Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: B/W and stock agency licensing

Subject: [OM] Re: B/W and stock agency licensing
From: Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:07:46 +0100
I agree with Ken (AG) about RF (I think I do, at least ;-)), but I 
cannot remember what conclusion I came to James.  I am with Alamy as 
well, so look for "Barker" and you will see what I labelled mine.  I am 
about to process another submission so I shall have to work it out 
myself again.

I am very sad about Ilford; I am trying to work out what I will do next 
about mono.

Chris

On 24 Aug 2004, at 23:12, James Royall wrote:

>
> If I had to lose colour or black and white, I think I'd prefer to lose
> colour - there's something added to a photo by b&w. Now that I have two
> bodies, one for each, I find I go for the one loaded with b&w more
> often than not (and it's not because of the body, colour's in the OM4
> for the spot metering).
>
> As for the stock photography, can anyone give any pointers to the pros
> and cons of licensed versus royalty free when choosing what to set as a
> license type. I understand the difference in what the legal framework
> is, but not how the choice might affect buying decisions. Basically
> I've got a few images to post at alamy.com (a very easy stock agency to
> submit to digitally) and don't know which license type to choose.
>
> James
<|_:-)_|>

C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.

+44 (0)7092 251126
ftog at threeshoes.co.uk
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko
... a nascent photo library.


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz