Lately, more and more people are talking about some big changes in the Microstock industry. "It is coming soon, a new Microstock style, giving your images for free?!?"  If this is the case then I am done with Microstock.
No freebies. I don't give my images for free. I live from photography and why would I give it for free. Camera and photo equipment is expensive. I don't get that for free. Who is going to pay my time spent producing free images?
Microstock is big part of my income but if I quit Microstock I will have more (plenty) of time to do some other stuff (as a photographer). Currently, I spend 70% of my time on Microstock productions so if I use that time to advertise myself I think it will pay off.

"Microstock - Microprices. There is no money."  -  That is what I have been told by some of my friends who are photographers in 2005-2006 when I joined Microstock. But I found a way to make some money and after all of this, if agencies want me to give them my images for free, I will quit Microstock and close all of my accounts. No agencies give us anything for free (they make more money from our images then we do) so why should we give them free images. For exposure? If they do that, personally I think it will be the end of Microstock. Are they trying to go back to 2003 and start all over again?

Personally I think this is not going to happen, they can't ask us to give them files for free, they must have something smarter on the way. Right now we need some growth in income or most of the big guys will leave Microstock. If they leave, customers will leave too (those who are after quality). So somebody with something else will come up, maybe RM Microstock.
And also agencies are making big money on this business so why would they screw this all up? I am not worried too much right now, I'm just trying to say that I am not supporting a free-image type Microstock and I am not interested in that type of business at all.

I know some of you commented on this in the other thread but anyway feel free to say few words.

I am wondering what you think and what would you do if this is true. Free images?

Me? I am out!

Kone

Obviously, I'd rather sell things, but I don't think the concept of free is all that horrible. It really depends on how it is done.

No it doesn't.  Giving away your work is idiotic, "advertisment" or not.

Quote from: cthoman on June 15, 2010, 16:25

Obviously, I'd rather sell things, but I don't think the concept of free is all that horrible. It really depends on how it is done.

No it doesn't.  Giving away your work is idiotic, "advertisment" or not.

Agree it is idiotic. Idiotic and desparation. Devaluation of your hard work. Silly and stupid, I agree. Only amateur who live with mother and father with no rent to pay can see freebie as sensible. If I want to give freebie, I shoot
landscape and give to grandma to hang in house. Why I give to some * stranger to use to make money for them?

I'm not sure it is the same thing but I seem to remember FREE Gift as an enticement to attract "subscribers" to newly formed web sites.  An SEO ploy to raise site relevancy in search engines.  Higher placement led to "advertisers" and "click thru" references for such as Amazon Associates.  Or, it could lead to purchase of upgraded (larger) images from a photographer's website.  My site designer/SEO expert hounded me to make Free CD offerings.  I probably would have but it was too much work.  I turned to Microstock. 

People are always talking about big changes in microstock but - although this industry is constantly changing and sites are opening and closing and merging all the time - I still haven't seen any *big* change in the last few years.

I don't think microstock as a whole is turning towards "free", because that won't benefit the agencies as well as photographers, so I am not too much worried.

They are offering some free pics as an advertisement - that's all.

Luckily, we can decide whether to offer our pics for free or not. In the end, it's up to us photographers to avoid giving away too many good images for free and compete with ourselves.

I'm sure someone is thinking of way to go from giving images away to having you pay to place them and pay for someone to use them.

Free i.e. no one is paying you. Even from a microstock perspective that's a big jump down.

OUT!

I've seen nothing, but prices going up. I've heard nothing, but the main agencies talking about increased revenue. "Free" just sounds naive. If you're worried about free, stop submitting to 8 million agencies all trying to make the same dollar. Back the sites that are making you real money and keep prices moving in the right direction.

Is excellent point. You waste time giving sites that do not get your downloads. Big waste of time. Better to kill the proliferation of lame duck site and support the one giving you downloads regularly.
Also, when site boasts wow look we got 8 million pictures. You don't encourage with free , you said no, not 8 million, maybe only 6 million if you stop count on free.
Time we tell agency and lookers, Sorry no free lunch. I want the money .

I've seen nothing, but prices going up. I've heard nothing, but the main agencies talking about increased revenue. "Free" just sounds naive. If you're worried about free, stop submitting to 8 million agencies all trying to make the same dollar. Back the sites that are making you real money and keep prices moving in the right direction.

Yes, prices are going up at several sites which is a step in the right direction. Good trend.

But cutting the contributor's chunk of sales also seems to be in the works for most sites. Not a good trend.

Does iTunes give aways songs for free? Oh wait, yeah they do but just as a teaser to introduce new artists.

I really don't feel free is a sustainable business model now, or ever.

I know some of you commented on this in the other thread but anyway feel free to say few words.

I made some comments, but I never talked about giving images for free to a third party. Free images, when combined with relevant textual material (or tutorials) can drive traffic very efficiently. Traffic can be monetarized. I would offer the freebies myself, of course. Secondly, nobody is going to give away prime content for free. You can do that with old sub-par material that didn't sell the past years, or with sub-par or LCV editorial that illustrates a story. In that case, I would spend maximum 5 minutes in PS to make the shot presentable at 1000px.

Whenever you hear a phrase like "getting your foot in the door" or "getting your name 'out there'" you know you have a big sucker sign hanging around your neck.

Guys the concept of "Freemium" although we do not like it is here to stay. I have heard various movers and shakers on the management side of micro talking about it over the last 6 months as the next natural step of their marketing campaigns.

Look at the way Fotolia is using everystockphoto.com if you want to see this in action.

Of course it is unsustainable as a universal model for providing pictures to the customer but as a strategy of getting customers to sign up to site and then to upsell to them it actually makes a lot of sense.

Not that I will be giving any of my content away for nothing any time soon but I can see where they are coming at this one from.

George