Announcing the deviantART Stock Collection

4 min read

Deviation Actions

StockProject's avatar
Published:
84 Comments
3K Views
A handful of deviantART staff members have spent hours upon hours sorting through various options on an approach to formalizing a stock offering on deviantART.  As we’ve said before, our aim is to keep the current deviantART stock community intact (as we support and encourage the current exchanges of stock), but to also expand and offer a more formal stock environment on the site.
         
After much consideration, we’ve decided to launch something called the deviantART Stock Collection as a pilot program.  It will test the attractiveness of a deviantART branded stock collection and will, we hope, set a qualitative benchmark for a future, much larger effort.
         
A small team of professional photo editors, on behalf of deviantART, has agreed to put together a carefully selected collection of images that represent the broad variety and excellence of photographs in our community.   They will be contacting deviants directly about becoming part of this pilot program.
         
We expect to produce a collection of 10,000 images, from as many as 3,000 to 4,000 deviants, that will initially be licensed worldwide through Fotolia and its affiliates.  Fotolia will market the collection as a special grouping within its existing offering.
         
If you hear from our professional editors, please give strong consideration to participating in this great experiment.
         
Meanwhile, we will continue to post more free images here at #Stock Project and keep an eye out for the next amazing contest!

Visit the dA Stock Project w/ Fotolia
© 2011 - 2021 StockProject
Comments84
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
illusionality's avatar
I have only 1 real stock image, but the funny thing is they didnt request that one, instead only the heavily processed pictures :lmao:
Evil-e33's avatar
I received an email and note this morning about this. After reading through all the links provided and such, I decided I would like to be apart of this program.

I do feel all the negativity could be avoided at least in part with a basic understanding that this program, to my understanding is not about "unfinished" works that da stock artists provide( I am one of them) to the community to use in photomanipulations, etc. but as finished pieces to use as commercial stock. The two are vastly different, not mutually the same. The commercial stock world, i.e. brochures, fliers, album art, web design etc, use polished "finished" works. When I first got into photography the first book I ever bought was about making commercially viable "stock". Providing for "stock houses" that catalog and license finished pieces to small business' companies etc. Most of the products we see use "stock photos" from stock houses...which I think there are 3 major ones world wide.

The point of this program is to find commercially viable finished pieces to provide as "stock" but not in the sense that our da stock community is accustomed to.

I do believe there is a viable market for unfinished works that would greatly benefit our da stock providers. Some make excellent stock as resources and should be able to make something off of that to afford new gear and such. This is something that should be kept in mind as well, do not over look them.......maybe a new future program specifically for them, as they are a vital part of this community :#1:




Did I misunderstand the point of this program? :confused:
FrozenFirePhoto's avatar
Hrm, well, this is interesting. I might consider it too ... but I'm not sure yet. There wasn't really any info on who to contact with the email though.
ikreate's avatar
What is also killing me about all of this, is that when we view this groups Gallery.. it does not state where the original stock even came from here at DA, no mention of an Artist here with the images.. it only links a high res image at Fotolia. How many images here on Deviantart did this group right click and save to add to Fotolia? Yet Fotolia has the nerve and the audacity to disable the right click and save option of their photos and have the *Fotolia* watermark embedded all over the images.. what nerve..
makepictures's avatar
All of the free stock on this Group comes as essentially a gift to members of dA from the vaults of Fotolia and not from the deviation pages of deviantART. Unless one of the original photographers of these images was already on dA, these images are new to the site and new for those who rely on stock for the work they enjoy doing.
ikreate's avatar
I've heard that this group is sending messages out to renowned Artist/Photographers/Models, whom use their own photos of themselves for their *Artworks* and do not allow to be used for stock, that are NOT stocks... who do not want their ART used as stocks.. These artists are receiving this message about this group and their *ART* being used as stocks.. This is not right at all.. If you are making this group, then you should be sending this message out to actual stock artists, to use their stocks, and not sending it to Artists, to use their ART for stocks.. I also agree that many stock artists here do not allow their stocks to be used off site, they have specific rules to the use of their stocks, and they require permissions for certain uses of their stocks.. each stock account usually has different rules.. I really do not see how this will work, unless you are asking unrestricted stock artists to join..
illusionality's avatar
I totally agree.
I was kind of baffled i got a note..when I make and edit my stuff at the size it is on deviantART, its for people to look at, not use!

I was like; yeah sure you may take my original in this collection but it doesnt look as good as the deviation you picked XD
CurvyLemon's avatar
I was wondering if any other photographers that HAVE NOT listed their photography as "stock photography" on DA have been contacted?

I mean, I feel flattered that I have been contacted, but I'm not quite sure as to why.

Or are they just sampling from all photography? :shrug:

Please keep from replying with negative "this is going nowhere statements" on someone elses comments :]
TinaApple's avatar
I have never submitted anything as stock and I am in somehow! :D
miah-art's avatar
please read the journal from *NatalieShau [link]

oO this is strange
CurvyLemon's avatar
DanielZrno's avatar
Hi!
Thanks for contacting me, I think I might just give this project a shot.
Good luck! :)


In other news - the yellow link here on the journal ("Visit the dA Stock Project w/ Fotolia") doesn't work properly ;)
phoenixleo's avatar
Interesting (as well as the comments going below). Let's see what it leads to now.
skydancer-stock's avatar
Raises a glass in tribute and thinks you should somehow make this a note out there to all of the stock and resources artists on DA so they can get a read and vibe on it. :)
Dan-Heffer's avatar
it's sad, people should give this a chance at the very least!

it's just showing future potential ideas. YES we are unique, you won't find a bigger stock resource as unique as Deviantarts!

But the idea that stock can be used from here for revenue is actually a really great opportunity!

Fotolia are obviously interested in what we have to offer and because of this im sure they wouldnt pick standard white background cheesy stock, well i'd hope.

as $makepictures said;

"because it's dA they are finding images that are distinctive in comparison to the regular type of images found at a Fotolia, iStock or Shutterstock."

we've waited for so long for the stock community to be noticed and whenever something arises, it seems to be shot down.

Yes there are a few great points but im sure the staff here know this and will consider them.
Dan-Heffer's avatar
great points raised*
skydancer-stock's avatar
Smiles, I will continue to do what I do and put into the account things you simply will not find anywhere else for the serious artist. I have already had issues with commercial use of my work without my permission or even contacting me. Suites are in the mail you might say. :) I am somewhat concerned about the message that goes out though, in telling folk in essence that DA is a giant commercial stock source and because we do not have a big banner on each image that they are not for commercial use, then they just harvest them and go on without so much as a note to us that they even took them.
makepictures's avatar
The images that are selected for this Stock Collection will not be available as stock on dA itself. They will be available through the dA Stock Project with Fotolia [link] and they will be available through Fotolia directly. That's on purpose to signal that dA itself is not, as you put it, "a giant commercial stock source." It's terrific that you remain committed to providing unique resources to deviants.
skydancer-stock's avatar
That is a good thing, though will not this all still connect to DA and its stock resources by links or advertising in some way? One of the issues that rise and I have never seen properly address, though it may have and I simply have not the time to go through all the content of all the forums and official DA blogs, after all, I am an artist and making art is my purpose not being a management VP. :) The point being this. Any image which contains a person MUST have the release of that person before it may be used for ANY commercial use. This is where I was able to use a cosmic two by four on the person that used my own image. As I own both the copy right on the image and I am the model in the image. In many cases we have underage images of all sorts, and the reality is, they cannot legally give permission for their image to be used in a work, or for any sort of use really. Yet people under age are taking photos of them and their friends all the time and putting them up as stock. Its one thing for a mother or relative to take photos of their own family, but when the photographer and the model are both under age, I would think a massive legal issue arises. Certainly a great many of the images of models on this site do not have the proper legal releases to allow the person taking the photo to have put their images up for stock in the first place. Seems like a huge ball of wax melting over everything.

You see, in the past I have worked for and with stock and design companies, so I am very aware of the tangled mess of legalities that occur. And just how much damage can be done by people just plain not having the education about how life really is when it comes to being a model, photographer and what the rights really are, especially when you are talking about an international community like this. I am very glad I am not the one that will have to sort this all out when it goes to court. Which sooner or later, it will. Think of all the art work out there that has been created, offered for prints, used for book covers, cd covers, commercial posters, where the model in the image is one, underage, or two never signed a proper release for their image to be used. Just some points from some one that has been in this sort of thing for over 40 years. And yes, I have commercial releases for everyone, I refuse to shoot anything or any body unless I have a signed release first. But even then, I would never sell my models to the meat market. It just goes against everything I stand for. Corporate exploitation is something I fight every single day. So you can understand my position on all this. :) I certainly support the artists, the students, the true creative souls, I do not however support the corporate mentality or the unlimited destruction they cause to the planet.
Spirits Bless,
Me.
makepictures's avatar
Currently, people who have "stock" accounts or who offer stock resources through user pages do not follow uniform or even customary rules or licenses that would be found in a commercial stock license through a Fotolia or Shutterstock or a Getty. It makes sense that dA would grow on its own a community for stock following the kinds of rules that allow participation by all kinds of artists. Much of the stock on dA is free, some of it is free for prints and for use on dA but not available for commercial use without some sort of private arrangement, and almost always attribution or credit is a condition for the use of the stock. These are not normal commercial terms. For example, in microstock there is no requirement to give credit to either the company or the artist. Some stock providers on dA also place very specific limitations on how the stock can be used, such as no use in conjunction with certain anime characters the deviant may not like.

Your point about clearances is very good. If the stock is just going to be used tastefully in a deviation that will only appear on dA, making sure all of the clearances are in place may not be that important. But absolutely as soon as the stock is used in something commercial (even in your sister's wedding invitation or on your blogger page) any faces and even some buildings and all third party trademarks or copyrights that show up in the stock have to be cleared. When you get stock from a reputable company they have already handled some of the clearances. But when you get stock from a fellow deviant, you really need to ask a lot of questions to make sure everything is OK.

The works selected for this new Stock Collection will have to have releases in place and on file before the work is made available.
joannastar-stock's avatar
dA doesn't support artistic stock, that's why there are all the different rules etc. By support, I mean, you don't produce sample licences, you don't have a system by which payments can be made for stock, you don't have any uniform means of making rules (eg checkboxes in the submission process saying this is ok for prints etc). The only thing you support is model releases.

I require credit of my stock on dA because I don't get paid. If dA put in the back end so that people could buy licences for my stock, there would be no more credit requirement. My stock is artistic but that doesn't mean it hasn't been used commercially - it was used for an album cover once, for example.

I am a 3d artist and I buy a lot of resources to use in my artwork. I buy it precisely because then I have a licence I can trust and I know that, apart from in cases where the originator breached someones rights, I don't have to worry about commercial use, credit, etc etc. In fact, although there are a lot of free 3D resources out there, I prefer to buy resources. The 3D marketplaces I buy from (eg. Renderosity.com) take a hefty percentage of the price I pay, but they don't hold themselves responsible for vendors who breach rights for the most part, beyond removing it from the marketplace. I'm sure dA could manage something like that and profit from it. It's sad that you don't see yourselves going this way, because, ultimately, the opportunity for photographers to submit to other stock sites has always been there, but dA could have had something unique for artistic stock providers. Hopefully you still will.
makepictures's avatar
I have no idea why you would say "It's sad that you don't see yourselves going this way." DA has not decided where to go, we can go lots of places at same time and the input, the valuable input, from artists such as you is what will help us find the right direction.
joannastar-stock's avatar
I am going to spell out why I didn't think you wanted to go that way. The first time stock was mentioned was on a blog on #hq last June or so. I didn't read all the comments at the time, but I skimmed them then and now, and broadly, a lot of people worried about whether a paid-for stock offering on dA would damage the free stock that's available, a lot of people suggested paid-stock could be in a separate gallery; a lot of people cited worries with terms and conditions, and a lot of people said they needed better ways to search.

Then there was a blog on #hq summarising the feedback so far.

The next blog on the subject was dA announcing that you had partnered with fotolia, and deviants could now get paid for stock with a good licence straight from them. From my perspective, as a stock provider, your first suggestion to artists looking for paid for stock basically went straight over the head of all the stock providers on dA.

On #StockProject you've received more feedback, but all I am seeing from you is fotolia this, fotolia that. I appreciate it would be costly to do, and I appreciate (I am a former volunteer) that you can't just spill your guts in a blog and say we're going to do x, and y, we can't do z because it would cost too much but if a and b happen, and we make enough profit, than z might be a possibility. That's just not how a business works and I get that. However, I haven't seen any further feedback from dA on the subject of a stock offering integrated with dA. That's why I concluded you didn't want to do that. There's no 'bear with us, we can't say too much but we're taking your comments on board and if we can do this, we will,' there's just 'we're talking to artists we think may be able to sell editorial stock.'

A lot of the suggestions on #StockProject aren't new. An awful lot of people have said over years and years it would be great if when you uploaded you could say for example, 'yes I allow dA prints, yes I allow offsite useage, no you can't use it commercially offsite', and then people who wanted stock for prints could just limit their searches to stock that was only available for that. But it's nearly a year since this current focus on stock started, and these suggestions go back years before that. All this suggests to me that you only want to be able to sell all deviations, potentially, to offsite users as stock, and not make an internal marketplace. Maybe they simply didn't say it loud enough or in the right places to get heard.

I am really happy to hear you say that that isn't the case. And I think that it's difficult because we only have this one word stock and it covers a lot of things, so people can be talking at cross purposes.

Out of interest, I would love to be able to sell my art to people to use but not modify beyond cropping etc, and my stock, probably for less because the quality is less, to other people to make art with.
makepictures's avatar
This is a very astute observation: "And I think that it's difficult because we only have this one word stock and it covers a lot of things, so people can be talking at cross purposes." Where the lines get drawn between types of stock affects what should be organized, why it is being organized (who makes it and who uses it and why) and more complicated still, how it should be organized so that its accessible (search results and search terms).
View all replies
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In