0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
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.
Quote from: cthoman on June 15, 2010, 16:25Obviously, 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.
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. If they gave away small web images that were specially watermarked with the agency and artist info, that might work as good advertisement. Then, clients would pay for the upgrade like a non-watermarked image or a larger size. I think that is what most of the "free-conomics" business models are based on is buying the upgrades. I'm not sure if any of the stock agencies free sites work like that.
I'd agree that in certain situations I think free is okay for stock photography but only when it's a direct incentive to buy. Buy 10 images, get one free. 10 free images when you buy a $200 credit package.
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.
Btw, the only people talking about 'big changes' or 'free' are those who aren't actually active in micro. The 'pundits' of the industry if you will .
I know some of you commented on this in the other thread but anyway feel free to say few words.
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.