Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Hi guys,

I just got a most disturbing message...

"Hi David,

I am writing to let you know that one of your photos has
been short-listed for inclusion in the second edition of
our Schmap Canada Guide, to be published at the end of this
month.

(LINK PROVIDED SHOWING PHOTO AS APPEARING IN SITE)

Clicking this link will take you to a page where you can:
i) See which of your photos has been short-listed.
ii) Submit or withdraw your photo from our final selection
phase.
iii) Learn how we credit photos in our Schmap Guides.
iv) Browse the first edition of our Schmap Canada Guide.

While we offer no payment for publication, many
photographers are pleased to submit their photos, as Schmap
Guides give their work recognition and wide exposure, and
are free of charge to readers. Photos are published at a
maximum width of 150 pixels, are clearly attributed, and
link to high-resolution originals at Flickr.

Our submission deadline is Sunday, March 9. If you happen
to be reading this message after this date, please still
click on the link above (our Schmap Guides are updated
frequently - photos submitted after this deadline will be
considered for later releases).

Best regards,

Emma Williams,
Managing Editor, Schmap Guides"


Has anyone gotten a message from these people? I am seriously thinking of withdrawing my photo.... (Flatiron Building).. for two reasons... #1 - there is no financial compensation for use of my photo in a published guide, and #2 - I don't appreciate people just pulling my photos off of flickr and then asking me 'after' the fact. Now I know that my work is stolen all the time, and that is a risk I take making my images available on the world wide web... but when it comes to a publisher, I am not a happy camper. So do you think I am doing the right thing? Or just over-reacting?

I've had a few from them. Just decline it and move on!

ya, that's what I was going to do.

Same here, I declined.

xref here : http://tpmg.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?p=52 ... ght=#52962

#1 but not everyone is in for it for financial gain. I think it's a great opportunity to build one's portfolio if you are an amateur and have had no exposure yet.

#2 But doesn't it say that you have to either approve or decline?
I don't think they will publish it until you approve. Wasn't the link that showed your picture on their site just a mock-up?

I've had my work published (both online and printed) a couple of times with no financial gain (but full credit). Of course it would be great to be paid but I still consider myself an amateur. I will eventually release my work only for payment...

I don't blame you if this rubs you the wrong way. The way they word their message makes it look like they're doing you a favour, not the other way around (IMHO). They could at least say "Please".

If you check out their website, pictures that are "selected" by them to be posted are obviously not based on artistic quality. So I am not sure how much recognition they are giving you.

I was tempted at first to let them use my picture but at the end I declined.
I surely hope they didn't use my picture anyways. Maybe I should go and check

I've done enough freebies .. its time to start making some coin!

I declined the request. I agree John -- they do word it as if they are doing me a favor...

I think building a portfolio using Schmap will lead to a dead end.

The way I see it, maybe from a marketing perspective, is that people who travel would be using Schmap possibly. So that's the market that Schmap is going after. Considering this, do you really think a lot of people here would be looking at the photographer of these photos? Probably not. And artistic value isn't one of their key requirements as WKHC mentioned.

But for one that declines these requests, there's probably ten other people that are glad to provide their photo to them for nothing.

I got one today. It was a picture of a broom hanging on a wall at pioneer village. Not very artistic compared to my shots now. I figure they are just tourist industry and looking for shots of the area. I declined.

Sorry I was unclear. I was thinking more in general - not specifically to Schmap (since I have not heard of Schmap before).
But I agree. The organization using your work matters.

I received one today as well. Not to mention I declined too.

Got one too - they seem to be on a spamming spree...

I got the same email. I did some research on them and they seem to be legit and no negative comments anywhere. It seems they must have gone through TPMG Flickr group and picked the photos they wanted.

I was feeling left out seeing that many others got a notice from schmaps. I just checked my email and got one too.
.... declining....

TPMG selling the list of member's flickr to companies??? lol J/K.

I got one the other day .. I can't see the harm in it for me personally so I will let them use it.

Hahaha I must be lacking since I didn't get an invite. Schmap did ask for permission last year for a photo I took a long time ago and I thought it was kind of nice. I was still in the beginning stages and thought it quite flattering to be asked. Like Seren Dipity, I didn't see any harm in it so I gave them permission.

I think what it comes down to is another company making money off the backs of other people. They get free images for their website, even allow people to print them. Yet with all the advertising, and pay per click money they will get will become rich, and the people that made it like that, the photographers will get nothing. Most Photographers who make a living from their business would not give them a photo of theirs. If you make a living from something you probably would not give it away for free, doctors, lawyers, mechanics, plumbers, electricians, nobody gives work away for free, unless its for charity. It appears that photography is being devalued everyday to the point that it will be worthless. Sure anyone can take a photograph of a building, just like any artist can paint it, but an artist would not give away a painting for free, if so they would starve, so why should we as photographers give away our art for free. I agree they are giving you advertising, maybe thats a worthwile exchange, but how many people are looking to buy photography on a map site I ask you. Sorry if I offended anyone. I think the site is a great idea for travellers, but at least pay something for it per click on the photo to the photographer.

P.S. if you want it hust for the link to your website or flickr, or give you more clicks, then it may just fit the bill for some people.

I got the email too saying it's on their site. Even though it's mainly for their benefit it's still pretty cool.

I understand your point, ther is no harm done to you, it gives you exposure, and they used a photo of yours. I am not attacking you, I am attacking the website. if they get away with getting photos for free, then then next website will want them for free, it is a domino effect. It overall devalues phootgraphy as an art form. We as photographers need to stand together and say no to this kind of business practice.

N.B. True not everything is about money, I offer many of my services to charities, and will do Pro Bono work for them, I even offer services to local groups that cannot afford photography services, or people that are of low or no income.

The Problem I have with this bottom statement is, that there is no harm to you, but it's taking money and food off the plate of the Pro who would sell his images to make ends meat. The digital camera is killing the professional photography industry.

Video Killed The Radio Star

this is so ridiculous, a business build on begging for freebies when the stock has billions of good quality pictures. cheep too.
yep, that is less money for the photogs who decide to honestly sell their images through stock agencies.
exposure what exposure? what tourists will look at the guide and smack their heads in awe looking at your amateur picture, saying: I want to buy this image now
IMHO don't give them anything; if they steal there is a law for it...

So let's put it this way, lets take industry you work in for instance (whatever that maybe) and some other company started doing the work for free and handing it out like candy how are you suppose to compete with that? How would you and or your company like to be under cut like that? How would that company be looked upon in the industry?

Just because people take pictures doesn't mean their business is any less important. Professional photography is a dying art because everyone with a digital camera can easly obtain reasonable results now days.

I think we were better off with film as an industry, hobbiest were hobbiest and pros were pros, the line wasn't as blurred as it is today. Imho

It's still a bit more than just ...

"Professional photography is a dying art because everyone with a digital camera can easly obtain reasonable results now days."

Anybody can take a DSLR, throw it in the green mode and take decent pictures. With respect to the pros, you still need to have a great eye to get great photos. And hopefully these realize that they do have a skill (whether natural or years of effort) and don't simply give photos away for free. For non-profit organizations I can understand.

The problem with the digital age, no matter what it is, it's forcing the ones that are doing this for a living, rethinking about their service and finding new ways to be competitive out there vs the amateurs.

Hello. I am going to nitpick, but only for discussion sake:

It's not the dslr phenomena causing this, it is the popularity of cheap or free hosting and social sites making plethora of images consumable with minimal effort. In the olden days, there were tons of film photographers, but their output was not publicly consumable.

And to me that's the conundrum: we use the social sites for obvious reasons, but, assuming here, also probably some people use them with the raison d'etre, no matter how small, to be seen, discovered.

To deflect my own argument, perhaps some use them as a teaser, to draw attention to more serious or accomplished work, indeed for sale. But really how many, or is that argument too specious?

Well after reading this thread a few times and mulling over the topic in my head I have to say that you guys have swayed me. You are right, as photographers we should not be giving our photos away for free to businesses who are making a profit off of it. I agree that it ultimately de-values our work as photographers and makes it harder for professional photographers to make a living.

So from now on I will not be giving away my photos for free unless it is for a charitable cause or something similar.

James

Want to be a successful photographer? Go to business school not photography school.

What's that saying "adapt or die"?

Want to be a successful photographer? Go to business school not photography school. Work on your business and don't worry about digital cameras or Schmap.

If you haven't already do a search and watch the Chase Jarvis video where he speaks in NYC.