Posted by Carie
Ok, he does – he totally called it.
I was uploading some photos to my Flickr account today and noticed someone had commented on one of my photos from an MS Walk I participated in on April 13. The comment was, “Hi, I’m an admin for a group called Intl Multiple Sclerosis Fundraising Events, and we’d love to have your photos added to the group! 
”
Needless to say, I promptly joined her Flickr group and added all of my photos from the Seattle Walk – took me about ten minutes (including titles and tagging). Sound familiar? It’s a combination of Shirky’s description of the Brooklyn Mermaid Parade photo compilation via tagging and the motivators to participate in Wikipedia (since it took additional action on my part to join the group and add my photos manually).
Why did I do it? Mostly because she asked me to with smiley face – and because it cost me very little time or effort. Do I really care if she compiles tons of photos in her group? Not really. Will I visit the group regularly now that I’ve joined it? Probably not. However, the tools were available to me to make it easy, thus the cost was miniscule, and she asked nicely, so I did it.
Ironically, as I was writing this post I became curious to see where she’s from, since it could be anywhere on the planet (she’s from Montreal Canada) and her profile says she has MS. So now, I’m glad that I helped her build up her Flickr group for International MS Fundraising Events and that I did something nice for a complete stranger - but it’s also pretty interesting that I did it before I read her profile!
I wonder if the group admin has de facto right to publish your photos elsewhere since you posted your photos on her page. I imagine she does not have that right, but I can also imagine a court interpreting that such an infringement was accidental.
It is because of sites like Flikr and iStock Photo that I question my future as a photographer. Even if an amateur makes one good photo their entire life, that soon adds up. Therefore is it inconceivable that almost every photo imaginable will eventually be free or nearly free to acquire?
It is partly due to the long tail aggregation of near free/free photography that I have started moving in new directions. I don’t want to be the last one off the ship.
-Kirk
Kirk,
In my group, a new director started his this week. Prior to Microsoft, the bulk of his professional career was spent at Kodak. He introduced himself to the team and then opened the meeting to Q&A. I took my turn and explained that I believed a fundamental shift had occured in the way content was produced and that a significant power shift has occured. This power shift means that now the production of content is in the hands of the consumer rather than the producer or publisher. I asked him what he thought of that.
He went on to explain that he had been in charge of film development at Kodak. He was responsible for the U.S. infrastructure that supported the “drop off your photos at the grocery store and get them back in a week” thing. When digital photography arrived, he began to warn his management that their film development business would dry up in six years. They would not believe it. They couldn’t believe that a multi-million dollar industry could go away in six years. They did not change. As it turns out, he was wrong. It didn’t take six years. It was gone in three. I thought that was an interesting answer.
All of us that are in the business of content production need to know that the power base has shifted. Welcome to the lifeboat.
Mark