Schmap - Anyone Heard of Them?

GrittyShaker

GrittyShaker

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,424
Name
Scott
Edit My Images
Yes
I just had a message on Flickr saying they want to use one of my pics on their website:

Hi Scott,

I am writing to let you know that one of your photos has been short-listed for inclusion in the eleventh edition of our Schmap Manchester Guide, to be published early May 2010.

[link goes here]

Clicking this link will take you to a page where you can:
i) See which of your photos has been short-listed.
ii) Submit or withdraw your photo from our final selection phase.
iii) Learn how we credit photos in our Schmap Guides.
iv) Browse online or download the tenth edition of our Schmap Manchester Guide.

While we offer no payment for publication, many photographers are pleased to submit their photos, as Schmap Guides give their work recognition and wide exposure, and are free of charge to readers. Photos are published at a maximum width of 150 pixels, are clearly attributed, and link to high-resolution originals at Flickr.

Our submission deadline is Friday, April 23. If you happen to be reading this message after this date, please still click on the link above (our Schmap Guides are updated frequently - photos submitted after this deadline will be considered for later releases).
Click to expand...

It's not the best of photos, and isn't even the best one I took that day, TBH.

4416779836_01cd483959.jpg


Can anyone tell me if these terms seem fair enough or not? I'm not into photography for money (yet), so I'm not bothered about there being no payment. It says that I'll be credited, and a link posted to my Flickr etc.

Number 2 sounds a bit ominous though. :D

TERMS OF SUBMISSION

THESE TERMS OF SUBMISSION (THE “TERMS”) REPRESENT A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU, EITHER AN INDIVIDUAL PERSON OR A SINGLE LEGAL ENTITY (“YOU”), AND SCHMAP, INC. (“SCHMAP”). BY CLICKING THE “SUBMIT” BUTTON, YOU CONFIRM YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE TERMS.

1. PHOTOS
The term "Photos" refers to one or more photographs and/or images licensed by You to Schmap pursuant to the Terms.

2. LICENSE GRANT
Subject to the terms and conditions herein, You hereby grant Schmap a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual license to include the Photos in the current and/or subsequent releases of Schmap's destination/local guides.

3. FAIR USE RIGHTS
Nothing in these Terms is intended to reduce, limit, or restrict any rights arising from fair use, first sale or other limitations on the exclusive rights of the copyright owner under copyright law or other applicable laws.

4. LIMITATIONS
The license granted in Section 2 above is made subject to and limited by the following express limitations:

(a) Schmap may only distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, and/or publicly perform the Photos pursuant to the Terms.

(b) Schmap shall be required to keep intact all copyright notices for the Photos and provide, reasonable to the medium or means of utilization, the name of the original author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, for attribution in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or by other reasonable means, and a credit (implemented in any reasonable manner) identifying the use of the Photos in any derivative Photos created by Schmap.

(c) Schmap shall, to the extent reasonably practicable, provide Internet link(s) to your Photos.

(d) Schmap shall not sublicense the Photos.

(e) Schmap shall indicate to the public that You reserve all rights with respect to use of the Photos.

(f) Schmap shall continue to make its destination/local guides available at no cost to end users.

(g) Schmap shall display the Photos at a maximum width of 150 pixels.

5. RIGHTS
You confirm that You own or otherwise control all of the rights to the Photos and that use of the Photos by Schmap will not infringe or violate the rights of any third parties.

6. NO OBLIGATION
Schmap shall have no obligation whatsoever to reproduce, distribute, broadcast, or otherwise make use of the Photos licensed by You to Schmap hereunder.

7. NO AFFILIATION
While the Flickr website and/or Flickr API have been used to short-list your Photos, Schmap claims no affiliation or partnership with Flickr.

8. MISCELLANEOUS
If any provision of the Terms is ruled unenforceable, such provision shall be enforced to the extent permissible, and the remainder of the Terms shall remain in effect. The Terms constitute the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the Photos licensed hereunder. There are no understandings, agreements or representations with respect to the Photos not specified hereunder. If there is any dispute about or involving the Terms or the license granted hereunder, You agree that such dispute shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to its conflict-of-law provisions. You agree to personal jurisdiction by and venue in the state and federal courts of the State of California, City of San Francisco. The license granted in the Terms may not be modified without the mutual written agreement of You and Schmap.
Click to expand...

Any opinions greatly appreciated. :)
 
I don't have any valid comment on this topic, but I'm interested in what the outcome will be!
 
Schmap generally trawl Flickr and use photos they like for their online travel guides - they're always very good about contacting people and crediting them, but you won't get any payment for the photos.

I've had one of mine used in their Paris guide last year. It's all much of a muchness; personally, I like to see my photos used, and being used by Schmap never did me any harm.
 
Had a couple of photo's selected. I let them use them as they weren't really that good and wanted to see if it generated many click throughs to my Flickr account. It didn't. I'll probably be declining their generous offers from now on.
 
I had one on their Tatton Park page and they kept me informed what was happening and a link through to the page. OK really but I thought they chose the weakest of the deer pictures on my flickr page :shrug:

Andy
 
I've also got one of mine in one of the London guides. Had a few click through links back to Flickr from it, but tbh hasn't really upped my profile in any noticeable way.
I was quite pleased that they actually bothered asking in the first place though.
 
And there was me thinking I was special. :p

The general concensus seems to be that it doesn't do any harm, so I've submitted it. Thanks for everyone's advice/comments/linkies. :thumbs:
 
Photo Plod said:
Schmap generally trawl Flickr and use photos they like for their online travel guides - they're always very good about contacting people and crediting them, but you won't get any payment for the photos.

I've had one of mine used in their Paris guide last year. It's all much of a muchness; personally, I like to see my photos used, and being used by Schmap never did me any harm.
Click to expand...

Ditto - one of mine from Venice was used recently.
 
I've had a couple of mine used (with my permission) They only use thumbnails, link back to the original page and credit you...no harm done and quite pleasing to be in there (for me at least :))
 
yoby said:
I've also got one of mine in one of the London guides. Had a few click through links back to Flickr from it, but tbh hasn't really upped my profile in any noticeable way.
I was quite pleased that they actually bothered asking in the first place though.
Click to expand...

Basically Schmap's robot just trawls the Flickr groups and sends out spam.Those who reply are told that their photo has been "chosen" to feature in one of their guides.

As Andrew says, they make money out of it but don't want to share - a great business model which is now being adopted by the mainstream media and which only benefits the publishers.
 
Dark Star said:
I've had a couple of mine used (with my permission) They only use thumbnails, link back to the original page and credit you...no harm done and quite pleasing to be in there (for me at least :))
Click to expand...


X2 - I've also had a couple used with no payment, but no harm done and you get credited on the site.
 
I've had one shortlisted from my trip to Boston in 2008, which as it was a bit of a stock shot I'm more than happy to let them use, I don't do this for profit (or even payment usually!) so no harm to me...
 
I think the photos get used for their online guides (which are free I tihnk?), I have a vague recollection of seeing the page where they used one of mine.

I had an email from them some time later saying that the guide was being re-issued and they were using it again.

As with the others who've posted the picture of mine that they used wasn't exactly the best ever - actually taken with my old powershot compact.
 
Craft said:
I think the photos get used for their online guides (which are free I tihnk?), I have a vague recollection of seeing the page where they used one of mine.

I had an email from them some time later saying that the guide was being re-issued and they were using it again.

As with the others who've posted the picture of mine that they used wasn't exactly the best ever - actually taken with my old powershot compact.
Click to expand...

The guides may be free, but Schmap aren't a charity, they're still making money off the back of pictures that they don't pay for...

The fact that many people say that their pic that Schmap "chose" wasn't a particularly good one is a clear indicator that they don't choose images at all, they simply take the ones they can get for free.
 
mark_farrell said:
I've had a couple of mine used. Neither were that good, so I didn't see any harm in it.
Click to expand...

Its no different from sitting outside your local Sainsburys with a couple of manky dogs and begging, while signing on and driving a Porsche.
 
well said about the pond scum, they used that trick on me, and i fell for it.
 
Nope, I got a very flattering message about 2 of my shots, I replied saying that I was honoured to be 'chosen', and if they wanted to use my shots they were more than welcome for my regular rate.

Funnily enough I never heard from them again ;)
 
I allowed them to use one last year. I was new to photography and still naive about that sort of thing. It was nice to see my image out there but I won't allow anything else to be used for free. I think I was called a disgrace or something similar by someone on this forum for allowing it to be used!

I've declined the request I received this year.
 
I got a request from them last year for their Brisbane guide. The photo was the only one on my flickr site taken with a compact point and shoot - terrible quality, but it was a close-up of a python in the wild so I guess it was the content rather than the photographic merit? Despite the fact that it was a crap photo, I wasn't tempted to give it away for free - I've read previous thread on here about Schmap and don't like what they do so declined their kind offer!

Behold the wonder of my 'chosen' photo:

4067184073_0e60944e64.jpg
 
I don't do photography for money, so I suppose it's easier for me to "give my photos away". The fact is that I'm posting my photos on Flickr for free, and anyone can view them, should they wish. So a small link on another website, with a credit, is really not doing any harm to me at all, and may only serve to get a few more people looking at my Flickr.

Flickr make millions, and they have a great many of my photos in their possession. They don't use them for their advertising, but anyone could search for "Chester Zoo" and find my snaps on there. That's not really any different to Schmap (taking into account that I'm a complete amateur), as far as I can see.

I can completely understand the stance the pros take though. If I were in it for money then I would be annoyed by their cheeky request. Probably. Although it's still more exposure. It could even be considered free advertising. :thinking: Isn't it benefiting both parties?
 
given that several people on this thread have said that the photos chosen by Schmap weren't exactly the greatest, I wouldn't consider it good advertising at all. But like most things, it comes down to personal choice - my personal choice is not to support a company that makes money by trawling photography sites for free photos.
 
That's a good point, actually. My Flickr has been used as a dumping ground for all of my photos for ages now, and a lot of them are just snaps from car meets I've been to over the past three years or so. It would be a different story if my Flickr was used for only me best stuff (which still isn't very good :D ).

My photo isn't the best, but it is one of my better ones. I am a noob. :)

As Photoplod said at the start, I'm just happy to see my photos used for something.

Maybe I'll change my mind if I ever turn pro.
 
And the people who are so precious about their photos being nicked choose to put them all on flickr where anybody can take them without even bothering to ask because ...
 
puddleduck said:
Frankly, I think a commerical organisation using spam and false flattery ("chosen" :lol:) is a pretty much pond scum.
Click to expand...

I think that comment sums up Schmap beautifully. They get away with it and more and more publishers are trying the same thing. Don't let anyone fool you - your pictures aren't chosen for any reason other than you are prepared to give your work away for an ego boost! Don't do it!
 
gingerjon said:
And the people who are so precious about their photos being nicked choose to put them all on flickr where anybody can take them without even bothering to ask because ...
Click to expand...

That way we can share them on here, get advice, and improve our photography. If I found a website using my shots, I'd send them an invoice.

You can't do that if you've given them away :)
 
andy_fozzy said:
This thread is going to get ugly :shake:
Click to expand...

Hopefully not, people are always going to be divided on this, as long as the mudslinging is kept to a minimum I'm sure it'll be fine :D
 
Anyone know a plumber. I will send him a mail saying how I love the way he joins pipes, and my house i am happy to put his name on all the pipes! See how ridiculous that is! You are doing the same thing giving work away.

These companies work like a lap dancer. They flirt with you, say how hot u r, take your money, and leave u with nothing to show for it except an inflated ego.
 
In my case...I'm not a professional...they were not images that I ever intended selling, they were thumbnails and as a noob (then) it seemed quite good (and flattering at the time) that someone would even want my images in their document/on their site. Ok a bit wiser now and although I still have no issue at all about the Schmap thing I would tend to pick my fights on who gets what of mine and who pays what.

Another flickr story below from last year that taught me its worth saying 'No, you're paying' sometimes (all the time?)

My Chicken Story :)
 
I read the first couple of pages, and the first post on page two I agree with entirely.

"Thanks again folks I just hope this encourages peoples to push for payment when it feels right !"
 
jerry12953 said:
Several people here have said that their pictures were used by Schmap and it didn't do THEM any harm.

What about those that are trying to earn a living from photography? Amateurs giving pictures away certainly harms them.....
Click to expand...

I don't really see it as "giving away pictures". It would be different if they were using a high-res image, without crediting me, and without linking to my Flickr page. I certainly wouldn't agree to allowing that for free.

They're using a thumbnail image, and it might get a few more people looking at my photos. A bit like being on the first page of Google Images if someone searches for "Chester Zoo". There would be a thumbnail image dispayed of my photo, and I wouldn't have billed Google for use of it. Not only that, they wouldn't have asked my permission, and I wouldn't have a credit next to the thumbnail either.
 
I have one in this years Hanover Guide.. taken with a point and shoot, while on a business trip at Lake Constance. Was of a play area near the Zeppelin Museum, why they put it as Hanover I will never know :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top