pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fed up to my ears with all the sites. And why!  (Read 27090 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: April 22, 2010, 16:28 »
0
nattering nabobs of negativism...

Don't try to tell me you're old enough to remember the source of that classic quote!   :D


« Reply #126 on: April 22, 2010, 16:30 »
0
nattering nabobs of negativism...

Don't try to tell me you're old enough to remember the source of that classic quote!   :D

You must return here with a shrubbery or else you will never pass through this wood alive!

« Reply #127 on: April 22, 2010, 16:40 »
0
nattering nabobs of negativism...

Don't try to tell me you're old enough to remember the source of that classic quote!   :D

You must return here with a shrubbery or else you will never pass through this wood alive!

One that looks nice... and not too expensive.

« Reply #128 on: April 22, 2010, 17:02 »
0
Now please don't tell me you guys think "nattering nabobs of negativism" came from the Pythons.

lisafx

« Reply #129 on: April 22, 2010, 18:03 »
0

... how smart is it so spend so much of your time and energy kicking what you see as a dead horse, when you could be making more money elsewhere?  

This is a really good question ^^

lisafx

« Reply #130 on: April 22, 2010, 18:05 »
0
Now please don't tell me you guys think "nattering nabobs of negativism" came from the Pythons.


I knew it was a politician, but not which one.  Turns out it's Spiro Agnew:
http://www.answers.com/topic/nattering-nabobs-of-negativism

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #131 on: April 22, 2010, 18:07 »
0
doomsday ? kicking dead horses ?

i'm just analyzing the market from a broader perspective.

if you all admit nowadays is harder to get the foot on microstock, how and why should this change or improve
in the next 5 yrs ?

on one side istock is launching its "Exclusive Plus" option, on the other side they're pushing for super cheap subs with Thinkstock.

Alamy in the meantime announced its new "Creative Collection", and Getty keeps fishing new amateurs on Flickr.

Corbis never made a single profit in years, and is kept in artificial life because it's owned by Bill Gates.

Others are struggling to survive with wild discounts or trying to get bought by Getty.

IS, FT, SS, DT are getting bigger and bigger, small players are going miserably out of the arena.

in the meantime there's dozens of new sites popping up trying to sell overpriced prints & merchandising,
some are good, some have no buyers at all, others resemble more flickr or facebook rather than a serious
online shop.

and the good ones wants to be paid (see FineArtAmerica, or AllPosters/art.com) or accept only few selected contributors.

music labels are starving due to piracy, trying every dirty trick in their hope of catching the new "viral" hit of the moment like Lady Gaga and friends.

newspapers are in deep sh.. since years, 2009 has been their worst ever.
gossip magazine and paparazzi keep making million $ as usual.


so where are we heading ?

« Reply #132 on: April 22, 2010, 18:23 »
0
Now please don't tell me you guys think "nattering nabobs of negativism" came from the Pythons.


I knew it was a politician, but not which one.  Turns out it's Spiro Agnew:
http://www.answers.com/topic/nattering-nabobs-of-negativism


Correct, Spiro Agnew - the man who had to resign as Vice President to face corruption charges - the man who Nixon himself privately referred to as an "@sshole".  The "negativism" being mocked by Agnew was the steadily growing feeling that the Vietnam war was a mistake and a disaster.  That view turned out to be "realism".

« Reply #133 on: April 22, 2010, 18:38 »
0
Now please don't tell me you guys think "nattering nabobs of negativism" came from the Pythons.


I knew it was a politician, but not which one.  Turns out it's Spiro Agnew:
http://www.answers.com/topic/nattering-nabobs-of-negativism


Correct, Spiro Agnew - the man who had to resign as Vice President to face corruption charges - the man who Nixon himself privately referred to as an "@sshole".  The "negativism" being mocked by Agnew was the steadily growing feeling that the Vietnam war was a mistake and a disaster.  That view turned out to be "realism".


A bit more trivia... Agnew didn't come up with the phrase himself... rather, it was his speechwriter William Safire, who went on to be a respected conservative columnist.  I was too young to hear it being used first-hand... instead I heard it in college and have loved the phrase ever since.  I dish it out when surrounded by people being way too glum.

No connections to the Pythons, of course, aside from being from the same era.  Holy Grail is probably my favorite comedy of all time... just introduced my ten-year-old son to it a few weeks ago and I was thrilled to find that he loved it.  He and I were quoting the movie for days.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2010, 18:40 by PowerDroid »

« Reply #134 on: April 22, 2010, 22:30 »
0
So that came from Safire! Now that's great trivia.  I know there were a couple more alliterative gems in subsequent Agnew speeches, no doubt from the same source - wish I could recall them.  What a worthless windbag Agnew was.  I read a bio of Nixon a couple years ago and learned that he detested Agenew and kept him totally out of the loop.

My wife and I recently watched a Python retrospective and I was struck by how complex, polished and rehearsed those skits were.

Now how can I relate all this to microstock...? 

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #135 on: April 22, 2010, 22:47 »
0
+1, what steve (cascoly) said.

Add to his argument:

- When the world emerges from the current recession, more businesses will form and need to advertise, and those who have been quiet will jump back into full marketing gear, and the need for images will increase dramatically.

- As the undeveloped, or underdeveloped, world sees growth in their small business sectors, those businesses will also look for the most cost-effective ways to advertise and will become big users of microstock.

To macrosaur and the other nattering nabobs of negativism... why do you spend so much of your energies concerning yourself with something you see as dead or dying?  You present yourselves as astute business people, but how smart is it so spend so much of your time and energy kicking what you see as a dead horse, when you could be making more money elsewhere?  

Negativity or reality?

I see an aweful lot of optimists here carying love signs but have poor sales performance. Optimism only goes so far unless you're one of the few who coast through life on pure luck. And the negative people defeat themselves. Only the paranoid survive.

« Reply #136 on: April 23, 2010, 02:22 »
0
I coast through life on pure luck.  The harder I work, the luckier I get :)

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #137 on: April 23, 2010, 03:19 »
0

Negativity or reality?

it's typical of the american sub-culture.
all these buzzwords "think positive", "learn the I CAN attitude", "you can do it", and the list goes on...

but fact is, there's probably just a 100 people doing microstock full time, anyone else is starving
but won't admit it, after all they've no idea about any other alternative, they wouldn't even be
in this market if they hadn't heard about microstock.

for instance how many of you guys are selling prints now ?
« Last Edit: April 23, 2010, 03:37 by macrosaur »

« Reply #138 on: April 23, 2010, 07:47 »
0
I think exactly the opposite that there are a lot of people quietly raking in a fortune out of microstock.  It isn't that difficult with the right portfolio, I know plenty of people doing it.


but fact is, there's probably just a 100 people doing microstock full time, anyone else is starving
but won't admit it,

« Reply #139 on: April 23, 2010, 10:08 »
0
Optimism only goes so far unless you're one of the few who coast through life on pure luck.

What a jaded view to think that optimism = luck.  I'm optimistic becuase I've worked hard, reached my goals, and all the evidence I've collected so far points to more work equaling more results.  Luck doesn't enter into it.

When I decided to try microstock, I did my homework.  I checked out all the sites, figured out what were the lucrative subjects, what was oversaturated and what topics were underrepresented.  I developed what I believe is a unique style.  And I set a quota... a few hours a day and a few uploads every night.  I'm right where my goal line says I should be right now, and my trend line is pretty straight and upward.  But if I were struggling to hit my goals, you can bet I would have moved on to a different pursuit, and wouldn't be hanging around here moaning about it and ridiculing others for chasing their failed dreams.  What a silly waste of time that would be.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2010, 10:13 by PowerDroid »

« Reply #140 on: April 23, 2010, 10:45 »
0
I can't agree more powerdroid. For me as I've taken it more seriously and now woven it into my work plan alongside design jobs I find my monthly graph continues it's steep climb. Otherwise I wouldn't do it as there's plenty of graphic design work now. Whilst there wasn't when I started this at the beginning of the recession. For me it was ' have a go and see ' and now it's part if my job as returns are very good.

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #141 on: April 23, 2010, 12:10 »
0
you guys still don't get it.

if YOU don't price your photos high enough, NO ONE WILL.


macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #142 on: April 23, 2010, 12:16 »
0
the only reason you guys are "stuck" on microstock is because you're not good enough to produce photos saleable on Getty RM or saleable as fine-art in expensive galleries.

and the funny thing is this : there's plenty of GREAT photos on istock but as the market got saturated because of istock & the micros, these beautiful pics are worth what ? as low as 0.25$/download, and 5 or 10$ if you're lucky.

in short, they're worth the same as postcards, and that's what essentially you're good for as long as you only sell on micros.

microsotck is by a far margin the LEAST paying field in photography.

art, prints, and galleries are where the money is.

« Reply #143 on: April 23, 2010, 12:24 »
0
the only reason you guys are "stuck" on microstock is because you're not good enough to produce photos saleable on Getty RM or saleable as fine-art in expensive galleries.

Lay it on me, macrosaur. I can take it!

There is some truth here of course.  But my real complaint is there is not much middle ground between 25 cent micro and $300 "fine art" sales. 

Microtock is like a shopping mall with nothing but "Everything's $1" stores.  Oh yeah, I know how we're supposed to be able to work our way up the pricing ladder, go exclusive at IS, become "Vetta", yada yada yada.  My material will never generate the volume it takes to get to those exhalted levels.   

« Reply #144 on: April 23, 2010, 12:32 »
0
What a jaded view to think that optimism = luck.  I'm optimistic becuase I've worked hard, reached my goals, and all the evidence I've collected so far points to more work equaling more results.  Luck doesn't enter into it.
...


I can't agree more powerdroid. ...


You might want to pick up Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers, where he postulates that in the end it is perhaps nothing but else but luck that propels the overwhelmingly successful and separates them from the also-rans.

« Reply #145 on: April 23, 2010, 12:39 »
0

You might want to pick up Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers, where he postulates that in the end it is perhaps nothing but else but luck that propels the overwhelmingly successful and separates them from the also-rans.
[/quote]

I'm assuming that this postulation is in jest.

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #146 on: April 23, 2010, 12:57 »
0
the only reason you guys are "stuck" on microstock is because you're not good enough to produce photos saleable on Getty RM or saleable as fine-art in expensive galleries.

Lay it on me, macrosaur. I can take it!

There is some truth here of course.  But my real complaint is there is not much middle ground between 25 cent micro and $300 "fine art" sales. 

Microtock is like a shopping mall with nothing but "Everything's $1" stores.  Oh yeah, I know how we're supposed to be able to work our way up the pricing ladder, go exclusive at IS, become "Vetta", yada yada yada.  My material will never generate the volume it takes to get to those exhalted levels.   

i've now almost 100 fine-art photos on sale.
no sales so far but the feedbacks i received so far is encouraging.

that's where i hope to make big $$ sales, or at least i'm trying.
we'll let you know.

the "middle way" is Vetta and now there's no turning back as anything else
has lost any value, even your best photos can be bought for few bucks
so take it or leave it.

the problem of microstock is they're targeting the very bottom of the barrel.
no wonder their buyers even complain about prices being too high !

5$ for a photo is too high ?
how they pretend photographers can even go on par with the production costs ?

so that's the value of micro images today, we can only accept it.

i'm studying ways to quit stock altogether and becoming a full time
fine-artist.

anyone can do stock, soon it will be impossible to get in and to
sell decently.

« Reply #147 on: April 23, 2010, 13:01 »
0
Quote
You might want to pick up Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers, where he postulates that in the end it is perhaps nothing but else but luck that propels the overwhelmingly successful and separates them from the also-rans.


I read the book. He said that some people are lucky because they are born at the right time to take advantage of new technologies and because of the opportunities and tools offered to them but in the end, the ones who work the longest and hardest are the most successful. He says 10,000 hours are needed to go to the very top of the heap and to master your skills. Excellent book, highly recommended.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2010, 13:07 by epantha »

« Reply #148 on: April 23, 2010, 13:04 »
0
Epantha,
 Thanks for your clarification of the book. I think it was Lee Trevino, the pro golfer, who once said "the more I practice, the luckier I get".

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #149 on: April 23, 2010, 13:05 »
0
Quote
You might want to pick up Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers, where he postulates that in the end it is perhaps nothing but else but luck that propels the overwhelmingly successful and separates them from the also-rans.


I read the book. He said that some people are lucky because of the opportunities and tools offered to them but in the end, the ones that work the longest and hardest are the most successful. He says 10,000 hours are needed to go to the very top of the heap and to master your skill. Excellent book, by the way.


from my experience the most crucial factor is talent and continuity.

any one can make a few good pictures, but how many do that for 20-30 years ?

if we look at the best photographers in any field they are famous and rich
because they kept working hard, luck is only one of the many factors in the mix.

luck is more important in music and art in my opinion, because people's tastes
vary so much for silly reasons.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
2887 Views
Last post October 19, 2006, 08:00
by CJPhoto
3 Replies
2489 Views
Last post January 22, 2007, 16:52
by madelaide
2 Replies
1904 Views
Last post February 12, 2007, 17:13
by XeniaII
12 Replies
3998 Views
Last post April 04, 2008, 06:34
by RacePhoto
43 Replies
8926 Views
Last post April 24, 2010, 19:01
by Jonathan Ross

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results