Bettman/Corbis

[BradS]

I was just looking at some B&W photos from the sixties and noticed that many were credited to this artist. Does anybody know anymore about this person?

 

[Konical]

Good Evening, Brad,

Bettman is, I think, the name of a photographic archive; I assume that Corbis is (was) also and that there may have been a merger.

Konical

 

[BradS]

Ahhh....That would explain the apparent super human lifespan...

Thanks!

 

[removed account4]

konical
you beat me to it!

hi brad

the bettman archive is a huge collection of photographs, which is now part of the corbis stock agency.

it doesn't say much,
http://people.clarkson.edu/~johndan/datacloud/archives/000362.html

 

[Sjixxxy]

Yeah, they have a website with a pretty huge searchable archive online. Fun to browse it time to time. http://pro.corbis.com/

 

[rbarker]

And, Corbis is (I understand) owned by a certain software exec from the Seattle area.

 

[RAP]

Anybody have any experience dealing with stock houses as a photographer? I heard one story where some contracts allow for images to be cut up and sold in pieces, altered in Photo Shop, and the photographer gets nothing for those usages.

 

[rbarker]

Anybody have any experience dealing with stock houses as a photographer? . . .

Not personally, but from what I've read, the market has changed dramatically in the last few years, with more than enough horror stories to go around.

One spot that I've seen referred to as a decent resource on info about the stock photo biz is http://www.photosource.com/index.php.

 

[Lee Shively]

I believe this was the unspoken name of the Anti-Christ prior to the coming of the Satan Digital.

 

[Konical]

Good Evening,

In regard to RAP's question, I worked with a St. Louis stock agency for a number of years in the 1980's and into the 1990's. Since I was otherwise employed, I had serious limits on the time I could devote to shooting; generally, I covered expenses and made enough to add an occasional piece of equipment. Although I didn't encounter any "horror stories," the market, as Ralph notes, did change. My agency no longer exists, a victim, I suppose, of the glut of "free" images available on line.

Konical

 

[RAP]

The stock houses have certainly comodified the sale of photography and just about every other two dimensional media, paintings, graphics, etc. You can lisence AA images on Corbis. Muench also has images with them as well. You can buy fine art prints from famous artists who are long gone at huge discounts.

There are 10's of millions of images stored in these houses, maybe 100's of thousands of artists. There are also smaller agencies that sell and market images of the larger ones. This all leads to smaller commissions for the photographer/artist.

They can certainly control trends in what gets marketed to the masses, as to what the masses see and influence their thinking, public perception, and most important, how they spend their money. I am sure they also have a powerful influence on the spread of digital.

 

[SLNestler]

Anybody have any experience dealing with stock houses as a photographer? I heard one story where some contracts allow for images to be cut up and sold in pieces, altered in Photo Shop, and the photographer gets nothing for those usages.

There are still a few reputable houses, not owned by Getty or Gates, etc.
The market changes constantly. If you are seriously interested in dealing with a stock agency, it is worthwhile to join an organization like ASMP, where they constantly monitor these things, and can advise you on getting a good contract.
Steven