  |
|
|
|
Page 2
Dugald Stermer
In other news, Conde Nast sent contracts to illustrators that supersede any contracts already in place, claiming all rights to any imagery, any artwork, created at any time in the past, present, or future, in any medium whether print, digital, or that not yet conceived. This means there will be no money coming back to the artists for re-issuing and re-publishing of their imagery. So far 500 artists have sent letters of cancellation in protest. Getty, the huge stock imagery house, recently publicly stated, “The only thing standing in the way of our profits is the money we have to pay the artists.” This is quite simply an astounding statement in the eyes of any self-respecting freelance artist. The Washington Post has decided to phase out illustration in favor of photography because “illustrations disturb people.” Scientific American made the decision to go with all photography because it is “more contemporary.” Fast and Utne Reader may be cutting their illustration budgets. It seems too often that cutting edge = no illustration. To describe the frustrating state of the current market, Stermer told a story of a firm requesting a poster design. Through the means of a “contest,” they selected ten artists, asked them to create artwork on spec, selected one artist’s work, and bought all rights for a paltry $1,500. Unfortunately, this type of story is becoming all too common. In Stermer’s opinion, the trade press has been silent in its coverage of this state of affairs in the illustration market, despite proposals sent to publications to cover the issues. Therefore illustrators owe it to themselves to get involved, form coalitions, share ideas, and keep their influence strong to insure their future livelihood. In Summary |
|
|
|
