Licensing?

[monicasigmon]

I'm curious about licensing images. I have no experience or knowledge in this arena, but I do have some fine art images and I'd like to explore some options. Does anyone have some wisdom they can share? @CarolineJensen have you done this?

[CarolineJensen]

I want to do this, but I’ve heard mixed reviews on it. I do better with stock, historically, but even that is waning right now. The hard part is it isn’t regulated, so the burden is on us to get a good representative. 

[tonygale]

I find I do much better when I am able to directly license. The stock agencies all seem to have raced to the bottom, and everybody lost 

[davidmclain]

Great question Monica.

Licensing has always been an important part of my business. I license images I have already shot (stock) and I include a license fee for assignments I am about to shoot. The stock part of the business has become a race to the bottom and it's harder and harder every year to make meaningful income from stock photography. Depending on your business and what you shoot, it is still possible to include a license on commercial assignment work by defining the rights the clients need  (ie. 1-year web use only) or by licensing the right for the client to use the work however they want (ie. non-exclusive, in perpetuity). ASMP is a great org that explains all of this in depth.

In terms of fine art, you can always go directly to the client. For example, a greeting Card company or rep who sells art to institutional buyers looking to decorate large buildings. I would recommend going this route. It won't be any more work than trying to find and submit to a stock agency and will allow you to more accurately target potential buyers your art will appeal to. You can use a service like adbase to identify potential buyers.

[IraBlock]

Licensing is critical to protect the rights to your images. Though the stock business barely exists anymore you still need to be careful what you do with your photos. You would be devastated to see an image that you gave away for a small fee used as for branding a major corporation. Images no longer have territorial licensing as the internet sends images around the world, but you can still put other restrictions in your license. As far as fine art you sell prints directly to the client, but they do not have the copyright to that image, you do. The client only owns the print and can sell the print at any point. But they cannot use the image of the print for any thing else - commercial or editorial.

[monicasigmon]

Licensing is critical to protect the rights to your images. Though the stock business barely exists anymore you still need to be careful what you do with your photos. You would be devastated to see an image that you gave away for a small fee used as for branding a major corporation. Images no longer have territorial licensing as the internet sends images around the world, but you can still put other restrictions in your license. As far as fine art you sell prints directly to the client, but they do not have the copyright to that image, you do. The client only owns the print and can sell the print at any point. But they cannot use the image of the print for any thing else - commercial or editorial.

Thank you for that feedback, Ira!!

[monicasigmon]

I want to do this, but I’ve heard mixed reviews on it. I do better with stock, historically, but even that is waning right now. The hard part is it isn’t regulated, so the burden is on us to get a good representative. 

Goooootcha...so I think you're saying it would be best to work with an agent? Sorry if the question is dumb, I've literally not done ANYTHING like this 😊

 

 

[monicasigmon]

I find I do much better when I am able to directly license. The stock agencies all seem to have raced to the bottom, and everybody lost 

That makes sense. Is that something you do on your own? Or do you work with agent/representative?

[monicasigmon]

Great question Monica.

Licensing has always been an important part of my business. I license images I have already shot (stock) and I include a license fee for assignments I am about to shoot. The stock part of the business has become a race to the bottom and it's harder and harder every year to make meaningful income from stock photography. Depending on your business and what you shoot, it is still possible to include a license on commercial assignment work by defining the rights the clients need  (ie. 1-year web use only) or by licensing the right for the client to use the work however they want (ie. non-exclusive, in perpetuity). ASMP is a great org that explains all of this in depth.

In terms of fine art, you can always go directly to the client. For example, a greeting Card company or rep who sells art to institutional buyers looking to decorate large buildings. I would recommend going this route. It won't be any more work than trying to find and submit to a stock agency and will allow you to more accurately target potential buyers your art will appeal to. You can use a service like adbase to identify potential buyers.

David! Thanks so much!! So, your send option is more in line with what I was thinking. I will definitely check out adbase asap! I may reach out with questions if that's ok? 🙂

[Drew_Geraci]

Licensing is quite simple once you understand the terms you and your client want. There are two types, Rights Managed and Royalty Free. If you want to make money, RM is the way to go, and if you want to sell bulk, RF is the way to go. 

 

The number one thing is understanding how the images/video are going to be used, what media space they'll live in (print, web, tv, film etc), how long they'll be in use, and whether or not they are exclusive or non-exclusive to the client. All of these aspects are incredibly important when understanding how much you should charge. 

 

The game has changed quite a bit in the last 10 years thanks to cheap stock sites like Adobe, Pond5, Getty, and iStock (all horrible), which makes it very difficult to charge what the image or video is likely worth. That being said, never sell yourself short on what you should be valuing your work at. 

[monicasigmon]

Licensing is quite simple once you understand the terms you and your client want. There are two types, Rights Managed and Royalty Free. If you want to make money, RM is the way to go, and if you want to sell bulk, RF is the way to go. 

The number one thing is understanding how the images/video are going to be used, what media space they'll live in (print, web, tv, film etc), how long they'll be in use, and whether or not they are exclusive or non-exclusive to the client. All of these aspects are incredibly important when understanding how much you should charge. 

The game has changed quite a bit in the last 10 years thanks to cheap stock sites like Adobe, Pond5, Getty, and iStock (all horrible), which makes it very difficult to charge what the image or video is likely worth. That being said, never sell yourself short on what you should be valuing your work at. 

Thanks, Drew! I appreciate this explanation so much!

[tonygale]

That makes sense. Is that something you do on your own? Or do you work with agent/representative?

It's more by happenstance on my own. I do have work with agencies but it really doesn't amount to much

 

[davidmclain]

David! Thanks so much!! So, your send option is more in line with what I was thinking. I will definitely check out adbase asap! I may reach out with questions if that's ok? 🙂

Reach out anytime!