Alamy - the world's largest photographic stock library - today rolls out a new 'Limited Use' purchase scheme. But what does this mean? Well, many of you may (or may not) be aware that photographers sell their images on Alamy for commercial use.
In old money that use would tend to mean you would end up paying a chunk of cash dependent upon how and where the image were to be used, and how many people would see it in this context (the more people, the more the cash) as licensed, royalty free images. But with times changing and new markets bounding out from the cyber-undergrowth, many people are starting to question why they should pay so much money for images.
As such 'microstock' libraries - such as iStockPhoto - charge very little money for the use of images, albeit in a limited context. Alamy's response has been to generate Limited use - from as little as 60p per image - for sole use on non-commercial blogs, social networking sites or for education use.
Whilst this may be met with glee by teaching staff, blog addicts and social networkers alike, there's a sour taste in some peoples' mouths. Pete Jenkins, Vice Chair of the Photographers' Sub Committee of the National Union of Journalists, writes in his blog: “The arguments against this are not that Alamy are charging too little - no, the arguments are that it could easily lead to orphans, and subsequent stealing of images from one bloggers site by anyone else who feels like it? Will Alamy police this? Will Alamy ensure all images used are credited to the creator? If one blogger can swipe an image from free, then any web user can.”
Professional Photographer Scott Hortop also writes at his concern that, “I could complete the whole process through to inputting all my credit card details without being told what Limited Use meant and what the lack of model releases could mean.”
On the other hand any Tom, Dick or Harry can now purchase cheap images for legitimate use - thus paying the photographer, albeit a very small amount; an amount, supposedly, with a greater potential abundance.
So, a great thing for the masses? Or a kick in the teeth for photographers? Have your say...
