Getty Images is Changing Access to its Photos

Site FAQs, calendar of festivals and other helpful tools.
User avatar
Rick Lanham
Posts: 2054
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:16 pm
Location: Gainesville, FL

Getty Images is Changing Access to its Photos

Unread post by Rick Lanham » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:10 pm

The article at the link below says that Getty Images is allowing freer access to its images by others. It says that it will do this by adding credit information via an embed code. This will make it clear where the image is from, and allow them to gather info about where it is posted, etc. It also allows them, if things change in the future, to remove such access.

The article explains that a lot of their images have been being used without attribution anyway, so they may as well get the publicity from their use.

I tried searching for several people of interest on the Getty site, and could not find such embed information on those particular photos. So either I was unlucky, or it's not fully implemented, or I don't know what I'm doing.

In any case, it's something to be aware of: ... ree-to-use" target="_blank

"If you go to the Getty Images website, you'll see millions of images, all watermarked. There are more than a hundred years of photography here, from FDR on the campaign trail to last Sunday's Oscars, all stamped with the same transparent square placard reminding you that you don't own the rights. If you want Getty to take off the watermark, you'll have to pay for it.


Starting now, that's going to change. Getty Images is dropping the watermark for the bulk of its collection, in exchange for an open-embed program that will let users drop in any image they want, as long as the service gets to append a footer at the bottom of the picture with a credit and link to the licensing page. For a small-scale Wordpress blog with no photo budget, this looks an awful lot like free stock imagery.

It's a real risk for the company, since it's easy to screenshot the new versions if you want to snag an unlicensed version. But according to Craig Peters..." The rest is at the link.


Ken Viewer
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:01 am

Re: Getty Images Reacquired by the Getty Family.

Unread post by Ken Viewer » Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:05 pm

According to published reporting, including in the New York Post citing the Financial Times, a controlling interest in Getty Images, the joint that asserts copyright on what sometimes seems like everything, perhaps including The Book of Kells, has been reacquired by the Getty Family. Mark Getty, a grandson of J. Paul Getty, is to be the new CEO. A majority interest had been held by The Carlyle Group, which purportedly paid some $3.3 Billion for it , $500 million of which was in cash, about six years ago. Apparently it has not been a remarkably profitable venture for them. Mark Getty was one of the founders of the company some 23 years ago.

I've avoided embedding anything or downloading from their publicly-viewable site, instead using links to send people to them who might want to view certain footage/photos... they can afford to litigate any copyright claim they choose to at any time and I can't, nor would I want to. ... 1522415488


User avatar
Daniel D. Teoli Jr.
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:28 pm
Location: Born in L.A...NYC is 2nd home...Rustbelt is home base

Re: Getty Images is Changing Access to its Photos

Unread post by Daniel D. Teoli Jr. » Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:07 pm

Once in a while I blog on Getty. If they watermark them it is free advertising for Getty. Just don't remove the watermark.

https://danieldteolijrarchivalcollectio ... ty-images/

https://danieldteolijrarchivalcollectio ... ty-images/

In my case, it is for educational / editorial work aka fair use. In the worst case scenario I own nothing of attachable value, no real estate, just a few old cameras, outdated Epson ink jet printers and some 16mm VS reels. One of the few benefits of being underground and never making anything out of yourself.

User avatar
Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 11:06 pm

Re: Getty Images is Changing Access to its Photos

Unread post by Harlowgold » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:59 am

I also did not see anything to suggest one could get these images non-watermarked for free with the credit embedded. Perhaps this is going to be done sometime in the future. I did see though a lot of publicity photos issued by movie studios, tv networks, record labels, etc. on the site which Getty wants $450 each or so for you to use, pictures that are usually quite easy to find online or at the very least for sale in actual prints for $5 at Movie Star News, Movie Market, etc. On the right side it notes "ACCESS RIGHTS ONLY. This is a publicly distributed handout. Getty Images provides access rights only and does not license the copyright in the image". Also in the many actual candid shots (at premieres, events, etc.) I'm sure there were usually plenty of photographers taking almost duplicate shots so they may be presuming people are taking their images when they are not (and of such photos, one can often find original slides from such events on ebay for sale at usually no more than $8 each and often quite cheap in lots.)

If they would sell "rights" for non-professional use at like $5 a picture they could make a fortune. I mean who wouldn't want a candid of Lillian Gish, Lena Horne, and Cher together, or Dorothy Lamour meeting Garth Brooks, etc.

User avatar
Posts: 9483
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:31 pm
Location: Dallas, TX USA

Re: Getty Images is Changing Access to its Photos

Unread post by silentfilm » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:57 pm

Daniel, you are welcome to use any of the photos on my website, the Silent Film Still Archive without any payment. I would appreciate a credit if you use them. I also supply watermark-free scans for free to scholars writing articles or books or making documentaries. The only time I charge is if they need quite a few photos that have to be re-scanned at a high resolution.

Post Reply