-hour segments beginning at 8:00AM all the way until 10:00PM.”

After those 3 hours of basic lessons, you should have  a good idea on what to do. If still unsure, you still go to You tube and hit one of the hundreds of videos of paparazzi chasing celebs.

next, you should get a map of the stars and figure out where most live and hang out. Those maps are sold in the street of hollywood and for those who are map reading impaired, tours are organized that will actually show you where everyone lives . Some websites can be useful too.

Now, you need to know who is where when. Nottaproblema : website like Just spotted.com can help you with that . Using a combination of users tips and website searches, it delivers the recent location of whom you would like to search. You can also, if you like, just follow your target star’s Twitter feed. They sometimes reveal their location real time.

Finally, once you are all set up, you need to figure out how to price your images. Here to help you is a real quote from a top Pap agency :

……………………………………………………………….
100 Non + Exclusive Pics: $500/ month ($5/pic)
100 Non Excl ONLY: $400/ month ($4/pic)
250 Non + Exclusive : $750/ month ($3/pic)
250 Non Excl Only: $500/ month ($2/pic)
Unlimited Non + Exclusive: $2000/ month
Unlimited Non Excl Only: $1500/ month

 …………………………………………………………….

Now, go ahead , make millions !!

 

Posted in magazine, Tweet, Waste of time, celebrity, license, editorial, No sense, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

The Caveman Dilemna

October 14, 2010 by pmelcher.

“You want to save it, you should niche it”. From old timers stock gurus to young green microstock expert, they all tell the same tale of potential success : dig yourself into a deep hole where no one else can reach you and stay there. Shoot stuff no one else shoots and bark if they approach. If you can, trademark your subject so no one else can do it.

It’s not about being successful as a photographer anymore, it’s about protecting your turf, like a suburban owner protects his patch of lawn from his neighbors. It’s the typical bourgeois mentality. In face of adversity, retreat and protect. Would you like a pair of well trained Doberman with that ?

Problem is, you do not own your subject. You do not own your clients . You do not own anything ( well, besides your equipment). So there is nothing to protect.

In Microstock, more than anywhere else, clients belong exclusively to the platforms. Contributors have no clue who they are selling to, or why.  In more traditional markets, sales report still carry some information on the licensor. However that is diminishing too. So, tell me, if you do not know who your clients are, what your market is, how can you niche yourself ?

By trial and error ? Sure. Another problem, is that, mostly in microstock, it is very easy to see what works. Makes that niche even more so attractive to others. Quickly.

The commercial stock market has decided to walk on its head. It used to be that photographers would shoot what they loved and sell that. Some, very, very well. That worked well, especially since no one had really any clue what the other was shooting, except by seeing what was being published. Now, everybody can see everybody else’s body of work, especially the vast quantity of what never gets sold. So, instead of shooting what they love, they shoot what has not been shot. They search for a niche, like miner search for a vein.

Let’s say you find a niche. Then what ? How do you find your clients? Since you are the only one with these images, they will find you ? Is that the thinking ? The “field of dreams” marketing strategy ?

Images don’t market themselves ( at least, not yet) . Those images you see going viral are the exception, not the rule. They are billion of images just on Flickr and you think your images will stand out ? because they are rare ? Did you ever think, for one second, that they are rare because no one cares ?

Once you start leaving the crowded marketplace you certainly find less competition but also less clients. And that is what this whole “find a niche” counsel is all about : If you can’t sell what you have it’s because of the competition thus if you eliminate the competition by going where they are  not, you will be successful . It’s not by moving away miles away from Wal-Mart that you will beat them.

Here’s a niche you should try : talent. Shoot everything that everyone else shoots : with talent. No one can copy talent. You will be own out there, because clients will request your images, and no one else’s, regardless of what you shoot.

Leave the niches to those who like living in caves. Your specialty should be how you approach your subject, not your subjects.

Posted in license, commercial stock, Waste of time, Search, prosumer, Royalty free, flickr, Microstock | Print | 1 Comment »

Could be

October 13, 2010 by pmelcher.

Saw this today :

Idea is smart: Charge and download images at the same time. no wires. Problem : it seems to be entirely thought around the “family picture” market only and not for the pro or semi pro user. Furthermore, you seem to need a box that is linked to your TV. Now really ? who needs another box under the TV?

One step forward, two step backwards

Posted in Waste of time, Good Enough, technology, multimedia, No sense, slideshow | Print | No Comments »

Burning Man

September 14, 2010 by pmelcher.

So, what do you do when you have a problem ? Burn everything ? Apparently , that is the new solution.

A year ago, French photographer, Jean Batiste ( sorry, couldn’t find his last name), decided that, in order to protest the harsh financial conditions some photographers face, he would burn his images. You can see the dramatic video here :

The result ? A lot of sympathetic press coverage on a slow news day and not much more. After all, if his images don’t sell, why would any care what he does with it ? Furthermore, he might have scanned all of them, making the burning of negatives ( remember those ?) barely symbolic.

He wanted to bring the attention of the French government on the fact that he was making little less than minimum wages with his pictures due to the financial mistreatment of photography. The French Government did not particularly react as they had to deal, like so many others, to a global meltdown of the economy. The financial trouble of a lonely photographer was no match to the global collapse of our banking system.So what does this Jean Batiste do ?

He is at it again. This time, he wants all photographers to join him in burning their negatives at the footsteps of a statue of Nicephore Niepce, the inventor of photography. Located in the remote town of Chalon sur Saône, somewhere in France, the event is schedule for January 11, 2011.

Surely, this is no Koran burning and it is doubtful that it will receive any of the obscene amount of coverage that we have recently seen. It is neither the self immolation of a monk, as we had dramatically witnessed during the Vietnam war. This is the tantrum of a unknown french photographer who like many of his fellow citizen cannot think of anything better than blame the government for his hard time and demand that they hold his hand.

We are aware of at least two photographers currently about to be evicted from their houses because they cannot pay their bills anymore. Do you think they are burning their hard drives in their back yard hoping Obama will notice ? No. They are hard at work trying to reinvent themselves in an extremely difficult time. Do they complain, bitch, cry, and kick. Sure.

But they certainly have no attention to walking in Washington demanding their rights to make a decent living. You know why ? Because they feel extremely fortunate to have been a living on a trade they love. Because they knew from day one of embracing this life that they would hit bumps and roadblocks.

Because they love photography too much to burn it.

Posted in license, copyright, Waste of time, No sense, finance, editorial, transaction, news | Print | No Comments »

Message in a Bottle

July 29, 2010 by pmelcher.

This is what happens when you tweet :

Your little message in bottle that you thought was so important disappears in a sea of messages. We are not saying you shouldn’t tweet, just saying you should take pictures instead.

Posted in Social Media, Waste of time, Corpocrates, Tweet, commercial stock, No sense, multimedia, technology, web 2.0 | Print | No Comments »