Contest or Way To Obtain Royalty-Free Photos?

[JimMcClain]

A friend called my attention to a "photo contest" thinking some of my photography might earn me the top prize (we all love a friend that thinks we're the best). When I checked it out, I knew the submission requirements would disqualify me: "...should be in natural color, with only minimal color correcting and shadow/contrast adjustment, if any." I don't do this type of photography, which I refer to as documentary style. I always push the envelope, sometimes too far for some tastes.

But I looked a little closer at the contest specifics and see that there is only one winner of $101.00. No secondary prizes. But entering the contest gives the owners of the website "...unrestricted, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to publish, edit, promote, republish and otherwise use their credited submissions at any time(s) in the future in any and all media."

101 Things to Do Online - 101 Things To Do has 14 magazines and it appears that many of the photos they display are from submissions, possibly contests just like this one. I visited one magazine and see that they just announced a contest winner. My guess is that they have a contest similar to this in all of their mags at least once a year. This gives them a huge cache of stock photographs to use and it only costs them $101.00 per contest. What a great deal... for them.

There's prob'ly a lot of photographers that wouldn't mind having their photos published in an online magazine with their photo credit. The chance to win a hundred bucks is a plus. But it just doesn't seem fair to me. Maybe not quite a scam, but definitely favors - and profits - the sponsor/website.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid.

 

[40737014]

A friend called my attention to a "photo contest" thinking some of my photography might earn me the top prize (we all love a friend that thinks we're the best). When I checked it out, I knew the submission requirements would disqualify me: "...should be in natural color, with only minimal color correcting and shadow/contrast adjustment, if any." I don't do this type of photography, which I refer to as documentary style. I always push the envelope, sometimes too far for some tastes.

But I looked a little closer at the contest specifics and see that there is only one winner of $101.00. No secondary prizes. But entering the contest gives the owners of the website "...unrestricted, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to publish, edit, promote, republish and otherwise use their credited submissions at any time(s) in the future in any and all media."

101 Things to Do Online - 101 Things To Do has 14 magazines and it appears that many of the photos they display are from submissions, possibly contests just like this one. I visited one magazine and see that they just announced a contest winner. My guess is that they have a contest similar to this in all of their mags at least once a year. This gives them a huge cache of stock photographs to use and it only costs them $101.00 per contest. What a great deal... for them.

There's prob'ly a lot of photographers that wouldn't mind having their photos published in an online magazine with their photo credit. The chance to win a hundred bucks is a plus. But it just doesn't seem fair to me. Maybe not quite a scam, but definitely favors - and profits - the sponsor/website.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid.

Nope you are not being paranoid. This is an example of why I dont enter photo contests.
My other bug bear about photography contest prizes being based on how many likes a pic gets. This is a social media contest and has nothing to do with photography.

 

[Rick50]

National Geographic doesn't allow any photoshop at all. I visited the local museum and some of the pics were stunning. So I guess it can be done but I'm just not that good.

 

[tirediron]

It's nothing more than a rights grab. They stump up $101 and probably receive tens of thousands of images. If even only .1% of them are worth while, that's still 10-20, maybe 30 or more good images for $101, so from their point, win-win. I'm not a contest enterer either.

 

[40737014]

National Geographic doesn't allow any photoshop at all. I visited the local museum and some of the pics were stunning. So I guess it can be done but I'm just not that good.

Do you really think that ?
Cameras have incredible editing suites in the device. Saturation, HDR, BW, Sharpness etc can all be controlled inside the camera.

Are they seriously suggesting that none of these were edited 2015 National Geographic Photo Contest | National Geographic

The NG Rule on editing.

1. Only minor burning, dodging and/or color correction is acceptable, as is minor cropping. High dynamic range images (HDR) and stitched panoramas are acceptable. Any changes to the original photograph not itemized here or in the NGS Your Shot Photo Guidelines are unacceptable and will render the photograph ineligible for a prize.

 

[KmH]

Another urban myth bites the dust.

 

[480sparky49 48]

I don't enter contests on a regular basis because they are mostly rights grabs. I am very selective on which ones I enter, based on reading the Terms & Conditions and Rules very very very very very carefully.

 

[KmH]

Rights Grabs |

 

[vintagesnaps]

That's what I've seen them called - 'photo rights grab' sites. You're not paranoid Jim, you hit the nail on the head with your perspective on it.

I think people need to look at the Terms & Conditions. For contests, I have a friend who has submitted to our local fair, or people could look at reputable published magazines and publications. Online I think it's necessary to be particularly careful and read through everything, make sure there's an actual address and that they actually exist somewhere on planet earth.

 

[480sparky49 48]

Rights Grabs |

The forest will have non-exclusive, unlimited use of the photo(s).

Now, exactly how would a forest use a photo?

 

[vintagesnaps]

I was starting to think 101 Ways is on planet Mars... I didn't see any location or contact info. - or nuthin'! Found it at the bottom clicking on 101 Things To Do to the right of the copyright but it wasn't easy to see.

 

[480sparky49 48]

I've often wondered how profitable it would be to get into such a racket.

Offer on-line contests, get thousands of submissions, pick a handful for measly prizes, bury the rights grab in the rules, then...............

List the good images for sale wherever I could. Pay fractions of a penny for each stellar shot, yet sell them (rights or prints) for moo-koo bucks.

 

[table1349]

June 17, 2016

Bernie Madoff # 61727-054
Federal Correctional Complex, Butner
2 Old 75 Hwy
Butner, NC 27509

Dear Mr. Madoff,

A few friends and I would like to engage in a rights grab scam where in we would hold photo contests and give a way a nominal prize to one "lucky" winner. In return we would get full rights to all submitted photos in perpetuity. We will then lease/sell usage rights for any of the collected photos to any person(s) or entities that desire to use one of the photos.

I am writing to you as with you current level of experience and history you could perhaps share with use your learned wisdom of the past few years whereby we would avoid the situation you find yourself in. In return we would send to your commissary account the sum of $101.00.

Sincerely,

The Photo Entrepreneurs


Sparky, Keith, Iron, Sharon & Number. You are all in. Will let you know what Bernie suggests we do.

Jim McClain, you will be our first winner. To show you our appreciation we will not take the $50.00 handling charge from you $101.00 winnings.

 

[jsecordphoto]

it seems that most contests are like this now. Top prize will be like a d5300 or something, but every entry can be used by those hosting the content in any way they want. Great deal for those running the contests...

 

[Dave442]

I've entered one contest similar to this (a county tourism office) and so far batting a 1000 with the $100 for the photo, but now I feel cheated as I see that Jim could have won $101.