In my recent Intel on Street Photography, I referred to accepted use of images. Making money from your hobby has always been a popular theme amongst photographers, in fact to sell your work is probably the dream of most amateur photographers; dealing with confusing legal issues and contracts isn't part of their dream. Of course, a photographer should rarely sell any photo. What you really want to sell is permission to use your image in a particular way for a predetermined length of time. This is called licensing the Image. There are many different license types, but understanding the basics will help you keep control of your sales, manage your work and maybe even retain your sanity!
Non-Commercial Rights - When you visit my will see that I offer my images free in certain groups. I am not giving away either the images nor my rights to them, but offering “Non-commercial rights”. It is not my lack of profit that makes this non-commercial, but the restriction I, as copyright owner, place on the use to which the pictures can be used. They are not used to be used to create significant income or financial gain, but to support community, charitable or non-profit groups. Things such as church bulletins, an image for a charity’s annual report or a public service bulletin for a community group trying to raise awareness about hopelessness could be typical non-commercial usage.
First Rights - When the word "first" is placed in front of other rights it simply means that the entity purchasing these rights gets to publish/use the image before anyone else who has purchased a license to publish the image. First rights caries a dollar premium!
Serial Rights - “Serials” are magazines, so Serial Rights license the image to be used in magazine format. Once you have sold serial rights to a magazine you can't sell it to another magazine. Unless you only sell "FIRST" rights - then you can sell more rights later. You can, however, sell it to other markets.
Non-Exclusive Rights - Non-exclusive rights means that the licenser has a specific set of rights. that’s good, because you can license other uses at the same time (say a calendar as well as book). But it also carries the risk that many companies include clauses that allow them to reprint and resell your work. Non-exclusive rights can be a reasonable license to sell but be careful; they can also be a quick way to lose control of your work.
One Time Use Rights - Probably the photographers’ best friend. One time use means that the license is good for "one time", for one specified project.
Royalty Free vs Rights Managed
Royalty-Free licensing is a broad-use license that does not require additional payments for additional uses. The amount of time an image may be used is generally unlimited. You can place restrictions on use; the most common limitation being on relicensing the image. Price is often based on the pixel-size of the image, the number of images bought in a period of time and other characteristics not directly related to use.
Rights-Managed licensing or "Rights-managed", is priced for a specific use based on factors like length of use; type of use; number of insertions; size; number of impressions or displays; geographic region; etc. This type of licensing allows the photographer to retain more control over their work.
If you are marketing your images yourself, rights-managed licensing makes the most sense for all your pictures: it makes sense not to give away any rights that might limit a big sale later on, especially if you are going to spend the time dealing directly with the buyer.
You might wonder why anyone would consider licensing images royalty-free;many buyers will license only royalty-free photos these days so, unless your work is unique and unlike any found on Royalty-free sites you might be passing up sales by offering only rights-managed stock.
The potential income of royalty-free vs. rights-managed sales might come down to an image-by-image decision. It is certainly a lot more possible to make money selling royalty-free images through micro-payment agencies.
Many photographers do not market their work directly, but sell through agencies, preferring to concentrate on photography rather than marketing and customer service. Marketing is a speciality and is best done by those who know how to reach the target audience. If you do choose to market your own images, whether royalty-free or rights-managed, price them according to industry standards; do not try to compete against the Micro-agencies volume rates. Their model depends on vast image banks and a huge marketing budget. Individual photographers cannot make much money with the micro-payment model; if it appeals, join one of the agencies and get the benefit of their clout.
If a buyer is willing to buy from you rather than a large site or agency it is because you have a unique image and that buyer is willing to pay for it. Price your stock photography accordingly
.
Unusual or hard to find images are candidates for rights-manager licensing; more common images are better candidates for royalty-free. This has little to do with quality, and royalty free images are typically of outstanding quality - what they lack is uniqueness, but that is also their strength. A unique image will have fewer potential uses! If you're unsure which model is best for you start with rights-managed. Once you license an image royalty-free you can’t retrieve it.
If an image has never been licensed royalty-free you may move it to rights-managed; you should not offer an image as Royalty-free if any rights-managed licenses have yet to expire, nor should you ever license the same image under both system at the same time!
Interesting Facts -
* About 2/3 of stock images are Royalty Free but 2/3 of revenue.comes from Royalty Managed
* Royalty-free prices are rising while Rights-managed prices are falling.
* Most stock photographers sell both Royalty-free and Rights-managed.
* Those who sell only Rights-managed tend to be older, more skilled, more established and generate more income per photo.
* No matter which system you choose, you retain Copyright.
