MicrostockGroup

Macro Stock / Midstock => General Macrostock => Topic started by: wut on December 20, 2011, 04:26

Title: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: wut on December 20, 2011, 04:26
They don't sell at all in micro (50$ per photo/year at best, but usually just a couple of $) and I have a few, that I think could sell at higher prices. Besides, that's what I love shooting the most and ever since I shoot MS, I rarely really do what I enjoy and love shooting. I could combine my passion with some modest income if there's a market for portraits in macro.
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: Sean Locke Photography on December 20, 2011, 14:55
I'm not sure what a "fine art portrait" is.  You'd need to post an example.
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: ShadySue on December 20, 2011, 15:02
I'm not sure what a "fine art portrait" is.  You'd need to post an example.
Most iStockers seem not to be sure. Just try an iStock search for "fine art portrait".
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: gostwyck on December 20, 2011, 15:08
I'm not sure what a "fine art portrait" is.  You'd need to post an example.


Any of your images could be 'fine art' if you want to big yourself up express your professionalism. As the artist, if you define them as 'fine art', then that's what they are. Apparently.

Here's what Wiki says about it;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-art_photography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-art_photography)
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: RT on December 20, 2011, 16:28
I'm not sure what a "fine art portrait" is.  You'd need to post an example.

Isn't it what some 'photographers' tell the model just before asking her to take her clothes off.  ;)
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: wut on December 20, 2011, 16:48
I'm not sure what a "fine art portrait" is.  You'd need to post an example.


I'd say the style of most portraits on this site http://1x.com/photos/portrait (http://1x.com/photos/portrait) .

So would portraits like this sell at macro agencies?
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: wut on December 20, 2011, 16:54
I'm not sure what a "fine art portrait" is.  You'd need to post an example.

Isn't it what some 'photographers' tell the model just before asking her to take her clothes off.  ;)

Well, been there and done that, got bored :P . No, it was really like that; I did a couple of fine art nude shoots, but stopped when I found out that it was even much more complex than portrait photography (which really is one of the most advanced/demanding genres of photography, really hard to master) and at almost the same time, the magazine that used to publish my photos on the covers, suddenly stopped posting nudes on the cover and changed it for sports (lifestyle magazine). I got back to doing portraiture and a few years later, I started doing MS.
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: Carl on December 20, 2011, 17:58
I had the same question, so upon examination and a cursory investigation, I came to the conclusion that there isn't enough of a market in stock (whether micro, macro, or RM) to make portaits worthwhile.  I'm talking here about actual, traditional portraiture.  The stock buyers seem to want images that are much more commercial and have a commercial application.  I realize that this encompasses a very broad range of material (thank God), but not portraiture.  Your experience, of course, might be different.
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: briciola on December 20, 2011, 19:31
N/a
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: wut on December 20, 2011, 19:48
I had the same question, so upon examination and a cursory investigation, I came to the conclusion that there isn't enough of a market in stock (whether micro, macro, or RM) to make portraits worthwhile.  I'm talking here about actual, traditional portraiture.  The stock buyers seem to want images that are much more commercial and have a commercial application.  I realize that this encompasses a very broad range of material (thank God), but not portraiture.  Your experience, of course, might be different.

Yeah, and then there's the question of which agencies to UL to. I'm sure as hell not paying Getty 50$/UL (if I even got accepted), nor am I willing to wait for months for them just to review my initial 12, I don't have a clue about Corbis (I just heard they sell a lot less than Getty) and Alamy isn't really a macro agency anyway (and I just hate keywording images there, into 3 sections, in order of relevance etc, it's even a lot worse than at IS). So if I really think about it, I don't even know where I should try to sell those portraits. Is it even worth splitting my attention...I mean, I'll shoot those portraits anyway, but all the hassle with the agencies, I'm not sure about that.
Title: Re: Is there a place for (fine art) portraits in macro?
Post by: djpadavona on December 31, 2011, 15:45
Dan Heller once acknowledged that he received 40-50% of his revenue from print sales, and 30-35% from digital downloads. The remainder came from assignment work. In his case, I think that clearly fine art print sales were an important part of his macro/mid (however you wish to define it) stock business.