[Dipsoid]

I think most of you miss one point - this kind of promotion, if you win the lens for testing, will not promote just Irix, but also you. I'm sure more people are watching Irix page on FB, than mine. Not to mention that those photos will be reproduced on many pages, probably not always with info about author, but at least sometimes. In that case it will promote this person quite a lot. If photography is bussiness for you, it can be quite good marketing, if it's only hobby, I would be realy happy to see few thousands people watching my FB page insted of current 100+
So, if i was into macro more than few shots a year, i'm sure i would try to participate.

The good old "exposure" angle:
You're doing it for the EXPOSURE - The Oatmeal

I think the point is for this company to get marketing material from photographers without having to pay actual photographers to produce work for them. This is why artist labor is so undervalued, because so many artists are willing to give their work away for free. If the toilets broke at Irix's HQ, I'm sure every plumbing company in the region would be lining up to fix them for all of the promotion they would get. It would only be good marketing. Ask any non-creative to produce work for you for "promotion" and watch them laugh in your face.

[travelswsage]

The good old "exposure" angle:
You're doing it for the EXPOSURE - The Oatmeal

I think the point is for this company to get marketing material from photographers without having to pay actual photographers to produce work for them. This is why artist labor is so undervalued, because so many artists are willing to give their work away for free. If the toilets broke at Irix's HQ, I'm sure every plumbing company in the region would be lining up to fix them for all of the promotion they would get. It would only be good marketing. Ask any non-creative to produce work for you for "promotion" and watch them laugh in your face.

Well said! Hell, I can't even get an electrician out here when paying …. This goes hand in hand with all the product companies who run contests but keep rights to all the photos entered -- one prize offer and they have all the photo rights they need for years, effectively cutting photographers out of the business equation.

[RobA_Oz]

The good old "exposure" angle:
You're doing it for the EXPOSURE - The Oatmeal

I think the point is for this company to get marketing material from photographers without having to pay actual photographers to produce work for them. This is why artist labor is so undervalued, because so many artists are willing to give their work away for free. If the toilets broke at Irix's HQ, I'm sure every plumbing company in the region would be lining up to fix them for all of the promotion they would get. It would only be good marketing. Ask any non-creative to produce work for you for "promotion" and watch them laugh in your face.

I doubt many successful commercial/professional photographers would be interested in doing this, if any. On the other hand, there are plenty of keen hobbyists whose work would be good enough to demonstrate the virtues of the new equipment, and who probably wouldn’t mind having a “loaner” for a month to try it out. I suspect Ricoh does this with their new cameras, judging by the standard of many of the photos they submit with a new camera launch.

On the other hand, I doubt there are many amateur plumbers around who’d be willing to chance their arm at fixing someone else’s toilets, even licensing aside, for free. I do my own all the time, which qualifies me to speak on the subject, but I wouldn’t go near anyone else’s, even for money. I know you were making a point with that example, by the way, and I concur in general (unpaid “internships” I particularly loath).

[mee]

I think most of you miss one point - this kind of promotion, if you win the lens for testing, will not promote just Irix, but also you. I'm sure more people are watching Irix page on FB, than mine. Not to mention that those photos will be reproduced on many pages, probably not always with info about author, but at least sometimes. In that case it will promote this person quite a lot. If photography is bussiness for you, it can be quite good marketing, if it's only hobby, I would be realy happy to see few thousands people watching my FB page insted of current 100+
So, if i was into macro more than few shots a year, i'm sure i would try to participate.

I understood that fully when I commented initially. But that is the same awful comment corporations try to make when they ask people on twitter or facebook for use of people's art for their promo campaigns. You're telling me a multi-million dollar company cannot afford to offer a 600 dollar lens to a few winners in a contest they're holding? Instead we'll give you a little promotion. hahaha no no that's cheap and unsatisfactory behavior on the company's part.

They can pay in a better form than simply promotion... in this case.. in offering one of these lenses as payment (or err reward).

[Doundounba]

FWIW, you don't need to send your pictures to them, just post them on your own social media account and tag them appropriately. The contest announcement page is devoid of small print, AFAICT. I don't think publishing something on your own social media gives anyone else rights to (legally) use the images commercially in any way. If you win and Irix wants to use your images - either the ones you posted to win or the ones you'll take with the loaner - they'll have to negotiate something with you separately from the contest. Again, that's AFAICT.

[photoptimist]

I understood that fully when I commented initially. But that is the same awful comment corporations try to make when they ask people on twitter or facebook for use of people's art for their promo campaigns. You're telling me a multi-million dollar company cannot afford to offer a 600 dollar lens to a few winners in a contest they're holding? Instead we'll give you a little promotion. hahaha no no that's cheap and unsatisfactory behavior on the company's part.

They can pay in a better form than simply promotion... in this case.. in offering one of these lenses as payment (or err reward).

A give-away is a bad idea. Giving away the lens will just attract people who plan to eBay the lens on day 1 rather than take and post pictures with it. By contrast, the 1 month rental increases the likelihood that the people that enter the contest will be the kind of people who take and post pictures during the early days of the product's launch when that could help drive buzz and sales.

It's up to each entrant to assess whether they will come out ahead by participating in the contest. If one a fan of Irix, has a few decent macro shots gathering dust on a hard disk, and would like to see if the new lens is worth it, then the question of entering the contest is an easy "yes."

[mee]

A give-away is a bad idea. Giving away the lens will just attract people who plan to eBay the lens on day 1 rather than take and post pictures with it. By contrast, the 1 month rental increases the likelihood that the people that enter the contest will be the kind of people who take and post pictures during the early days of the product's launch when that could help drive buzz and sales.

It's up to each entrant to assess whether they will come out ahead by participating in the contest. If one a fan of Irix, has a few decent macro shots gathering dust on a hard disk, and would like to see if the new lens is worth it, then the question of entering the contest is an easy "yes."

Then you are telling Adam that his K-1 giveaway this summer was a bad idea. After all, anyone entering that contest could have ebayed the camera had they won.

Yet they don't care who enters the contest just as long as the images are high quality enough.. and that is how it should be. Whether they keep the lens or sell it afterwards is entirely up to them (provided they were doing the right thing and awarding a lens for keeps).


Of course it is up to each entrance to assess whether they will come out ahead by participating in the contest, but it is silly to think that the contest isn't weighted in favor of the company. They're not looking for crummy snapshots of flowers and cats like we commonly see on here and other hobby sites.. but are picking the best of the best macro shots they can find (in hopes of getting some promo shots out of it for dirt cheap to them). You're working for the company.

[BrianR]

Of course it is up to each entrance to assess whether they will come out ahead by participating in the contest, but it is silly to think that the contest isn't weighted in favor of the company. They're not looking for crummy snapshots of flowers and cats like we commonly see on here and other hobby sites.. but are picking the best of the best macro shots they can find (in hopes of getting some promo shots out of it for dirt cheap to them). You're working for the company.

What exactly do you think you're agreeing to by entering the contest?

As far as I know, putting a hastag on an image on social media isn't giving anyone consent to do anything they want with the image. Additionally, the images people are entering are not likely going to be taken with an Irix lens, so what are the chances Irix is going to want use them in their marketing materials?

[mee]

What exactly do you think you're agreeing to by entering the contest?

As far as I know, putting a hastag on an image on social media isn't giving anyone consent to do anything they want with the image. Additionally, the images people are entering are not likely going to be taken with an Irix lens, so what are the chances Irix is going to want use them in their marketing materials?

It isn't those images they want... those are just a means to judge your abilities. After you get the Irix lens for the rental period the fun begins..

[clackers]

Traditional marketing … paying a roster of professionals to showcase their work … is expensive and may or may not achieve sales objectives in the camera industry as it stands. Part of the reason Kenspo came over to do his stint with Pentax was that Nikon were laying off such people left, right and centre a few years ago.

This sort of guerrilla campaign assumes that a large enough number of amateurs with good equipment and proud to do work without being paid will generate a showcase gallery that's relatable … that stunning bug picture was taken by an 'Uncle Bob'!

And Uncle Bobs would be the target audience, too, not pros.

[fs999]

Can the tripod collar be removed ?

[gaweidert]

Can the tripod collar be removed ?

Yes. On the B&H website it is listed as part of what's included in the box.

[photoptimist]

Then you are telling Adam that his K-1 giveaway this summer was a bad idea. After all, anyone entering that contest could have ebayed the camera had they won.

Yet they don't care who enters the contest just as long as the images are high quality enough.. and that is how it should be. Whether they keep the lens or sell it afterwards is entirely up to them (provided they were doing the right thing and awarding a lens for keeps).


Of course it is up to each entrance to assess whether they will come out ahead by participating in the contest, but it is silly to think that the contest isn't weighted in favor of the company. They're not looking for crummy snapshots of flowers and cats like we commonly see on here and other hobby sites.. but are picking the best of the best macro shots they can find (in hopes of getting some promo shots out of it for dirt cheap to them). You're working for the company.

No, Adam's goals were totally different than Irix's goals. Adam wanted (and got) a lot of traffic and activity on PF which probably directly boosted ad sales and possibly even helped ad rates if it helped push PF into some high-traffic category. Adam did not care what the winner did with the prize although the K-1s do seem to have gone to people who will enjoy them.

"Weighted in favor" makes it sound like this is a zero-sum game, as if the only way for Irix to win is for entrants to lose. But the entrants can win, too. The value of the borrowed lens + the fun of winning + "exposure" + supporting a liked brand can vastly exceed the cost of posting some macro images that the person was probably going to post anyway. To the right kind of person, the cost is zero, the opportunity is high and thus the contest is also weighted in their favor, too.

Absolutely no one is being forced or even slightly coerced to participate. It really is a free market situation. As such, Irix has proposed a deal that benefits Irix and anyone who looks at the deal can decide whether it benefits them, too.

[mee]

No, Adam's goals were totally different than Irix's goals. Adam wanted (and got) a lot of traffic and activity on PF which probably directly boosted ad sales and possibly even helped ad rates if it helped push PF into some high-traffic category.

And that is different than what Irix want out of this contest in what way? That's exactly what they want here too! They are trying to build interest in their product while simultaneously finding cheap labor to advertise the same product.

Adam did not care what the winner did with the prize although the K-1s do seem to have gone to people who will enjoy them.

Then giveaways aren't a bad idea by your own admission.

"Weighted in favor" makes it sound like this is a zero-sum game, as if the only way for Irix to win is for entrants to lose. But the entrants can win, too. The value of the borrowed lens + the fun of winning + "exposure" + supporting a liked brand can vastly exceed the cost of posting some macro images that the person was probably going to post anyway. To the right kind of person, the cost is zero, the opportunity is high and thus the contest is also weighted in their favor, too.

Maybe it sounds like a zero-sum game to YOU. But that part is all in your head. 'Weighted in favor' doesn't mean 'Entirely in their favor' it means 'Weighted in favor' nothing more nothing less.

IMO - The value of the borrowed lens is minimal since that has minimal value. The fun of winning is minimal since your reward is minimal. Exposure is a minimal, fleeting object that every company wants to give since it costs them little to nothing. Common Joes freely supporting a brand also costs the company nothing so again there is minimal value there too. So these events have high upside, low downside for the company.

Perhaps John Q Public thinks otherwise, then go for it. I'm not stopping them...

Absolutely no one is being forced or even slightly coerced to participate. It really is a free market situation. As such, Irix has proposed a deal that benefits Irix and anyone who looks at the deal can decide whether it benefits them, too.

Well we both agreed to this before we discussed this. So I'm not sure what your angle is...


All I said (as a number of other folks here also said -- watch the Dipsoid linked comic [crude language warning though]) was Irix's proposed deal is a poor one for entrants. With all due respect, If you have a problem with how I feel then that is your problem, sorry. But you're not changing my mind on this matter and I'm allowed to hold my own opinion, even if it is contrary to yours.

[BrianR]

After you get the Irix lens for the rental period the fun begins..

Do you know what the winners have to do for Irix? You've already decided this is a raw deal for the entrants, so I'm assuming you know what the winner will be obligated to do and that this is less valuable than a one month rental?

I'm all for reading the fine print and figuring out if what you're giving up is worth what you're getting. I'm opposed to making assumptions and assigning values to unknown things. Maybe they are going to demand a credit card before sending you the lens (how will they ensure it's returned?) and demand you write a glowing 2000 word review of the lens plus hand over the rights to a dozen awesome photos. Maybe they're relying on the contest itself to generate some free buzz and will put no obligation on the winners. Who knows? I don't.