Interesting read on what we shouldn't shoot in the micrcostock business anymore--- I am guilty of having a few of these images 

http://webmeup.com/blog/stock-images-to-avoid.html

Interesting read on what we shouldn't shoot in the micrcostock business anymore--- I am guilty of having a few of these images 

http://webmeup.com/blog/stock-images-to-avoid.html

No, it's what buyers shouldn't buy (or use).  But they will.

Really? It's interesting to read, but in my opinion it's not really the truth. People still likes "retro" style images 😁
Of course for this style there is a gigantic competition, but there is still great demand, I think

Its one persons educated opinion backed up with no evidence...its a bit of a Social Media thing to have headlines along the lines of "Why you have been doing xyz" wrong.

Quote from: nobody on October 23, 2018, 13:28

Interesting read on what we shouldn't shoot in the micrcostock business anymore--- I am guilty of having a few of these images 

http://webmeup.com/blog/stock-images-to-avoid.html

No, it's what buyers shouldn't buy (or use).  But they will.

Right, some people apparently didn't read the article and what it's about. "Are you sure your site's images are good enough to drive traffic?" SEO, clicks, avoiding cliche images and especially the last one avoid low res images.  But mostly it's not about what we should shoot, but a better online look.

What we sell and what this article is about, are not exactly the same. Some people want distinct emotions or cheesy looking business handshakes. Little bubble people, anyone here going to be an advocate for that junk? And then the incongruous positioning of models, sure that's fun, but is it making your website look more professional and attractive for customers, or making it look like a cheap attempt at click baiting? 
 
Here's my view. Making what's out of style, over used in the past, and copying what was or is "best selling" is chasing your tail. Look to the future, new ideas, new trends, modern colors, what buyers want now, instead of what they used to want.

He was right with a basic point, bright, clean, clear images that grab the attention of the person viewing it. Avoid dull drab, ordinary scenes, if you are marketing and running a website.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on October 24, 2018, 09:36

Right, some people apparently didn't read the article and what it's about. "Are you sure your site's images are good enough to drive traffic?" SEO, clicks, avoiding cliche images and especially the last one avoid low res images.  But mostly it's not about what we should shoot, but a better online look.

What we sell and what this article is about, are not exactly the same. Some people want distinct emotions or cheesy looking business handshakes. Little bubble people, anyone here going to be an advocate for that junk? And then the incongruous positioning of models, sure that's fun, but is it making your website look more professional and attractive for customers, or making it look like a cheap attempt at click baiting? 
 
Here's my view. Making what's out of style, over used in the past, and copying what was or is "best selling" is chasing your tail. Look to the future, new ideas, new trends, modern colors, what buyers want now, instead of what they used to want.

He was right with a basic point, bright, clean, clear images that grab the attention of the person viewing it. Avoid dull drab, ordinary scenes, if you are marketing and running a website.

I found it very narrow in scope directed at one specific kind of buyer. How about designers who license images because they need an object and don't care about stories or themes? How about advertisers who are selling a product not a concept?

About the only useful part I got was using low res images. I don't shoot people, I don't do concepts or stories. Buyers are as diverse as artists.

The title of this article should be changed to "7 types of stock images you must stop using today for motivational business stories on websites."

Let me put this another way. The subject of the article is not, don't shoot these (that's what the OP decided to label it) The article is about website designs, not Microstock.