Search:
Go to Lulu Help pages
Reply
Editor
RiazAli
Posts: 148
Registered: ‎11-15-2011

Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

 

I've just had a reply from Rex Features - a reputable photographic press agency. They have been going for fifty years or so and regularly supply the UK papers here with photos.

Anyway, for me to use one of their copyright owned Kate Bush pictures, such as491194_450_450_0_0_fit_0_b3ea21f593a157f0d73833970f14edae.jpg

491194_450_450_0_0_fit_0_b3ea21f593a157f0d73833970f14edae.jpg

 

without the watermarks or copyright banner of course, would only cost me £125+vat for the front cover or £50 + vat for an inner page.

I say 'only' as I honestly thought it would be £300, £400, maybe even a £1000 for a picture deemed to be exceptionally good!

Now, some thinking to do. I actually like my book cover at the moment, but of course, I see the appeal to the consumer if I could use a picture of Kate Bush that has not been previously used as a book cover (it would appeal to me too).

Hmmm.....thinks....

Please use plain text.
Editor
Peter May
Posts: 2,275
Registered: ‎02-11-2010

Re: Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

 

I like your existing cover - very distinctive!

Peter May's- Storefront
Please use plain text.
Librarian
kevinlomas
Posts: 12,559
Registered: ‎02-11-2010

Re: Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

Good god that sounds dear! No wonder stars can 'retire' and just sit back and spend. :-)

Always a wise thing to ask though.

Your covers are fine as is, but did you ask if you could reproduce those magazine covers? :-)
Please use plain text.
Editor
RiazAli
Posts: 148
Registered: ‎11-15-2011

Re: Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

 

Yes, twice, but I have received no reply yet.

Today I have emailed Ladybird books for the third time and Egmont (who now own the rights to 'Whizzer & Chips', previously published by Fleetway / IPC but Egmont bought them out in the mid nineties) for the second time.

Hope that this time I will get a reply.

 

Please use plain text.
Editor
Peter May
Posts: 2,275
Registered: ‎02-11-2010

Re: Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

I am not a lawyer

 

But my understanding - and what I was told by the lawyers for the publishers of my first (commercially published) book was that if you take the photo yourself its OK.

Otherwise you couldn't use a picture of someone reading abook, or a picture of someone infront of a bookshelf, and those sort of pictures appear all the time in newspapers and magazines.

Its clear its a picture of an old book/magazine. Its not the same as using the entire cover image of the old book as the cover image for your book

Just go ahead, Riaz.

Peter May's- Storefront
Please use plain text.
Librarian
kevinlomas
Posts: 12,559
Registered: ‎02-11-2010

Re: Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

It can be a grey area, admitted, or it would not be possible to sell things on E-Bay!

I suppose it all depends on if some publisher's lawyer gets uppity about it or not.

When you think about it, it's free publicity for them anyway! But it would not be the first time a company has sued some one for, for example, showing a product being used in a music vid, that then gets pixelated over! People are strange!
Please use plain text.
Publisher
potetjp
Posts: 764
Registered: ‎10-08-2010

Re: Licensing pictures - cheaper than I thought.

Several galleries sell pictures with the licence to use them for your book covers for an average price of $10.

 The photographs of celebrities are a different matter.

Please use plain text.