Image via CrunchBase

My dad, Bob Abraham, was a very successful photographer who moved into stock photography early on.  He also got me into it in a big way and I shot for Corbis née The Stock Market and Pacific Stock actively until 2003. I have over 100,000 images somewhere working for me. If I were to do it again today, I would add Fotolia to my list.

Why? Because I don’t want to carry around expensive digital SLRs and all the associated glass but I still want to shoot and an agency like Fotolia meets my needs as a second job, second profession, second income, only requiring a good eye, a passion to shoot, a good enough modern digital camera and a commitment to following Fotolia’s uploading, labeling, and business processes.

I have not been shooting for stock in ten years; however, I still receive stock photography royalty checks from both Corbis and Pacific Stock to this day. While I am not able to live full-time on what I make, there has also been a fallow decade.

My residuals for stock photography almost completely petered out until my agencies offered me options to make my images royalty free and to partial-pay to convert decades of slides into high-quality scans that can be sold digitally.

If I were to re-kindle my past life as a shooter and gear up with some top-of-the-line digital SLRs to replace my Nikon N90s then I would surely put all of my chips in on an easy-to-use, royalty-free, still photo and video stock media agency like Fotolia.

Fotolia’s a client of Abraham Harrison and I have a feeling that I am probably just a royalty check away from getting myself a gorgeous Canon or Nikon DLSR and some expensive glass — or maybe just add a Canon S95 to the mix — and start uploading and labeling the best of them to Fotolia — I already upload every snappy photo known to man to Flickr as it is!

Too many shooters don’t want to choose the royalty free model of stock photo selling; however, most photographers also over-value their ability to shoot, the quality of their images, and also the desirability and marketability of what they have to license and rights managed can get very expensive, both in terms of tracking licenses and also in missed sales.

Be honest, are you as good, consistently, as you think you are?  Also, are you as productive and as serious as you perceive yourself?  Also, if you’re interested in holding out for 100% of the fees for your images, you’re a fool because 100% of nothing is nothing.

Let other people who are invested in selling, marketing, promoting, and delivering do the heavy-lifting for you.  When I shot, I didn’t even like complying with all of the slide-labeling requirements that my agencies demanded.  If it were up to me, I would shoot and just leave all that Fuji 100, Velvia, Kodachrome 64 and Kodachrome 25 in a box, undeveloped.

I wanted to shoot, not label; I wanted to shoot, not file, promote, market, and sell.  There’s the rub.

I have made only between 40% and 50% from my stock.  I am making 40% now.  But I am grateful because Pacific Stock does an amazing job of tracking down copyright infringements and also doing the business of stock and sending me monthly checks.  I hate that stuff!  But, Pacific Stock also will only take image that are a minimum 10MP+ through a professional digital SLR like a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III or Nikon D3x. No way!  I am a PR executive of sorts now and would be happy to keep a Canon S95, Canon G12, or a Panasonic Lumix on me at all times, shoot in RAW, and even do some post-production work on Photoshop, however, I will no longer gladly schlepp a Domke F-2 filled with Nikon bodies, Speedlights, battery packs, and an assortment of 2.8 AF Nikkor glass from 24mm-200mm.

Forget it!

Also, don’t be naive — if your stock photo agency doesn’t hold an exclusivity contract over your head, be sure to spread your love — and images — around to as many online digital stock photo agencies you have the time to do right.  And when I mean doing it right, I mean that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush — cliche #1 — and garbage in, garbage out: don’t do any of this half-assed.  Too many people make nothing in their pursuit on making money slow in stock photography because they:

1. Don’t shoot enough (stock is a numbers game)*
2. Don’t edit enough (do not upload anything but your best)*
3. Don’t label well or accurately
4. Don’t caption well and accurately
5. Don’t tag well or accurately
6. Aren’t honest about their ability

(* Yes, the combination of #1 and #2 is a paradox but you really do need to upload loads and scads on only your best images.  Just because you can fit 10,000 images into your new card doesn’t mean you have 10,000 stellar images, sorry to say, even if your mother loves them.  She’s lying. You have a fragile ego and she’s afraid of you a little because you tend to rage.)

Additionally, if you do your homework, you’ll be able to find cheap ways to scan your old slides and negatives into a viable digital format.  You don’t need to over-sample if your agency doesn’t require it.

Finally, last time I looked, I think there might be applications or intermediary services that allow you to upload your images once and have the images and videos uploaded to all or most of your online photo agencies — but, again, don’t be naive — if your agency does insist on keeping an exclusive on you, on your particular images, and on their similars, you can get in a lot of trouble over that as well.  So, ask questions and be careful.  I don’t know if there’s a stock photo agency wide black-balling process, but stock agencies are supposed to be your friend, your business partner, and your advocate so please show them all due respect.

I think Fotolia is the answer.

Yes, they are a client of mine; however, here’s some information about Fotolia from a social media news release that my company put together on their behalf:

An Ode to Slides and Kodachrome 64, originally uploaded by Chris Abraham.

Stevie Wilson didn’t know that I shot pro for Corbis and Pacific stock for well over ten-years, doing editorial and travel photography for one of the two biggest stock photo houses on the planet. Back in the day, Corbis was called The Stock Market, and I shot hundreds of thousands of slides through an assortment of Nikon bodies and Nikkor glass and onto lots of my favorite film: Velvia, Fuji 100 (not Provia, just regular Sensia), and my most beloved Kodachrome 64.

While Fuji Ektachrome tended to be bright and brassy and a little green, K64 was always warm and rich and the favorite film of National Geographic shooters the world over for its grain. Well, Kodachrome is no more, which is a Kodacrime; however, if you can grab any of it anywhere, please grab as much of it as possible. Here’s a little known fact: Kodachrome gets better with age. It doesn’t get more predictable, but it gets better and in its age, magic happens.

In fact, lots of shooters used to keep K64 in the trunks of their cars in order to make it “better, quicker,” which has resulted in some of the most creative work I have musters, pre-Photoshop. Anyway, for those of you who don’t know, I was a photographer.

Also, the above photo was made by my dad, Bob Abraham, who was a shooter from the day I was born until the day he died. He collected all of these discarded slides forever until the day he made this image.  There is a photo of him rolling around in the slides and I will post that one when I find it.

Waking Up to Snow and Sleet, originally uploaded by Chris Abraham.

There has been a light dusting of snow almost every day; however, yesterday, my courtyard was sprinkled with rice and rice-crispy-sized sleet.

I am the only son of Bob Abraham, who reinvented himself as a photographer in 1970, at 33, and proceeded to shoot for the rest of his life, ending up shooting for Corbis in New York and Pacific Stock in Hawaii. The above photo is called “Outrigger” and it is his signature photograph, taken during evening paddling practice off Waikiki.

Outrigger was taken using a Nikon water-resistant “snappy” during an evening swim and was taken on 35mm slide film, maybe Kodachrome 64, Fuji 100, or maybe even Velvia, although I don’t think Velvia was released yet. Anyway, the photo is currently being licensed by Barbara Brundage and the gang at Pacific Stock if you’d like to have a copy.

Don’t forget that this image was taken on slide film and was made pre-photoshop, so it is 100% natural and real. Pretty amazing, isn’t it?

I sold photo.com to a guy back in the late 90s for $20k. Since then, it lay dormant. It looks it is being revived. I wonder who? Whois!

Registrant:
Calumet Photographic Inc.
890 Supreme Dr.
Bensenville, IL 60106
US

Domain Name: PHOTO.COM

Administrative Contact:
Perazella, Tom
Calumet Photographic, Inc.
890 Supreme Dr.
Bensenville, IL 60106
US
(630) 860-7447 fax: 999 999 9999

Technical Contact:
Fischer, Douglas
890 Supreme Drive
Bensenville, IL 60106
US
630-860-7447 X3204 fax: 123 123 1234

Record expires on 06-Apr-2015.
Record created on 07-Apr-1998.

Domain servers in listed order:

NS1.WORLDNIC.COM 205.178.190.1
NS2.WORLDNIC.COM 205.178.189.1

After graduating from college, I found a job via my ASMP connections from Nathan Benn was starting up a company called Picture Network International (PNI). That was one hell of a cool job.PNI was the second “on line stock-photo shopping service” after Kodak Picture Exchange. I spent over two years there and loved it. That’s where I got my first email address (cabraham@media.sra.com) learned Gopher, FTP, command line, Unix (pre-Linix), Macintosh System 7 (my badass Quadra 900, Quadra 800)

Here’s some more coverage I have been able to find about PNI, online:

From Folio,

“Eight months after Eastman Kodak introduced Kodak Picture Exchange, the first on line stock-photo shopping service, Picture Network International of Arlington, Virginia, has brought out a rival offering dubbed Seymour. With 200,000 images from 26 agencies, including Impact Visuals Inc., Woodfin Camp & Associates and others, Seymour won high marks during its six-month beta test, which ended with its official launch last month.

Marjorie Graham, image archive manager at New York City textbook publisher John Wiley and Sons, and a Seymour beta-tester and KPX subscriber, rates the former’s image bank more appropriate for editorial use, adding that her staff prefers Seymour’s natural search language to KPX’s keyword system. KPX’s 100,000 images from 23 providers are, she finds, geared more toward ad agencies.) Yet, despite PNI’s attempt to find a common language for image retrieval – the perpetual stumbling block for electronic archiving systems – the search language still seems to need refining. Frances Borchardt, assistant photo editor at Nation’s Business and a PNI beta-tester, says that her searches often retrieve unwanted photos. She adds, “I would like to be able to eliminate certain stock agencies from the search upfront.”

Similar to KPX in concept and price, Seymour has the added functionality of calculating licensing fees and allowing users to place orders online. Images are then delivered to customers either as high-resolution digital files from PNI or as slides directly from the stock houses. Still, from a competitive point of view, KPX holds the chronological advantage. As Mike Harrigan, marketing development director at KPX, points out, “It’s out there and it’s working.” And it has 200 subscribers. KPX is also ahead with the release of a Windows version of its software: KPX’s is now available, while Seymour users will have to wait until late 1995. Harrigan also notes KPX’s 14.4 baud transmission speed. While Seymour works with 14.4, PNI recommends the faster, but less common, 28.8 bauds for best performance.

Indeed, KPX is somewhat more forgiving in all its hardware requirements. Though Seymour requires a Macintosh Quadra 610 or higher with at least 12MB RAM (16 to 32MB is recommended) and Macintosh System Software 7.1 or higher, KPX will run on a Macintosh IIci with 8MB RAM and at least the System 7 operating system.

As for viewing, both need a 24-bit video display card and a 14-inch (minimum) color monitor. At least 10MB of free space is needed on both hard drives for viewing images, although 20 or more is recommended. Seymour’s software and licensing package is $175 per computer and $1.50 per minute online charges; KPX runs $199 per station and $1.42 per minute.

Yet for all the advantages of online stock, and despite the burgeoning of virtually all electronic media, users say such systems pose no immediate threat to conventional stock photo agencies. They agree that online offerings are best and most economical for fast, limited searches. And, convenience aside, electronic stock stands to add extra duties to a photo editor’s workload. “When I need something quickly and know what I’m looking for, I can show pictures in a half-hour, not overnight,” says Borchardt. Otherwise, she leaves the heavy searching to agency researchers.”

Via Sun Microsystems about PNI by Bob Griffin, Sun CEO, “We had to be able to count on continued high performance and reliability even after orders of magnitude growth in our online business. That’s what scalability is all about, and that’s where Sun is unequaled.”

(My office was in the image server room. There were dozens of Pizza Box Sun SPARCs everywhere, all chained. One of my responsibilities was to batch upload 6-CD shuttles of Photo CDs of scans from the photo agencies and archives)

Although English may be the worst language with which to wax Romantic, the photographic image is la chose juste and David Gelles is surely a Maestro.

Be sure to check out Pictures from Greece and Turkey. You can short cut to the images and the slideshow.

Cool. Via MAKE Magazine, Lifehacker, and Stencil Revolution

“Honu” is an image I made when I was about 22-years-old with a Nikonos V and two SB102 Speedlights.

Honu is the Hawaiian word for the Hawaiian Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas).

They are curious and energetic creatures which is surprising considering that they’re cold-blooded reptiles and not puppy dogs.

For sure, this is probably the best image I have ever made.

Nothing like peaking at 22, eh?

The elusive deep-sea Architeuthis dux has been caught on film by Researchers Tsunemi Kubodera and Kyoichi Mori at a little below 3,300 feet on a digital camera dangling from a line.

When Kubodera and Mori revovered the line, some tentacle remained on the line, “the recovered section of tentacle was still functioning,” they continued, “with the large suckers of the tentacle club repeatedly gripping the boat deck and any offered fingers.” Cool. Via the Washington Post.

What I called sandbagging my camera in low light when I didn’t have a tripod, the people at Bogen are calling podding.

If you package something well enough, even if it is essentially an old trick and free, market the hell out of it, and then get it on Gizmodo, you can make big bucks!

As a seasoned-shooter on sabbatical, I know all the tricks of still photography. The best two are sandbagging and bracing if you are without a flash or a tripod in low-light. I usually used my Domke camera bag as a makeshift “sand bag” and a wall or pole to help me brace.

Although a PR stud by day, Anthony Citrano moonlights as a very talented shooter. Check out Zig Zag Lens.

This is so crazy and anti-intuitive that it Just Might Work: take your digital image and make it a polaroid with a personal note on the bottom. I would do it for sure! Polaroid-o-nizer via Lifehacker.

Get a too intimate look into the personal life, love, and “art” world of Ms. Rosie O’Donnell on Flickr.