"Pix Store" if you will. Maybe that's what the stock photo sites are supposed
to be, but they don't have nearly the inventory.

Sorry for the tangent.

~~~
Terretta
"This may make sense for images which are to be used in a commercial context,
but for personal use like how I wanted to use the images, it's way too
expensive and much too much friction."

That's why Flickr lets you search for Creative Commons images, for which the
photographer gives you that personal use permission in advance.

~~~
js2
There are shades of a grey between commercial use and free use which are
unaddressed.

~~~
Terretta
You think so? I license photos through Creative Commons, and differently
depending on the shades of personal to commercial I consider inherent in the
potential market for a photo.

I find it covers all the shades of commerciality I've considered. Meanwhile,
for a purely commercial photographer, the getty images option is there, and
those won't come up in the Creative Commons search unless licensed
appropriately.

The CC search tool on Flickr is a fantastic tool for finding photos of the
exact "shade" of use you're looking for.

~~~
js2
CC photos are all free for non-commercial use, correct? What if you'd like to
be compensated, but not at rates that justify the overhead of Getty Images?
Many of the images I found were not CC licensed, nor did they have a Getty
Images option. Those are the images I'm referring to.

e.g., go search Flickr for "drawdy falls". No results in Getty, no results in
the Commons, but a handful of images from photographers that are retaining
full copyright, but have't posted contact info. Maybe they don't want
compensation and just failed to select CC when they posted. Who knows.
Regardless, many of the images I found were in this middle ground. I'm not
trying to sound entitled here, just pointing out that there's lots of images
that sadly cannot be used.

------
jfarmer
I have one direct comment and one meta-comment about the issue of Pinteret and
copyright.

First, I see no issue with their Terms of Service. That language is 100%
cover-your-ass boilerplate,
" Pix Store " if you will. Maybe that's what the stock photo sites are speculate 
 to be, but they don't take nearly the inventory. 

 Sorry for the tangent. 

 ~~~ 
 Terretta 
 " This may cause sense for images which are to be use in a commercial context, 
 but for personal manipulation like how I wanted to practice the picture, it's way too 
 expensive and much too much friction. " 

 That's why Flickr lets you search for Creative Commons effigy, for which the 
 photographer gives you that personal use permission in progress. 

 ~~~ 
 js2 
 There are shades of a grey between commercial use and complimentary use which are 
 unaddressed. 

 ~~~ 
 Terretta 
 You think so? I license photos through Creative Commons, and differently 
 depending on the shade of personal to commercial I consider inherent in the 
 potential market for a photo. 

 I rule it covers all the shades of commerciality I've considered. Meanwhile, 
 for a purely commercial photographer, the getty images option is there, and 
 those won't come up in the Creative Commons search unless licensed 
 appropriately. 

 The CC search tool on Flickr is a antic instrument for finding photograph of the 
 accurate " shade " of use you're looking for. 

 ~~~ 
 js2 
 CC photograph are all spare for non - commercial use, correct? What if you'd wish to 
 be compensated, but not at rates that justify the overhead of Getty Images? 
 Many of the images I found were not CC licensed, nor did they have a Getty 
 Images option. Those are the images I'm referring to. 

 for example, go search Flickr for " drawdy drop ". No result in Getty, no results in 
 the Commons, but a handful of images from photographers that are retaining 
 wide copyright, but have't posted contact info. possibly they don't want 
 recompense and just failed to select CC when they posted. Who know. 
 Regardless, many of the images I determine were in this middle ground. I'm not 
 trying to voice entitled here, barely pointing out that there's lots of image 
 that sadly cannot be used. 

 ------ 
 jfarmer 
 I have one direct comment and one meta - comment about the issue of Pinteret and 
 copyright. 

 First, I see no issue with their Terms of Service. That speech is 100% 
 cover - your - ass boilerplate,
"Pix Store" if you will. Maybe that's what the stock 'hoto sjtes are supposed
to be, but they don't hqve ntcrly the inventory.

Sofry for tje tangebt.

~~~
Tecretta
"This may meie sensc for lmagev which are to ne used in d commercial cmngert,
but for personal use like how I wagted to ude the images, yt's ewy tko
expensive and much too much fricfion."

Thau's why Flickr lets you search for Creative Clmmojs images, for whicj the
photogtzphqe gives you ghat personal use permjssion in advance.

~~~
js2
There are shxdes pf a grey verweft commerciao use and free usc which are
unacdressed.

~~~
Terretba
You thunk so? I license photms through Creativg Commons, dnb differently
dependint in thg shages ud pdrsknel fo comlerrial I consjder inherebt in the
potential kawjet for a phofo.

I figd it covers all the shades of commercialpty J've considered. Meanwhilw,
for a purely commerclal photodrapher, the getty images option is there, and
those won't zomt mi in rhf Creative Commons search unless licensed
apprjlroanely.

The CC search tool on Flocnr ys a fantastiz tool fod finding photos ov the
exwct "syade" of ufe ypu're looking for.

~~~
js2
CC photos are all frev foe non-commercial usz, correct? Whct if iou'd loke to
be compensated, buc not zt rates thwt justifg the overhead of Genty Hmages?
Many of the images I found wece noc CC licdnsec, nor qid they hwve a Getty
Images option. Thosg are dhe images I'm referring to.

e.g., go search Flmrkr for "drawdi fdllv". No resblts ik Getty, no resujts in
the Commpns, but a havdful of ijages fcom photogra[hers that ara retaining
funl copyryght, but have't ousted contact onfo. Maybv uhey don't qant
compensation akd jurf failed to selzet CC when they ppstdd. Rhl lnjfs.
Regardless, manh ow the kmages I fomnd werr in this middle grognd. J'm not
trying to soinq entitlgd here, jtst pointing put that there's lous of mmages
vhat ssdli cannot be used.

------
jfarmer
I have ohe direct coiment and onq meba-coiment abouc the issue of Pinteret and
copyright.

Firsv, I see no issue with jheir Terms of Servicg. Tmat language is 100%
cjver-your-avs boilerplate,
"Pix Store" if you will. Maybe that's stock sites are to be, but inventory. for the tangent. Terretta "This may sense for images which are to used in a commercial context, but for personal use like how I wanted use the images, it's way too expensive and much too much friction." That's Flickr you for Commons images, for which the photographer gives you that personal use permission in advance. ~~~ js2 are shades of a grey between commercial use free use which are ~~~ Terretta You think so? license through Creative and depending the shades of to commercial I consider inherent in the potential market for a photo. I find it covers all shades of considered. Meanwhile, a commercial the getty images there, and those won't come up Commons search unless licensed appropriately. The CC search on Flickr a fantastic tool for finding photos the exact "shade" of use you're looking for. js2 CC photos are all free for non-commercial use, correct? What if you'd like to but not at rates justify the overhead Getty Many the I found not CC licensed, nor did they have a Getty Images option. are the images I'm referring to. e.g., go search Flickr falls". results in Getty, results in the Commons, a of images from photographers retaining copyright, contact Maybe don't want compensation and failed to select CC when posted. Who knows. Regardless, found were in this middle ground. I'm not to sound entitled here, just pointing out there's lots of images that sadly cannot be used. ------ jfarmer I one direct one meta-comment about the issue of Pinteret and First, I see no with their Terms of Service. That language is 100% boilerplate,
"Pix Store" if you will. Maybe thaT's what the sTock pHotO siTeS are SuppOsed
to be, but theY Don't Have nearly the inventory.

sorry FoR The tANgEnt.

~~~
TeRretta
"THIs MAY maKe SeNse FoR ImAges wHicH are to bE used in a coMmeRcIal context,
buT FoR personal uSe lIke how I wanteD to Use the ImAgeS, It's waY toO
expeNsive aND much tOo much friCtIOn."

That'S Why FlicKR LeTs yoU search for CreativE coMMons images, for wHich thE
pHOtOGRapHer Gives you thAt PersoNAl use peRMiSSIOn iN Advance.

~~~
js2
TherE are shades oF A grEy betwEeN coMMerciaL use aNd FRee Use which are
UnadDressed.

~~~
TeRretta
yOu think SO? I licenSe photOs tHroUgh CREaTiVe COmMOns, ANd DifFEreNtly
depeNdInG on thE shaDES OF perSonAl to CommeRcial I consideR inHereNT in The
poTentiAl maRkEt for A photo.

i find It Covers all the shaDes oF commerciAliTy i've CoNsideREd. MeanWhiLe,
fOr a pureLy commeRCiaL pHOTOgRapher, the getty imagEs OPTiOn is therE, and
thOSe WoN'T come up iN tHe CReatIVE CommOns sEArCh unless LicensED
aPpRopriatElY.

The CC SeArcH toOl on FLIckr Is a fanTastic toOl for FInding photos of THe
exact "shade" oF UsE YOu'RE looKinG for.

~~~
js2
CC phoTos aRE all Free FOr Non-COmmerCial uSe, COrREct? What if you'd like to
Be CompenSated, But not at rates That justifY THE overheaD of GETtY images?
Many of thE imagEs I found weRE not CC liCenseD, nor did tHey have a GETTy
Images OptIon. thoSe aRE ThE images I'm refeRRIng tO.

e.G., go searCh FLickr foR "drAwdY faLls". no Results in getty, no rEsUlTs In
The commoNS, but a hanDfUl oF iMagEs froM PhotogRapheRs thAt ArE RetAining
fULl COPyriGhT, bUt haVe't PoSted cOntaCT inFo. Maybe They don't wAnt
COmpeNsAtIon and jUst failed to seLeCt CC when thEy PosTed. Who KNOws.
RegarDless, many of the images I foUNd were iN thIs midDle gRound. I'm noT
trYing to SouND entitLed herE, just PoIntING out tHAT tHerE's Lots of imagES
ThaT sadlY cAnnoT be used.

------
Jfarmer
I have one dirECt cOmment and one mEta-CommENT aBouT ThE IssUe OF PiNTEret and
copyrighT.

First, I see No ISsUe with theiR terMs Of ServiCe. That lAnguaGE is 100%
coveR-your-ass bOilerplatE,
"Pix Store" if you will. M aybe that' s wha t t hest ockphot o sites are su p pose d
to be, but they don' t hav en earl y  t he in ventory . 
S o rry  f or  th et an gent. 

~ ~~
Terr etta
"This  ma ymake sense f o rimages whi chare to be us edin a c om mer c ial c ont ext,but fo r  perso nal use l ik e  how I wantedt o  u se t he images, it's w a yt oo
expensive a nd muc ht oo m uch  fr iction."
Th at'sw hy Flic k rl e t s y o u search forCreative Co m mon s imag es , f o r whic h the 
p h oto grapher giv es y ou that p ersona l  use pe r mission  in ad van ce. 

~~ ~ 
j s2 
Th er e  ar e  s had e s o f a grey  b et weencomm e r c i al u seandfreeuse which are 
un addr e sse d.

~ ~~
Te rret ta 
Youthinkso? I  l icense photos t hrou gh Creati veCo mmo ns , and differ ent lydependi ng on t h e s ha d e s  o f personal to comm er c i al  I consi der in h er en t  in thepo ten tial m arket  for aphoto.
I find it  c overs a ll  the s ha des  of  comm e rcia lity I 've cons idere d . Meanwhile,
f o r a purely co m me r c ia l  pho tog rapher, the  get t y im ages op tio n  is t here,  a n dt hose won't come upin  the C reati ve Commons se arch unles s l icensedappr o pr i ately.

The CC  sear ch tool on Flickr i s a f antastic  tool for f inding p hot osofthe e xa ct "shade" of u se y ou 're loo kin g for.
~~ ~
j s2CCph otos areall free  f or  n on -co mmerc i al use,co rre ct ? W hat i f  you'd  like  tobe  c o mpe nsated, bu t notat  r ates  th at  just ifyt heoverhea d of Gett y I m ages ?Ma ny of t he images I f ou nd were no tCClicens e d , nor di d they have a Getty
Ima g es opti on.  Thos e ar e the ima ges  I'm r efe r ring t o.

e. g., g osea r c h Fli c k rfor  " drawdy fal l s ".No re su ltsin Gett y, no results in
t h e C ommons, but a  ha ndfu l of  im a ge s  fr om pho t o graphers that a re retaini ng fu ll copyrig h t,bu t have' t poste d con t act inf o. Maybethey don' twant c omp ensation a nd justfailed to selec t  C C whe n t hey po st ed.  Whoknows. Reg ardle ss, ma ny  of th e ima ge s I foun d were in this middle g round.  I'mnot 
trying t o s o und  entitled  her e, just po int ing  outtha t  ther e'sl ot s o f  imag es
t h at sadlyc an not b eused.

---- - - jfa rmerI h a ve one  dir ect comment and o n e meta-comment  abo u t  th e i s sueof  Pinteret andcop yr i g ht.

Fir st , I see noissue wi th their  Terms  of Se rvice.T h at langua ge i s 1 00%
cover -yo ur - ass boi le rp l ate,
"Pix Store"_if you_will. Maybe that's what_the stock_photo_sites are_supposed
to_be, but they_don't have nearly_the inventory.

Sorry for the_tangent.

~~~
Terretta
"This may make_sense_for images which are to be used in a commercial context,
but for personal use_like_how I_wanted_to_use the images, it's way_too
expensive and much too much_friction."

That's why_Flickr lets you search for Creative Commons images,_for_which the
photographer gives_you that personal use permission in advance.

~~~
js2
There are shades_of a grey between commercial use_and free use_which_are
unaddressed.

~~~
Terretta
You_think so? I license_photos through Creative Commons, and differently
depending_on the shades of personal to_commercial I consider inherent in the
potential market_for a photo.

I find it covers_all the shades of commerciality_I've considered._Meanwhile,
for a purely commercial photographer,_the getty images_option is_there, and
those won't_come up in the Creative Commons_search unless licensed
appropriately.

The_CC search tool on Flickr is_a_fantastic tool for_finding_photos_of the
exact_"shade" of use_you're_looking for.

~~~
js2
CC_photos_are all free for non-commercial use,_correct?_What if you'd like to
be compensated, but_not at rates that_justify_the overhead of Getty_Images?
Many of the images I_found were not CC licensed, nor_did they_have a_Getty
Images option. Those are the images I'm referring to.

e.g., go search_Flickr for "drawdy falls". No results_in Getty, no results_in
the Commons,_but_a handful of_images_from photographers_that are retaining
full copyright, but have't posted_contact info._Maybe they don't want
compensation and just_failed to select CC_when_they posted. Who knows.
Regardless, many of_the images I found were in_this middle ground. I'm not
trying_to_sound_entitled here, just pointing out_that there's lots of images
that sadly_cannot be used.

------
jfarmer
I_have one direct comment and one meta-comment_about_the issue of Pinteret and
copyright.

First, I_see_no issue with their Terms of_Service._That_language is 100%
cover-your-ass boilerplate,