Click here to print this page

Title: Royalty-free has a cost
Feature: news
Date: 7 December 2005

Some photographers think that royalty-free will be the death of the industry as we know it - and given it's alarming growth at the expense of commissioned and rights-managed imagery, they might be correct.

RF cements the fundamental shift in the relationship between libraries and photographers. Not so long ago, libraries worked as agents to photographers, the latter determining (theoretically, at least) the terms by which images were sold. Now, photographers are most often reduced to 'content providers' within a global delivery model that dictates those terms - and not surprisingly, when taken out of the loop, are finding that model unsustainable. By way of example, I was recently contacted by a new company which hast plans to provide RF images 'either free or starting from as little as £1'. Go figure.

But the main reason why the RF model has been so successful is that it's made simple for image buyers: see what you like, download it, and use it as you see fit. Most customers understand that a lot better than the complexities of RM, for which there has been no fixed model.

But three factors are determining that RM makes a fight back. Firstly, many image buyers have to be more discerning about how an image they buy is consequently used by others, such as a competitor. Secondly, the issue has been made all the more urgent by the launch of Adobe Stock Photos, which provides a direct link to imagery through Creative Suite's Bridge platform. Some commentators believe this will become the main route to stock pictures, and so far Adobe has determined that RM is too complex a fit. And thirdly, someone is actually trying to address that problem - and it has got some heavyweight backing.

PLUS is a coalition of photographer organisations, libraries and end-users that has put together some standards for RM. Its simple goal is 'to provide a single, comprehensive resource for use by every professional engaged in licensing images, so that we all may speak a common language, avoid misunderstandings, and achieve a precise mutual understanding of the scope of any image licence'. As a consequence, says PLUS CEO Jeff Sedlik in our story on page five, 'clients were shying away from rights-managed images to royalty-free images and sacrificing their exclusivity because the latter were easier to use'.

PLUS was derived in the US (and where else would this actually get off the ground?), but has the initial backing of the AOP and BAPLA in the UK. Some will see doors slamming and horses bolting, while others will find new cause for hope - not least from the fact that Adobe is a leading member of the coalition. A one-size-fits-all approach won't suit everybody: for some the boutique approach works better than a global distribution deal. But one thing is for sure, the PLUS proposals now need to be looked at and debated internationally.

Simon Bainbridge, Editor.

Source:

© Incisive Media Ltd. 2008
Incisive Media Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, is a company registered in the United Kingdom with company registration number 04038503