Four Key
Factors:
Since there unquestionably are
significant cost and logistical advantages to royalty-free, it's a good idea not to be too
restrictive in your thinking.
While at first blush you might say to
yourself, "No, it would be too awful to be embarrassed by having someone use the same
picture in the same way," you might want to examine it in the light of the following
factors:
- Viewers remember pictures with people
in them far longer, and far more specifically, than pictures that do not have people in
them.
Therefore, if the picture you're thinking of using does not have models in it, your
chances of being embarrassed by a competing usage-- even if it does happen-- are far less.
People aren't going to remember, necessarily, that they've seen the same picture used
twice.
- Are you going to use the picture as the
"major visual" in the piece you are designing?
If not, if the picture is secondary or supportive or essentially just one of many
"graphic elements", the competing use issue is diminished considerably, possibly
to insignificance. After all, the viewer is going to key in on whatever you do use
as the "major visual", so if you protect that, it might very well be
sufficient.
- [Incidentally, that's why, as you'll see
as you read on, many savvy art directors are using a combination for their
projects: Traditional, rights-protected stock for the major visuals, and royalty free for
the backgrounds, objects, and supporting elements. It makes good sense. Go to: Why Savvy Art Directors use a Combination of "Rights
Protected" and "Royalty-Free"-- and HOW]
- Will you be altering the picture or
using only part of it?
Is the picture going to experience a Mac Attack? Are you going to work it, change it,
play with it or take just part of it? Obviously, as you move away from the original image
the competing use problem diminishes accordingly.
- Is the distribution of my piece broad
enough to even worry about this?
Doing an in-house presentation? A local newsletter? A Web page buried seven levels
down? Who cares if someone else uses the picture? Royalty-free makes complete sense.
But make no mistake about it, and don't
forget: If you are trying to decide between "Traditional" rights-protected stock
and royalty-free, the very first question you should ask yourself is (yes, it's so
important that we'll say it again):
Does it matter if someone else uses the same image???
If it does matter, in any way-- we highly
recommend rights protected photography where the agency controls the rights-- not only how
you use it, but how anyone else uses it. [Oh, and by the way, that's
something you should nail down with your traditional agency: Some agencies do a
better job than others on all these "controls", and if you're paying for
control, you ought to get it. See "What to Look for in
a Traditional Agency.] |
|
