[LDB]

I have an acquaintance who is a good photographer with a strikingly lovely model. She might be an excellent cover photo for a book. How do a model and photographer get involved in doing a cover photo?

 

[boxer44]

Generally, you pay the model, get a model release, and buy specific photo rights from the photographer. Lots of ways to contract, depending on your use of image. Long-term, short-term, perpetual use, you buy all rights, or buy one time specific use.

For example:  Book cover only, with promotion rights. That would limit your use to only that one book.

 

[LDB]

Is there anywhere specific I could suggest the photographer check to see about offering his work for a cover?

 

[ShayneRutherford]

Is there anywhere specific I could suggest the photographer check to see about offering his work for a cover?

He could get an account on some stock sites. Or he could create his own web site and sell the photos from there.

 

[Doglover]

Is there anywhere specific I could suggest the photographer check to see about offering his work for a cover?

There are many stock photos sites that sell images for commercial use. People upload their artwork or photographs; I don't know anything about the process, but that's the place to start. Get one really good picture and offering it.

I've noticed that in general the same pictures appear on all the sites, but often under different user names.

 

[LDB]

Yes, I'm slightly familiar with stock photos but wondered if there was anything specific to publishing and book covers I am unaware of. I'll suggest the stock photo option as a starting point and continue to hope to find something more specific to books and less dependent on luck of being found in a sea of other photos.

 

[ShayneRutherford]

Yes, I'm slightly familiar with stock photos but wondered if there was anything specific to publishing and book covers I am unaware of. I'll suggest the stock photo option as a starting point and continue to hope to find something more specific to books and less dependent on luck of being found in a sea of other photos.

There are sites that are specific to books. My friend and I run a render stock site, where we sell 3D renders that are specifically geared toward cover design. My friend used to design websites, so she took care of the web design and adding the Shopify plug-in for the shopping cart. But any of the book cover-specific sites that I know of are just small businesses selling their own work. I don't think they sell other people's stuff.

I would suggest getting your friend to set up their own website, and then once it's all ready, to find some FB groups where cover designers congregate and see if they allow service providers to promote their stuff to the designers.

 

[catslover]

Yes, I'm slightly familiar with stock photos but wondered if there was anything specific to publishing and book covers I am unaware of. I'll suggest the stock photo option as a starting point and continue to hope to find something more specific to books and less dependent on luck of being found in a sea of other photos.

You can't use a Stock image for book cover with basic license, you will need and extended license. Extended license cover a number of printing units, for example 250,000 units, If you sell more than that you should buy the license again; although the ability of agencies to verify the units you have sold/printed is null.

Edit: I was wrong, sorry; read posts below.

 

[ShayneRutherford]

You can't use a Stock image for book cover with basic license, you will need and extended license. Extended license cover a number of printing units, for example 250,000 units, If you sell more than that you should buy the license again; although the ability of agencies to verify the units you have sold/printed is null.

That's incorrect. You most definitely can use a stock image for a book cover with the standard license.

 

[catslover]

That's incorrect. You most definitely can use a stock image for a book cover with the standard license.

Well you are right, i am sorry for the incorrect feedback.

I am very familiar with the world of microstock and I really believed that it was so, but when I verify I see that what I said is not correct.

Shutterstock for example (maybe the most famous stock agency) allows you to use images in book covers up to 500,000 units printed with basic license, but if you buy the enhanced license you can print as much as you want.

Source: https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/Standard-License-vs-Enhanced-License

In the other hand they discourage or at least make some warnings about the use of images in book covers.

Source: https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/using-stock-photos-for-book-covers

The problems are associated with the fact that the images you buy with them are not exclusive and can be used both for the covers of other books and for advertisements that you do not want to associate with.

I remember a few years ago, a gay couple took photos with their children as models for a photographer who sell those photos in microstock agencies. Naturally, they signed the papers allowing this usage, thereby losing the right to any claim for those images. A few months later, these images were bought by a political party and used in a campaign against gay marriage. Of course that gay couple does not want that use for their photos, but they could no longer change it.

Antoher microstock story is a guy who exchanged $100 in Uzbekistan for the local currency, and due to inflation he received hundreds and hundreds of bills, the guy took a photo holding the bundles of money and uploaded it to a microstock site, now he sees his face in all the Internet advertising scams associated with money investments.

Source: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/somebody-who-bought-my-picture-uses-it-to-promote-investments-to-my-fb-friends/msg556981/#msg556981

So the risk is to use a pretty nice photo in your cover and see this photo used in a mass exposure negative publicity in the future.

 

[ShayneRutherford]

Well you are right, i am sorry for the incorrect feedback.

I am very familiar with the world of microstock and I really believed that it was so, but when I verify I see that what I said is not correct.

Shutterstock for example (maybe the most famous stock agency) allows you to use images in book covers up to 500,000 units printed with basic license, but if you buy the enhanced license you can print as much as you want.

Source: https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/Standard-License-vs-Enhanced-License

That 500,000 units is just for print copies. For ebooks, it's unlimited.

In the other hand they discourage or at least make some warnings about the use of images in book covers.

Source: https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/using-stock-photos-for-book-covers

The problems are associated with the fact that the images you buy with them are not exclusive and can be used both for the covers of other books and for advertisements that you do not want to associate with.

That is definitely one of the pitfalls of using stock photos. It's also one of the reasons that it's good if you, or your cover designer, can manipulate the photo enough that it no longer looks like the plain stock photo.

I remember a few years ago, a gay couple took photos with their children as models for a photographer who sell those photos in microstock agencies. Naturally, they signed the papers allowing this usage, thereby losing the right to any claim for those images. A few months later, these images were bought by a political party and used in a campaign against gay marriage. Of course that gay couple does not want that use for their photos, but they could no longer change it.

Antoher microstock story is a guy who exchanged $100 in Uzbekistan for the local currency, and due to inflation he received hundreds and hundreds of bills, the guy took a photo holding the bundles of money and uploaded it to a microstock site, now he sees his face in all the Internet advertising scams associated with money investments.

Source: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/somebody-who-bought-my-picture-uses-it-to-promote-investments-to-my-fb-friends/msg556981/#msg556981

So the risk is to use a pretty nice photo in your cover and see this photo used in a mass exposure negative publicity in the future.

There is actually a stipulation in the Shutterstock license that says pictures are not allowed to be used for political ads, or in any way that might be defamatory to the model. So the gay couple might have grounds for getting those ads pulled.

 

[catslover]

That 500,000 units is just for print copies. For ebooks, it's unlimited.

I don't know how it works for ebook because the ebooks (usually) don't include the cover in the pdf, so if ebook don't include the cover, so no problem. If the book had the cover in its pdf then the image would be embedded in the file, and i don't know if the standard license covers it or not. For the cover preview on amazon or any other website it is ok becuase it is just web impresion and it is unlimited.

Again covers are (usually) not included in pdf, and this is probably to reduce the file size.

There is actually a stipulation in the Shutterstock license that says pictures are not allowed to be used for political ads, or in any way that might be defamatory to the model. So the gay couple might have grounds for getting those ads pulled.

I cannot find the thread in the Microstock group now, but as i remember they can get the ads out of circulation, but part of the damage was done.

I did not know that they did not allow political content, they probably got their photo out of the campaign for that, but qualifying pro-gay marriage or anti-gay marriage positions as defamatory, is something very relative. Of course, for them it was a negative thing, but if the moral position on gay marriage allows voting for and against them, then it cannot be said that one or the other position is defamatory.

That is another problem of being a microstock photo model, the photos can be used in contexts that the models consider negative, but that in general are not.

If you are a militant of veganism and you sell photos of yourself in the microstock, those photos can be used to promote the consumption of meat, and you can not do anything, and the buyer of the photo could not know that you are against this use .

The only two things that microstock agencies guarantee (at least most of them) is that the photos will not be used in a gambling context (casinos) or in a pornographic context; also for political use as I am finding out now.

 

[Elemental BC]

LDB actually emailed me about this, and I thought I would share my thoughts with the forum, as well get people's feedback on a question I thought of. In regards to the best ways to get publicity for a specific photo or photographer, I recommended some of the same things people here have mentioned, such as creating a Facebook group, and doing general online marketing. I mentioned Pinterest and Instagram would work as well.

I wanted to get others' feedback on a question I had. Do stock photo sites like Shutterstock allow photographers to promote their photos so that they appear higher in search rankings? In my own experience, when I'm searching for stock photos, it seems that certain photos appear more frequently than others for the given search terms I use. This made me wonder if some photos are ranked higher behind the scenes. Is this something stock photo sites do? The photographer pays an extra fee and their photos get bumped to the top of search results? Just wondering.

 

[ShayneRutherford]

I don't know how it works for ebook because the ebooks (usually) don't include the cover in the pdf...

Technically, ebooks aren't usually PDFs. Most of the time they're either MOBI or ePUB.

...so if ebook don't include the cover, so no problem.

eBooks do include the cover, because otherwise, when you go to look them up on your Kindle, the little thumbnails would be empty.

If the book had the cover in its pdf then the image would be embedded in the file, and i don't know if the standard license covers it or not. For the cover preview on amazon or any other website it is ok becuase it is just web impresion and it is unlimited.

The image is embedded in the file. And the standard license does cover it, because the license says digital use, which covers both website and use on ereaders.

Again covers are (usually) not included in pdf, and this is probably to reduce the file size.

I cannot find the thread in the Microstock group now, but as i remember they can get the ads out of circulation, but part of the damage was done.

I did not know that they did not allow political content, they probably got their photo out of the campaign for that, but qualifying pro-gay marriage or anti-gay marriage positions as defamatory, is something very relative.

I didn't mean that the pro-gay marriage was defamatory. I meant to say that it would be excluded on the grounds of being a political ad. And I added the defamatory part more in reference to the other part of your comment, about the guy with the money who was made to look like a scammer.

The only two things that microstock agencies guarantee (at least most of them) is that the photos will not be used in a gambling context (casinos) or in a pornographic context; also for political use as I am finding out now.

Here's what it says about that kind of thing on the Shutterstock site...

https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/Can-I-use-Images-for-sensitive-subjects?l=en_US

 

[ShayneRutherford]

LDB actually emailed me about this, and I thought I would share my thoughts with the forum, as well get people's feedback on a question I thought of. In regards to the best ways to get publicity for a specific photo or photographer, I recommended some of the same things people here have mentioned, such as creating a Facebook group, and doing general online marketing. I mentioned Pinterest and Instagram would work as well.

I wanted to get others' feedback on a question I had. Do stock photo sites like Shutterstock allow photographers to promote their photos so that they appear higher in search rankings? In my own experience, when I'm searching for stock photos, it seems that certain photos appear more frequently than others for the given search terms I use. This made me wonder if some photos are ranked higher behind the scenes. Is this something stock photo sites do? The photographer pays an extra fee and their photos get bumped to the top of search results? Just wondering.

Those are good ideas about Instagram and Pinterest.

I don't think they can. I think it's more likely that the pics which get more interaction might get more search love. Or else, if you use multiple search terms, a pic that has more keyword matches will rank higher.