MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Gizeh on November 24, 2007, 04:17
-
Some basic wisdom from Harlan Ellison. I love this guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE
-
Some basic wisdom from Harlan Ellison. I love this guy.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE[/url]
I don't see how that has anything to do with shooting photographs (as your thread title suggests)
-
Horrible pimping thread to promote the writer's strike. Has nothing to do with microstock, stock, or even photography. Thread should be deleted.
-
I don't see how that has anything to do with shooting photographs (as your thread title suggests)
The title of the thread only suggests it has anything to do with shooting photographs to the narrow minded. It is about being a successful shooter, which is about much more than just the photographs, unless you are an amateur. Professionals need to be paid, which is what the clip is about. You can't be successful if you keep giving your stuff away, because then they expect you to give it away the next time and they expect the next person to give it away, too.
-
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.
-
ROFL....
If I close my eyes I can see a chap who took a seminar I did on photography about 15 years ago...
He was pissed off at freelancers undercutting him, and spoke with great passion about how large companies ask for free images all the time.
I think it is relevant to photography, the writers strike in the US is also relevant, as it's about people being paid fairly for I.P. Similarities can be found across all businesses that rely on creativity...
Cheers, Me.
-
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.
-
I agree with every word you've said YinYang.
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.
The 'old school' are like King Canute trying to hold back the tide.
We all have to adapt. No business is immune to change.
-
... 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.
-
And guys... I'm sorry to say it like this... BUT for all you who say that this has nothing to do with photography (or pros whining) only shows that photography isn't your first profession. :)
Watch the clip again (I still have tears in my eye...bloody funny!) replace the word writer for photographer and listen to his remarks about Warner Brothers. That's the key.. the remarks about the company, not competitors.
In the past 30 years in this business I have found every year this issue gets worse.. companies ringing your office and want something for nothing and get pissed at you when you don't give it to them. I'm talking the biggest magazines, ad agencies and yes, even film studios. I had the largest IMAX film maker want a unique set of images for free. Yes, free.. claiming IMAX movies were educational, not commercial therefore we shouldn't charge him. I did the same thing as in the clip... asked and yes, everyone and every contributor was getting paid except for us. I said no... they got very, very upset and 2 months later came back and happily bought the set of images. Somehow in the 2 months they BECAME commercial. ;)
This happens daily... and is a real pain in the ass. Try paying your rent with a credit line in the local paper... good luck.
Thank you Gizeh that clip is a ripper!
(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)
-
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.
-
Gizeh... just wanted to say thanks again for that clip... I've passed it around to a few friends in the biz and everyone is loving it! How this thread got turned into microstock photogs being better and pros running scared has me a bit baffled.
This clip has more to do with the business of photography than 90% of the threads on this site.
Keep up the good work mate! ;D
-
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
-
I would think that if the "pros" are having trouble competing with the amateurs then maybe it's time the "pros" to step it up a bit and show us why they are considered pros. Competition is part of every business. And as in every business there will be someone willing to get paid less to get work. I don't think this writer's plight has anything to do with micro stock photography. He seems to have a decent job writing for a popular show. Getting paid well for something he loves doing. His video didn't impress me. He doesn't sound very professional. You would think a writer could find a better way to get his point across to the public. Just my opinion. Take it for what it is.
-
...
(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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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.
-
You can complain about this or take advantage of it - the choice is yours to make.
We had a discussion about this in SP, as they are introducing a price scheme equivalent to microstock.
Not only digital cameras made photography more affordable, but the internet put sellers and buyers more easily in contact, and within global reach. Also there is a much bigger market now - a lot of people that would never buy an image now do. Possibly there is more money than ever in the stock photo market, but much more distributed.
It's a fact that Nike will keep on making shoes in Indonesia (or whatever), regardless of Michael Moore's protests... Not that it's a good thing. I try to buy Brazilian products whenever possible, even if more expensive than imported stuff, as it means more local jobs (less unemployment, more consumer market), but I won't break my budget.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
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.....................
-
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.
I will try again. The title of the thread is only misleading to people who think that being a successful shooter starts and ends with taking the photograph. Professional photographers know that this is simply not true. That is why there are many excellent photographers who are not successful and why many successful photographers are only capable of capturing mediocre images. The business side is critically important and you don't have to be a genius at puzzle solving to immediately understand how the video applies as much to professional photographers as professional writers.
Never undervalue your work. It will work against you in the long run.
-
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.
-
Mark... checked out your DT stuff... Man!! Nice work!! I really liked "storm on the horizon VI" .... beautiful images!! 8)=tom
p.s. thanks for the comment... but I'm sure it will tick some folks off. One of the things that upsets me most in life is wasted talent. People who intentionally waste their talents tick me off. What saddens me is people who are never able to realize their talents for reasons they are not able to control in life. When someone gets the opportunity to display and develop their talents and... so called experts or pros bad mouth them... Then I really get ticked off. And I think that is quite prevelant in professional photography circles.
One of the things I like so much about this forum is that it seems to be populated with REAL professionals. Here you will find a group that doesn't hesitate to help each other. Be it techincal tips about the craft or solid business advice, they give freely. There is no cut-throat competition here. I'd love to see MSG grow into a business association. I'd join it in a new york minute.
Welcome to the gang!
-
Beautifully written Tom, enjoyed your post immensely!
-
Thanks Gizeh for posting the link. What a superb clip. Never heard of the guy, but it struck a chord with me. Misleading subject title though.
I'm an illustrator by profession, and I'd have loved to have shown this to my ex agent (who is now out of the business). The amount of free promotional stuff I did for that guy, and none of it worked.
I just got ripped off. In the end the artist's were expected to give stuff away because we loved doing our work and it would give us exposure. Well that don't pay the mortgage...
Thank god for the web. I'm a realist in the end, and I've had to change with the times. Getting peanuts per image from microstock is better than nothing. When all the peanuts add up, it can come to something worthwhile, and its great for promoting my work.
I've had more jobs since being on the micro's (and one macro) than ever before. One client even gave me a whopping great bonus last week... bless him.
If it weren't for stock I'd probably be the oldest trainee plumber around, and there would be water everywhere.....
I still value my work (if I don't who will?), I just get the chance to sell it repeatedly.
Doesn't mean its worth any less. Each image is a long term investment (hopefully).
So next time the phone rings and its an old publisher from my past asking for freebies, I hope I can remember some of Harlan's words...
-
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.
-
As college students we would sit in the jaccuzi and read short stories from "Shaterday". He really shou,d have made it bigger in the field like Koonz and King.
Anyway, I got a differnt take on what he was saying and I guess what played into my obrsevation of it was partially do to the fact that I was working on my Model Release today. The part that says they have reveived"valuable consideration" for their releaseing all rights. I had someone ask today, so what's my valuable consideration?
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.
My 2 cents (Love ya Harlen)
Connie (Very tired so spellimg doesn't count)
www.ticopuppy.com
-
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.
-
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.
Every model release is a contract and consideration should be involved. Every model release includes "For valuable consideration hereby acknowledged as received..." Every photographer should be giving their models something, prints or a cd, etc. If you don't given them something, then the contract's validity may be challenged, but to say it's "a liability waiver, not a contract" is just wrong.
-
Well said yingyang.
Now back to the Ellison :)
I found this part of a different interview even more compelling http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI2XuMoQOCU&feature=related then the one that started this topic.
-
I found this part of a different interview even more compelling [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI2XuMoQOCU&feature=related [/url] then the one that started this topic.
Now that was a funny and interesting interview.
-
Love it when he says he wouldn't take a piss without getting paid
It's true for any profession there is always someone that wants something for nothing.
-
The question remains, where will all this stop? Entry level cameras are now so accessible a further price drop is almost inevitable.
I see a proliferation of free image stock sites cropping up where the only potential revenue is Google ad dollars.
I hope it doesn't happen too soon but I think a lot of microstock pros are already planning their exit strategy.
-
I couldn't disagree more. There is a serious shortage of professional microstock photographers - you only have to look at the top lists at any of the agencies and all the action is confined to just two or three hundred contributors. The exception is iStock who now have 2,300 'gold' photographers (but 2,700,000 members).
Yes, free sites will be popular. But can you really see the average Joe with his $400 P&S causing Andres, Yuri, Lise, Ron, Dolgachov, Hidesey, Irana, Photoshow, Sjlocke or anyone else of that calibre to lose sleep at night?
I don't think so.
I think 'free' sites will expose the huge difference in quality between 'free' and 'professional' and I think prices will rise. In five years time the average price for a 'professional' microstock will be 100% higher than today.
-
I think 'free' sites will expose the huge difference in quality between 'free' and 'professional' and I think prices will rise. In five years time the average price for a 'professional' microstock will be 100% higher than today.
It is extremely difficult to come up on lower pricing than vice versa and that is well documented. It all ties in closely with perceived value, over subscription, over duplication and many other variables that ultimately lead towards a consumer driven market.
While the notion that MS will enjoy growth of 100% over the next 5 years is an interesting one, I cannot see how that can possibly happen based on recent trends.
Mass market consumerism has seen prices drop worldwide with no evidence of recovery except in cases of scarcity.
Let's face it, there's only so many ways you can photograph a duck but when 3,000 other photographers are doing exactly the same shot, rejection rates increase, prices drop further and contributor revenue falls.
That decline has already started. Sites like StockXpert, SS, etc are now sitting on their laurels turning down stock that only 2 years ago would have been seen as perfectly adequate. The evidence of over subscription is there if you want to look at it. Gone are the days of 200 - 300 photos being accepted on upload, now you're lucky if the average contributors gets a hit rate of 2/10 which will only result in perfectly good snappers becoming disenchanted and then giving it away in response to mass rejections.
You can't see that happening? Well I certainly can and those sites are already there.
-
As in every other "not-protected" market prices move with demand and supply. First people coming into MS got nice earnings because it was a "fresh" market. Now most of their worse shots would probably be rejected or very scarcely downloaded considering the supply of more and more professional-looking shots.
When people will see how hard is just to gain a bunch of bucks with their snapshots they'll turn their time to something else more profitable while the ones really interested in a professional approach will continue to study and improve to reach the best seller ones.
So I expect to:
a) in the short term:
1) a lot more contributors will apply
2) most of them would get tired before reaching the first payout because high rejection rate and scarce downloads
3) the hard workers ones will accept to stay instead working hard to increase their quality
b) in the medium term:
1) The hard workers who will succesfully reach a good quality probably would also have the skills to get assignments outside MS, so they can also decide to dedicate less time to MS shooting.
2) There will be less new applicants because the "easy money" myth surrounding MS now will shatter.
3) less supply, with higher quality, means higher prices IF (underlined) also the demand will stay at the same level
c) in the long term:
1) who cares. As Keynes (the economist) said, in the long term we'll be all dead ;)
The ones who talked about the automotive market could notice that after the oriental brands entered the market the american and european brands raised their quality, lowered their prices but right now here in Europe a car, even if it's japanese or korean, is proportionally more expensive than 15-20 years ago.
-
Well, see iStock's announcement today - prices increased by 50%.
-
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.....................
Well said!!
-
Well said!!
I guess I was a little hot under the collar that day... :-\ I hope it was understood that I was speaking in general only about those 'old timers' that feel threatened by new blood and would try to make themselves look better primarily by ridicule & making others look bad.
One's work speaks for itself. An individual's work will make them great along with those that appreciate their work. That goes for any business any profession. Great photogs will always be great by their works.
But a 'well said' from you, sir... I take as a great compliment. I have respected your work and opinions since I got into this crazy but fun biz. thank you, rinderart!! -tom
-
yeah, well said akatom. I hadn't read that post before.
I always awe at the postings where people grumble at microstock saying people don't earn money. I read one post on microstockdiaries by a reader that said that Yuri can't be making much money and saying that Yuri stated he only made MOST of his money in microstock not ALL.. if it was THAT good he would make ALL his money there... ::) oh brother.
I guess each is free to his own thoughts, and i can just be glad that is another old timer that is staying out of our playing field - it is probably to our benefit that most people think we are earning $100/month on thousands of images.
-
I guess each is free to his own thoughts, and i can just be glad that is another old timer that is staying out of our playing field - it is probably to our benefit that most people think we are earning $100/month on thousands of images.
Yeah, you got that right, leaf!! It's amazing.... but when all is said and done... as long as we are happy, that's all that matters! And I'm still having fun! 8)-tom