I believe that the XP hill and sky image was bought for something like $100.000 – $150.000

I am not allowed to re-sell those pictures to any other party, but i have the right to use them personally and display them however i want.

MS has the right to do whatever they want with the 5 photos they commissioned (but authors must be credited)

MS has the right not to use any of the photos commissioned at all, if they wished. (in my case, they only used 2 out of the 5; while they only used 1 photo from each of the other photographers).

if they wish, they can use the images in other areas, not just as desktop wallpapers, this includes packaging, website, ads, …. .

the most important was, the whole deal was done for a flat fee…. there is NO compensations for how many times they use the pictures… so no “royalties”? (isn’t that what it’s called?)

so, in my opinion, it was a fair deal, sure if could have been better!… but still good. so no regrets what so ever.

One thing some photographers seem to be curious about with this issue is what kind of license was granted to Microsoft for these images. Did you give them all rights or did you grant them some other license?

I’m not going to hound you into answering, but if you want to share, that would be great and I’m sure a few people would be interested to hear about what kind of arrangement you made with them.

Thanks again!

I just wanted to mention that, Microsoft did their homework. Before the approached any of the amateurs they looked around in the industry to know how much an average job like this would cost. They pretty much matched what an agency would pay a pro photographer for an average 10 day shoot. Although I was clearly told by MS that it didn’t have to take 10 days, I could have shot all of those images on one afternoon and that would have been ok.

bottom line is the pay, in my opinion, was good. But the offer went beyond all of that… it was all about exposure!
I honestly dont think my images are the best out there… they are simply NOT!
so if MS comes to me and tells me they want me to go on a photoshoot for them … to have my work displayed in Windows… I wouldn’t think twice about it, and I don’t think a pro photographer would either. MS could have went with anyone they liked… fortunately for me, they offered it to me! why would I turn it down?

I’m doing my hobby, doing something I like, and having fun doing it. Along side all of that, I’m getting paid well to have fun, and getting massive global exposure on top of it.

honestly, the offer was fair. and I dont think I would regret anything about it ….. like the DOS guy! – ((once again, I quote Long’s response above)).

It’s also good to hear that this likely wasn’t a case of a corporation taking advantage of a photographer.

Hamad Darwish did not surrender all his rights to Microsoft. He was commissioned to do a photoshoot, which he did and chosen 5 images to Microsoft for approval. Microsoft then paid a commission for these 5 images as anyone would when purchasing images from anywhere.

Simply put, Microsoft sourced photos from both professional services and amateurs. If you think there is a hidden agenda here, then you need to conspiracize elsewhere.

(Insert NO!SPEC link and image here.) : )

You’re right. Microsoft wins here and the photographer loses. At the same time, so do pro photographers.