Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Should you upload images on flickr if you want to sell them?


14 Apr 2014 12:31PM
Just wondering if you want to sell your images is it a good idea to have them on Flickr.

Does anybody know the best site to showcase your images on if you wish to sell them.

Cheers

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Evertonian 1 461 England
14 Apr 2014 1:08PM
You can prevent downloading from Flickr by going into "settings" and clicking the situation that you require.
14 Apr 2014 1:55PM
If you're looking to sell images then probably the best site is Alamy:

ALAMY

I've used them for several years with some succcess. Read their guidance notes as they are quite helpful.

I think Flickr was linked with Getty Images in some way but I'm not sure about that.
14 Apr 2014 6:43PM
I think that flickr's small print(they are owned by yahoo) states that they own the copyright once posted to the flickr site.

That's why a lot of people are up in arms over them.
mikehit e2
5 6.8k 11 United Kingdom
14 Apr 2014 7:23PM
AFAIK their small print doesn't give copyright to them but posting on flickr gives them approval to use the image however they want - you still own the copyright and can sell it to other parties.
TTT 13 559 Germany
15 Apr 2014 10:09AM
500px has started a store and wall art section for selling prints and/or licensed downloads... This is mine just to give you an idea.....
http://500px.com/photo/66249033?from=user_store
CarolG e2
8 141 18 Greece
17 Apr 2014 8:09AM

Quote:If you're looking to sell images then probably the best site is Alamy:

ALAMY

I've used them for several years with some succcess. Read their guidance notes as they are quite helpful.

I think Flickr was linked with Getty Images in some way but I'm not sure about that.



I checked out ALAMY, and note that they will NOT accept images taken with a compact camera, which I use. Who is to say that a compact camera can't take as good an image as a DSLR?

Carol
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
17 Apr 2014 10:11AM

Quote: Who is to say that a compact camera can't take as good an image as a DSLR?


You're right, Carol, but from a technical perspective the images aren't as good. That's where they're coming from. They will accept photos from some compact cameras. Images from cameras neither recommended or condemned basically require careful processing (my Panasonic LX3, for example).

Alamy lists are by no means perfect - there are questionable inconsistencies. They now have an edited 'Stockimo' sideline for iPhone pictures, so maybe they'll eventually move away from camera lists.
altitude50 10 2.1k United Kingdom
17 Apr 2014 10:53AM
That seems to be an unwarranted prejudice against compact cameras.
I belong to a very good camera club, well respected in the area. I own a DSLR and three compact cameras. The first compact I owned (2004) and still use was a Pentax Optio 3.2 mp camera. In a competition in January this year I obtained a 10/10 and best of evening for a 10x8 print made from that camera, no colour manipulation, spot zapping, or cloning done to it. I did tweak the contrast up a small notch.
I have never discussed what camera it was taken on and nobody has ever asked.
mikehit e2
5 6.8k 11 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2014 11:06AM

Quote:That seems to be an unwarranted prejudice against compact cameras.
I belong to a very good camera club, well respected in the area. I own a DSLR and three compact cameras. The first compact I owned (2004) and still use was a Pentax Optio 3.2 mp camera. In a competition in January this year I obtained a 10/10 and best of evening for a 10x8 print made from that camera, no colour manipulation, spot zapping, or cloning done to it. I did tweak the contrast up a small notch.
I have never discussed what camera it was taken on and nobody has ever asked.



Companies like Alamy sell their images for all sorts of uses, from websites to double-page spreads and larger and their traditional model is that all pictures should be suitable for all uses so their clients don't need to worry about it - 'I like it, I'll buy it' not 'I will buy it if it is the correct resolution for my centre page spread'. So while a photo may be good enough for a competition, it is good enough for large advertising copy? And when they have tens of thousands of images on their database why do they need to compromise? So Glenn says, it will probably change but for now it is what it is.
Nickscape 8 696 9 England
17 Apr 2014 1:04PM
Alamy are very picky about the quality of their images and so they should be, I wouldn't want to upload any images taken with my compact - as good as they are the clarity is nowhere near the quality of the output from my DSLR. I've taken some very good pictures with my little compact but even printing at 10x8 you can start to see the limitations.

I've seen images licensed for use on huge billboards from Alamy so the original file needs to be incredibly clean to blow up this large, I can't imagine a picture from a compact camera standing up to well for this kind of output.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
17 Apr 2014 2:52PM
If you lean towards a certain type of picture (i.e. editorial), a compact camera of decent quality won't be meaningfully discernible in output from a DSLR at the likely sizes of reproduction. That's undoubtedly why Alamy allow them at all, because traditionally most of their business has been editorial. The number of times I've made poster-sized sales on Alamy or even DPS sales are relatively small. My own technical preoccupation is total overkill - it's more for me than them, but I have occasionally submitted compact camera photos (never rejected). You just have to shoot raw at low ISOs, and process with care.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.