Continue reading »]]> Because of my personal distaste and dismay of the Stock Photo industry which started with the Getty Images Extortion Demand Letter, I have taken steps to personally boycott the Stock Photo Industry and advocate not using stock photos altogether.  The stock photo industry seems to be rapidly consolidating into two companies:  Getty Images and Corbis, as they buy their way into near-monopoly status with them setting outrageous rules, policy, and pricing.

This article will not give you all the information necessary to entirely eliminate the need for stock photos in every situation.  However, this article will give you some ideas and strategies to wean yourself and perhaps altogether eliminate your need for stock photos.  I firmly believe that if you put your intentions behind the idea, you can make huge strides towards eliminating the need for stock photos altogether.

The very first thing you need to think about is whatever media project you are working on is, do you truly need a photo at all?  Chances are that you are working on a website, book, magazine, brochure, news story, banner, or some other media project.  Alternatives to photos might be diagrams, cartoons, illustrations, and drawings that you or a graphic artist you hire can create.  Can you take your own photo to fit the need?

If you hire a graphic artist to create your own artwork, do not hire anyone in China or India where there is very little respect for intellectual property.  They may be inexpensive but you can never be assured that their work is original.  There is little recourse for their bad behavior because they are so far away.  I recommend hiring graphic artists from the U.S. because as a professional community, they have a greater respect for intellectual property than their Chinese or Indian counterparts.  They will think twice before using pirated material.

I would avoid hiring any company that outsources their work to graphic artist worker bees.  In other words, I always want to deal and negotiate with a graphic artist professional themselves, not some agent or agency that farms out graphics art work.

If you do want to use and take your own photos, I highly recommend investing in a good digital camera so that you can begin taking your own photos.  I also recommend getting to know amateur hobbyist photographers who have access to good cameras and enjoy taking photos.  Very often, amateur photographers with good cameras are trying to find a way to justify the costs of their hobby.  By hiring them inexpensively, you can get some great looking photos but also help the amateur photographer pay for his hobby.  Make sure they understand that you are they are working for hire and that you will have full ownership and rights to the photos.

Professional photographers can be expensive depending on what you want and who you use.  For these folks, I recommend bartering with them for exchange of services if you have talents in your profession.  I find many professional photographers finicky.  They will sometimes not give you full ownership or rights of the photo even though you paid them to take a photo.  They are quite protective and their thinking is aligned to many in the stock photo industry.  Admittedly, this is a broad generalization and based only on my experience.  I am simply not optimistic that you will get good value from a professional photographer but it certainly does not hurt to try and negotiate with them.

Another source of quality photos is product photos from product manufacturers.  Often, they are happy to have their products publicized and placed in a positive light and will give you free rights to use their photos.  Product companies mostly police and control their photos because they don’t want their photos used in a manner they did not intend or in a way that paints their company or products in a negative light.  Many will grant you free usage of their photos if you approach them the right way.  However, large companies can be a challenge sometimes because of their size.  They may be so large that they may not even get back to you.  Again, it never hurts to try.  Product companies are in the business selling more of their products, not sue people who use their product photos.

If you choose to take your own photos, invest in a digital camera that can take a resolution of 4 megapixel images or higher.  You want to take high-resolution photos as your master copy.  You can then “downsize”, crop, and enhance the photos for your websites or other uses.  I recommend buying an easy-to-use photo editor such as Adobe Photoshop Elements 7 or Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 that allows you to crop and resize photos easily.  The photo editor can greatly enhance the quality of the master photos you take.  You can also enhance colors and adjust lighting with the software.  Special effects such as blurring, stretching, pixelating, framing, adding captions, etc. are included with photo editing software.

I truly believe that with the increasing power and technical capabilities of digital cameras, cell phone cameras, and camcorders, the value of stock photos and stock photo companies will eventually decline.  It is going to be a losing business to be in.  This whole notion of extorting your way to profitability is distasteful and eventually will fall by the wayside much like what has occurred in the music recording industry.  One only has to look to RIAA for that lesson.

Along the “do-it-yourself” philosophy, you should have the mindset that you will fit images or photos you create to your media project, not let your media projects deciding the specific images you need.  Stock photo companies are trying to brainwash you the idea that THEY have the perfect photo for your particular needs.  If you are creative, imaginative, and resourceful enough, you will almost always find an alternative or work-around solution that does not require the use of stock photos.

If you want to show the stock photo industry you don’t need them, the best way is to simply generate more of your own photos to devalue theirs and then use your own.  I have published two books recently and have been able to successfully avoid using stock photos of any kind.  I used my own photos as well as authorized product photos.  I created my own artwork.  If more publishers, graphic artists, and graphic designers started doing this, I truly believe the stock photo industry could be brought down to their financial knees very quickly.

Many years ago, people said that we would run out of .com domains available because all the good ones were taken.  It is true it has become more challenging to find a good .com domain name.  However, I have made it my policy to not deal with any domain speculators or domain squatters.  I won’t be extorted into paying thousands of dollars for an available domain I can register for less than $10.  And because I have set that restriction and policy for myself, I have always been able to find many suitable .com domain names for my various websites.

It is the same principle here.  Think abundantly.  Think creatively.  Tap into your imagination.  There are many ways to implement a visual concept besides a specific photo you might have in mind.  There are many ways to implement a concept visually. Do not let the stock photo companies brainwash you into thinking you have to use their particular photos because there are no other ways of finding an image for your particular website, logo, banner, sign, book, magazine, or other product.

The best kept secret that the stock photo industry hates are government websites and their photo collections.  Great public domain photos can be found from U.S. government agency websites.  “The people” own the photos, not any one individual or organization.  USA.gov is a government-operated website that was launched to help U.S. citizens have better access to various government agencies and resources.  Specifically, USA.gov has a page called U.S. Government Photos and Images which contains links to government agency websites that have public domain images.  The diversity of images available is quite impressive.   An off-shoot of that page is the State Photo & Multimedia Galleries which links to public domain images at the State level.

Some of the more notable ones I like and found impressive are listed below:

• NASA Images has space-related photos.
• Our Earth as Art has photos relating to the earth, weather, oceans, and nature.
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s National Digital Library has photos relating to animals, plants, nature, and wildlife.
• NOAA Photo Library has several collections of photos relating to nature, weather, oceans, and wildlife.
• U.S. Department of Defense DefenseLINK has photos relating to the military, war, politics, and the President.
• Library of Congress Geography & Map Reading Room has images relating to historical and current maps.
• National Archives America’s Historical Documents has images relating to history, politics, and historical events.
• National Park Service Digital Image Archives has images relating to nature, history, and national parks around the U.S.

Are you impressed with these websites?  I was.  It is all free and much of it is available in high-resolution.  However, you should realize that not all images from government websites are public domain.  You will need to seek out the image usage rights notices on each website.  As I said USA.gov is a great starting point to a wealth of high-quality public domain photos.

If there are any other great public domain or government photo sites, please let me know and I will add them.  If you have any additional tips to stop using stock photos and boycott the stock photo industry, send them to me and I will incorporate them into this article.

Continue reading »]]>

Below is my in-depth response and commentary to Attorney Oscar Michelen’s  (friend and business partner) article,

NY Times Reports Grim Reality: Many Law Grads Jobless!

============================================================

I have long had concerns of many young lawyers (under 30 group) I have met over the years.

Your article has sparked my interest to comment on this subject. As a small-business owner and private citizen who has often gone into court to represent myself over the last 20+ years (plaintiff more than defendant though), I have become more comfortable than the average person in court. I have also frequently hired lawyers to consult with and represent my or my company interests in court. These experiences have shaped my views of young lawyers in particular.

Continue reading »]]> This article first appeared on “The TurnKey Publisher’s Blog”

===================

Because of my personal distaste and dismay of the Stock Photo industry which started with the Getty Images Extortion Demand Letter, I have taken steps to personally boycott the Stock Photo Industry and advocate not using stock photos altogether. The stock photo industry seems to be rapidly consolidating into two companies: Getty Images and Corbis, as they buy their way into near-monopoly status with them setting outrageous rules, policy, and pricing.

This article will not give you all the information necessary to entirely eliminate the need for stock photos in every situation. However, this article will give you some ideas and strategies to wean yourself and perhaps altogether eliminate your need for stock photos. I firmly believe that if you put your intentions behind the idea, you can make huge strides towards eliminating the need for stock photos altogether.

The very first thing you need to think about is whatever media project you are working on is, do you truly need a photo at all? Chances are that you are working on a website, book, magazine, brochure, news story, banner, or some other media project. Alternatives to photos might be diagrams, cartoons, illustrations, and drawings that you or a graphic artist you hire can create. Can you take your own photo to fit the need?

If you hire a graphic artist to create your own artwork, do not hire anyone in China or India where there is very little respect for intellectual property. They may be inexpensive but you can never be assured that their work is original. There is little recourse for their bad behavior because they are so far away. I recommend hiring graphic artists from the U.S. because as a professional community, they have a greater respect for intellectual property than their Chinese or Indian counterparts. They will think twice before using pirated material.

I would avoid hiring any company that outsources their work to graphic artist worker bees. In other words, I always want to deal and negotiate with a graphic artist professional themselves, not some agent or agency that farms out graphics art work.

If you do want to use and take your own photos, I highly recommend investing in a good digital camera so that you can begin taking your own photos. I also recommend getting to know amateur hobbyist photographers who have access to good cameras and enjoy taking photos. Very often, amateur photographers with good cameras are trying to find a way to justify the costs of their hobby. By hiring them inexpensively, you can get some great looking photos but also help the amateur photographer pay for his hobby. Make sure they understand that you are they are working for hire and that you will have full ownership and rights to the photos.

Professional photographers can be expensive depending on what you want and who you use. For these folks, I recommend bartering with them for exchange of services if you have talents in your profession. I find many professional photographers finicky. They will sometimes not give you full ownership or rights of the photo even though you paid them to take a photo. They are quite protective and their thinking is aligned to many in the stock photo industry. Admittedly, this is a broad generalization and based only on my experience. I am simply not optimistic that you will get good value from a professional photographer but it certainly does not hurt to try and negotiate with them.

Another source of quality photos is product photos from product manufacturers. Often, they are happy to have their products publicized and placed in a positive light and will give you free rights to use their photos. Product companies mostly police and control their photos because they don’t want their photos used in a manner they did not intend or in a way that paints their company or products in a negative light. Many will grant you free usage of their photos if you approach them the right way. However, large companies can be a challenge sometimes because of their size. They may be so large that they may not even get back to you. Again, it never hurts to try. Product companies are in the business selling more of their products, not sue people who use their product photos.

If you choose to take your own photos, invest in a digital camera that can take a resolution of 4 megapixel images or higher. You want to take high-resolution photos as your master copy. You can then “downsize”, crop, and enhance the photos for your websites or other uses. I recommend buying an easy-to-use photo editor such as Adobe Photoshop Elements 7 or Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 that allows you to crop and resize photos easily. The photo editor can greatly enhance the quality of the master photos you take. You can also enhance colors and adjust lighting with the software. Special effects such as blurring, stretching, pixelating, framing, adding captions, etc. are included with photo editing software.

I truly believe that with the increasing power and technical capabilities of digital cameras, cell phone cameras, and camcorders, the value of stock photos and stock photo companies will eventually decline. It is going to be a losing business to be in. This whole notion of extorting your way to profitability is distasteful and eventually will fall by the wayside much like what has occurred in the music recording industry. One only has to look to RIAA for that lesson.

Along the “do-it-yourself” philosophy, you should have the mindset that you will fit images or photos you create to your media project, not let your media projects deciding the specific images you need. Stock photo companies are trying to brainwash you the idea that THEY have the “perfect photo” for your particular needs. If you are creative, imaginative, and resourceful enough, you will almost always find an alternative or work-around solution that does not require the use of stock photos.

If you want to show the stock photo industry you don’t need them, the best way is to simply generate more of your own photos to devalue theirs and then use your own. I have published two books recently and have been able to successfully avoid using stock photos of any kind. I used my own photos as well as authorized product photos. I created my own artwork. If more publishers, graphic artists, and graphic designers started doing this, I truly believe the stock photo industry could be brought down to their financial knees very quickly.

Many years ago, people said that we would run out of .com domains available because all the good ones were taken. It is true it has become more challenging to find a good .com domain name. However, I have made it my policy to not deal with any domain speculators or domain squatters. I won’t be extorted into paying thousands of dollars for an available domain I can register for less than $10. And because I have set that restriction and policy for myself, I have always been able to find many suitable .com domain names for my various websites.

It is the same principle here. Think abundantly. Think creatively. Tap into your imagination. There are many ways to implement a visual concept besides a specific photo you might have in mind. There are many ways to implement a concept visually. Do not let the stock photo companies brainwash you into thinking you have to use their particular photos because there are no other ways of finding an image for your particular website, logo, banner, sign, book, magazine, or other product.

The best kept secret that the stock photo industry hates are government websites and their photo collections. Great public domain photos can be found from U.S. government agency websites. “The people” own the photos, not any one individual or organization. USA.gov is a government-operated website that was launched to help U.S. citizens have better access to various government agencies and resources. Specifically, USA.gov has a page called U.S. Government Photos and Images which contains links to government agency websites that have public domain images. The diversity of images available is quite impressive. An off-shoot of that page is the State Photo & Multimedia Galleries which links to public domain images at the State level.

Some of the more notable ones I like and found impressive are listed below:

• NASA Images has space-related photos.
• Our Earth as Art has photos relating to the earth, weather, oceans, and nature.
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s National Digital Library has photos relating to animals, plants, nature, and wildlife.
• NOAA Photo Library has several collections of photos relating to nature, weather, oceans, and wildlife.
• U.S. Department of Defense DefenseLINK has photos relating to the military, war, politics, and the President.
• Library of Congress Geography & Map Reading Room has images relating to historical and current maps.
• National Archives America’s Historical Documents has images relating to history, politics, and historical events.
• National Park Service Digital Image Archives has images relating to nature, history, and national parks around the U.S.

Are you impressed with these websites? I was. It is all free and much of it is available in high-resolution. However, you should realize that not all images from government websites are public domain. You will need to seek out the image usage rights notices on each website. As I said USA.gov is a great starting point to a wealth of high-quality public domain photos.

If there are any other great public domain or government photo sites, please let me know and I will add them. If you have any additional tips to stop using stock photos and boycott the stock photo industry, send them to me and I will incorporate them into this article.

Continue reading »]]> I want to keep this post as brief as possible because this announcement is not one I consider “good news” but it was necessary given the amount of inquiries and information I have been getting regarding the infomercial company, “Incredible Discoveries”.

As a brief recap, “Incredible Discoveries” came into my life around June 20, 2007 when they wanted to talk to me about marketing my books with infomercials.  The conversations ultimately led to a $75,000 fee they wanted me to pay.  I was immediate suspicious and I declined the offer.

A disgruntled, ex-employee, Robert Danoff, and another individual made contact with me feeding me insights.  With my suspicions and their suggestions, I followed up on their insights.  I made a few more blog postings regarding Incredible Discoveries updates as it related to Robert Danoff.  I posted them because Robert Danoff gave me information that I thought might be of public interest.

To make a long story shorter, I eventually put an end to discussing “Incredible Discoveries” because I did not want my blog to become overrun with this story that really had little to do with me or my business. If you want to know more, go visit these posts.

• “Incredible Discoveries” Sets Up Phone Appointment
• “Incredible Discoveries” Makes First Contact
• Highly Suspicious of “Incredible Discoveries” $75,000 Fee
• More Thoughts on Infomercials & Complaints
• Incredible Discoveries Lawsuit against Bob Danoff – Part 1
• Incredible Discoveries Lawsuit against Bob Danoff – Part 2
• “Incredible Discoveries” Submits Alleged Written Retraction by Robert Danoff

However, since these posts last year, this blog persistently gets traffic on “Incredible Discoveries” which means many people are interested and someone is reading.  But I also continue to get emails and phone calls from people wanting my opinion on “Incredible Discoveries“.  I also get a few complaints.  But I am not the Better Business Bureau.  Nevertheless, I keep my ears open to what people tell me.

The straw that broke the camel’s back is when yet another person called asking me my opinion.  I told them it was up to them and it was their money.  It was like they wanted me to prove or disprove that “Incredible Discoveries” was a “bad” company.  Quite frankly, it isn’t my job to be responsible for others.

As a public service, I shared my opinions on the blog already and if you think you can part with $50,000 to $75,000 and take the risk, fine with me.  It is your money.  But I keep telling everyone that my internal radar says to spend your money elsewhere.  You can do a lot with $75,000 on your own plus I think a lot of the infomercial business is one that offends my sensibilities.  That is why there are so many complaints.

• InfomercialBlog.com
• InfomercialScams.com
• InfomercialRatings.com

In any case, I did get curious enough to do more fact-checking on “Incredible Discoveries“.  After all, why does this blog get so much interest because of “Incredible Discoveries”?  Obviously, a lot of people are searching for information on them which led me to do some searching on my own.

And so, I am trying to put this issue to bed.  I dug out more interesting information.  I had some interesting phone conversations from various past plaintiffs and defendants against “Incredible Discoveries”.  I found information from the Florida Attorney General’s Office and Florida Division of Corporations.

With all of this, I compiled my findings into “The Incredible Discoveries Information Page“.  I have tried to be fair and I am upfront of my biases.  I give commentary and information but it is up to the reader to draw their own conclusions whether anyone should do business with them.

If you have additional meaningful information or corrections, I will accept them.  But I am resistant to taking any more phone calls on Incredible Discoveries. I got better things to do than discuss them.

To those who care, “The Incredible Discoveries Information Page” is a free resource. The direct link is:  http://matthewchan.com/incrediblediscoveries-info.htm. To those who don’t care, you aren’t missing much.

Continue reading »]]> This was first posted on The TurnKey Publishing Blog.

========================================

When I first received my Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter on Monday, June 16, I took prompt measures to be proactive.  One of those proactive steps was to face this issue head-on.  I called the phone number 800-272-4170 twice and left one message.  My voice message was professional and courteous.  I was letting them know I acknowledged their letter and was quickly taking corrective measures.  I also told them I welcomed a call to discuss the situation.

Chloe Surdyk called late Wed. afternoon.  It was actually a cordial conversation.  I did my best to find common ground.  I understand their need to protect their copyrights and go after people but I did not agree with their tactics.

I told her I especially did not agree with her rationale that victims of Indian web designers should have to pay Getty Images especially when I contracted for a web banner, not specific images.  I also had little or no say in the selection of any images, only whether I liked a web banner or not.

She offered me a lower settlement (from the original $1,300) of $800-something.  I told her I did not agree with her and it was likely we would have to agree to disagree.  In the conversation, I told her I was not ignorant of the law and due legal process.  I have been to court many times to be a plaintiff and occasionally a defendant.  I was not simply going to “roll over”.  I told her I did my research on the Internet on Getty Images and I was informed of their upcoming tactics.  I told her I was not going to sit still and that I would likely publicize my interactions with her and her company.

My sense of embarrassment over this is substantially lower than my sense of outrage at their attitude.  Surprisingly, during most of the conversation, Chloe was cordial.  Even towards the end of the conversation, she said she would put into her notes to give me another 14-days to consider her offer.  Chloe even gave me her direct phone office line:  206-925-6779.

In my mind, there was no way I was going to “settle” with them.  I mentioned to her that she would likely have to sue my company if she wanted anything.  For now, I told her we would simply agree to disagree.

My next move is to get my “official reply” sent out by Certified Mail within the next couple of days.  I am biding my time as I continue to do more research.

=================================

If you want to learn more about this case, visit ExtortionLetterInfo.com.