Author Topic: Macworld Article On Microstock (Read 14602 times)

ichiro17 · « **Reply #25 on:** September 28, 2009, 13:39 »

Thats okay, your experiences have led you to that conclusion. You should do some checking into that as there has been a precedent set to raising prices every so often. It should happen more and more now that small players are being bought up. Hopefully....

However, 1 year isn't a good timeperiod to gauge the industry, especially one thats continuously changing. As for subs, I'm not effected but I can see why you would be upset about it

elvinstar · « **Reply #26 on:** September 28, 2009, 14:27 »

While there is quite a bit of talk about subs eating all of the downloads, there will ALWAYS be per-credit sales. There are thousands of developers just like myself that don't do the volume of business to need a sub plan. I buy credits as I need them and there are plenty of other that do the same.

While most of the big buyers use subs, I really think that they might not have purchased anything at all on a pay-per-credit site.

HermanM · « **Reply #27 on:** September 28, 2009, 17:36 »

As a whole prices have remained stable, with slight increases at IS and maybe a couple of other sites, but with subs becoming more common those increases become diluted. The problem is that if one site increases prices too much there will always be another undercutting it. The net result is stagnation of returns for photographers. IS can get away (to some degree) with price increases for various reasons, but don't expect it to be like that everywhere .

cascoly · « **Reply #28 on:** September 30, 2009, 14:10 »

Quote from: sjlocke on September 26, 2009, 18:26

"Not only is it almost impossible for even the best, most established photographers to make even a basic living now, but I hear from young, talented, aspiring photography graduates who just can't get into an industry that has been so badly damaged by the over-use of amateur material at rock bottom prices."

Waaaaahhhhhh....

what's the difference between young, talented, aspiring photography graduates and an amateur? why should one group feel entitled to success because they have a diploma? sunds lmuch like the complaints of IT pros when micros stasrted to replace mainframes at larger companies

in the end, the pc revolution exploded the possibilities for both jobs and apps as millons of people started using computers

similar in the photography biz - in the 90's the film pros vehemently protested digital stock at any price, but the $50-$100 per image model for digital downloads didnt destroy the industry - it opened it to a larger group of buyers. the buyers for MS are not the same as the ones 15-20 yrs ago -- images are becoming commodities, and photographers need to adjust their attitude and workflow. the chances for an indivdual to make a six figure career from images may be less, but the total income from photography has only increased with the emergence of digital photography.

s

HermanM · « **Reply #29 on:** September 30, 2009, 14:47 »

Quote from: cascoly on September 30, 2009, 14:10

what's the difference between young, talented, aspiring photography graduates and an amateur?

If you need to ask then you are an amateur

Having a diploma (or at least some studies) takes a lot out of the trial and error amateurs run into, gives you (at least) basic if not advanced notions of sthetics and all the other things that we, amateurs, find out in the long run, but sometimes after lots of mistakes. Also they understand from the begining the concepts of photography that make amateurs that want to submit photos flood many forums with basic questions. So, I guess that there is a difference.

ap · « **Reply #30 on:** September 30, 2009, 15:09 »

Quote from: HermanM on September 30, 2009, 14:47

Quote from: cascoly on September 30, 2009, 14:10

what's the difference between young, talented, aspiring photography graduates and an amateur?

If you need to ask then you are an amateur

Having a diploma (or at least some studies) takes a lot out of the trial and error amateurs run into, gives you (at least) basic if not advanced notions of sthetics and all the other things that we, amateurs, find out in the long run, but sometimes after lots of mistakes. Also they understand from the begining the concepts of photography that make amateurs that want to submit photos flood many forums with basic questions. So, I guess that there is a difference.

but i'm sure these amateurs, after a lot of ' trial and error' become 'talented, aspiring photography graduates'. for, at the end of day, it's practice and the love of the art that makes it. all that schooling, for anyone, is only the start.

elvinstar · « **Reply #31 on:** September 30, 2009, 17:32 »

Couldn't a period of trial and error pretty much equate to 4 (or however many) years of school without the price tag?

ap · « **Reply #32 on:** September 30, 2009, 17:47 »

isn't that how ansel adam started?...i mean photography really isn't rocket science, especially these days.

HermanM · « **Reply #33 on:** September 30, 2009, 18:10 »

With answers like these it becomes clear why photos sell for pennies, photography is devaluated as it is and so many consider themselves "professional photographers" ... $:-\$

ichiro17 · « **Reply #34 on:** October 01, 2009, 07:46 »

Its good to know that the 'professionals' are automatically amazing photographers and they too don't need to go through a trial and error period either. Schools today must be that good.

Please...

gostwyck · « **Reply #35 on:** October 01, 2009, 08:18 »

Quote from: HermanM on September 30, 2009, 18:10

With answers like these it becomes clear why photos sell for pennies, photography is devaluated as it is and so many consider themselves "professional photographers" ... $:-\$

Maybe you could help us by defining what you mean by "professional photographer"?