MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: KnowYourOnions on April 03, 2015, 14:48
-
http://www.imagebrief.com/briefs/rf-fit-active-people-wearing-nike-S3YdbM/details (http://www.imagebrief.com/briefs/rf-fit-active-people-wearing-nike-S3YdbM/details)
Just sharing.
more here - http://www.imagebrief.com/briefs/live (http://www.imagebrief.com/briefs/live)
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
-
Imagebreif is a massive time suck, lots of submissions, lots of short lists no commissions. Flawed business model for photographers, better off buying a lottery ticket.
-
......................
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
And how many will be falling over themselves to submit in hopes of getting $250?
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
And how many will be falling over themselves to submit in hopes of getting $250?
Whats wrong with that? You are selling for $19.99
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
And how many will be falling over themselves to submit in hopes of getting $250?
probably fewer than the many that are proudly falling over themselves to submit images in dreams of making 0.25 to 0.38 per sale.
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
And how many will be falling over themselves to submit in hopes of getting $250?
Whats wrong with that? You are selling for $19.99
ummm, no, not really
I dont have any model released fit athletes in action with Nike product in the shot that I'm selling as an unlimited royalty- free license in my porfolio :)
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
And how many will be falling over themselves to submit in hopes of getting $250?
Whats wrong with that? You are selling for $19.99
What's wrong is that it's speculative work that might not even win the money, and if you don't win there is very little else you can do with the custom photo you have created
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
And how many will be falling over themselves to submit in hopes of getting $250?
Whats wrong with that? You are selling for $19.99
What's wrong is that it's speculative work that might not even win the money, and if you don't win there is very little else you can do with the custom photo you have created
Thats not the point. And no one is forcing you to create anything. I did some custom shoots, simple ones none the less, but they werent chosen and now make me money on micros. Anything with a logo can be sold as editorial or RM on Alamy for example. So its not really a loss of time or work.
-
a company logo is such an important thing for a company, it's a shame so many think it's worthless and that the graphic designer should be paid a few bucks !
go in any decent design studio, you'll be asked a few 1000s for custom company logo + company font + brochures etc
-
Custom photography they want to pitch to Nike for $250. Sigh.
Nike spends $2.4 billion a year on marketing. Hire a photographer and pay a decent amount for licensing. I really find crowd sourcing for custom work disturbing.
-
I don't participate in any type if SPEC work, another thing devaluing art and our industry. Here is a fun series that rips apart crowd sourcing sites like this:
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0lNJEnwfVVNFN_lk9JRKSLT0wJ3-dnyk
-
Its not Nike asking for photos. The people who are submitting this brief might have gotten a $10K budget and are just making a bundle of the back of photographers. The shots people take for 38 cents are seriously high quality. And now someone offers 250$ and you are ALL slating the photographers and the designers. Make up your minds.
This was shot for 38 cents. I really dont get the upset over 250$
(http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/140251/222253792/stock-photo-sports-background-runner-feet-running-on-road-closeup-on-shoe-222253792.jpg)
(http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/59253/59253,1305044248,2/stock-photo-latin-american-athlete-running-in-havana-cuba-horizontal-shape-full-length-low-angle-view-77005810.jpg)
(http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/1634471/154526315/stock-photo-single-runner-running-in-rain-and-making-splash-in-puddle-154526315.jpg)
-
The difference is that those shots are generic enough to be used by all sorts of different individuals and companies. That gives them high marketability and the potential for big earnings. By shooting specifically Nike, you're limiting yourself to editorial on a couple of sites. I doubt the returns would be worth it. Also, you're not shooting for $250 (which is a pathetic price for use by a huge corporation anyway), but only for a very slim chance at $250.
And ethically, it just turns my stomach that a corporation like Nike might wind up paying $250 for worldwide rights to an image. Normally they pay tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
-
Well, if you have a pix already on file just submit it.
If not, skip it.
Happy Easter!
-
The difference is that those shots are generic enough to be used by all sorts of different individuals and companies. That gives them high marketability and the potential for big earnings. By shooting specifically Nike, you're limiting yourself to editorial on a couple of sites. I doubt the returns would be worth it. Also, you're not shooting for $250 (which is a pathetic price for use by a huge corporation anyway), but only for a very slim chance at $250.
And ethically, it just turns my stomach that a corporation like Nike might wind up paying $250 for worldwide rights to an image. Normally they pay tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I dont understand why Nike ends up paying 250$? The people doing to the work to pitch to Nike are buying the images. Nike might pay 10K for that job, we dont know. Its the people submitting the brief that are the culprits here. IMO.
-
OK, fair enough. We don't know who they are, although you do give them worldwide rights to the image in perpetuity.
But think about it...by the time you buy a new, pristine pair of Nike shoes (or shorts or shirts or whatever you're shooting) and pay your model, you've already blown more than $250, would be my guess.
-
I dont understand why Nike ends up paying 250$? The people doing to the work to pitch to Nike are buying the images. Nike might pay 10K for that job, we dont know. Its the people submitting the brief that are the culprits here. IMO.
i think the logo designers don't care about the money, they would probably do it for free, their goal is to design something for a major company like Nike and being allowed to list Nike in their portfolio.
basically they're giving away a freebie in exchange of gaining PR and reputation but it's a double edged sword, many photographers do the same joining any possible photo competition in order to gain an award and to call themselves "award winning photographer" no matter if they even had to pay to join these competitions and they won a few bucks and a free UV-filter ..
-
Its not Nike asking for photos. The people who are submitting this brief might have gotten a $10K budget and are just making a bundle of the back of photographers. The shots people take for 38 cents are seriously high quality. And now someone offers 250$ and you are ALL slating the photographers and the designers. Make up your minds.
This was shot for 38 cents. I really dont get the upset over 250$
but i can't believe this set of images has been shot specifically for microstock, you can bet they're leftovers from a commercial assignment.
-
I dont understand why Nike ends up paying 250$? The people doing to the work to pitch to Nike are buying the images. Nike might pay 10K for that job, we dont know. Its the people submitting the brief that are the culprits here. IMO.
i think the logo designers don't care about the money, they would probably do it for free, their goal is to design something for a major company like Nike
Oh, they care very much. Nike's logo was created for very little when the company was in its infancy and run by a college professor who asked a design student for help. But large corporations pay millions for logo redesigns.