Pro-Imaging

 PROPOSED SALE OF GETTY IMAGES

There have been countless articles published over the last few days regarding the possible sale of Getty Images.  The pieces are readily available on the web.  We suggest that you read more than a few of them.

The fact that image licensing fees have been driven down over the last several years is a common theme.  Most of the authors claim this is due largely to: 

• the advent of the internet; 
• the competitive nature of the business;
• that there exists just a precious few “players” i.e. Corbis, Jupiter;
• profit cannot be made on transactions concerning just a few dollars.

  The articles make little to no mention of the fact(s) that:

• photographers were now taking percentages of 40% (and in many cases less) rather than the formerly customary 50%;
• that the agencies’ costs of doing business via internet were less than when analog film required processing, physical delivery, duping, etc.;
• agencies were in effect, double dipping on fees by replacing formerly independent sub-agents with wholly owned ones;
• that agencies were marketing “wholly owned images” in direct competition with images upon which photographers received royalties; 
• that complacent photographers abandoned images to agencies which by magic, became “owners” of same.
• Replacement of agency veteran employees with younger and cheaper albeit,  inexperienced ones.

We have been correctly predicting these type of events in the stock industry for almost a decade.  Had we exhibited such accuracy at Churchill Downs or Mandalay Bay, our concern now would only be with the SPF number of our sun block.  This sale will make photographers, illustrators and creators who choose to work with such "agencies" even more irrelevant than they already are.

For quite some time the stock agencies have been dropping the business model of making money by generating licensing revenues.  Their goals were to create archives and other hard assets with the goal of baling out of the business entirely and selling what was left.  In so doing they have made blatant attempts to debase and devalue photographers and their work. 

Unfortunately, many shooters bought into the corporate speak espoused by the PR people at most, if not all agencies.  Countless shooters wanted to believe that the changes in the stock industry would benefit them and/or that they had no choice but to “partner” with those who were devouring them.  As has been written by many wiser than I, the will to believe is oft times more important than cold facts staring one in the face. 

Many of you were offended by our rather aggressive view that photographers were hastening their own demise.  To all of you and particularly the idealists out there, we ask the following questions:

Why no mention of the effects upon photographers of the consolidation in the stock industry?  Why no reference in the lay press concerning the effects upon your income(s) by the various sales, acquisitions and machinations by and among the agencies?  Why no reference to the federal court decisions finding that Corbis has lost many, many thousands of important historical images through its negligence?

We could, of course, go on and on ad nauseum.   The agencies diminished your value, cut you loose if you did not play along and licensed your images for literally pennies.  That is only a short list of what the agencies did.  The photographers let it happen.

No doubt that Getty and its equivalents will put the PR machine on high and advise the industry that all is well.  Photographers need not worry, according to the agencies.  Sure.

Dated: January 22, 2008 

Edward C. Greenberg, PC

570 Lexington Ave.

17^th Floor

New York, NY  10022

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it