MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Who is our customer?  (Read 12984 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 24, 2015, 04:14 »
+1
Dear photographers and designers!

Lately, I've been faced with the fact that customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content. Of course, the evaluation of any photo or vector is subjective and depends on the personal preferences. But I am very interested in how you see your customers? When you create a picture that you think about how it will be used, do you imagine options and variants? Do you have an image of the client for which you work? Is it important for you to receive feedback from those who buy your images or not?

I am waiting for your comments.

Yours, Maria.


« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2015, 07:05 »
0
Soup to nuts.

« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2015, 07:09 »
0
Soup to nuts.

Can you tell me more? That is so general)

Shelma1

« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2015, 07:12 »
+3
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers, since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2015, 07:55 »
0

« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2015, 07:59 »
0
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers, since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2015, 08:01 »
0
http://photodune.net/statement   check invoice and you'll see who the customer is.

or http://photodune.net/financial_document/invoices/item_purchases/1234567


I'd like to know the way you thinking. It is not a financial or marketing search. It is my curiosity. I prefer to understand people I am working with.

Shelma1

« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2015, 08:07 »
0

Shelma1

« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2015, 08:10 »
0
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers, since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

Well, based on your OP, "customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content." Why don't you tell us what those different views are? Then perhaps we can tell you what we think.

« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2015, 08:13 »
+12
I figure there's a buyer for every image and it's your job to find them.

« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2015, 08:19 »
0
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

Well, based on your OP, "customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content." Why don't you tell us what those different views are? Then perhaps we can tell you what we think.

Ok, I will give you an example from yesterday. One of our clients found a photo with, which shows a picture of a famous artist in the museum. It is the high-quality photo, but with a special light, which was in the museum. He is a painter and he wanted to find a reproduction to explore the manner of drawing. He was very disappointed. I think the reason of such situations is misunderstanding and "different view" on purposes of photos.

« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2015, 08:25 »
0
I figure there's a buyer for every image and it's your job to find them.

I can't understand why your reaction on my question is so, hm, strong. Yes, it is our job to find a buyer to each image. That's why we have inspectors, who examine your portfolios and choose those photos which have commercial value. What I am talking about, is a process of creation photos. Now I have the feeling that for you it is absolutely the same to whom you produce images, what will happen to photos and the context in which they are used. I thought that the authors are careful to their work, even to stock images.

Shelma1

« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2015, 08:26 »
+1
It sounds like you had a painter who wanted to create a forgery and was disappointed that the photo someone took wasn't accurate enough to copy the artist's strokes exactly. When creating an image to license I sure don't picture that scenario in my mind.

« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2015, 08:28 »
+2
   Having worked with ad agencies for 25 years, I see how they use microstock. Initially, they buy cheap versions to use in comps to present their projects. Then they would contract me to shoot something very similar. As cost cuts became more important, they would just start using hi-res microstock images and eliminate the photoshoot. Many times I would end up using microstock photos for my project because I couldn't find the subject matter to shoot myself. (especially food or plants that were out of season, or not available in the US)
  I shoot isolations, in full focus, that can easily be stripped into projects. I try to imagine how an art director would use my isolated image in their project. That's how I made a good living for years, taking various images, and assembling them in Photoshop, to match an art director's comp.

« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2015, 08:33 »
0
It sounds like you had a painter who wanted to create a forgery and was disappointed that the photo someone took wasn't accurate enough to copy the artist's strokes exactly. When creating an image to license I sure don't picture that scenario in my mind.

Not that bad) He didn't want to make a forgery, I am sure, just to study genius author technic. It was one example, a bright one. I prefer to exaggerate a topic to show it more in contrast. I feel that you don't want to answer, but I will ask (why not?!) - what scenario you have in your mind?

« Reply #15 on: April 24, 2015, 08:41 »
+1
   Having worked with ad agencies for 25 years, I see how they use microstock. Initially, they buy cheap versions to use in comps to present their projects. Then they would contract me to shoot something very similar. As cost cuts became more important, they would just start using hi-res microstock images and eliminate the photoshoot. Many times I would end up using microstock photos for my project because I couldn't find the subject matter to shoot myself. (especially food or plants that were out of season, or not available in the US)
  I shoot isolations, in full focus, that can easily be stripped into projects. I try to imagine how an art director would use my isolated image in their project. That's how I made a good living for years, taking various images, and assembling them in Photoshop, to match an art director's comp.

Dear Rimglow, thank you for your answer. I appreciate your personal and sincere explanation. You helped me to understand the process. For me, it is very important to know more about people I am working with. I choose that work to have a possibility to communicate with interesting people from all over the world. And I enjoy it (mostly). And the process of creation and motivation is very interesting for me. I ask customers as well about their vision of photographers and vector designers. And the hole picture is very surprising.

Shelma1

« Reply #16 on: April 24, 2015, 08:41 »
+2
My scenario is creating images that hopefully will appeal to a broad international audience. Like everyone else, I try to find niches that aren't saturated. It has never occurred to me to take a detailed shot of someone's artwork so someone else could "study" it.

I don't think anybody understands what you're asking, exactly. Or why you're asking.


« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2015, 08:42 »
+5
I figure there's a buyer for every image and it's your job to find them.

I can't understand why your reaction on my question is so, hm, strong. Yes, it is our job to find a buyer to each image. That's why we have inspectors, who examine your portfolios and choose those photos which have commercial value. What I am talking about, is a process of creation photos. Now I have the feeling that for you it is absolutely the same to whom you produce images, what will happen to photos and the context in which they are used. I thought that the authors are careful to their work, even to stock images.

No, I'm happy to create what I do, leaving copyspace and such, but every image is usable to someone.  We make 'em, you find the buyer for 'em.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #18 on: April 24, 2015, 08:46 »
+2
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

Well, based on your OP, "customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content." Why don't you tell us what those different views are? Then perhaps we can tell you what we think.

Ok, I will give you an example from yesterday. One of our clients found a photo with, which shows a picture of a famous artist in the museum. It is the high-quality photo, but with a special light, which was in the museum. He is a painter and he wanted to find a reproduction to explore the manner of drawing. He was very disappointed. I think the reason of such situations is misunderstanding and "different view" on purposes of photos.
LOL. Really?

I agree with Shelma, sounds fishy, also, what do you want the photograph to do in this instance. Set up his studio lights in the museum to get a better lit shot?


« Reply #19 on: April 24, 2015, 08:54 »
0
My scenario is creating images that hopefully will appeal to a broad international audience. Like everyone else, I try to find niches that aren't saturated. It has never occurred to me to take a detailed shot of someone's artwork so someone else could "study" it.

I don't think anybody understands what you're asking, exactly. Or why you're asking.

I try to explain why and what. I started working with photographers not so long ago. I am interested in this profession, the process of creating pictures, personal motivation and attitude to work of those with whom I work, whose interests I represent. I ask customers as well about what they thing about photographers. I always prefer to see people in the client, not something abstract. And surprised by the attitude that I see here. And the reluctance to talk about it. Maybe specificity of work affects on a detached attitude. Maybe, camera, computer, internet dehumanizes people more than I thought. For me, the Internet and the overall process of globalization have always been a possibility, rather than an obstacle. I worked in Europe, I always have customers of half of the world and virtual communication tools have helped us to communicate. But now it seems to me that through the Internet, including us, photo banks, people no longer think like human beings. And I am sorry for that. Maybe if I posted this question on behalf of the photographer, and not representative of the ImageBank, the dialogue could be more sincere. But I do not see any reason to hide or pretend to be someone else. I love my job.

« Reply #20 on: April 24, 2015, 08:59 »
0
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

Well, based on your OP, "customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content." Why don't you tell us what those different views are? Then perhaps we can tell you what we think.

Ok, I will give you an example from yesterday. One of our clients found a photo with, which shows a picture of a famous artist in the museum. It is the high-quality photo, but with a special light, which was in the museum. He is a painter and he wanted to find a reproduction to explore the manner of drawing. He was very disappointed. I think the reason of such situations is misunderstanding and "different view" on purposes of photos.
LOL. Really?

I agree with Shelma, sounds fishy, also, what do you want the photograph to do in this instance. Set up his studio lights in the museum to get a better lit shot?

Yes, It is real and we were surprised not less than you. In this situation, I am totally on a side of the photographer. And the dismissing was a problem of that painter. But this example shows us, very graphically, the way of thinking of people on both sides. As for me, the mediator between one and other, it is very important to understand needs and thoughts of both sides.

« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2015, 09:01 »
+1
Well, someone buying is going to have something specific in mind.  And even though we have X monkeys shooting Y topics for Z days, that particular angle, lighting or whatever may not be available.

« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2015, 09:02 »
0
I figure there's a buyer for every image and it's your job to find them.

I can't understand why your reaction on my question is so, hm, strong. Yes, it is our job to find a buyer to each image. That's why we have inspectors, who examine your portfolios and choose those photos which have commercial value. What I am talking about, is a process of creation photos. Now I have the feeling that for you it is absolutely the same to whom you produce images, what will happen to photos and the context in which they are used. I thought that the authors are careful to their work, even to stock images.

No, I'm happy to create what I do, leaving copyspace and such, but every image is usable to someone.  We make 'em, you find the buyer for 'em.

Is it important for the future life of your photos? For example, if an author is vegetarian (it is hypothetical), but his images is using in any advertising about hunting?

« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2015, 09:03 »
0
Well, someone buying is going to have something specific in mind.  And even though we have X monkeys shooting Y topics for Z days, that particular angle, lighting or whatever may not be available.

Love that X-Y-Z example!)

farbled

« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2015, 09:21 »
+3
My stock shooting is more about me and improving my photography than catering to customers these days. I can't predict who/why/how so I simply don't bother. I do research a few themes or trends or try and create my own, but I don't go out of my way to do it for anyone specifically.

« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2015, 12:15 »
+1
Assuming we aren't grabbing our pitchforks yet. Rimglow nailed it I think, at work if we can't find an image to fit, we take one, make one, mesh two images together or just scream in frustration that the advertisement is stupid and ragequit for a while.

   Having worked with ad agencies for 25 years, I see how they use microstock. Initially, they buy cheap versions to use in comps to present their projects. Then they would contract me to shoot something very similar. As cost cuts became more important, they would just start using hi-res microstock images and eliminate the photoshoot. Many times I would end up using microstock photos for my project because I couldn't find the subject matter to shoot myself. (especially food or plants that were out of season, or not available in the US)
  I shoot isolations, in full focus, that can easily be stripped into projects. I try to imagine how an art director would use my isolated image in their project. That's how I made a good living for years, taking various images, and assembling them in Photoshop, to match an art director's comp.

ShadySue

« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2015, 12:29 »
+1
Is it important for the future life of your photos? For example, if an author is vegetarian (it is hypothetical), but his images is using in any advertising about hunting?
I had one of my wildlife photos used in an advertisement for hunting equipment. I hated the usage, and would rather not have had the sale, but I doubt if (m)any agencies would ask the client what they were going to do with it and then ask the author it it was OK.

It's similar to an ethical vegetarian (I mean vegetarian for reasons of animal rights) taking a job in the fruit department of a supermarket, but one day because of staff absence, they're required to work in the butcher's department.


Shelma1

« Reply #27 on: April 24, 2015, 12:49 »
+2
I'm a vegetarian and was briefly assigned to the KFC account. Everyone was required to eat KFC in client meetings, so I ate the mashed potatoes and corn. Got off the account as quickly as I could. Refuse cigarette accounts and try my very best to avoid working on pharma. It restricts my freelancing income a bit, but I feel better about it.

Nothing you can do about image usage, unfortunately. I've found some of my illustrations being used for political causes I'm opposed to. All you can do is grin and bear it.

ShadySue

« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2015, 13:41 »
+5
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

Well, based on your OP, "customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content." Why don't you tell us what those different views are? Then perhaps we can tell you what we think.

Ok, I will give you an example from yesterday. One of our clients found a photo with, which shows a picture of a famous artist in the museum. It is the high-quality photo, but with a special light, which was in the museum. He is a painter and he wanted to find a reproduction to explore the manner of drawing. He was very disappointed. I think the reason of such situations is misunderstanding and "different view" on purposes of photos.

Your client could have paid about a dollar for a photo of a famous artist in a gallery and complained about the lighting not being suited to his specialist and possibly suspect requirements? And he bothered to contact you to complain?

« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2015, 19:30 »
+1
I figure there's a buyer for every image and it's your job to find them.

Exactly.  Customers come from all walks of life.

« Reply #30 on: April 24, 2015, 19:56 »
+1
Quote
For me, it is very important to know more about people I am working with. I choose that work to have a possibility to communicate with interesting people from all over the world. And I enjoy it (mostly). And the process of creation and motivation is very interesting for me. I ask customers as well about their vision of photographers and vector designers. And the hole picture is very surprising.

Yeah, some hole pictures can be surprising.
Of course, it depends on what kind of hole, and also whether it is a close-up or shot with a wide-angle lens.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2015, 20:33 by LesPalenik »

ShadySue

« Reply #31 on: April 25, 2015, 07:12 »
0
Quote
For me, it is very important to know more about people I am working with. I choose that work to have a possibility to communicate with interesting people from all over the world. And I enjoy it (mostly). And the process of creation and motivation is very interesting for me. I ask customers as well about their vision of photographers and vector designers. And the hole picture is very surprising.

Yeah, some hole pictures can be surprising.
Of course, it depends on what kind of hole, and also whether it is a close-up or shot with a wide-angle lens.
Far too technical and complicated.
Best to stick with pinhole.

« Reply #32 on: April 25, 2015, 11:17 »
0
No wonder people have been drifting away from this forum. Someone comes on with a well meaning topic of discussion and they mostly get unhelpful snide comments. Kind of sad.

ShadySue

« Reply #33 on: April 25, 2015, 11:38 »
+2
No wonder people have been drifting away from this forum. Someone comes on with a well meaning topic of discussion and they mostly get unhelpful snide comments. Kind of sad.
Where's your helpful reply?

« Reply #34 on: April 25, 2015, 12:34 »
+2
No wonder people have been drifting away from this forum. Someone comes on with a well meaning topic of discussion and they mostly get unhelpful snide comments. Kind of sad.

Very sad indeed, I couldn't agree more with you. Some people come here only to complain.

ShadySue

« Reply #35 on: April 25, 2015, 12:51 »
+2
No wonder people have been drifting away from this forum. Someone comes on with a well meaning topic of discussion and they mostly get unhelpful snide comments. Kind of sad.

Very sad indeed, I couldn't agree more with you. Some people come here only to complain.
Like we should waste time on companies selling images for 80c - $1?

« Reply #36 on: April 26, 2015, 22:27 »
+1
My stock shooting is more about me and improving my photography than catering to customers these days. I can't predict who/why/how so I simply don't bother. I do research a few themes or trends or try and create my own, but I don't go out of my way to do it for anyone specifically.

Your comment has hooked me and I found your website! Teddy, you're doing great photos! I will be very happy to work with you if you have such desire. I invite you to cooperation.


« Reply #37 on: April 26, 2015, 22:35 »
0
I would think stock agencies would have a much clearer picture of our customers since you/they have access to data we don't. Maybe we should ask you?

The idea is we have a clear picture, but it is very curious to know what contributors think about their customers. I have data, but can't read your mind and predict your personal view.

Well, based on your OP, "customers in the microstock and photographers have very different views on provided and purchased content." Why don't you tell us what those different views are? Then perhaps we can tell you what we think.

Ok, I will give you an example from yesterday. One of our clients found a photo with, which shows a picture of a famous artist in the museum. It is the high-quality photo, but with a special light, which was in the museum. He is a painter and he wanted to find a reproduction to explore the manner of drawing. He was very disappointed. I think the reason of such situations is misunderstanding and "different view" on purposes of photos.

Your client could have paid about a dollar for a photo of a famous artist in a gallery and complained about the lighting not being suited to his specialist and possibly suspect requirements? And he bothered to contact you to complain?

You can't imagine, it is not the end of story. We always trying to do our best and even more for our customers, so I called to The Russian Museum, where this picture is, and they gave us a highest-quality image of this picture. Unfortunately, the client chose to continue to insult our staff and we were forced to deny him in our service.

« Reply #38 on: April 26, 2015, 22:53 »
0
Is it important for the future life of your photos? For example, if an author is vegetarian (it is hypothetical), but his images is using in any advertising about hunting?
I had one of my wildlife photos used in an advertisement for hunting equipment. I hated the usage, and would rather not have had the sale, but I doubt if (m)any agencies would ask the client what they were going to do with it and then ask the author it it was OK.

It's similar to an ethical vegetarian (I mean vegetarian for reasons of animal rights) taking a job in the fruit department of a supermarket, but one day because of staff absence, they're required to work in the butcher's department.

Good example. Maybe it makes sense to introduce some rules? For example, to specify tags "Do not use for hunting advertising" or write on the page of the author about his interests and preferences. I'm not sure that we can prohibit the use, but to voice your preferences is possible.

« Reply #39 on: April 26, 2015, 22:56 »
0
I'm a vegetarian and was briefly assigned to the KFC account. Everyone was required to eat KFC in client meetings, so I ate the mashed potatoes and corn. Got off the account as quickly as I could. Refuse cigarette accounts and try my very best to avoid working on pharma. It restricts my freelancing income a bit, but I feel better about it.

Nothing you can do about image usage, unfortunately. I've found some of my illustrations being used for political causes I'm opposed to. All you can do is grin and bear it.

It is nice when you can choose with whom to work. It was my first rule in all my PR projects. It is so hard to do something good when you can't share the company values and mission.

« Reply #40 on: April 26, 2015, 22:57 »
+1
Quote
For me, it is very important to know more about people I am working with. I choose that work to have a possibility to communicate with interesting people from all over the world. And I enjoy it (mostly). And the process of creation and motivation is very interesting for me. I ask customers as well about their vision of photographers and vector designers. And the hole picture is very surprising.

Yeah, some hole pictures can be surprising.
Of course, it depends on what kind of hole, and also whether it is a close-up or shot with a wide-angle lens.

God save the autocorrestion!) It gives us the moments of joy and fun)
« Last Edit: April 27, 2015, 00:11 by PressFoto »

« Reply #41 on: April 28, 2015, 10:00 »
+1
Regarding the shot of the painting in the museum...it must have been taken on the sly, because every museum I have been to forbids photography, without special permissions.

I haven't submitted images in a long time, but I do still have about 900 images up online. I also buy images for client work. My workflow is pretty much as rimglow described. I look for images to illustrate the article, but a lot of times the "perfect" image can't be found. I use a watermarked image to place FPO, or do a minimal amt of compositing to give the client the idea. When everything is approved, I purchase the hi rez versions and finalize the image. I sometimes do a lot of compositing to get the result I want.

Some people here make fun of the photographers shooting isolated objects, but I find them to be very useful. A technically bad photo can't be much use, but sometimes I would be baffled by the "no commercial value" rejection of photos. As Sean said, there's a buyer for every image.

« Reply #42 on: April 28, 2015, 14:18 »
+1
Let's also never forget that one man's junk is another man's treasure.  How many times have you uploaded a photo of something entirely random, only for it to earn you hundreds of dollars within a short period of time?  If it hasn't happened to you yet, then step outside of your boundaries and start "throwing some spaghetti at the wall" once in a while. Some niche or obscure topic may be bound to surprise you. 

I'm glad I don't have to personally rely on being a direct salesman in this saturated market.  It would be like trying to sell tapwater to people for $5 a bottle.  I do my job, the agencies do theirs, and that's why I only make the piddly peanut portion via commissions.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
2515 Views
Last post September 11, 2008, 15:42
by Karimala
7 Replies
1821 Views
Last post September 18, 2015, 19:33
by mj007
4 Replies
1760 Views
Last post February 06, 2017, 16:25
by BigLeague
2 Replies
2195 Views
Last post November 24, 2017, 11:04
by Pixart
19 Replies
3209 Views
Last post February 06, 2019, 09:15
by Year of the Dog

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results