pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Microstock compared to drugs and polution  (Read 10674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 30, 2009, 10:16 »
0
If this hasn't been picked up here yet I thought this would be an interesting discussion to follow:

http://www.fastmediamagazine.com/?p=2440

Techdirt has written about Microstock in response to a post on Photobusinessnews. This is some of the things that Photobusinessnews wrote:

The profits in microstock are like end products where the pollution dumped into fragile eco-systems as a part of the process is simply disregarded.

In the same vein of thinking, microstock photographers have little to no regard for the damage they are doing to the photographic environment, causing immensely talented photographers to close up shop.


Techdirt doesn't agree and says:

In the end, it really comes down to how you deal with it. Do you whine and stomp your feet and compare the new world to pollution? Or do you figure out how to adapt? Economic progress doesnt care in the slightest how much you liked how things used to be.

I think it's interesting how the opinions still differ so much on the subject...


« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2009, 10:28 »
0
http://techdirt.com/articles/20091124/0318437068.shtml

I'm not sure there is a "right" to have cheap images - the author says "Compare that to the situation seven years ago when we were working on a revamp of our corporate website. We went in search of a photo to use, and the licensing deals we saw wanted about $1,000 for just one year of usage. That meant we spent nothing, because that just doesn't make sense. "  I guess that means they could not derive that value or more back from their usage of the image on their website.  Well, that's tough, isn't it?  Just because you _want_ something for pennies doesn't mean you have a right to _get_ something for pennies.

I certainly don't agree with the posters who seem to think that just because IP has no replication costs, that it should be free.  That's just silly.  As the one poster pointed out, there are costs in time and production inherent in each piece of IP that we produce.  Tossing copyright laws out the window to "encourage production" is a ridiculous idea.  Most of that drivel comes from "Anonymous Coward".  Sigh.

Also bits like this are just sour grapes: "I think most TD commenters are people who work every day, are paid for the work they do that day, and have to work again the next day to keep getting paid. And we don't see why artists should be able to work once and live off the income from it for the rest of their lives. And we really don't see why artists' children and grandchildren should be getting income from that work."

And of course, the nonsense about giving away IP "free" to get exposure is nonsense as well.  From many stories posted in many forums, we know the "great exposure you get from giving us your image for free", is worth nothing.

In the end, the comments are more about IP, then about micro.

vonkara

« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2009, 10:55 »
0
Another "I can't compete" photographer I guess.

Personal Wiki about the term: "I can't compete photographers"
-1 search result-

They usually call themselves "Che". They think each times they press the shutter button someone die from admiration. They sometimes talk about themselves at the third person. They never browsed Google and see there's trillions of similar images looking like theirs.

Also known as "Macrosaur", they upsize their images and love to make blogs about another species called the "microboys". Those "microboys" can be compared to the younger lions taking the lead of the pride and get all the females... also called "buyers"

RT


« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2009, 11:02 »
0
.......causing immensely talented photographers to close up shop.

Please pass on my congratulations to whoever said this for winning the 'dumbest statement of 2009' award.




lisafx

« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2009, 11:16 »
0
Call me naive, but I am really surprised this type of discussion is still going on. 

Seems to me that many macro photographers have been diversifying into micro for a couple of years now. 

« Reply #5 on: November 30, 2009, 11:19 »
0

sc

« Reply #6 on: November 30, 2009, 11:21 »
0
causing immensely talented photographers to close up shop.[/i]

I worked as a 2nd shooter in a commercial studio 20 yrs ago and it became obvious then it wasn't about how talented you were (not that talent doesn't help) but it was more about how good a businessperson you were. Still holds true today.

vonkara

« Reply #7 on: November 30, 2009, 11:41 »
0
Seriously a discussion about that topic is quite useless. Though it's interesting/funny to get links about macrosaur thoughts. It's like someone say, I used Web Crawler in 1998, why do everyone use Google. Look like redundancy to me

« Reply #8 on: November 30, 2009, 18:27 »
0
Sorry I'm confused - are we discussing the original article, or the article about the article, or the article quoting the article about the article?


« Reply #9 on: November 30, 2009, 18:34 »
0
I can't be bothered to read anti-microstock nonsense any more.  Times have changed, I wish I could go back to the 80's but time only moves one way.  I would like to see microstock sites increase subs prices, give us at least 50% commission and charge a lot more for some licenses.  Other than that, I love microstock.

lisafx

« Reply #10 on: November 30, 2009, 18:55 »
0
I can't be bothered to read anti-microstock nonsense any more.  Times have changed, I wish I could go back to the 80's but time only moves one way. 

LOL!  Seriously.

OTOH I would think twice about going back to my 80's hairstyle ;D

« Reply #11 on: November 30, 2009, 19:18 »
0
Oh come on Lisa, Big hair was cool  ;D I had an afro in the seventies. I was so skinny I looked like a giant dandelion.


Cheers,
J

ap

« Reply #12 on: November 30, 2009, 19:35 »
0
Oh come on Lisa, Big hair was cool  ;D I had an afro in the seventies. I was so skinny I looked like a giant dandelion.


Cheers,
J

photo please?  8)

« Reply #13 on: November 30, 2009, 19:42 »
0
Oh come on Lisa, Big hair was cool  ;D I had an afro in the seventies. I was so skinny I looked like a giant dandelion.
Cheers,
J


photo please?  8)



ap

« Reply #14 on: November 30, 2009, 20:33 »
0
is that you sean?!  :D

« Reply #15 on: December 01, 2009, 01:50 »
0
No, I don't think that Sean was ever a lipstick wearing sort of guy.  ;D
is that you sean?!  :D

Microbius

« Reply #16 on: December 01, 2009, 05:31 »
0
This is the same thing that we've been discussing here http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/artist-rising-photographers-direct-and-fine-art-america/msg123942/?topicseen#new
It seems to me that many of the old school don't even understand the model they are arguing against. They still think of it as selling an image for peanuts, when you are not actually selling the image, just licensing it. Many seem incapable of thinking of it in terms of overall RPI across a portfolio rather than fixating on single sales.


« Reply #17 on: December 01, 2009, 06:03 »
0
Oh come on Lisa, Big hair was cool  ;D I had an afro in the seventies. I was so skinny I looked like a giant dandelion.


Cheers,
J

Screenshot or it didn't happen :D
I was cuddly and cute in my cradle in the seventies... I have photographic proofs.

« Reply #18 on: December 01, 2009, 07:53 »
0
I can't be bothered to read anti-microstock nonsense any more.  Times have changed, I wish I could go back to the 80's but time only moves one way.  I would like to see microstock sites increase subs prices, give us at least 50% commission and charge a lot more for some licenses.  Other than that, I love microstock.


Well...at least read Fastmedia's blog post.  He used one of your photos.  :-)

http://www.fastmediamagazine.com/?p=2440

« Reply #19 on: December 01, 2009, 08:44 »
0
I can't be bothered to read anti-microstock nonsense any more.  Times have changed, I wish I could go back to the 80's but time only moves one way.  I would like to see microstock sites increase subs prices, give us at least 50% commission and charge a lot more for some licenses.  Other than that, I love microstock.


Well...at least read Fastmedia's blog post.  He used one of your photos.  :-)

http://www.fastmediamagazine.com/?p=2440

Thanks for pointing that out.  A great example of how microstock has opened up a new market for cheap blog photos :)

lisafx

« Reply #20 on: December 01, 2009, 12:01 »
0
Oh come on Lisa, Big hair was cool  ;D I had an afro in the seventies. I was so skinny I looked like a giant dandelion.


Cheers,
J


photo please?  8)


ROFL, Jonathan!  AP took the words out of my mouth :D

Here's me and hubby with our 80's hair.  We thought we looked so cool!


Microbius

« Reply #21 on: December 01, 2009, 15:13 »
0
ooops
« Last Edit: December 01, 2009, 16:24 by Microbius »

« Reply #22 on: December 01, 2009, 19:47 »
0
At least I had hair!
Smiling Jack

RacePhoto

« Reply #23 on: December 01, 2009, 21:22 »
0
At least I had hair!
Smiling Jack

That's what I was thinking, don't let the glare from my forehead distract you. Maybe consider it a reverse Mohawk? ;D

The person who compared it to the gold rush was closest. The people selling supplies made the money, a few miners who got in early made some returns, and in the end many people went searching and found nothing.

Microstock, the agencies make money, the new agency of the month club is prospecting, staking claims and going bust, some photographers are making the profits and most are searching but find it's like wandering in the mountains, finding just brown rocks or Fools Gold.

Microstock isn't the problem, it's the reaction to a world market and inexpensive good equipment. It is crowd sourcing and a solution to a problem created by a worldwide web economy and demand for reasonably priced images. While we see a Time cover, or some billboard, most of the sales are economically driven. Ask yourself what sells best on Micro? (don't think too hard, after headsets and handshakes) It's designs and graphics, not photographs!

While I'll never make much on Micro and I think it's fools gold or a MLM kind of atmosphere, with things like "sell those snapshots on your hard drive" being used to lure in photographers, the top is still like anything else. It's professionals who work hard and invest large amounts of time on equipment and editing and work hard to make what they EARN. The tale of how many make nothing, make no payout and may never get accepted, is true. Most will fail.

This forum is the cream of the crop. Like Las Vegas, you don't have people coming back bragging about how they lost thousands gambling, you only hear from the winners. The casinos don't put pictures on the walls of people who lost a fortune, they show the lights and glamor of the few who win big. Same with Microstock. The people here, for the most part, are making some returns, the other 90% aren't writing messages saying, "I sold $20 in two years with 200 images." which is closer to the truth. Not that the successful people are lying, it's just that they are the minority.

Most of the comments on the blogs and articles, about how Micro-payment has ruined the market, are alluding to profits, earnings and income. Or about making a living shooting quality images. I'm of the belief that people shooting quality images are hardly impacted by micro, while the economics of micro are targeting people who would never, in most cases, every... buy one of the high priced photos. What website or blog can afford $400 for a photo the size of a stamp, that's up in the corner, illustrating a concept?

Has McDonald's driven steak houses out of business? Has Long John Silvers caused seafood specialty restaurants out of business? I could go on, but I think I already have. Top of the line photos and specialty images will never be replaced by micro. Have you seen a NFL game lately with someone running along the end zone with a P&S shooting for micro? National Geographic?  The fashion industry hasn't been swamped with people shooting in the corner of their living room or garage studios. In the end, the high end is still there and the market has sorted out based on supply and demand. Plain simple economics drove the buyers to micro. The people crying have been hit the same as many other industries, by mass production and global economics adjustments.

Micro-payment wasn't invented and forced into the marketplace, it was discovered to be successful at filling a need and demand. It's not going away! The top conventional stock shooters can still sell and have a good market and demand for their work. It may not be as large as it was, but it's still there. As some have pointed out before, there's room for all of us. As always, the best will prosper the rest will either adjust and adapt or become extinct. In this case, go find some other way to make a living. It isn't really the dinosaurs, wiped out by lack of food caused by an explosion. It's more like one species that adapted better, take a giraffe, which can reach the food supply, while the short necks became extinct.

In stock, the food supply is marketing and changing and reaching for the buyers in new ways and new places with multiple agencies.

But believe it or not that's not what got me started writing.  ;)

Everyone is talking profits, sales, income, making a living. (or how it has negatively impacted their ability to make a living as they used to) Then they point out that the collections are being filled by hobbiest photos. In fact they are right about the free sites and people giving away images on sites like Picassa, Flickr or maybe you haven't seen that MSN has one that's also free and really well done. FREE! But wrong about comparing what was film, expensive, analog and high priced, maybe over priced, to the modern era of digital.

What about me? I'm in it for the personal reward, not the money. Seems that the artistic aspects of photography have been completely ignored by the money in stock photography. There's much more to taking pictures than money. There's news, documentary, art, and many other reasons for taking photos. That's why I take photos. I shouldn't even be here because I'm not a micro shooter and never will be. I can appreciate the way people work and the success of the few, but it's not what I do and not what I want to do.

When I become a SS exclusive, I'll write and explain it all.  ::) (maybe not?)

« Last Edit: December 02, 2009, 12:51 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #24 on: December 01, 2009, 22:06 »
0
Okay,

 I will have to dig for one but I know my wife has a couple put away. I will scan it and post it. My high school grad shot is pretty classic with the giant bow tie. Sean, take away the mustache and 40 pounds and you start getting close, only blonde. Don't forget the giant hair picks we used to carry in our back pockets, they would be considered weapons at school these days :)

Best,
J

« Reply #25 on: December 02, 2009, 12:26 »
0
OTOH I would think twice about going back to my 80's hairstyle ;D

I still have it since my mom didn't allow an 80's hairstyle in the 80's.  ;)

lisafx

« Reply #26 on: December 02, 2009, 12:46 »
0

I still have it since my mom didn't allow an 80's hairstyle in the 80's.  ;)

Good for you FD!  That'll show her ;D


vonkara

« Reply #27 on: December 02, 2009, 12:49 »
0
I was 6 years old when the 80s ended... I hope all of you had fun. I know the 90's have been seriously boring and superficial. I can't believe I listened to music on tape, used web crawler and wear jean coat. Cars exaust, fluorescent colors and the most depressive music ever heard playing on radio lol

« Reply #28 on: December 04, 2009, 16:52 »
0
Can anyone help me upload a photo. I click on the link to upload from my computer but I don't seem to get it.

Thanks,
Jonathan

« Reply #29 on: December 04, 2009, 16:54 »
0
delete upload effort.

lisafx

« Reply #30 on: December 04, 2009, 19:13 »
0
Can anyone help me upload a photo. I click on the link to upload from my computer but I don't seem to get it.


Try hosting the pic on another site (mine is on pbase).  Then in your post here, paste the url plus .jpg, then highlight it and click the "insert image" link above.

Hope that helps.  Still looking forward to that 'fro ;D

« Reply #31 on: December 06, 2009, 00:36 »
0

 I am a loser at this uploading images. I am sure it is simple but I don't get it. Tried posting to a separate url and pasting in the url and hitting image button but no picture. I know it is me, as long as I have blamed computers I find 99% of the time its me : )

Thanks for the help Lisa,

Best,
Jonathan
« Last Edit: December 06, 2009, 00:40 by Jonathan Ross »

ap

« Reply #32 on: December 06, 2009, 02:29 »
0

 I am a loser at this uploading images. I am sure it is simple but I don't get it. Tried posting to a separate url and pasting in the url and hitting image button but no picture. I know it is me, as long as I have blamed computers I find 99% of the time its me : )

Thanks for the help Lisa,

Best,
Jonathan


maybe you can email your photo to someone (you trust) who'll post it for you. but, it's like this:

1) press insert image link
2) then insert your url address in between the two  [img] brackets

otherwise, we know you don't have no picture.  ;)
« Last Edit: December 06, 2009, 02:33 by ap »

« Reply #33 on: December 06, 2009, 06:28 »
0

 I am a loser at this uploading images. I am sure it is simple but I don't get it. Tried posting to a separate url and pasting in the url and hitting image button but no picture. I know it is me, as long as I have blamed computers I find 99% of the time its me : )


Try Imageshack to host your images. It's very simple and they give you a variety of links with which you can experiment for the actual use you need. Even I can do it with them.

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #34 on: December 06, 2009, 08:52 »
0

Microstock, the agencies make money, the new agency of the month club is prospecting, staking claims and going bust, some photographers are making the profits and most are searching but find it's like wandering in the mountains, finding just brown rocks or Fools Gold.

...


Fantastic post!  :D

« Reply #35 on: December 06, 2009, 09:05 »
0
Jonathan, to attach an image do as follows:

1. Reply to this message
2. Click on Additional Options
3. Click on Choose File (make sure file is not too big, maximum size 275 kb)
4. preview
5. post

« Reply #36 on: December 06, 2009, 14:56 »
0
Here is My 78' Fro in all it's glory. This is for my grad photo so I hadn't picked it out yet that day. It grew about twice the size when I put my fro pick to it : ) And thank you for helping me down such a simple path everyone.

Best,
Jonathan


vonkara

« Reply #37 on: December 06, 2009, 15:26 »
0
 :) How you guys were achieving hairs like that. I would need at least 3 years for them to grow like this. Do any of you had hippy vans and want to show ?

We should make an official 70's thread though...


lisafx

« Reply #38 on: December 07, 2009, 11:00 »
0
Here is My 78' Fro in all it's glory. This is for my grad photo so I hadn't picked it out yet that day. It grew about twice the size when I put my fro pick to it : ) And thank you for helping me down such a simple path everyone.

Best,
Jonathan

OMG, Jonathan, you weren't kidding about that 'Fro!!   You could be a member of my family - we all have curly hair.  Although the guys keep it short these days ;)

« Reply #39 on: December 07, 2009, 12:56 »
0
Hi Vonkara,

 My son is 14 and he is set on getting a VW hippie Van. Thing is the good ones fetch a price these days. He'll have to start working after school soon : )

Best,
J

vonkara

« Reply #40 on: December 07, 2009, 13:18 »
0

« Reply #41 on: December 07, 2009, 13:54 »
0
I lived in Volkswagen van for a year once. Best time of my life. Not in the sixties or even seventies, more like the early nineties but I think everyone should give it a go.

ap

« Reply #42 on: December 07, 2009, 17:05 »
0
I lived in Volkswagen van for a year once. Best time of my life. Not in the sixties or even seventies, more like the early nineties but I think everyone should give it a go.

i would love to do that! did you travel a lot with it? or was it just parked outside your house?  ;)

ap

« Reply #43 on: December 07, 2009, 17:10 »
0
:D Ask leaf he know where to get one...   

http://www.dreamstime.com/leaf_portfolio_pg1/royalty-free-stock-photography-hippie-van-image30987



what a great way to circumvent the vw trademark...replace with peace sign! maybe we can do that with all vehicles.

« Reply #44 on: December 07, 2009, 21:02 »
0
Hi AP,

 The peace sign emblem is a cool idea. Some cars better than others. I think it would replace the Mercedes logo perfect but I don't know if you'd be sending mixed messages : ) I found this site today that has some awesome VW vans for sale. Makes me wanna get one and take off. Here is the link. http://www.vintagevwcars.com/vw-buses-for-sale.htm

Best,
Jonathan

« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2009, 05:15 »
0
haha, yeah there is some definite charm there!

That one you showed a picture of Vonkara happens to be for sale! ... send me a PM if you want to buy it anyone.  $1000 and it's yours.  The engine doesn't work the body is in really great shape and the interior is pretty good too.

I sure like the old vans and would be totally driving one everywhere I go - if only it wasn't for the 50,000km life span of the engines and the death trap waiting to happen.  Your feet can rest on the headlights from the inside.... if you were ever in a crash ... well... byebye legs.  I have been in 2 car crashes recently (both of which weren't my fault and were inavoidable... it doesn't help if you drive safe if the other on the road aren't driving safe) - one of which I would have died had I been driving this Van - the other... I probably would have lived in the van.  They are definitely cool though and fun to drive - and everyone driving these wave at each other. :)  I took a few good long road trips going up north to plant trees then lived in the van for the summer.  Ahhh the memories.

ap

« Reply #46 on: December 09, 2009, 16:55 »
0
Hi AP,

 The peace sign emblem is a cool idea. Some cars better than others. I think it would replace the Mercedes logo perfect but I don't know if you'd be sending mixed messages : ) I found this site today that has some awesome VW vans for sale. Makes me wanna get one and take off. Here is the link. http://www.vintagevwcars.com/vw-buses-for-sale.htm

Best,
Jonathan


thanks for the link. being so mechanically challenged, i'd probably opt for their latest model (which is only made for europe  :( ), but these are sure pretty to look at or to photograph.

cool photo, by the way (i like the oversized bow). you sure can pass as pres. obama's twin brother (back when he had afro).
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 18:17 by ap »


« Reply #47 on: December 09, 2009, 17:37 »
0
I lived in Volkswagen van for a year once. Best time of my life. Not in the sixties or even seventies, more like the early nineties but I think everyone should give it a go.

i would love to do that! did you travel a lot with it? or was it just parked outside your house?  ;)

No we travelled a lot but in a year you don't have to move far to see a lot. We drove from Vancouver to Cabo San Lucas and then up to Inuvik in the Yukon through Alaska and back home again. We figure we drove less that year than what we used to drive to work commuting.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
4501 Views
Last post August 17, 2006, 14:34
by fintastique
4 Replies
3681 Views
Last post September 14, 2011, 12:02
by Noedelhap
25 Replies
4682 Views
Last post April 02, 2015, 23:40
by wordplanet
20 Replies
3683 Views
Last post January 06, 2016, 04:03
by fmarsicano
12 Replies
4173 Views
Last post August 13, 2016, 15:15
by cobalt

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results