pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Free: The Future of a Radical Price"  (Read 18693 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 15, 2009, 18:09 »
0
I was reading the other day about the book "Free: The Future of a Radical Price", by Chris Anderson, from Wired magazine.  He has been recently in Brazil for the launch if his book.

He discusses the effect that free things in Internet - legal free things such as online newspapers, search tools, website hosting, YouTube, etc - has on the consumers' behaviour. 

One example he discussed here (I don't know if it's in his book as well) is the Brazilian band Calypso that is very popular in Northern and Notheastern Brazil.  They distribute their own CDs and allow street vendors to copy them and resell these copies.  Their CDs are in regular stores at affordable prices as well.  They make money not from their CDs, but from concerts, which are always crowded because their songs are played in all sorts of popular places thanks to the cheap/free CDs.  This has proven a profitable business model - they even have their own private jet. 

I wonder if they would be able to make more money if they were with a big record company behind them.  Their CDs would cost more, would still be pirated like everyone else's, so in the end how much would they actually get?

Anyway, this is something to think about: giving something for free to advertise yourself (not the free photos we have in some agencies!).  Imagine having bookmarks with a nice image on them given away free by a local bookstore, with a link to your website were people would be able to buy prints, posters, photo books...  There would be a cost of course in printing these bookmarks, and perhaps some agreement with the bookstore, but would sales generated from this advertisement prove profitable? 


« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2009, 19:05 »
0
Interesting.  I think 'free' is where microstock really wants to be.  When buyers see millions of images available for pennies - from multiple sources - they realize that  there's basically an enormous oversupply.

Eventually some big microstock is going to throw in the towel and start giving away the images,  and run ads on the search pages. Contributors will get nothing - but of course, we'll make it up on the increased volume of sales... :) 

« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2009, 20:43 »
0
Moo cards? (where applicable)

« Reply #3 on: August 15, 2009, 22:01 »
0
Interesting.  I think 'free' is where microstock really wants to be.  When buyers see millions of images available for pennies - from multiple sources - they realize that  there's basically an enormous oversupply.

Eventually some big microstock is going to throw in the towel and start giving away the images,  and run ads on the search pages. Contributors will get nothing - but of course, we'll make it up on the increased volume of sales... :) 


the tighter the entry and criteria for rejection gets the more likely it is to happen. there was a site a while back trying to focus on the rejected images (cant remember details though). sxc has 400k+ images. how many people would be upset if flickr said we're running ads and give you a percentage of the revenue. I think they'll end up free, just a matter of time

« Reply #4 on: August 15, 2009, 22:27 »
0
Interesting.  I think 'free' is where microstock really wants to be.  When buyers see millions of images available for pennies - from multiple sources - they realize that  there's basically an enormous oversupply.

Eventually some big microstock is going to throw in the towel and start giving away the images,  and run ads on the search pages. Contributors will get nothing - but of course, we'll make it up on the increased volume of sales... :) 


Oversupply of what? Images no one needs? That I CAN SEE. Markets change - so does stock photography, collections always have a shortage of images that customers are actually looking for. As for giving stuff away for free, somehow, someway, they have to make money or they will close. Simple as that.

Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2009, 08:39 »
0
I was reading the other day about the book "Free: The Future of a Radical Price", by Chris Anderson, from Wired magazine.  He has been recently in Brazil for the launch if his book.

He discusses the effect that free things in Internet - legal free things such as online newspapers, search tools, website hosting, YouTube, etc - has on the consumers' behaviour. 

One example he discussed here (I don't know if it's in his book as well) is the Brazilian band Calypso that is very popular in Northern and Notheastern Brazil.  They distribute their own CDs and allow street vendors to copy them and resell these copies.  Their CDs are in regular stores at affordable prices as well.  They make money not from their CDs, but from concerts, which are always crowded because their songs are played in all sorts of popular places thanks to the cheap/free CDs.  This has proven a profitable business model - they even have their own private jet. 

I wonder if they would be able to make more money if they were with a big record company behind them.  Their CDs would cost more, would still be pirated like everyone else's, so in the end how much would they actually get?

Anyway, this is something to think about: giving something for free to advertise yourself (not the free photos we have in some agencies!).  Imagine having bookmarks with a nice image on them given away free by a local bookstore, with a link to your website were people would be able to buy prints, posters, photo books...  There would be a cost of course in printing these bookmarks, and perhaps some agreement with the bookstore, but would sales generated from this advertisement prove profitable? 


yes,

it's the future of microstock : free images, no copyright, and few bucks $ coming from advertising or revenue sharing.
be prepared, as in 2-3 years this will be the norm.

« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2009, 09:02 »
0
Wrong, wrong and wrong!

That will never happen...

Always good photo will have price...

« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2009, 10:36 »
0
Always good photo will have price...

But with millions of free photos available - not necessarily "good", but "good enough" for the buyer's purposes...

We aready have Junk Food. Are we entering the era of Junk Images?




Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2009, 10:50 »
0
Always good photo will have price...

But with millions of free photos available - not necessarily "good", but "good enough" for the buyer's purposes...

We aready have Junk Food. Are we entering the era of Junk Images?

we already entered the junk images era : it's called microstock.


« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2009, 12:28 »
0
Wrong, wrong and wrong!

That will never happen...

Always good photo will have price...

wrong.
there's plenty of good photos on micros and they're sold for 5$ each and you
get paid 0.20$ ...

tell me ONE reason they should pay you more than today.
if anything, they'll raise their own commission and lowering yours,
there's 1000s of microstockers knocking at their doors every day,
they're grabbing you by the balls and all you can do is complaining in a forum.

Why more than 80 % of new microstockers never reach first payout?
Because they think that too much effort for "too little money"..
I future will be 95 %...

In every young industry comes to the phase of falling earnings for "workers" , and phase branding and filtering ...
In fact ,Professionalism comes in every segment where you can earn money...

Follows the phase of establishment and strengthening of  "Microstock Photographers Association", and even the establishment of new microstock agencies by  "brand microstockers"...
After filtering,will come times when microstock agencies will pray you to incorporate your portfolio on their site...
One day they will start to offer more and more in percent for every good photographer...
Because, with further development of the Internet, you will not need the agency to sell photos and get money,some other services will make marketing for you...

Marketing and advertising always need a photography...

I saw this steps in some other but similar industries, where afer some period you don't need agencies any more for your business.

« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 12:34 by borg »

Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2009, 12:42 »
0
exactly.

too much work, and too few money.
that's why i only sell RM.

if you wait for micros to raise your royalties, hahaha, you'll wait a looong time my dear.
you better stop microing and join some serious RM agency instead.

ask yourself how many pros are selling on micros ?
none, because they have very good reasons.

the biggest stockers all sell RM for a simple reason : it pays the right price
and it pays more, period.


« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2009, 12:44 »
0
Always good photo will have price...

But with millions of free photos available - not necessarily "good", but "good enough" for the buyer's purposes...

We aready have Junk Food. Are we entering the era of Junk Images?


Also I can find new cotton t-shirt for 10 $ for me, but my wife will buy 10 times more expensive, because one reason, "name of company" on it...
Both are t-shirts... ;)

« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2009, 12:47 »
0
too much work, and too few money.
that's why i only sell RM.

Maybe you're looking for rightsmanagedstockgroup.com then, eh?

« Reply #13 on: August 16, 2009, 12:51 »
0
exactly.

too much work, and too few money.
that's why i only sell RM.

if you wait for micros to raise your royalties, hahaha, you'll wait a looong time my dear.
you better stop microing and join some serious RM agency instead.

ask yourself how many pros are selling on micros ?
none, because they have very good reasons.

the biggest stockers all sell RM for a simple reason : it pays the right price
and it pays more, period.




Maybe You have right, but microstock has different license for their users, RM sells "originality", purchased image is only your...
Search and needs are not always on originality, but on the brand is much more frequently....

I think that the process of growth of earnings will be faster,maybe it already started...

Please read "download  per image" by LEE THORENS...
http://www.microstockdiaries.com/page/6
« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 13:14 by borg »

Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2009, 13:38 »
0
wrong.

RM == rights managed, it doesn't imply what "right" exactly, it means the buyer can
track who bought that picture before and for what use etc, it doesnt mean it cant
be resold.

and you can sell as RM or L (licenced), not just RM, you can choose
which continent or country to sell, you can sell it "editorial only", and much more.

this is the way everything should be and the way it was before the appearance of micros.

with RF you've no choice on nothing, buyers can do whatever they do, they can pay you 1$
for a cover of TIME magazine or use the image of your wife for advertising an escort service...

« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2009, 13:45 »
0
wrong.

RM == rights managed, it doesn't imply what "right" exactly, it means the buyer can
track who bought that picture before and for what use etc, it doesnt mean it cant
be resold.

and you can sell as RM or L (licenced), not just RM, you can choose
which continent or country to sell, you can sell it "editorial only", and much more.

this is the way everything should be and the way it was before the appearance of micros.

with RF you've no choice on nothing, buyers can do whatever they do, they can pay you 1$
for a cover of TIME magazine or use the image of your wife for advertising an escort service...


If you sold an image (RM), does it still visible in your portfolio and ready to another sale...?

« Reply #16 on: August 16, 2009, 13:48 »
0
with RF you've no choice on nothing, buyers can do whatever they do, they can pay you 1$
for a cover of TIME magazine or use the image of your wife for advertising an escort service...

Sergey,
You are so wrong on many points, there are limitations of use on a Microstock Licence, it cannot be used in many ways, do a bit of research!

You only sell RM which suits you, others here prefer RF which suits them, you are inviting all the RF photographers to change to RM, if they did this that would dilute your revenue so best keep it a secret for now.

You may think we are micro fools, but I like many others here do upload our RM images to Alamy, I assume that is why you are quoting the 'L' license, we can see the value of both models and realise that different images suit different agencies, so we have a finger in both pies, instead of in our ears.

David  ::)  
« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 13:51 by Adeptris »


Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2009, 14:07 »
0
yes, i see you like microfools.

your only legitimate excuse is that some types of images only sell well on micros,
in that case do whatever you feel pays more.

as for me i do mainly travel editorial so RM is the best choice by far,
i would never sell much on micros and even if it did i dont wanna
dirt my hands with a dozen fly by night micro agencies.
 
but money apart, no microstocker so far agreed that micros just
dont pay the right price, that's the biggest drawback reading this forum.

there is a point where you better NOT sell your images rather than spend
time selling it for peanuts and that point has been already reached by micros
a long time ago.

0.20$ for an image ? is it a joke ?
on RM the cheapest i sold was 50$.

this is the price i'm willing to sell, for less than that i better get another job or another hobby
and so you should too but you're blinded by the microstock virus, you feel micros are
the new frontier, the new eldorado.

micros are the biggest ripoff in the history of photography, either you get it or you dont.

« Reply #18 on: August 16, 2009, 15:26 »
0
exactly.

too much work, and too few money.
that's why i only sell RM.

if you wait for micros to raise your royalties, hahaha, you'll wait a looong time my dear.
you better stop microing and join some serious RM agency instead.

ask yourself how many pros are selling on micros ?
none, because they have very good reasons.

the biggest stockers all sell RM for a simple reason : it pays the right price
and it pays more, period.



quite a number of pros selling on both macro and micro

« Reply #19 on: August 16, 2009, 15:35 »
0
I think you got my post completely wrong.  I am not talking about free images or near-free images.  It's about giving things for free in order to attract customers, like the example of the band.  It's not about giving away photos to sell photos, but for instance distributing postcards or bookmarks that people will enjoy having and may in return be attracted by other products by that person.

Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #20 on: August 16, 2009, 16:29 »
0
I think you got my post completely wrong.  I am not talking about free images or near-free images.  It's about giving things for free in order to attract customers, like the example of the band.  It's not about giving away photos to sell photos, but for instance distributing postcards or bookmarks that people will enjoy having and may in return be attracted by other products by that person.

it's still "indirect marketing".

are you selling photos or postcards ?

years ago i did the same making a travel blog with lots of photos
in order to sell my e-book.

as it turned out, i made some money with advertising and sold
very few ebooks, and many of my images got stolen despite the watermark.

on top of that i received 5 offers from travel magazines and newspapers
to use my images for free (!) .. "we can't reward your work but we'll credit you and your web site" ..
*, and one of them was a well known magazine that is not starving nor going bankrupt soon.
 
as far as i'm concerned, it pays much more if you're fast to go out and shoot instead
of "promoting" here and there ... of course you can potentially make big bucks even with
travel photoblogs but it takes too much time and dedication in the end.

moreover,i see plenty of portfolios around selling also their own stock.
now tell me, unless it's 100% automated how much time it will take to reply to the client,
giving him a link to the hires image, agree on the payment, price, etc ?

it's just not gonna happen.
if you like this way then better upload your whole portfolio on Flickr with a watermark
linking to your site for stock and prints, if you're lucky you'll fish the random sale every here and then
but once again is it worth it ?

there are 100 ways to promote your pics but none is working as good as putting your pics
on a stock agency and counting the money flowing in, fact !

as a stocker i don't give a sh-it about who's the buyer and yadda yadda, i don't even
need a portfolio if that matter nor a web site, i don't need promotion at all actually
as the only reason i do stock is because someone else (my RM agencies) provide
the market and the clients for which they eat their generous fee.

10.000 pics dont pay enough ?
good, then make 20.000, or 30.000.
*, there's people with 100.000 pics for sale and they're mostly rubbish.

if they can do it, we can all do it.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 16:38 by Sergey »

Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #21 on: August 16, 2009, 16:47 »
0
exactly.

too much work, and too few money.
that's why i only sell RM.

if you wait for micros to raise your royalties, hahaha, you'll wait a looong time my dear.
you better stop microing and join some serious RM agency instead.

ask yourself how many pros are selling on micros ?
none, because they have very good reasons.

the biggest stockers all sell RM for a simple reason : it pays the right price
and it pays more, period.



quite a number of pros selling on both macro and micro

but not the top pros.

and yes, i could sell micros as well, actually it was the reason for which i
came in this forum initially.

but i concluded it's not worth the hassle.
i rather focus on making more pictures in my field and forget
about wasting time with shooting food, textures, patterns, etc

after all it makes sense, just do what you do best, dont mess
with the rest unless it pays well.

« Reply #22 on: August 16, 2009, 16:56 »
0
as for me i do mainly travel editorial so RM is the best choice by far,
i would never sell much on micros and even if it did i dont wanna
dirt my hands with a dozen fly by night micro agencies.

Ah, "travel editorial", aka "un-released vacation snapshots".  Are you sure you want all the other travelers around the world uploading to RM?  You'd probably never make a sale then...

Sergey

    This user is banned.
« Reply #23 on: August 16, 2009, 17:12 »
0
as for me i do mainly travel editorial so RM is the best choice by far,
i would never sell much on micros and even if it did i dont wanna
dirt my hands with a dozen fly by night micro agencies.

Ah, "travel editorial", aka "un-released vacation snapshots".  Are you sure you want all the other travelers around the world uploading to RM?  You'd probably never make a sale then...

well in case you never noticed most of the travel editorials have always been and always will be in RM.
and dont think millions of pics are enough, try for instance to search for a specific area of your city
or a specific event and see what i mean.

micros will never beat the variety of RM agencies/

as for the other travelers you overestimate them.
most of them are casual shooters and quite slow
and overcritic on their work, then they go home and spend
nights on photoshop, and guess what ? they sell zero
or not enough to justify the whole waste of time.

too much photographers are overdemanding and overcritic
and too much focused on their gear and the technical side
of imaging.

and i can tell you, 90% of the "holiday shooters" are shy
and so you rarely see good ethnic portraits or they're pityfuly
staged.

so what ? they end up shooting the usual boring touristic
spots that millions of people shot before them.

conclusion : very nice pics, very few sales due to enormous
competition.

i instead focus on people, street people if possible, and i go
straight in the people's face, some say my style is "slash and burn" :)

but it gets the job done and you end up meeting lots of bizarre people,
i like it, even if it can get a bit risky sometimes...

my opinion ?
a pictures is worth a 100 words, but a good portrait is worth 100 pictures.
and you'll never find 'em on micros, see by yourself, and that's why buyers
are willing to pay.



« Reply #24 on: August 16, 2009, 19:12 »
0
well in case you never noticed most of the travel editorials have always been and always will be in RM.

No, most of them are with an editorial license, which may be RM or RF, simply because you don't have releases.  You may find more in RM, because they aren't in high demand, and most would rather make that lottery sale then consistent sales.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
4937 Views
Last post December 12, 2007, 16:56
by araminta
30 Replies
12310 Views
Last post September 30, 2008, 01:03
by RacePhoto
11 Replies
5694 Views
Last post November 09, 2008, 14:48
by litifeta
5 Replies
2321 Views
Last post December 05, 2013, 17:20
by 33ft
13 Replies
3026 Views
Last post November 16, 2017, 04:51
by qunamax

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results