Talk to me about Royalty Free Non Exclusive licensing

KmH · Feb 17, 2015

unpopular said:
But the question remains, would time have used that image at all if it were $3,000?

I sincerely doubt it.

Read the tag line on the cover of that issue - "The New Frugality".
Using a stock image rather than paying a pro $3000 to make the cover shot supports the tag line.

unpopular · Feb 17, 2015

Well, I'll stress as I've stressed before. I have no obligation to other photographers.

Buckster · Feb 18, 2015

unpopular said:
or it could sit in my flickr account and never be used at all. seems silly to get greedy over an image that has no value...

I see your point. For people who shoot crap that has no value, they might as well take a dollar if someone's willing to offer it.

I personally place a much higher value on my work. It's not at all unusual for me to turn down an offer if a potential client doesn't want to pay my price, and it doesn't bother me in the least. But that's just me.

I've yet to see a stock agency deal that financially appeals to me as the one who put in the time, effort and money to create the work, especially with the current craze of noobs flooding them with a gazillion images in a race to the bottom.

unpopular · Feb 18, 2015

Yeah. I withdrew my license before they were included. I don't know if I'm subjecto to the 120 day thing, but you all are right. It's a pretty bad deal.

This isn't to say that my images will be on the cover of a magazine, but RF does impact the overall value and merit of my work. I don't want my images to be seen in a gallery and the first thing that comes into mind is, "hey, it's that background from the Viagra ad"

spacefuzz · Feb 20, 2015

I found this blog post enlightening on the subject: Why I Canceled Exclusivity with iStock - Nicolesy

As for me all my stock is RM, and although I wish it sold more often its more than pocket change. I shudder to think what I would be making in microstock.

unpopular · Feb 20, 2015

Just as an update, the Yahoo rep who was working with me was very helpful and said that because I withdrew my images before she had a chance to include them, they were excluded immediately.

Thanks for all your input guys.

DinoThePhotoGuy · Feb 22, 2015

unpopular said:
Yeah. I withdrew my license before they were included. I don't know if I'm subjecto to the 120 day thing, but you all are right. It's a pretty bad deal.

This isn't to say that my images will be on the cover of a magazine, but RF does impact the overall value and merit of my work. I don't want my images to be seen in a gallery and the first thing that comes into mind is, "hey, it's that background from the Viagra ad"

I Agree. Can you Imagine. I can't stop laughing thinking about it.