Disclaimer: This post is not promoting Getty images or anything else on God's green earth.
After perusing for a while, I decided to find an image of a photographer to illustrate the feature.
As you can see, Getty provides four essentials within the embed code:
• The photo itself
• "Gettyimages" branding
• Accreditation for the photographer
• Share options
This allows them to entice a broader audience with their products, i.e. perhaps someone who reads my blog will see this image and realize they need a Getty image for commercial purposes. Additionally, there's talk that they'll include advertisements in the future—another means of generating revenue from this model.
But what's my take on this? If it seems too good to be true, it probably is. Spend some time reading the terms, and you'll come across stipulations like this one:
"You may only use embedded Getty Images Content for editorial purposes (meaning relating to events that are newsworthy or of public interest). Embedded Getty Images Content may not be used: (a) for any commercial purpose (for example, in advertising, promotions or merchandising) or to suggest endorsement or sponsorship; (b) in violation of any stated restriction; (c) in a defamatory, pornographic or otherwise unlawful manner; or (d) outside of the context of the Embedded Viewer."That's right. Those of us who promote books and authors in our posts can't take advantage of Getty's impressive catalog. Don't worry, though. There are still plenty of other great methods for adding visuals to your blog posts!
• Use images you've taken or have express permission to use
• Find and credit images with appropriate licensing, i.e. public domain, creative commons, etc.
• Purchase/license an image from a stock site
Question of the Week:
Where do you find your images?
Almost all of my images are my own or of movie or book covers. (And I'm sure those people don't mind me advertising for them.) Images online are copyrighted, so you do have to be careful how you use them.
I use a lot of my own. I also use PowerPoint. I got a lot for my most recent trailer from Creative Commons mixed with rights I bought from Shutterstock.
This is very awesome! I love the look of their embed as well - very sleek and modern. And how nice of them not to sue people who do the right thing!
I sometimes take my own, but I'm a Fotolia fan. And now, after that Depositphotos.com deal, I'm a fan of them, too. ;)
I take my own, or use things I find on Google images...maybe I should stop doing that...
I use my own images, as I've taken thousands of photographs since I became an amateur photographer 10 years ago, and also have many old family photographs. My other main source is Wikimedia Commons. My theme for the upcoming A to Z Challenge uses a lot of photographs, and I meticulously credited them where I didn't take them.
I worry most when doing the blog hops where I have to pick celebrities for my posts. Those make me very nervous because good images are hard to find on the free site.
It does seem too good to be true! But it's awesome if it is. Lately I've been uploading my own photos (when I can find or take one that works) but it's hard.
I try to use images I gather from searches via creative commons or something I've purchased or taken myself. I guess this Getty Images thing really is too good to be true for someone like me networking via my blog.
I'm rather confused. You say because you promote books and authors on your blog, you can't use Getty images. And yet, you used one in your blog.
I said in our posts that promote books. I didn't promote anything in this particular post—just reported on a few options. :)
I aim for something under the creative commons license, but I also need to be better about attributing them. This is a very smart move on Getty's part, personally. The question is, is a blog post like this one a violation of those terms? You're not directly using it for commercial purposes, but you could argue that a part of this blog is advertising both your books and your other services.
If they stretch it to that point, they won't have any blogs to do their legwork. Rarely do we see people blog for the sole purpose of documenting their day-to-day. Let's hope they're sensible.
Exemplary as always, Captain! :)
This is great info, Carrie. The whole "Image" thing on the blog stresses me out at times. Right now, I'm lucky to have pictures from the authors (of themselves) or their books! Keeping it simple for now. :)
Might be an option if I ever return to blogging.
Using your own is the best way to play it safe! :) My trailer was a mix of Creative Commons and license purchases, too.
Good article! Since I'm an amateur photographer, I tend to use my own photos. But otherwise, I look for Creative Commons on Flickr and check to see what rights are listed.
Why am I not surprised that there are caveats? They joined the modern era by dragging their feet ;) BUT this is great to know for any non-promo posts. So, thanks so much for the great info!
Yes! Sleek and modern describes their embedded look perfectly. :)
Yikes! I get most my images from authors, but for the other ones, I usually go with google images search with permissions inclusive. I was excited by Ghetty's announcement, but the sign through process felt cumbersome to me. *shrugs* Maybe I'm just lazy. ;)
I've been blogging for a while now, and I've only used one image other than the IWSG banner. I just like the text-only format, and it saves me time since I don't have to worry about things like this. Eh heh heh.
Also: that one image? Grumpy Cat. I think I'm safe. ...I hope so.
Right now I'm big on Morgue File. Getty's a genius. I just really like having an image on my blog posts. Plus I'm a pinterest addict and want other addicts to have the chance to pin my posts.
Same here! :)
Yeah, using Google images is risky business. Have you ever read Roni's post? http://www.roniloren.com/blog/2012/7/20/bloggers-beware-you-can-get-sued-for-using-pics-on-your-blog.html
Thanks for stopping by, Randi! :)
It's good that you have your own stock of photographs! That certainly makes things easier. :D
I try to use as many of my own as possible, but I do to Morgue File or Photostock to purchase sometimes. The Smithsonian has a great public domain site.
Yeah, that's specifically why I avoid those types of blog hops. If I do participate, I link to images rather than embed them within the post. Scary stuff!
I've read too many horror stories, so mostly I use my own. I do grab some, very seldom, from photobucket.
I looked into using Getty and decided not to use them anyway, because of all the junk that embeds with them. Stock.xchng is an excellent website with a lot of public domain images, so I use a lot of theirs.
It is hard to come up with that many original photos! I'm trying to do it more, though. I think I'm depleting public domain resources... LOL
Go you, Angela! Sounds like you're already rockin' the right options. :)
Of COURSE you will! :)
Thanks, Leigh! It stresses me out at times, too. Simple sounds the way to go! :)
Thank you, Loni! :) You have the photo thing down. Your photos are always gorgeous!
Haha! Just like most things these days, right, Liz? ;) You're very welcome!
I've thought about searching with the usage filters on Google, but I'm just so darn paranoid! I can't even enjoy it. LOL
LOL I love that the one image on your blog is Grumpy Cat. Very nice!
I love Morgue File, too! They're full of public domain goodness. :D
I didn't know about the Smithsonian. Too cool! :D
I'm with you. Better safe than sorry, right? :)
I've heard quite a few people talk about Stock.xchng! I'll have to check out their terms sometime. :) Thanks, Nigel!
I try to use my own. But great post with heaps of information.
Thank you, Nas! :)
Post a Comment