| One of the biggest
misconceptions about Rights Protected Stock vs. Royalty Free is that essentially the same
imagery is being sold-- with the only difference being the price structure. Not so.
Indeed, as Geraldo might say, "This
is a developing story..." You are going to find, increasingly, that there will be a
split, a kind of "mitosis", between images provided by "Traditional"
photo agencies and those provided by royalty free companies. (Shameless self-promotion: At
Comstock we're especially attuned to this because we sell both.]
As a designer or art director, you've
probably already noticed that there is something different about the imagery
itself, rights protected vs. royalty-free (at least, good rights protected and good
royalty-free) but it's so visual, so ineffable and hard to describe that you probably
can't quite put your finger on it…
Well, there is a difference, and
here, in part, is a way to think about it:
To the extent that you want the image to
dominate your "theme"-- you are going to find the right image in "rights
protected".
To the extent that you want the image to support
what you are doing, visually-- you’re going to gravitate, appropriately, towards
royalty-free.
The "image reservoirs" on each
side will begin to look more and more different to you, and understanding that difference
can give you an important roadmap in your decision-making:
 |
Rights Protected Stock: Look for "Story Telling power" |
| |
Royalty Free: Look for "Image Adaptability" |
|
