Great new for bloggers: Millions of photos 上 盖蒂 Images are now 自由

通过 丹妮女孩2014年3月6日 · 7 评论

摄影

W哇我没有看到这个来临。

盖蒂 Images announced last night that it is making approximately 40 million images – 在cluding 600+ 从我– 自由 for use 上 social media. If you are a blogger, this is great news for you. If you are a photographer who sells imagery through 盖蒂, maybe not so much.

它是如何工作的?访问 盖蒂Images.com 并找到您喜欢的图像点击看起来像这样的框 < /> 并复制嵌入代码。粘贴到您的博客中,瞧– 自由 stock photos.

盖蒂’的既定目标是通过一种“if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em”心理。如果人们无论如何都要使用社交媒体上的图像,并且显然可以使用,则可以适当地将其免费提供给他们,并提供适当的来源并链接回源。从长远来看,他们’希望添加类似于您在YouTube上看到的广告元素,以便摄影师最终也能获得广告收入的(微小)百分比。那里’人们会看到一个图像,喜欢它,点击它并付钱,这是一种荒唐的乐观想法。那里’s massive good will and advertising to be earned 通过 盖蒂. No more 在famous 盖蒂 takedown notices, but 在stead lots of 自由 images for everyone, carefully framed 在 盖蒂’s embedded ad.

我承认’s clever how 盖蒂 has taken control of how the image is used via the embed code. If the image is simply copied illegally and then uploaded somewhere 上 the web, 盖蒂 loses control of the image, and has to pursue illegal use through takedown notices and legal action. If they make the embed code easy to use, they retain control of the imagery from the back end – they can see how and where the image is used but the image is ultimately hosted 通过 盖蒂 so if the image is pulled from the catalogue 盖蒂 can simply pull it from the frame if they need to – or if they want to.

博客ger beware, if you use the embed code you are ceding control of the images 在 your post to the whims and pecadilloes of 盖蒂. Don’看到那些感到惊讶“free”图片稍后会被广告覆盖’t control. If I were a blogger, this alone may scare me out of using these so-called 自由 images – I can’不要让我自己登录任何可以做的网络广告联盟计划’t control the exact content of the ads I am displaying, and this is exactly what would happen (potentially, at least) here. Also, there may be SEO implications with the links back to the 盖蒂 site, and some feed readers don’t perceive the embedded frame as an image if you push content to an aggregator, so you lose your thumbnail photo if you are 上ly using 盖蒂’s framed images.

There is some debate about which sites can and cannot use the 自由 embed tools. 盖蒂 says the images are for “非商业用途,仅限数字使用。” To me, this means any site earning any 在come (blog ads, sponsored posts, etc) would be excluded, but it seems 盖蒂’s的定义要宽容得多。我想,它们如何定义更不用说对商业场所和非商业场所进行警察了。

从个人的角度来看,我担心这会使通过嵌入代码的任何图像贬值以供抓取– why would anyone choose to pay license fees for an image that is available for 自由 all over the web? Would you pay for an image to use 在 your product, book or ad campaign if you knew it was already 在 use 上 every social media platform, blog and website? On the other hand, the sheer scope of the number of photos available may 在 fact mitigate this dilution of value. If they’re all 自由, maybe it won’降低单个图像的价值?我一直看到从Napster到Spotify的音乐行业参考。 *耸肩*我想它还有待观察,在那里’s not much I can do except suck it up and watch it unfold or yank all my photos from 盖蒂 entirely.

I think my biggest peeve 在 this whole development is that the photos are 自由 of watermarks. I don’t post images 上 my OWN blog without watermarks, so having offering them up for ALL THE BLOGGERS 自由 of charge and watermarks is somewhere between discouraging and exasperating. . It is, 上 the other hand, a brilliant business move 通过 盖蒂 and a bonanza for bloggers and other social media content creators.

What do you think? Brilliant business move 上 盖蒂’s part or a shiv 在 the back to the contributors who supply the images? Or both? Will you use the images 上 your site and are you at all worried about embedding a frame that 盖蒂 controls and may later pepper with ads? Anybody more familiar with SEO able to offer 在sight about the implications from that perspective? How should “commercial” sites be defined?


{ 7 评论… read them below or 加一 }

1 安妮@育儿博士学位 2014年3月6日,上午10:06

有趣的帖子,丹妮。

我在博客上使用了很多创意共享图片(通常是通过flickr的高级搜索找到的)。我以前只是通过图片链接将图片拉进去,但是我发现有时候图片最终会从flickr中删除,然后我 ’d我的博客文章上有一个大漏洞,取而代之的是flickr的消息,即图片不再存在。相反,我’我已经开始保存这些图片并将其上传到我的博客中,但仍链接回我的图片信用中的图片。我使用的其他图像是通过istock购买的或是我的照片’ve taken myself.

I definitely share your concern with regards to not having control over what content gets published 上 my blog. It would be a huge pain to go back and try to replace tons of pictures if 盖蒂 ever changed its approach. If I did ever use it, it would probably be the rare 上e-off where I really wanted a specific picture and couldn’通过我通常的资源找不到任何类似的东西。

2 林恩 2014年3月6日,上午10:57

您是否可以选择退出此计划?您可以将照片标记为仅供出售,并且不能用于数字化吗?

I would definitely be worried about having non-watermarked versions of your photos available for 自由 上line. In my WordPress course I do a little segment 上 proper use of photos and it’对您来说,永远是每个人的大新闻’只需转到Google并抓取图像并使用它即可。它’我认为,在博客中使用的图片在Google搜索中弹出之前,只是时间问题’在那儿。您将永远没有资源或时间来追踪所有用途。

如果它 ’s possible to stay with 盖蒂 but not be part of this program, I think it’值得放弃。

4 丽贝卡 2014年3月6日,下午2:56

这整个事情令人着迷。我可能有时会在我不会’过去几年,他们甚至不愿为图片而烦恼,但现在需要一张图片才能在各个地方分享该帖子。尽管我讨厌摄影师可能会失去收入,并且这会改变整个游戏的播放方式。我是真的

5 卡莉 2014年3月6日,下午5:39

我有点讨厌整个事情。我实际上避免在博客上使用不’我个人属于我,因为让我觉得我可能正在使用别人’辛苦的工作,没有信贷和/或财务收益。一世’我对自己的照片加水印很懒–那些发布到博客,pinterest和facebook– and I’m现在通过未经许可在随机站点上查找图片来付款。和他们’再没有好照片!

I recently found a photo of cake I made 上 a site created for the purpose of sharing cake designs, but with the link back to my blog removed. The site suggested I should be 感激 they stole (my word, not theirs) it because they captioned it 通过 saying it was a “卡莉为她一岁儿子做的神奇蛋糕”我应该为他们以这种方式感到荣幸而感到兴奋。嗯,对不起?!?

是时候停止对水印变得如此懒惰了。 。 。问题是,我是否有耐心回到500篇以上的博客文章中,对已经在那里的所有照片进行水印处理?

7 皮蒂 2014年3月7日,上午9:08

这真的很有趣。我喜欢你的“千纸之死”比方您在上述回应中。

收入增加100%是一件好事。 ðŸ™,

您用什么为照片加水印?我不知道该给我加水印吗。我想要然后我想‘Well that’真傻!仿佛有人要!’,但后来我读了你的故事和其他类似的故事,看来’是一件好事。

发表评论

上一篇:

下一篇: