Spearhead

I raised the GDPR issue to Glenn a few months ago but he's no longer with photo.net. It's unclear who has responsibility for this at photo.net. The only possible action I know is that you can lodge a complaint with the National Data Protection Authority in your country.

http://spirer.com/images/cemlisboa.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/spotonfloor.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/themess.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/museumwindows.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/thebirds.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/laundryhall.jpg

The early Mavicas used jpeg and either BMP or gif.

http://spirer.com/images/posto9.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/terminalf.jpg

You don't sell your copyright. You license the images and retain the copyright. You can give them unlimited usage (which is what it sounds like they want) at some price. For pricing, you should charge for the shoot and for licensing. The licensing value should reflect what it's worth to them and to you. If these are just product shots, without models or composed sets, there isn't much value to you but there is to them. I've done product shoots and not once have I even thought about using more than an image or two as an example for another client, so the value is close to zilch to me. But to them, there may be a lot more value. So you need to figure out what it's worth.

Thanks. Fuji X-T2, 10-24 at 11mm. Fortunately taken when I arrived at the winery.

That may be some issue with your phone. I can access on two different devices with both Chrome and LastPass browsers.

http://spirer.com/images/portofuni.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/winewall.jpg Wall of Wine

http://spirer.com/images/reguahouse.jpg

http://spirer.com/dreamsweb/content/images/large/DSCF9387.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/twowindowslisbon.jpg

Sounds like a personal issue to me.

Or a CD.

This is where you draw the line: http://spirer.com/images/pencil.jpg

Concert photography is extremely tough when it comes to money making. Photographers fight over unpaid jobs, let alone the ones that pay. And getting paid for it generally requires a very strong portfolio. Quite a few publications now use fairly low quality snaps by their writers. Street photography isn't going to make anyone money. Sports photography pays, real estate photography pays, event shooting pays. All of these are basically "assignment" photography. If you have a studio, you can do portraits and product shots. Other than sports and maybe portraits, most of this is not "fun" photography, it's a grind and can be very technical. I did well with real estate photography, pay running $250/hour, but I was shooting in a high-priced market. Events paid well, but not that well but required a lot of automation in post, there was a learning process on that. Real estate and events paid on-time every time. Stock photography is a waste of time unless you have a specific niche that doesn't have a lot of photographs. Usually that requires specific access. At one point in time, I had the largest collection of muay thai photos from the US and did very well with it. But nature, lifestyle, architecture, etc., all those categories are filled with great photos.

I just use HDR for real estate photos. http://spirer.com/images/nightmare5.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/lisbomirror.jpg

http://spirer.com/images/courtyard1.jpg