Sourcing images: best practices and best sources
There's a whole universe of images out there, but you have to be mindful. (Courtesy of NASA.gov)
We consistently hear from the Argo-bloggers that the most difficult part of blogging is the visual component – telling your stories in pictures as well as words. It’s hard even before we get to the many legal and ethical pitfalls that most folks haven’t been trained on how to avoid. But we also know how incredibly valuable images are for storytelling, comprehension, punctuation, humor, delight and many, many other things. So each blogger has to figure out a strategy for acquiring and using images.
First, consider this.
Before I get to the sources, let me spell out two big questions you want to keep in mind as you think about using images from any source. (And remember, I’m not your lawyer. These are what I view as best practices, not legal advice. Always check with your counsel, and keep in mind your organization is responsible for what appears on your site.)
1. Do you have the right to use this image?
Again, I can’t offer you any legal guidance on whether you have the right to use a particular image. Every organization has a different threshold for what it considers fair use, permitted use and other questions of rights.
But it’s important for you to figure out what your organization’s threshold is, and to be scrupulous about acting within that threshold. Be certain you’re using images that your organization is willing to defend its right to use.
2. What are you trying to portray, and how faithfully does the image accomplish this?
Be careful to make sure your images are faithful to their context. The images you use are part of the journalism you perform, and you should always treat them that way.
Broadly, you might think in terms of two distinct contexts for the use of imagery - editorial and conceptual.
Editorial: Editorial images should always directly relate to the story at hand. Sometimes they’re referential, such as the use of a head shot in a post about a particular individual, or a product shot in a post about a product. Sometimes they actually represent the story, such as a shot of a local event you’re posting about. Often, the photo itself is the story. But if your post is about a protest against the construction of a particular mosque, for example, don’t illustrate it with a news photo of a union protest that happens to be in front of a mosque. That’s unrelated, and misleading.
Be especially mindful about using editorial imagery from others. Other than sources such as Getty and the AP that have up-front journalistic standards for image production, it’s difficult to be sure that an image hasn’t, for example, been manipulated beyond a journalistic threshold. When vetting images, you can lean on some of the same instincts you use in vetting any information you don’t obtain firsthand – triangulating between multiple sources (if a few different people capture a similar perspective of a place or event, that ups the likelihood that those representations are faithful), weighing it against your firsthand knowledge, and pursuing more info about how the image was created.
Be sensitive about using editorial imagery in which people are recognizable. Be extremely careful about using such imagery in a pejorative context (e.g. when writing about the commission of a crime).
Conceptual: The MintLife blog is the first example that comes to mind of a site where the vast majority of images are conceptual. In this context, images are intended to play off a theme or idea in a post, rather than represent a news event.
In most cases, conceptual imagery is less valuable than editorial imagery; a stream of endless stock photos can have a sort of dulling effect. But it’s also generally more available and poses fewer questions about accuracy in representation. And you can often use conceptual imagery to add a touch of humor to your posts, although make sure it’s appropriate.
One key to locating or producing conceptual imagery is not to be too literal; the whole point is that these images illustrate or punctuate a post rather than representing it directly. If Wired’s Threat Level can illustrate a post about a potential cyber-extortion scheme with stacks of Spam, you can figure out a way to visualize that wonky post about budget processes.
Make sure you clearly signal to your users which context an image appears in, using cues such as captions and image placement to convey your intent. (Rule of thumb regarding image placement: play news photos big, but let conceptual imagery serve as punctuation.) And whenever you feature a post, take a moment to consider how the post’s headline and the featured image will appear alongside each other without that additional context.
We want to uphold our organizations’ reputations as exemplars for ethics in all aspects of our journalism, including visual journalism. So ingrain these questions and ask them every time you make or use an image.
Now without further ado …
My five favorite image sources.
1. You
You are hands-down your own best resource for generating imagery. Try to plan regular occasions to get out and do some photowalks around your beat, and always take your camera with you during your field reporting.
An afternoon spent capturing photographs of your topic is never an afternoon wasted; Argo blogs feature a big, beautiful, Laura Brunow Miner-inspired slideshow function that allows you to play your best images big, and a good slideshow will always snag the attention of your crowd. When deciding how to prioritize field reporting vs. remote reporting and curation, consider the potential visual benefits of field reporting. If on-the-ground coverage is likely to yield some valuable visual journalism, give it some points on your priority list. (Related: Five great photography resources.)
Pros: Good editorial photography’s always terrific. Questions about rights and accuracy are much more scarce and easier to answer.
Cons: The most time-intensive way to source imagery. Requires training and trial-and-error.
2. Your organization
The Argo stations have access to a variety of image repositories. Some stations have substantial photo archives the bloggers can draw on. Others have agreements with image clearinghouses such as Getty, Corbis and the AP. (Typically, these agreements have a monthly maximum number of images stations can use online.)
Your organization also has a bunch of people who you can deputize as honorary photohounds. Loop yourself into morning assignment meetings and snoop on where other reporters are going to be. Is anyone going to be on location in an area where you need imagery, or interviewing an official who figures into your beat? Ask them to take a camera along and snap some shots for you.
Pros: Again, questions about rights and accuracy are easier to resolve when you’ve got actual contracts. And whenever you’re making good use of station resources, you’re saving yourself effort.
Cons: Can be difficult to sort out what you have access to. And surfing through a variety of image databases can really wear on your time.
Glenn Beck's recent "Restoring Honor" rally in DC. (ep_jhu / Flickr)
3. Flickr Creative Commons
The millions of images on Flickr licensed for public reuse are a real treasure trove, and Flickr’s “Sort by interestingness” feature lets you use the crowd as a deputy photo editor.
Flickr’s Creative Commons search works particularly well for finding conceptual imagery, or for shots of photogenic locations. Prominent local events – especially if you live in a town filled with techies – are also good candidates for the Flickr commons.
On the other hand, use good judgment when sourcing editorial photography through Flickr. Unless you’ve seen an event yourself, or a variety of photos from different photographers attest to the portrayal of a scene, it’s difficult for you to be certain a Flickr photo is an accurate representation.
Also, in some cases, folks upload images to Flickr that they found elsewhere and mark them as Creative Commons, even though the copyright isn’t theirs to set aside. It’s difficult to guard against that, but be vigilant. If a photographer has one amazing photo of a scene and no others from the same time or place, be suspicious.
Lastly, before you grab an image from Flickr, always double-check the license. It’s really easy to mistakenly think you’re searching the Creative Commons repository. Just scroll down on the image’s page and look in the lower right. Under “License,” it should read “Some rights reserved.” (And you should see icons that represent the specific terms of the image’s Creative Commons license.)
Pros: Super-quick to search, especially with the right tools. Some terrific photography, with a decent filter for quality. Especially good for conceptual imagery.
Cons: Licensing is murkier. Images aren’t always what they seem. Geo-specific photos can be hard to find.
4. Google’s publicly reusable image search
Google’s Advanced Image Search allows you to filter your search to images that are licensed for public reuse. This pulls in imagery from a pretty wide corpus of sources, including Wikimedia Commons and government websites.
The results are something of a grab bag, but this search is especially useful for locating images of government agencies or personnel, historical imagery, and other material likely to be in the public domain. Google recently redesigned the search results page to be much more scannable, which makes up a little bit for the lack of a “Sort by interestingness” filter.
Like Flickr, you should double-check the licensing terms for the image. Clicking on images from Wikimedia Commons will take you to a page that lays out the licensing terms that enable Wikipedia’s use of the image. Government websites often feature a disclaimer like this stipulating that all images on the site are public domain unless otherwise noted.
Pros: Wider variety of sources than Flickr.
Cons: No image quality filter. Otherwise, several of the same concerns Flickr poses.
5. Handout imagery
Companies and organizations often send out media kits with hi-res images depicting new facilities or products, or featuring mug shots or photos of company officials, with explicit permission for media outlets to use these images. If you’re writing about these things a lot, the company photos can be a boon.
Be especially careful about using an organization’s handout imagery in an editorial context. As a visual reference, that Apple-approved shot of an iPhone is probably fine. But keep in mind that the job of the company’s communications department is to make them look good. Even if an image looks like a news photo, it might have been staged.
Also, pay attention to the terms that handout imagery has been released under. While academic institutions and nonprofits can be pretty generous with their imagery, sometimes companies restrict the use of handout photography to media reports specifically about the accompanying announcement.
Pros: Convenient. Usually well-lit, hi-res, attractive shots.
Cons: Licensing can be tricky. Images depict the org in the best possible light.
Bonus: Special permission.
If you come across an amazing image that you would really, really love to use, you have one fairly low-key option at your disposal: ask the copyright-holder for permission to reuse it on your blog. Local photographers who copyright their images on Flickr will frequently give permission for their work to be reused when asked. Even newspaper photo editors have been known to sign off on requests to reuse the occasional local news photo.
This path poses questions of its own that only your organization can answer, such as What constitutes permission, and what form do we need it in? And tracking down the copyright-holder for an image can sometimes be a high-drama proposition. But remember that this is an option, if the image is worth it.
Pros: If you really love an image, it’s your pathway to glory.
Cons: Can be tough to track down copyright-holders. And when you do, they can always say no. And even if they say yes, you may need it in triplicate.
(Updated 8/31 to underscore the need to consult your legal counsel for guidance on all these matters.)
-
http://environmentreport.org/michiganradio.org Mark B.