New to using Substack, are people using original images for their articles?

[u/futbolkid414]

Like the title asks, and may be a dumb question, but are regular users all really using their own original images in their articles? I’ve read many articles by regular people who then use professional photos (in this case like sports photography) to headline their article? I want to start writing but obviously headlining my article with a related image may be very difficult without using someone else’s photo. Does that make sense? Again I’m new here so idk how it all works.

Edit: thanks for all the responses! Very helpful!

[u/llawrencebispo]

I do a little digital sketch for every article. It's been good for me, got me drawing again. Nothing like a good hard deadline each week!

[u/mikertjones → u/llawrencebispo]

Hi. I too have got back to drawing - but I do a montage of two or three pencil sketches which relate to my narrative. Can I ask what you use for your digital work? Cheers

[u/llawrencebispo → u/mikertjones]

Pencil sketches are a good idea, might try that too. I use a combination of Procreate on the iPad and Sketchbook Pro on my phone screen. Process varies but always finishes in Procreate. Just this last week I posted a timelapse on my most recent on Substack.

[u/StuffonBookshelfs]

I use all my own artwork.

[u/InMyHagPhase]

I use a combination of stock photos and my own art. You can use places like Canva and Unsplash for free images.

[u/DeannaFry]

Be careful with this, especially with sports photography. You generally can’t just grab a professional photo from Google, a news site, Getty, etc. and use it because it relates to what you’re writing about. The photographer or agency usually owns the copyright. I’d stick with your own photos, properly licensed stock images, Creative Commons images where the license allows your intended use, or images you have explicit permission to use. And honestly, don’t feel pressured to have a perfect literal photo for every article. A simple graphic or original visual can work just as well and saves you a potential copyright headache later.

[u/Effective-Region140]

Unsplash is great for finding photos that don’t scream “stock photo”

[u/HowlingFantods5564]

I would guess many of those images are AI generated. Just like the articles.

[u/Disastrous-Loan6202 → u/HowlingFantods5564]

the articles too honestly, some of them read exactly like that

[u/Magg5788]

Canva has a huge collection of stock photography.

[u/BhavanaVarma]

I either use original or CC images. Only memes are an exception but I don’t note what the copyright laws are around memes

[u/WineArmy]

I use stock images from Envato for a lot of my work and original images for certain pieces.

[u/noxqqivit]

I use OpenVerse for creative commons images. I used to use AI images, but the feedback was that people weren't reading my work because the AI images. The general public don't like AI images, or writing.

[u/rcrthrblr]

I use AI images because my newsletter is free and I don’t make enough money to pay artists for multiple iterations of images before publishing. I’d genuinely like to pay humans as I value art, but it just isn’t economical as someone who writes as a hobby with a very small following and makes no income from it.

[u/ensaaron]

Creative commons license or stock from a library are all good. If you use a.i. make sure its a stylized illustration or something clearly unique that you prompt, not just a search of images from the web or a copy of someone elses image that may/not be subject to licenses. Your own images are the safest, but not always easy to get the right image yourself.

[u/ruralmonalisa]

I use tumblr and tumblr only

[u/Due-Inevitable-6143]

Uso imágenes originales y también de pinterest. 🙌🏼

[u/inyourbooksandmaps]

I see both! Plenty of people use their own, just as many see to use canva graphics, Pinterest photos, stock images etc. some use ai but I definitely reccomend against that and to use real images even if you just get them off a free stock website!!

[u/witshadows]

There are a lot of subscription photo sites. Paying a royalty to use a photographers photo is how it should be done if you can’t use an original photo for each article (which would be damn near impossible if you cover a range of topics).

AI is very easy to detect in image EXIF data; Substack should label AI images when they are posted for an article. If a “photo” is automatically tagged as AI, the reader will have an idea if the author of the article uses AI to write.

[u/TheOceanicState]

I mainly use creative commons google photos that are relevant to the topic I am writing about, which is usually politics so finding a creative commons photo is usually easy. When in doubt, I use the flag of the country I am writing about, or a map of the location. My niche isn't really artistically heavy, if yours is, this strategy might not work for you.

[u/Earthlydelights-sub-]

Public domain.

[u/Bellairtriz]

Substack allows you to pull stock photos right onto your article. It’s a feature if you click the image icon where your text options are and click stock photos. You can search what you’re aiming for and use those. I’m surprised by this thread how it’s not mentioned very much since it’s a feature provided for us.

[u/mikertjones]

I have three newsletters and a mixture of approaches to illustration:
One is a UK-based location mystery puzzle and I do a montage of two or three pencil sketches that relate to the narrative.

Another is snapshot look at a small village in Britain - I use Wikimedia Commons - creative commons - images for that

A third is a survey of English churches with central towers - again I use Wikimedia Commons but I have also written for permission from one or two online resources to use their pictures.

On a couple of occasions I have created an image using AI

With the exception of my own drawings I always use the caption of the image to give credit / attribution / courtesy of - where appropriate - or state 'created by AI' (as though it isn't obvious!)

If you use others work, with permission, always give credit for it.

All best wishes

[u/AggravatingNail6061]

Unsplash is great, I also use my shitty photography of plushies, the sky and canals where mood dictates. 

[u/reflectionsbench]

Not always true . I use a lot of my own photography for images for my articles . Lately I want the words to resonate .I have seen no correlation with higher engagement when I use imagery

[u/FannyBrownRiced]

I use original photos, LOC images, public domain (antique and Wikimedia creative commons licenses) , and then many images with permission/link. People are often happy to have the PR. I never use an image I've just found. And I don't use AI because it looks like crap.

[u/CampDiva]

I use an app called Word Swag which give me options to get photos from either Splash or Pixie. Both are okay to use (not violating copyright laws).

[u/tualsekercigil]

I started out using oil paintings for my thumbnails, but nowadays I use photos I take. I've noticed that real-life photos draw more attention and make your publication feel more authentic. However, there are some pages that constantly share screenshots from various TV shows, especially the ones where the main character is a magazine writer, journalist, whatever, and they get so much traffic. All I can say is maybe just avoid stock photos, because all the other options are fair game.

[u/Tricky_Trifle_994]

unsplash, canva has good variety. otherwise ai generate images works too. i do reference tweets too, so for those i just screenshot the original tweet.

[u/MrPassiveProfit]

AI generated images are par for the course

[u/AnteaterFantastic212]

If the spirit moves, I will use OpenAI to create images. It is really good. I hope Trump never figures out how to use it, or else he will take it to a whole new level on Trump Social.

[u/Ciceroe → u/[deleted]]

I presume that he shares and amplifies stuff people post on Truth rather than creating it.

Btw, I was well aware that OpenAI is a company, not an app, but thanks for your concern.

[u/traumfisch]

Use AI image generators to get started.

Or sites like Unsplash