MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Slavery  (Read 6488 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Beppe Grillo

« on: March 11, 2015, 05:15 »
-2
To get paid $ 0.20 or $0.50 for a sold image, is it not a kind of modern slavery?

And why we like it?*

* If we do it there should be some good reasons, or it is in the human nature to accept to be exploited?
« Last Edit: March 11, 2015, 05:17 by Beppe Grillo »


« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2015, 05:17 »
+13
To get paid $ 0.20 or $0.50 for a sold image, is it not a kind of modern slavery?

No it's not. We all could be doing something else, if we wanted to.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2015, 05:21 »
+9
To get paid $ 0.20 or $0.50 for a sold image, is it not a kind of modern slavery?

No it's not. We all could be doing something else, if we wanted to.

But they (agencies) ask us more and more and pay us less and less, so we are conscious (and consenting) masochists?

Shelma1

« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2015, 06:00 »
+36
Masochists, perhaps. Slaves, no. There is still plenty of real slavery left in the world, and those people are not shooting landscapes with $3,000 cameras or sitting in their comfortable dining rooms drawing Christmas cards.

But do we deserve a bigger slice of the pie? When one or two people are multimillionaires or billionaires and we're making a teeny tiny fraction of that, but the billionaires are making all that money just selling our work, then yes. There needs to be some more equal distribution of profits. We're living in the age of the new robber barons.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #4 on: March 11, 2015, 06:27 »
+5
Masochists, perhaps. Slaves, no. There is still plenty of real slavery left in the world, and those people are not shooting landscapes with $3,000 cameras or sitting in their comfortable dining rooms drawing Christmas cards.

But do we deserve a bigger slice of the pie? When one or two people are multimillionaires or billionaires and we're making a teeny tiny fraction of that, but the billionaires are making all that money just selling our work, then yes. There needs to be some more equal distribution of profits. We're living in the age of the new robber barons.


I fully agree with you Shelma.
When I tell "slavery" it is of course a little provocative.
We are far to work in the same bad conditions than some Asian children working for some big American or European multinational corporations this is real slavery.

But we are, in some way exploited, for the greatest benefit of few people.
My biggest concern is that we are gradually more and more exploited, and in some way it remembers me the story of the boiling frog: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog


« Reply #5 on: March 11, 2015, 06:29 »
+6
capitalism is  a modern slavery even if you are paid well - then, you are a well paid slave

« Reply #6 on: March 11, 2015, 08:36 »
+5
We're probably less "slaves" than someone who has a regular job.
We have the choice of whether to "be there" or not

When I started work I quite enjoyed my first day. Then I realised they expected me to go back five days a week. :)
The morality of the case where people make vast wealth off the backs of others is another thing, but 'twas ever thus.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2015, 08:55 »
+15
Slaves don't pick their jobs. Underpaid people in impoverished countries, don't have any other means of earning or feeding themselves. It's a matter of survival.

Microstock artists are willing victims who decided to participate - by their own choice. Anyone new who comes here or reads the percentages agencies pay, should know enough to go find something else.

I'm happy with my returns on my efforts from Microstock. I like what I shoot and enjoy taking the photos. (which I would be doing anyway)

But if I had to depend on this income to live, I'd be just as unhappy and disillusioned as many others who voice their dissatisfaction with the income earned for their hard work. I'd probably go find something else to do. No agency is forcing people to work for them for the low returns.

The only shackles people wear in Microstock are the ones we put on ourselves.

« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2015, 08:58 »
+18

Equating anything in the stock image business to slavery is insulting to people and families who have endured actual slavery.

« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2015, 09:50 »
+2
I'm only enslaved to keywording.

Tryingmybest

  • Stand up for what is right
« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2015, 11:00 »
0
This discussion is truly insightful. As an American, I'm very glad to have a worldwide perspective on this forum. Good question!  8)

« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2015, 11:19 »
+6
We are simply bottom feeders in a large pond.

Slavery it may not be.. but the share of the pie we receive, does seem more and more like a slave's share 
 ::)

Semmick Photo

« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2015, 11:20 »
+4
I'd say its more like entrapment.

Dook

« Reply #13 on: March 11, 2015, 11:23 »
+1
I'd say its more like entrapment.
+1. Something like when you receive first dose of drug for free.
Newbies are selling unbelievably well at the beginning.

« Reply #14 on: March 11, 2015, 12:04 »
+11
I feel bad now about microstock. Not what it used to be. But I still need extra money to live. But I need to shoot more and more and more to get less and less and less. That's depressing. I wish agency like shutter or istock pay us more like pond5.  I still hope someday something good will happens to contributor in this industry. We deserved it.

« Reply #15 on: March 11, 2015, 12:54 »
+3
Julie, we all wish something changed. It's very not good what is going on lately!

« Reply #16 on: March 11, 2015, 13:21 »
+3
We are simply bottom feeders in a large pond.

Slavery it may not be.. but the share of the pie we receive, does seem more and more like a slave's share 
 ::)

when did slaves ever have a 'share'???

microstock is just a part of the increasing inequality of profits - the tops 1% reaps most of the income, while the middle gets just enough to prevent any mass discontent from changing the system


« Reply #17 on: March 11, 2015, 13:31 »
+8
when did slaves ever have a 'share'???

Your use of the word share reminds me of the share cropping system.  I think these days microstockers do have a lot in common with share croppers. We're out here doing all the wotk and the agency owners are getting rich off our efforts.

« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2015, 15:30 »
+7
I happen to be a microstock contributor, and a publisher in another domain where I pay royalties to authors, so I know the business from both sides. And I feel comfortable as a contributor and I prefer agencies like SS, who pay me e.g. 20% but sell 1000 of my images, than other agencies that pay me 60% but sell one or two images in the same period of time. I am interested in my gross earnings and not in my share. Because I'm conscious how much money and work 7/24/365 it needs to promote the agency like SS to be nr 1 in the World and keep selling my images around the world in such a quantity. Never would I be able to do it myself. I shoot and postprocess my image once. Then they work and sell my image for several years.

I advise to all of you complaining just to open your own agency and try to compete with SS. Then you will understand what I mean.

« Reply #19 on: March 11, 2015, 15:47 »
+1
when did slaves ever have a 'share'???

Your use of the word share reminds me of the share cropping system.  I think these days microstockers do have a lot in common with share croppers. We're out here doing all the wotk and the agency owners are getting rich off our efforts.

or more like us mining the blood diamonds and at the end the mining town is left a ghost town
with nothing around it fit for living... then the owners move on to another country to mine them
and everyone is so grateful that they now have jobs in the mines.
UK coal mines also come to mind when you think of microstock.

dpimborough

« Reply #20 on: March 11, 2015, 16:23 »
+9
The agencies originally started off as a good idea a way for the ordinary photographer to sell their photos and make a little money from it.

The realm of the professional photographer was out of reach for many like wise access to the "professional agencies".

However over the years the relationship between photographer and the agencies has become one of exploitation.

They rely on the photographer's desire to earn money and gain some small recognition for their output.

If they truly had the interests of the image producer at heart then things would be more balanced.  Rates and royalties would be higher.  Websites that are broken would be fixed and reviewer would be professionals not other hired photogs with their own agendas.

Most photographers and image producers stick at it because there is little chance they would ever scale the lofty heights that industry top dogs reach.

Image producers are often stuck in this never ending cycle of an abusive relationship because they have little choice.

And some image producers just do it to fund their kit and don't really care how much they are paid.  Just look at the numbers of retired and employees (working in other jobs) in the game.  To them it's just extra spending cash.

There will never be any incentive for agencies to change their ways because they know that image producers are a disparate bunch of individuals who can never ever speak with one voice let alone act together to prevent this abuse.

And bet your bottom dollar that if they could get away with it the agencies would screw you and I and everyone to  the last and final cent. :-\
« Last Edit: March 11, 2015, 16:25 by Teddy the Cat »

« Reply #21 on: March 11, 2015, 18:38 »
+3
capitalism is  a modern slavery even if you are paid well - then, you are a well paid slave

capitalism Socialism is  a modern slavery

If Jon at SS is really a billionaire, then I'm guessing that he alone has made more money than all the contributors to SS put together. It doesn't seem fair, but the truth is that just about any of us could have done what he did back in the beginning of microstock if we had the foresight, energy, and business savvy. But we didn't. He did and he gets the big payout. Neither whining about it nor wishing for a Communist workers paradise is an attractive alternative IMHO.

If we don't like it, we can stop contributing, which in fact is what I personally have done. We're not slaves.

« Reply #22 on: March 11, 2015, 20:07 »
+8
Just as ridiculous to compare asking for a fair and long overdue raise to a communist paradise as was the original slavery metaphore.  There is a lot of room between pure capitalism and pure communism.   The ideal balance for everyone lies somewhere in the middle.   The reason there are so many unhappy contributors is that the balance swung too far to the agencies and time for some realignment.

« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2015, 23:00 »
0
capitalism is  a modern slavery even if you are paid well - then, you are a well paid slave

capitalism Socialism is  a modern slavery

If Jon at SS is really a billionaire, then I'm guessing that he alone has made more money than all the contributors to SS put together. It doesn't seem fair, but the truth is that just about any of us could have done what he did back in the beginning of microstock if we had the foresight, energy, and business savvy. But we didn't. He did and he gets the big payout. Neither whining about it nor wishing for a Communist workers paradise is an attractive alternative IMHO.

If we don't like it, we can stop contributing, which in fact is what I personally have done. We're not slaves.


Any of us could have done it

How about all of us...and I mean every single one ?


And about  ...isms, all of them were and are instruments of enslavement.



« Last Edit: March 11, 2015, 23:05 by Lizard »

« Reply #24 on: March 12, 2015, 01:48 »
-3
capitalism is  a modern slavery even if you are paid well - then, you are a well paid slave

capitalism Socialism is  a modern slavery

If Jon at SS is really a billionaire, then I'm guessing that he alone has made more money than all the contributors to SS put together. It doesn't seem fair, but the truth is that just about any of us could have done what he did back in the beginning of microstock if we had the foresight, energy, and business savvy. But we didn't. He did and he gets the big payout. Neither whining about it nor wishing for a Communist workers paradise is an attractive alternative IMHO.

If we don't like it, we can stop contributing, which in fact is what I personally have done. We're not slaves.

 american dream(ing)


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle