* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

Mondolibrary discussion (cont'd)

continued from:

Dear LS community.

Thank you all for your constructive feedback. I will add, that it has been diverse. We have received messages and emails advocating for a variety of models. The result is what follows. Of course, we look forward to your comments; indeed, we welcome them.

Mondolibrary: a photo library targeting the nonprofit and public interest sector exclusively. It aims to be affordable to the client but fair to the photographer. It aims to have high end images for the demanding circumstance, and affordable imagery for less critical missions that could still benefit from relevant visual content.

The rate structure: The photographer has the option to set her or his own price within a price bracket. The price can be set on a photo by photo basis. We encourage photographers to aim higher rather than lower. While we realise discounting seems attractive, we support the needs of photographers to make a living and cover their expenses. Note, however, that our photographers accept to have a discount applied, at the discretion of mondolibrary, of up to 50%, when the image could serve the need of justifiably under-resourced organisations. These discounts will be rare and will have to be, as said, fully justified by the client. In short, most organisations will pay the asking price. We will divide the price matrix into three resolutions. Each resolution will have a minimum and maximum asking price. In other words, we will not accept to sell an image for less than the minimum price, nor will we sell above the maximum price. Here are the prices in USD:

Full res Max: $300 Full res Min: $30 Mid res Max: $100 Mid res Min: $20 Low res Max: $30 Low res Min: $10

The revenues will be split as follows: Mondolibrary percentage: 40% Photographer’s percentage: 60% Note that we considered a sliding split, but our current application cannot handle it to our satisfaction.

Now for the new news. We are going to create a new agency. Name: mondoagentia Urls: not live yet but mondoagentia.org/net/com Goal of the agency: promote select communications and media professionals to the nonprofit sector aiming to obtain maximum/pertinent fees. We will be selective and position the agency at the high end of the competency spectrum. Our goal is to represent top photographers, illustrators, freelance graphic artists, editors, translators, fundraisers, campaigners, trainers and strategic consultants. We may add/modify these categories slightly. We will likely adopt an escrow payment system to ensure both the client and the professional obtain transactional satisfaction. The agency will not be up and running for a few weeks. We want to do it right.

In both cases, one thing is certain, we will be putting the full weight of mondofragilis’ marketing into the mix.

Please note that mondolibrary does not yet reflect the statements made above. We want some feedback before modifying the paradigm online.

A final note. The application currently used for mondolibrary is temporary. We will be upgrading in a few months and will be able to offer far more to the community.

Over to the community…

by Giray at 2007-04-12 10:56:31 UTC (ed. Mar 12 2008 ) Annecy , France | Bookmark | | Report spam→

Giray, while you’ll never please everyone – and in the end of course it’s your business – I commend you for being flexible and engaged in this process. Not every photo startup would seek feedback the way you did then actually incorporate that feedback (practically in real time) to shape their business model. Again, not that everyone will agree with the revised model, but it certainly moved substantially in a positive direction.

I won’t nitpick details at this point. Overall it’s a far more attractive proposition than before. The agency component sounds like a winner. I think the part about mondolibrary applying a discount in certain cases for orgs with clear lack of funds is not a dealbreaker (at least for me), but certainly demands a level of trust between photographers and mondo. Just make sure to be very rigorous and transparent on this point, so you don’t jeopardize that trust.

Good luck and thanks again for taking so much time to listen and respond.

by Bill Crandall | 12 Apr 2007 14:04 | Washington DC, United States | | Report spam→
Hi Giary,
Just been reading all that was said on the previous post and I have to agree with Bill, you have done a marvellous job of bringing it all around. So much so that I am prepared to sign up

by Gary Austin | 12 Apr 2007 14:04 | Derby, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
We have decided to incorporate the changes. Michael, go for it. Start making the mods on the site.

by Giray | 12 Apr 2007 14:04 | Annecy, France | | Report spam→
Hi Giray, good on you guys for following this up. It’s starting to sound better.

I would add a few comments and hopefully we can hear back from some others that may be using your services in the future – and maybe from the other side of the coin as well, the buyers.

Firstly, I understand the motivation to avoid a licensing model as it would be a nightmare to track. But pricing by resolution doesn’t seem to me to properly reflect the mileage that an organization might get from an image.

For instance a mid or large sized NGO in a developing country might be looking for funding for a project and have, I dunno, 10 or 20 donnors they could approach. So say they print up 50 or 100 capability brochures or funding proposals to distribute to the various people within those potential donors. Maybe they even print it on a laser printer in their own office and they include some of your stock in black and white, but stuff that was shot on one of their projects a few years ago. Because it’s a hard copy they’ll need a higher rez image. Are they going to pay $100 or $300? The pricing set by the photographer is set for that particular image, not for that particular sale, is that correct?

And conversely, what if a large and well funded organization does an emailing, web or TV campaign – all they need is a low rez image but it goes world wide.

I know some of the larger organizations maintain their own libraries but perhaps they’ll find yours useful. Should there be a max price? Perhaps I don’t understand and you could explain this. I guess it works if you intend to service just a certain segment of that world and avoid a licensing approach.

I do see that you’re looking for a quick and click approach for your clients. I still don’t know exactly what the solution might be here but I’d say it could use a bit more tweaking.

As well, you’re still offering pictures for $10. potentially. Not to mention that they could be up on the web “one time” for the next 10 years?

What about having a default 1 year useage? Enforced by the honour system? These photos still have value (as evidenced by the demand you speak of) and that should be recognized by the client.

But I think it would be most useful to hear feedback from those that actually might use your services. I’m probably not within the group of the photogs that shoot that kind of stuff. It would be nice to hear from photographers in the developing world that are working in that sphere already and have more ideas and insight.

Gotta run. Thanks for listening Giray.

by Nick Westover | 12 Apr 2007 15:04 | Vancouver, Canada | | Report spam→
Great to see these posts going some where positive. I have lots to say but unfortunately not a lot of time right now. Will try to post something in the next few days. Nathan (quickly…. Nick’s proposal of a one year limit on useage sounds like a very reasonable compromise, welll worth thinking about!)

by [former member] | 12 Apr 2007 17:04 | Tokyo, Japan | | Report spam→
I too like the one year. My problem is ‘reality’. There is no way to associate an image to a date on a website. I cannot imagine any webmaster caring enough to keep track of all the images on a website to figure out which ones expire when. I think it’ll be a lose lose. We’ll lose clients who think it’s too heavy to manage and we’ll in any case get very few who manage to, even honestly, figure out which ones they owe money on. My two cents.
This said, and I’m about to contradict myself, if the software allowed it, which our current one does not, but future one could, we could send a friendly reminder at the end of the year. Hmm.

by Giray | 12 Apr 2007 17:04 | Annecy, France | | Report spam→
Giray, I think a friendly reminder at the end of one year is a good idea, particularly as a starting point to chasing up clients for their licensing fees (something that is, unfortunately, very neccessary). In my experience, although people do very much like to get away with as much as possible in regards to getting free photographs, a tap on the shoulder such as this can go a long way.

I’d like to also thank you for engaging so much with the LS community on this one, well done. I agree with Nick, though, that the complete ditching of any licensing model is problematic, particullry in regards to his example of potential use of a low-res image for web, TV and emailing campaigns. I’m aware of how hard this is to police, but can you add an extra ‘click’ step to your sales procedure where a client nominates a bracketed ‘print run’ of some description? Just like you have options for low-res, med-res and hi-res, you could have an option for ‘print runs’ of 500, 5000, 50 000, or maybe make it a bit more specific so the low-res option gives you a selection of website (one page); email to 1000; email to 10 0000; worldwide email/tv, or something to that effect. Then the med-re and hi-res also have specific options for the size of the ‘print run’.

Actually, it’s just come to mind that the Fotoquote software (http://www.fotoquote.com/) allows you to set up automated licensing options for your clients according to the resolution, what type of context it will be used in, the region it will be printed in, etc. Perhaps something like this will help you guys to set up an automated licensing system for your clients?

by Ed Giles | 13 Apr 2007 00:04 | Sydney, Australia | | Report spam→
Thanks for the app tip. Looking at it now though it seems to fall short on the multi photographer front. But we’ll try to integrate it. My problem is timing here. I think I do like the idea of at least knowing what they will do with the image. That’s a starter. Then, I like the idea of reminders. What I think I’m hearing is that the community, and photographers at large, who work for nonprofs, need a very flexible model. We’re on it. So we’ll start with what we have, modified as we’ve discussed previously and we will very quickly move towards a new, far more malleable solution. Stay tuned.

by Giray | 13 Apr 2007 05:04 | Annecy, France | | Report spam→
It seems to me (having read the original thread) and Giray’s update, that this kind of dialogue is exactly what makes LightStalkers as a community and outlet so profound and special, and that is a tribute to Teru’s genius, insight and trust……

that Giray and his organization has taken into account all the ideas (both positive and negative) that were drummed up during the initial conversation is indeed (to my thinking) testament to his credibility and character. It is an inspiring and affirming experience knowing that there is still (from time to time) a viable and meaningful (read: REAL) opportunity to create meaningful and valuable dialogue from which all parties can reach purposeful and significant goals and achievements. THIS IS WHAT COMMUNAL COOPERATION IS ABOUT. Not paddy-caking but real and thoughtful argument, negotiation and benefit. Were it that the greater widening world photography be as available, though like Teru, im a bit of an old man dreamer and i believe that the harnessing of all this technology can, in the end, still provide the vein of character we once all sought long before time, long before we grew wearied and disillusioned by the temeridy and callousness of the dawning world of bigbusiness and all the rest…..

that dusty bottle of bourbon still do pour, as someone once told me ;)))))

Great for all of you for contributing and to Giray for his frank and open willingness.

Best of luck y’all :)


by [former member] | 13 Apr 2007 05:04 (ed. Apr 13 2007) | toronto, Canada | | Report spam→
Ok, a few more thoughts.

My idea of 1 year honour system useage was intended to keep your system simple, Giray. I don’t know that you need to be chasing people down after 366 days. Maybe if the image is still being used after 13 or 15 or 18 months a friendly note could be sent saying, “we’re happy our images are working out for you….” etc. etc. And maybe your office can track this or maybe the photographers can – after all, they’ll know where their images have been sold, right?

In addition to the initial length of time I think it’s normal that additional segments of time, beyond the first, are discounted, so that could act as an incentive.

And regarding the discretionary discount of 50%…. if the cause is under-funded and worthwhile enough my images are free! But again, that goes back to my thought of somehow maintaining a relationship between the photo fee and the fee for media placement. If everyone is on board and donates their contribution to a project that’s cool. If the client is just trying to save a few bucks here and there and sees the photos as a way to do this (after all, anyone can take a picture!) then that’s not cool. Buying media space is generally by far the largest piece of the budget for print and broadcast. Web and in-house print runs would be an exception to this. That’s why pricing by the probable viewership is important. The more eyes that see an image the more work that image has done for its user and the more value it has to them.

So what about pricing by mileage, as it were, and any discounts to be somehow tied to the media buy or the resources of the organization? And developing country organizations get preferential treatment here.

I’m still opposed to $10 photos. You are offering a specialized service that you’ve said yourself they can’t get elsewhere. And besides, with all this extra complexity in your system you’re going to need to charge more! : )

People understand the restrictions of this sector and aren’t asking for western magazine rates. But there is real value to what is being provided – it’s worth more than some people’s daily latté budget.

And finally, I like the sounds of your two agencies generally. I do hope that with both you will engage as many local photographers around the world as possible. These are the people to whom the rates we are speaking about will make a difference and it would seem there’s a natural symbiosis between you.

Looking forward to hearing more.
Regards, Nick

by Nick Westover | 13 Apr 2007 09:04 | Vancouver, Canada | | Report spam→
If you go to www.masterfile.com and register for an account and then go to their price calculator you’ll see a nice simple layout that gives immediate feedback on pricing various usages. I’m sure other stock agencies have a similar page, I just know of this one.

It sounds like one of the stumbling blocks is getting clients that may not be entirely IP savvy to go through what they may see as an onerous process when they just want a quick download. I think this page is really straightforward. It ties a usage to a price that changes as you change the variables of the usage. And it shows the price increasing as you increase the visibility of the image.

Obviously the prices would be lower in Mondolibrary’s case and there would be some different parameters but I think it clearly illustrates the changing value of a picture depending on its prominence.

Hope that helps.

by Nick Westover | 13 Apr 2007 10:04 | Vancouver, Canada | | Report spam→
So what is happening at this place? They were looking for an assignment shooter 6 months ago and said they were doing a revamp of their site. We have been waiting 2 years for a "voucher"program to be kicked off but no word. Anyone heard about sales being made here?

by John Brown | 11 May 2010 12:05 | | Report spam→
Hi John. Giray here.
It’s been a tough slog. We’re still at it and we’re not giving up. What we realize we need more than anything is additional visibility and then to create a reflex among the communications staff in the UN system and civil society. Basically, we needed to get the word out far beyond our existing clientèle. There is a ‘plan’ but it’s been, like I said, a longer tougher slog than I had originally thought. I really thought we would have an amazing public interest photo library and people would ‘run’ to it. As it happens, we have been selling, some photographers more than others. But it’s definitely not what it should be.
So what is ‘the’ plan? If you go to our main site http://www.mondofragilis.net, you’ll see that we are launching a new company called ‘causing change’. That company is a media company with our own magazines, television programming, etc. The media will be distributed throughout the UN system and civil society. As it happens, the first issue will likely be ready for mid-fall. After that, the plan is to roll out issues and editions regularly. I’m counting on these new publications to be the marketing venue we need. I’m also thinking of organizing a gallery exhibit at the UN in Geneva and New York in the fall. If I can pull that off, it’ll give us good visibility there too. Last but not least, I’m reviewing the pricing model. We are definitely price competitive (not istockphoto, but that’s not what we want to be either!!!). But I’m trying to propose some form of volume package for organizations that need a bigger package. Oh yes, one more thing. I’m hoping to find a better application for the store. The one we use is ok, but it does not do some of the things we’d like it to. We’d love it to handle custom jobs. We feel there is a major need to be able to sell the custom services of our photographers. A couple of years back we had announced our mondoexperts site. We had actually built it… it’s actually online. But I could not find anyone to run it. As it happens, we have just hired a new young lady whose job it is to run mondoexperts (amongst other things). I have my first meeting with her regarding the site in a couple of days. If she gets the hang of it quickly, we may find ourselves being able to use it sooner rather than later. If you want to see the beta version, it’s at experts.mondofragilis.net.
Anyway, enough words, actions matter more. We’re not giving up. Best I can say!

by Giray | 11 May 2010 15:05 | Annecy, France | | Report spam→
I think you might want to check these reports out Giray.


Cheers JB http://johnbrownphotos.blogspot.com/

by John Brown | 13 May 2010 08:05 | | Report spam→
Thanks John. Looked at some of the reports. Very useful.

by Giray | 13 May 2010 08:05 | Annecy, France | | Report spam→
IM NOT SURE THIS FIRM IS STILL IN BUSINESS NOW. Their web page says their 2011 calender is ALMOST READY! I have had photos in the pending queue for SIX WEEKS!

I emailed support over a month ago but thus far…..no reply. Their “Photographer” count is 55 on the site but I can only find 38. The weekly sales updates in the photographer forum…..well…..there hasnt been any for two years.

And that photographer forum…..its gone……the last time I checked it, it was internal company communication. Stuff like who went out for coffee.

Does anybody know what happened to these people? They asked us to dump our prices about 6 months ago…….but nothing from them in the last 5 months. RIP?

by John Brown | 29 Apr 2011 05:04 | | Report spam→
Im serious. Some of my photos have been in the pending queue for 3 MONTHS! WTF? And oh yea….the calender for 2011 is ALMOST READY!!! Guess they are trying to save trees with a 6 month or 3 month version.

Has anybody heard from these people? They came here and spammed a bunch of us about 3 years ago and a discussion began…..but that original post has been deleted. They said they were going to be a sponsor of LS. Anybody seen that?

I think the guy who runs this outfit is full of crap…..and I have to say it out here because the site does not respond to customer photographer’s questions, nor does he respond to private messages here on LS.


by John Brown | 22 Jun 2011 02:06 | | Report spam→

Today I clicked on the monodo library link from their main mondofragalis page


and I get this message


You don’t have permission to access / on this server.

Anyone else having problems with this website? How long are your photos in pending?

Do yo get the forbidden message?

Are your questions to support ever answered?

I found the original post through a google search. Here it is.


Yea, I’ve heard of it. The question is, have they heard of us?


by John Brown | 26 Jun 2011 05:06 | | Report spam→
What kind of people would operate a stock photography agency and tell their contributors that all of the photographs have been destroyed without an explanation?

Here is an email I received from Richard Petit (richard.petit@mondofragilis.net)on June 27th, 2011

Good morning.

In response to a question posed by one of the mondolibrary photographers, we can confirm that
all the digital information stored on www.mondolibrary.net has been completely destroyed.
It is completely impossible to source a photo from our platform for any purpose.

To simplify the responses and for the benefit of all photographers, we will provide our answers to your questions to the whole group.

We remain at your disposition.

The mondolibrary team

Bonjour à tous.

Suite à la question d’un photographe de mondolibrairie, nous tenons à vous confirmer que
la totalité des données numériques stockées sur www.mondolibrary.net a été totalement détruite.
L’utilisation ultérieure d’une photographie est totalement impossible par le biais de notre plateforme.

Pour simplifier les réponses et faire profiter l’ensemble des photographes, nous faisons des réponses groupées.

Nous restons à votre entière disposition

l’équipe mondolibrary

Is this the way to treat people?


by John Brown | 03 Jul 2011 03:07 | | Report spam→
So on July 4th, 2001 I finally get this email from Mr. Petit.

Dear Mr Brown

Due to considerable operational difficulties, mondolibrary has not been live since the 24th June 2011.

From your message, I gather that you had been waiting for a response from us and for this I am extremely sorry.

We took the decision to close this platform in order to avoid this type of problem and not neglect our photographers who have been with us for a number of years.

I hope you will have the opportunity to collaborate with other structures that are able to serve you better.

Best wishes for the future.

Richard Petit

Dear all

Over the past few years you have been providing your photographs to mondolibrary, the image bank dedicated to the public interest. You have helped to create an important sector-specific resource that is appreciated for its high quality.

Despite the interest that this site arouses, we have faced serious difficulties in running it and unfortunately we cannot continue with it. We have had to take the difficult decision to close it down completely in order not to neglect our clients and partners.

It has been a great pleasure to run this common platform and we are sincerely sorry that we cannot continue to work with the talented individuals that we have gathered here.

We wish you all the best for the future.

mondolibrary team

www.mondolibrary.net will be shut down on Friday 24th June 2011.

My question to Mr. Giray is why didnt you let photographers know what your intentions were BEFORE you closed the site down? And I mean YOU. Not Mr. Petit, who I have never heard of. YOU Giray were going to be a sponsor of Lightstalkersers. YOU havent logged in here for a YEAR! YOU were going to start Mondoagencia. YOU were going to appeove photos in the upload queue. YOU were going to upload more of your own photos (or so YOU SAID) 4 years ago.

Giray, YOU are full of more hot air air than a Loi Krathong balloon on a cool autumn night in Chiang Mai. That you marched out poor ol Mr. Petit to clean up after your circus act is not what photographers expect from a stock photo agency.

You could learn a lot about how to communicate from a very classy Lightstalker,Allen Murabayashi http://www.facebook.com/allenmurabayashi
who shut down the Photoshelter Stock Collection with respect for and communication to photographers and customers alike.

He was up front with us, not hiding under his momm’s Hawaiian muu muu.


by John Brown | 07 Jul 2011 02:07 | | Report spam→

Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
Feed-icon-10x10 via RSS
Icon_email via email
You can unsubscribe later.

More about sponsorship→


Giray, Producer / Photographer Giray
Producer / Photographer
(Messages must cause change)
Annecy , France ( GVA )
Bill Crandall, Photographer Bill Crandall
Washington Dc , United States
Gary Austin, Photojournalist Gary Austin
(British Photojournalist)
Derby , United Kingdom ( EMA )
Nick Westover, Photographer Nick Westover
Vancouver , Canada
Ed Giles, Photojournalist Ed Giles
Sydney , Australia
John Brown, Photojournalist John Brown
[undisclosed location].


Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2015 November Eleven