38-Use a Combination

Avoid the trap of locking yourself into an "either/or" way of thinking: Either I should use rights protected photography or I should use royalty-free. You don't want to miss out on what is ultimately the most effective way to interface with today's photography community: using a combination of both on any given project.

How do you do that? How do you figure out which to use when and why?

Well, you've already started-- by reading this document. So, let's quickly recap:

We've talked about the idea that even though many people think there is only one "difference" between rights-protected stock and royalty-free-- cost (and even that one isn't always as it seems)-- there are actually six differences:

Recap:

"Traditional" rights-protected stock images vs. royalty-free clip photos

The Six differences:

(We'll hyperlink each one of these to the corresponding section of this document in case you want to go back and review)

1. Permitted Use - What can you do with these pictures?

2. Cost (A few surprises)

3. Competing Use Protection (This one's a biggee...Don't get burned!)

4. The Nature and Purpose of the Imagery Itself (This'll surprise you!)

5. The Size of the Image Reservoir -- (An Ocean vs. a Pond)

6. The "Hassle Factor" (Things are changing...)

And we've discussed model releases -- why they matter and how to protect yourself.

Taking all this into account-- what then, is the "best" course for a designer to take? Rights-protected? Royalty-free?

There is absolutely no question but that the savviest graphic designers have found the answer, and the answer is:

A combination of both.

The smart move is to assess the "six differences" we've talked about within the context of any particular project you might be working on-- and then go in the direction best suited for that particular project-- or for that part of a particular project.

Example: We at Comstock are finding that, more and more, our customers who are working on, say, a brochure, will choose a "rights-protected" image for the cover -- and several royalty-free images for the interior shots. (Since we sell both "rights-protected" and "royalty-free, we are happy to provide the appropriate solution, rather than trying to "steer" things on way or the other...)

Why do our customers take that approach?

Because they know that in the case of the cover shot-- it very much matters if a competitor uses the same shot. (See, Does it Really Matter if my Competitor Uses the Same Photo I do.)

But on the interior shots-- it doesn't "matter"-- so they opt for the ease and flexibility of "royalty-free".

Or maybe they're doing a magazine advertisement. On the one hand, they're inclined to go with "rights-protected" to guard against embarrassing competing use. (See, Advertising and Royalty Free: A Dangerous Combination) But, then, they realize that the photo they need will not only be a background image-- they're going to throw it into PhotoShop� and change it considerably. Why not opt for royalty-free?

Or maybe they use a rights-protected image for the major visual in their ad-- and then a royalty-free image for the background.

Art directors and graphic designers who are being smart about all this are developing a huge advantage over their less-diligent confreres. When you get down to it, it's just like any other profession: It's a matter of fully understanding the tools that are available and then using the right "tool" for the right "job".

To help you think it through, go to the handy comparison chart, next.