Yes, RM prices are falling and I wonder why. If you can get a $5 RF license for almost unlimited use and time why would you pay more for an RM license. At least with the RM license it has defined usage, duration, possible renewal, and can be tracked.
Whoever came up with RF went way too far on loosening up rights. They could have very easily just simplified the usage model a bit to make it easier on buyers, left everything else intact, and image producers wouldn't have taken such a hit. Just like with micro pricing. They could have went reduced the $500 macro image to $100 instead of $1 micro and would still have been doing well.
We now face an uphill battle of near-unlimited licensing, plateaued demand, massive supply increase, and rock bottom pricing. Most industries would have collapsed already under these conditions.
RM is falling because of the unfair RF competition ! how can you beat RF after all ? as a buyer i would go 100% RF too ...
secondly, years ago only a certain type of images were available as RF so buyers were forced to go RM for anything else.
nowadays it's all over and i can find just about anything sold as RF, sometimes with even higher quality and creativity than RM.
exclusive usage and the whole mumbo jumbo is becoming a small insignificant market niche, and serious customers don't even use stock images, they pay somebody on assignment !
yeah whoever come up with RF was probably a marketer, not a photographer, think about the old PhotoDisc CDs ...after all we talk about photos, creative imaging and bla bla bla, they talk only about selling a product and making profits quick, they could care less about photography, Getty itself is owned by a bunch of bankers and traders, Corbis by Bill Gates...
