Some basic wisdom from Harlan Ellison. I love this guy.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE</a>

Horrible pimping thread to promote the writer's strike. Has nothing to do with microstock, stock, or even photography. Thread should be deleted.

Horrible pimping thread to promote the writer's strike. Has nothing to do with microstock, stock, or even photography. Thread should be deleted.

If it has nothing to do with photography, why is the clip being discussed in multiple threads in the Pro forum at dpreview?  There is a link in one of those threads to this one here with your dismissal and maunger's as proof that the amateurs have won.  Go back and listen again.  Everywhere Harlan Ellison says "writers" substitute the word "photographers" in your mind.  Everything he says will apply just the same.  Photographers that give their stuff away or sell it too cheap make life tough for everyone else, and make life tough for themselves when they decide it is time to charge "real" rates.

There is a link in one of those threads to this one here with your dismissal and maunger's as proof that the amateurs have won.  Go back and listen again.  Everywhere Harlan Ellison says "writers" substitute the word "photographers" in your mind.  Everything he says will apply just the same.  Photographers that give their stuff away or sell it too cheap make life tough for everyone else, and make life tough for themselves when they decide it is time to charge "real" rates.

You're right I dismissed it too quickly, mainly because the title of the thread was so far from what the topic actually was. Yet I take issue with both what you say. Ellison does represent the typical old-time photography pro that hasn't embraced the current trend toward high volume, low price images.

There is a huge fundamental difference between writers like Ellison and photographers. There never was large barrier to entry into the writers market, nor was the production cost high. For photography there was. Slide film, large format, etc were a barrier to entry into the market that allowed photographers to charge very high prices. With the advent of the digital format this is no longer the case. Yes, you still need to have the skills but anyone with a camera from walmart can now learn the skills and be taking quality stock images. What you're seeing now is a market shift from high cost-low quantity market that was necessary to support the high costs of production from film, to a low cost-high qunatity market for digital.

This is basic evolution. The pros at dpreview that are supposedly complaining will either have to adapt or go extinct. What I find fascinating is the statement that "amateurs have won". Whoever is is saying that obviously isn't taking photographs that are so far above what the amateurs are producing as to justify the price. It's more a reflection on the quality of their own work, rather than a reflection of the market as a whole.

... and all of us shooting for the micro stock agencies have in effect taken away a great deal of work from those that used to get the good commercial gigs....


Letting someone buy a shot for a quarter where it used to cost him two grand?

Yes we are to blame, yes we are giving it away.
There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it.
"Ohhhhhhh, my picture made it to the front  cover of a magazine and I go 20 bucks!"
Geez!

Having been a successful photographer for over a decade, I knew what would happen if microstock caught on.

It did.

And look around, we live in a world where "good enough" is indeed good enough. the image the art director finds on the micro stock site may not be exactly what they wanted but it is "good enough".

Microstock has changed everything but there will always be a need for the true commercial photographer, the one with the skills and knowledge that most micro stock contributers couldn't even fathom.


The amateurs have indeed won.

"ORIGIN late 18th cent.: from French, from Italian amatore, from Latin amator �lover,� from amare �to love.� "

I am an amateur and always will be for I do love what I do.

I've spent a lot of time looking at images available at the RM agencies, and I am not impressed at all.  Most of those would be refused at microstock agencies.  So would most of the photographers.

So true.

Being a stock photo noob I browsed what i thought were high professional photos (considered the price those agencies we all know charge to their customers) to learn lights, composition and so on.

Every time I bounced back or to the microstock photos or to the rare real pro who still are miles ahead the others.

Just search the food imagery on those huge RM agencies then go to Lou Manna or Michael Ray web sites to notice what food photos really are.

so... i can take an article about football and tell you to change every word from football to photography and see how it applies to photography and you'll claim i'm a genius?

the title of the thread implies that the video will make me a better shooter. It says nothing about watching the video and trying to see how it fits to photography.

it is wrong to pimp a thread with a bad title.

i can see how it can be interpreted to be about photography, but the author should have given clearer input instead of teasing me into thinking it was something it is not.

that's my complaint about the thread not about the video

...
(sharply_done..  hopefully this wasn't too negative.  Seriously thought this was bloody funny, but a little too close to the bone as this happens to me daily.  Cheers,  JC)

Huh? I don't get it ... why are you mentioning me?

I agree with Ellison's point - don't give your work away. I've only done this once, but it was an exceptional case, and I got a certain amount of prestige from it. I think we're all approached from time to time about doing work for free or for some sort of credit/mention/pat-on-the-back. Under normal circumstances, I just don't do it.

As far as the semi-related debate about microstock pricing goes, it's now obvious that the disruptive technology introduced by digital cameras has turned the photography business upside down. You can complain about this or take advantage of it - the choice is yours to make.

I've been shooting 35mm film for 36 years...   never thought about selling it until a year and a half ago.  Point... I just didn't bust into photography when I bought my first digital...been doing it a loooong time. ..and I still shoot film too.

That being said,   my take on the digital revolution is this.  Digital has enabled so many more folks who    HAD THE TALENT,  BUT COULDN'T AFFORD TO EXPLORE IT (or exploit it)   to now do so.   Ten minutes on any RM  site will show that too much of the work there is mediocre crap that would never fly on the new micros.  On the other hand,  ten minutes on any reputable micro will find you NEW talent that produces images putting the mediocre crap on the RM's to shame.

If you could buy a baby grand piano for 300 bucks (instead of 15 grand) you'd find a lot more people had musical talents as well,  perhaps even find dozens, even hundreds of new (amatuer) concert pianists  here and there. 

You could quite possibly have walked by an individual today who has the talent to be the next  Frank Lloyd Wright or da Vinci,  the next  Alexander Bell or Newton, or the next Mozart or Bach... or the next Ansel Adams...     but will never realize their potential because they can't afford to pursue the education or purchase the 'tools'...

The digital camera revolution.... allowed that for those who love to take pictures... to realize they had an ability they never knew they had.  Now we have a lot more  talented people producing images.  And yeah,   some are selling them cheap... that is,  cheaper than what oldtimers were accustomed to selling them for..  oh well. 

I find great humor in that argument as well.  Why do you think the Ford dealer in this block is selling T-birds for  2 grand less than the Ford dealer on the other side of town?  Why's a pound of provolone cheese sell for half as much at the deli 2 blocks away?  Why's the gas station across the street sell gas 4 cents a gallon cheaper???   You sell your picture to a magazine for 2 grand... I'm happy with 15 hundred. ....  oh well.  Now the guy that sold for 2 grand, didn't sell any... and I just got a second sale for 15 hundred more...  ....... do the math.  If that's whoring my pictures.... I'm crying all the way to the whorehouse (bank).  I guess your pix weren't worth the 500 more.....  welcome to the 21st century.

Times have changed... there's no turning back the digital clock.  There's a lot more competition now for the better or worse.   Instead of sitting around crying the blues....  maybe some of those whinning should get the camera out of the bag and get to work.

Hey... the really talented pros have nothing to worry about.  If they are that good,  they will still and always command top dollar for their work and the use of their images.  Those that need to worry are the old RM shooters (pros) whos work wasn't all that good in the first place.  They were only there because there was no competition, they were the only game in town,  there weren't thousands shooters with pocket cams breathing down their necks with work that is pretty good, even great!

Until the time machine is built and they can go back and kill the guy who invented the digital camera,  the whinners better think about getting off their complacent butts and...   go shoot some more and better pictures.  If they don't, some 'mom with a point and shoot'  will.  And more power to her, go explore and exploit that talent, momma, good for you,  I say!!
    I talk to people like that every day and you know what?  I encourage them all the more. Go for it!! You keep burning up that digital memory.   I think the competition is great!  It forces me to be better than yesterday.   And when I can't stand it any more,  I'll retire to the den, turn off the lights, suck down some beers and watch the slides I took in 1969.

 I understand Ellison's point.  I understand his feelings and fine... stand up for yourself.   But man....  this ain't your daddy's day and age.  There's only so far you can go telling people to  F-off before you find yourself with no pot to pee in.  Does he think the DVD won't be produced because he said.... no?

Do the RM's pros think mom will put the camera back in the box because... they said.. she was an amatuer?      Guess who the last laugh will be on.....................             

Tom,

What an AMAZING post ! Wow ... telling it like it is.

I remember saving my money from working for my family for $2.00/hr at the family gas station when I was around 11 yrs old,  to take a 30 day historical bus tour across the United States around 1981. For such an event I was armed with what I believe was one of the 1st Kodak "Disc Camera's". It was my mother's and believe me the film was EXPENSIVE to buy and to develop. However, it was the perfect size for my trip. To this day, I have a photo I will never forget from that camera. It as an almost straight-up shot of the Twin Towers. I went to the top that day ... other amazing shots followed (from an 11 yr old with an eye to shoot photos). I sadly enough I ran out of film shortly after making it to the east coast ...

My talent was never developed or explored due to the bottom line back then being, and for many years later in my life, the cost of equipment for taking photos, and the cost for developing photos, were cost prohibitive to me.

I've been shooting photos for years with whatever I've had at the time with amazing results with cheap equipment.

I am now looking forward to developing a talent, that was always lying dormant in side of me ... waiting to be developed

Mrk


Mark Payne's original photos, digital photo art, and graphic illustrations are currently available at the following links. Mark's approved online images, have met strict stock photography standards and are available for individual download, graphic design purposes, commercial or other uses with the purchase of special licensing rights.
 
http://www.dreamstime.com/resp384346
 
http://www.bigstockphoto.com/account/gallery/view/189832
 
Thank you for your support.

Beautifully written Tom, enjoyed your post immensely!

Ahhh Harlan, growing up I devoured all of his writing. My favorite quip of his has always been "Mental Midget". A truly smart, intelligent man, with a knack for not being afraid to show his temper.

When one of my adult kids asks, "what's my valuable consideration" I say, consider this... you want car rides?  Dinner? A roof over your head, etc... then pose and sign!  You've recieved valuable consideration.

But why would joe shmo on the street was to sign a MR for nothing?  I'm sure they do all the time, but I'm just waiting for the ball to drop.

A model release is a liability waiver, not a contract. As you observed, the element of consideration doesn't come into play, and if consideration isn't involved, a contract is not enforceable.