[ToddJ]

"Free to all" has it's problems too. Model releases, property releases, under age subject etc... It's called liability. Working with a real professional gets you security in permissions and usage that's negotiated and understood.
Don't get more than you paid for in trouble. Ask Virgin or Gateway. They know the cost of royalty free and creative commons. When you have something worth protecting like a brand or a reputation, why would you leave yourself open to having a competitor or an entity you are not aligned with use the same image. If you are a Designer or Art Director working with a client, why risk your reputation to get something free. Have the client pay for something they can bank on, not go for the free image that anyone can use for anything they want. Nobody will notice that their competitor used the image... on the internet everyone notices. When the blogs get hold of the news, you'll be all over them. Step up and hire a quality custom image or at least pay for the use to reward the creativity, effort and expense of what it takes to create something. There are many resources that explain the value of working with a professional. Start here http://www.asmp.org/commerce/buyer.php
Good luck and reward creativity and professionalism whenever possible. Strive to work with the people who have both traits.

[neutrino23]

In my experience the free or low cost photography sites fill a need not met by the professional photographers. There are many people who have little or no budget to start with. I sometimes make short run brochures (100 copies) for my sales group. I also prepare presentations for small groups. I don't mind paying $10 or $20 dollars to istockphoto.com or other places for legal images that I can use in these cases. If it was a matter of hiring a photographer it would never happen. So I think this is not taking business away from professionals.

On the other hand, I can clearly see how this is affecting your business. When I printed a brochure recently the printer complimented me on the layout (and I'm just an enthusiastic amateur at layout). He said that much of the time small businesses have a secretary do the layout rather than spend the money to have a professional make it. They try to do it in MS Word and the results are unprintable.

In many areas American business is relentlessly driving down costs with little regard to quality. I think it is short sighted and will come back to haunt them.

[Grapho]

For finding commercial logos in vector form, I have not found a better site than this.
Logo Types
I have submitted a couple that I have drawn, but when it comes to finishing a layout that requires this type of image, this resource has proven to be a time saver.

[dewd]

Thank you for your contribution to further putting us lifelong Stock Photographers out of business.

[Grapho]

Something you have to realize, and this is already happening. Within a particular industry, you start to see competitors using the same images. This is not good for branding or marketing purposes. Grab any trade magazine, scan through it, and you will see what I mean. It makes the company look cheap. So this free or cheap photography will only take you so far. Rest assured, if your work as merit, you will be fine. Projects that use this type of photography are not the kind that will usually be willing to pay $350+ for a unique photo. Now think about it this way, you, through your stock photography, are eating in to the full commissioned photography market. :-)

[James_Dempsey]

dewd said:

Thank you for your contribution to further putting us lifelong Stock Photographers out of business.

Welcome to my world dewd. As a designer, I've been competing with the office receptionist who "designs" the ads, brochures and newsletters in MS Publisher or PowerPoint for nearly 20 years. It's frustrating & insulting. You simply have to adjust the way you do business.
Make no mistake here, I understand the value of hiring a photographer. I also understand the difference between a $300 stock photo from Getty and a free image from Flickr. But lets be honest, if the free image is acceptable for a designer's needs, why would/should the designer pay $2,000+ fees for a shoot, or even $300 for a stock photo? This is the same argument I get from design clients. If the MS PowerPoint brochure is good enough (in the client's mind), why should they pay a designer $60-$150 per hour?
I hate to use the "don't hate the player, hate the game" line here, but it's actually quite fitting. We as content creators need to focus on the CLIENTS, not each other. The clients are the ones who are driving the price (and value) of professional work down. The clients are the ones willing to accept sub-par work as long as the price is right.
That being said, the quality of images available, and the talent level of amateur photographers due to digital photography, has gone way up the last few years. It's getting harder and harder to justify the high rates of commercial photography these days.

[chuckbo]

Here's a question I've asked on other sites and never gotten a very good reply, it seems.
Let's say that I want to use a photo in a presentation I'm giving. Maybe it's for work; maybe it's for a group outside of work. And I've got permission to use it. So what are the ways that any of you have provided credit without reducing the effectiveness of the presentation? You don't want the credit text on the slide itself, because that ruins the effectiveness of the presentation. (Side note: if you're a PowerPoint bullet-point junkie, of course, then I understand that it doesn't matter.)
Some suggestions I've been given:
include the credit in the speaker notes;
include the credit in the Get Info section of the file that you imported;
add a page to the end of the presentation that lists all of the credits -- but that page doesn't get shown in the presentation but it's included in any handouts.
Chuck

[Grapho]

I would probably use your last option.