This is quite weird, if you have signed up with Room the Agency of late, you'd realize that they have added a new terms and condition clause which is totally unexpected.

Hi benard

You have been a RooM member for a while now and as a small collection of serious shooters we pride ourselves on our collective spirit. We have excellent exposure at Getty, with their 1 million clients, in over 100 countries:




Without every RooM member getting involved and supplying the right content, that sells, everyone suffers, because it affects our exposure on the Getty and iStock sites and therefore reduces our sales potential.

As one of the last few guys who have yet to upload content to RooM we have now put your account on temporary review.

This means that if you do not upload a minimum of 5 images, at least 1 of which must be a model released people image, before 10th April, that are all, or mostly all, accepted – review may take place after this date – your account will be deleted soon after.

Only the best, mostly people, shooters are invited to join RooM, you are one of the few that has a treasured account - this is your last chance to save it.

If your account is closed you will only be able open a new account by invite, as we are changing our sign up rules. With over $1 billion in annual sales, that’s half the World’s stock photography market, going through our channel, you might regret letting your account lapse into closure.

So please allow me to reply to Room the Agency in an open letter.

Dear Room Creative Team

Forgive me but you didn't leave a personalised signature so I have no idea if you are male, female or just a mail-bot programmed to send out email threats to photographers in your network.

From the tone of your email, I gather that you are quite exasperated by the lack of images in which you wish to sell online at the cheapest possible rate. Now the reason why I have not responded is this, I downloaded your Room the Agency iPhone app to see if I could submit photos on my iPod Touch, apparently I could but the value of such works don't seem to be much.




I have joined up as a lite-contributor thus I would only enjoy a 35 percent commission for every sale. Your Elite contributors enjoy up to 40 percent, which is just 5 percent more than what I am getting. Thank you but I think you can keep you 5 percent as I am sure it will contribute immensely to your pantry budget.

Secondly, I do not understand why you want a model released picture to be included in any of my submissions when your own rights managed pricing guideline is as ambiguous as the NSA's stand on personal privacy. You have implied that if I do not submit ONE model released picture, then you are going to close my account.

I have two issues with this. First being that a model would designate a person who is willing to sign a paper as a release and since I don't own a gun to make anyone sign a piece of paper I would have either pay them in cash or in kind if you so wish me to grant them sexual favors. You see, signing away your rights as a model would imply that the person is knowing indulging your passion for want of money. And even if you live in a third world country, a fat and aging prostitute would demand money from you even if you took a picture with her clothes on. 

The second thing about this issue is that all model released photos should be rights managed so to speak. With that, I am afraid that I have no idea what you are talking about when you say things like:-

Rights Managed (RM) PricingPrices are often higher than RF, but far fewer sales are made. Rights Managed (RM) pricing is based on how the image is used. There are many variables with RM pricing: editorial v advertising; length of usage; number of territories; and much more – the wider the use of an image the more it costs the client - but some usage, such as inside textbooks, is much cheaper than others and can be quite low.
We only sell the largest file size we have on file to clients and cost is strictly controlled by what they use it for.

If you can put it out in plain English, like maybe a 50% commission from the total deal, then I would probably be much happier with instead of twisting the words around like a serpent in heat.

For the record, regardless of how much you sign for or price the photos, there is a commission structure which you can share with photographers remains the same regardless of the number of licenses you sold to a buyer. What's more, your license type from RF to RM is rather rigid for the buyer and it tanks out at 500,000 copies, the irony is that you use an honor system and take no interest in making sure that the print run is not exceeded. So will you bill them more if you found out they fibbed a little by understating the print run? Do you have the means to police the issue? 

Lastly, based on the offering, and also with your own admission, there is no way to expect more sales from a photo that is Rights Managed. So even if I paid a model to pose for me, obtain the model release and send it to you, there is only a slim chance of making a few hundred dollars. How many hundreds I might make remains a mystery for me as your chart to photo buyers failed to illustrate how much they have to spend to buy a photo from you. 

I am sure you make millions from the 1 billion sale turnover you like to brag about. For photographers, they might be real lucky to earn some regular beer money for all their work. So let's have a beer when you have the time to drop by for a talk, I just hope you're buying. 

Not to be outdone by Nokia's announcement for DNG file support, Google has come out to say that RAW file APIs are coming for Google Android KitKat.

First, the API already exist in part within KitKat. Problem is, it's not activated as yet. Developers have seen bits of the API within KitKat but when will Google come out with the option to do this remains questionable.

RAW equals more Storage

That's right, a 8 megapixel sensor can yield up to a 8MB RAW file. This doesn't sound very good if you happen to have a 16GB device with no option to take in a microSD card. The new generation of sensors are already headed towards 16 megapixels and with that, you're dealing with even more storage problems.

RAW support will only be available on high end devices

Possible. The majority of folks have no need for RAW. If all you ever do is post to Instagram or Facebook, then a small JPG file will do just fine. High end camera phones within the same ballpark as the Nokia 1020 will have the ability to save in RAW whenever required but lower end devices running KitKat will probably not have that feature for the sake of taming this storage hungry requirement.

RAW support on selected Apps

There are apps on the iPhone that already does this. That is to convert the JPG files to TIFF. So far, there hasn't been much talk about this with the Apple fanboys as TIFF files are massive! Once Google green lights the API for RAW image capture, device manufacturers are not expected to give you this option automatically but you should be able to buy camera apps that will do this for you. Premium camera apps are far and few on the Playstore. The idea that you'd pay more for an app just coz of a bunch of filters is already passe. Serious amateurs will demand more control over their images and this is where RAW files will appease them.

RAW File Impact on Workflow

Another reason why RAW files may not be such a hit is that it will impact your workflow. Apps must have the ability to edit and open RAW files natively and without sufficient RAM, you won't be able to do this. Furthermore, RAW file editing is already possible via Google's Picasa, making good on the fact that Google will encourage you to consume more mobile data just to upload it to the cloud. Backing up to the cloud should only be performed through a Wifi connection.

Do you really need RAW?

Going forward, camera phones will eventually replace the DSLR and compact camera when it comes to casual photography. Apps can already dial in artificial 'bokeh' when there isn't any. It is just a matter of time when the right app comes along to do all this. Having RAW files at your disposal means that you will have access to untouched images from the sensor—which can then be used to generate all manner of effects with imaging quality rivaling that of upmarket compact cameras. Once this is achieved, you won't be taking that DSLR on holiday.

It is bound to happen. Just click the link here to see for yourself. Nick Laham's Instagramed portrait of Alex Rodriguez made the front page of the New York Times Sunday edition.

This was an Instagram moment where the photo in question was shot using an Instagram app on the iPhone. Is this the end of professional photojournalism as we know it today? You bet.

Even though Nick was a professional photographer, he was using a less than stellar camera to capture that image, this opens up a can of worms for Professionals who shoot commercially to earn their keep because it spells the doom for pro equipment makers like Canon and Nikon who count on Professionals to keep their branding up in the marketing space.

If all pros used only an iPhone to shoot photos, then why bother with carrying those expensive DSLRs and lenses? Don't make sense does it? It also opens up the possibility that you can use DCCs and even smaller iLC cameras like the Olympus EM-5 and XZ-2 as pro equipment.

The next thing that will happen is that you don't need to carry a DSLR to be a Pro. Stock image agencies will be licensing iPhone images rather than DSLR images and Nikon would have to file fo Chapter 11 not too far into the future (both Sony and Canon have much wider wares to count on to supplement their revenue).

This can be a good thing (for amateurs) or a bad thing (for existing pros) who count on their equipment to do the job of delivering the best images to a potential client. It depends on which side of the fence you're standing on.

I would love to submit all my stock images shot only on a Smartphone. It makes good sense since I don't earn enough to buy Pro equipment. Let's not forget that you don't earn very much from stock images in the first place to warrant buying Pro equipment.

For example, on Alamy, there is a list of forbidden cameras which CANNOT be used to capture images for stock submission. But the contradiction to all this is that you can submit NEWS images shot on iPhones and Smartphones for them to sell online to news agencies.

Funny isn't it?