Should companies give credit to stock photo use?

Should companies give credit to stock photo use?

12 posts
2 Sep 2015
Chandos
Photographer
Chandos
Especially in a public sector?
I use to take pictures for a public sector for small pay and always insist on being credited unless they buy the rights which would be higher, but they often renegade on the credit thing. Anyway I no longer work for them and they chose to out source their photographers at higher cost with either credit or paying for the photos outright, no problem if they want to pay more. Anyway recently they stop hiring and use stock photos as oppose to their staffs taking photos on their phones. Obviously there is a jump up in quality but seeing the photos are so good make one ask they must have sourced a great photographer and money well spent with credit going to the marketing team for finding such talent which are not a dent to the annual budget. Most people won't know they use stock photos.

Posted 2 Sep 2015
Edited by Chandos 2 Sep 2015
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
No. They buy from stock libraries in good faith that they can use the images in pretty much any way they see fit, even if that also includes not crediting. To force this on people would infringe the rights of creatives to use whatever material they can (hopefully legally) obtain to produce their work.

If the stock libraries feel they're getting conned by this then I'm sure they'll implement such a rule, but in no way, shape or form will it have any bearing on individual photographers. Besides, I suspect less than 0.1% of people would give a damn where it came from, and even less would care whether or not an image was legally used (ie. paid for rather than stolen from the web for example).


Posted 2 Sep 2015
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Chandos

Should companies give credit to stock photo use?


Not unless the licence terms require it.

One of my stock images was used last weekend by a national newspaper, both in print and online. A name credit was given, as that is what both my Terms of Use and that of the Picture Library stipulate.

A stock image from Getty was also used is support of the story - only Getty was credited for that one as that is what their ToU requires.

I do not sell my images through Getty.

Bob

Posted 2 Sep 2015
Chandos
Photographer
Chandos
There can be issues using stock photos. For instant just last week they advertised a service with photos showing peoples' faces and facilities, obviously they look great but being stock photos the facilities are not theirs and the people, well they live across the pond. This amount to false advertising. People looking at the images might think it is the actual facilities offered by the company. If they said on their website the photos are not the actual facilties and are only used as reference then prospective clients might not feel so deceived.

For me it is more about transparency for prospective clients, and if a public sector it is check and balance on how tax payers money are spent on how they acquired the images, is it through hiring photographers, using their own staffs doing freebies or stock images.

Posted 2 Sep 2015
Edited by Chandos 2 Sep 2015
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
It totally depends on the nature of the business and the manner in which the images are being used.

Of course, if (say) a wedding photographer used stock wedding images to promote their service then it could be seen as deception, although another example of a business like a bank using stock images to promote some campaign for a finance package they're doing may not be deceiving anyone if they were simply looking for an image of an ice-cream or child's toy for their posters.

As far as public sector goes, people simply want them to make best use of tax-payers' money and stock libraries fit that criteria very well, and save the embarrassment of the public finding out if a photographer charges a standard market rate (Google: Julie Kirkbride MP Photoshoot, she had two photoshoots commissioned at a total of ~£1000 and the press went apeshit)

Posted 2 Sep 2015
Chandos
Photographer
Chandos
Depending on the sector but is not always about using stock photos to supplement inefficiency even though it might be perceived as saving money. If a public sector has been granted an amount of cash to be creative, money use to finance projects and marketing which involves hiring real people that would also lead to employment in the city, but instead of doing that, the sector or one of its department/employee uses stock photos and worse still not being transparent about it.

Posted 2 Sep 2015
Spike
Photographer
Spike
Can't see what the problem is with a local authority using stock shots, I regularly shoot for my LA & on several occasions have suggested the use of stock photos if it gives considerably better value & more practical. If there's no suitable stock or there is an issue of showing a "real" service I shoot it.



Posted 6 Sep 2015
Chandos
Photographer
Chandos
In a public sector depending what it is I suppose. What gets me is using stock images to mis sell and from a photographer's point of view the lack of transparency in not crediting that goes for both to the photographer and stock images. I have had images that I took for one department but used by another department whom I have not agreed to work for. They treated my images like stock images.

Posted 6 Sep 2015
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Chandos

What gets me is using stock images to mis sell

If you know that images are being used by a company or PSO to mis-sell or misrepresent their services, I suggest you report this to the local Trading Standards and/or the Advertising Standards Authority.

Chandos

What gets me is ... from a photographer's point of view the lack of transparency in not crediting that goes for both to the photographer and stock images.

If you wish to receive a credit whenever the image is used and have not asserted this when giving permission for your images to be used you cannot blame anyone else. If you wish it to be known that the images is from stock rather than being specifically shot for the user, you should write this into the Licence.

Chandos

I have had images that I took for one department but used by another department whom I have not agreed to work for.

If you have stipulated usage rights in the Licence and your client has ignored this you should take this up with them, but if you have not properly licenced the images when supplying them I'm afraid you only have yourself to blame.

If you do not have your own watertight Licence to Use documentation you can download a template, in either PDF or DOC format, which will stand up in court from this AOP web page.

Bob
Posted 6 Sep 2015
Chandos
Photographer
Chandos
Bob, which I always stated to my client who agreed to credit me unless they buy the images from me outright. They always never buy from me outright and never credit. One reason why I no longer pursue work with them. Other department nicking your images is no different than theft, just like lads mags nicking your images for publication. I know some have successfully sued whether it is "properly licensed" or not the images are the property of the photographer who had not sold the rights to his images to the publisher.

Posted 6 Sep 2015
Edited by Chandos 6 Sep 2015
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Chandos

Bob, which I always stated to my client who agreed to credit me unless they buy the images from me outright. They always never buy from me outright and never credit. One reason why I no longer pursue work with them. Other department nicking your images is no different than theft, just like lads mags nicking your images for publication. I know some have successfully sued whether it is "properly licensed" or not the images are the property of the photographer who had not sold the rights to his images to the publisher.

Simon, merely stating something to a Client is usually about as effective as using a pitchfork to bale out a sinking lifeboat. Issuing a properly worded Licence for each image, on the other hand, might make them honour their agreement and will give you something to use against them if they break the agreement or allow others to use your work without permission and/or credit.

Crying over spilt milk is useless. Putting proper safeguards in place for the future will probably reduce the chances of being shafted again, though of course there are no guarantees as the commercial world (which includes public sector bodies and charities, even though some consider their institutions to be seperate from commerce and/or above the law) is full of chancers and crooks.

Bob
Posted 6 Sep 2015
CunningLinguists
Photographer
CunningLinguists
I'm an art director and photographer.

As a photographer, my day job involves shooting customers and staff in entertainment venues and I wouldn't expect a credit, as I'm paid to go and take the photographs.

As an art director, I buy a lot of stock photography for clients, when I need a shot that is more technically proficient than I can manage, or the budget doesn't allow me to employ models.

I wouldn't buy an image that needed a photographer credit, as it would make my job designing a project harder. I guess you can either shoot for glory, or pay (I like a bit of both)

Posted 17 July 2016
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join