Agency Based Discussion > GLStock
GL Stock (GraphicLeftover) - The state of the situation
GraniteCove:
Again, agreed. But in my mind making it easier for buyers to find those images does absolutely nothing to address the growing disparity between sales volume and earnings.
Pauws99:
--- Quote from: GraniteCove on November 11, 2017, 08:21 ---Again, agreed. But in my mind making it easier for buyers to find those images does absolutely nothing to address the growing disparity between sales volume and earnings.
--- End quote ---
No it doesn't its just an observation of what's happening doesn't make me like it
stockastic:
Thinking about the idea that buyers no longer really care about 'quality' - well, maybe they just need some education. What if a stock site started working with a really good designer, to put up some pages of design examples using stock photos? The same content, text, layout, but one version with a 'good' photo and another with a 'poor' photo. Similar subjects, but showing the impact of better composition, lighting, use of DOF, color balance. Or maybe even a clever and surprising use of photo to make a point, or a less gag-inducing photo of apparently 'happy seniors'.
Before you all jump in and say 'designers already know what they're doing', think about some of the cringe-worthy stuff you've seen in print or on the web.
The people behind stock agencies presumably know something about photography and design. Why not use that to sell the product in some more sophisticated ways, not just a home page showing a bunch of typical stock photos?
farbled:
--- Quote from: stockastic on November 11, 2017, 11:10 ---Thinking about the idea that buyers no longer really care about 'quality' - well, maybe they just need some education. What if a stock site started working with a really good designer, to put up some pages of design examples using stock photos? The same content, text, layout, but one version with a 'good' photo and another with a 'poor' photo. Similar subjects, but showing the impact of better composition, lighting, use of DOF, color balance. Or maybe even a clever and surprising use of photo to make a point, or a less gag-inducing photo of apparently 'happy seniors'.
Before you all jump in and say 'designers already know what they're doing', think about some of the cringe-worthy stuff you've seen in print or on the web.
The people behind stock agencies presumably know something about photography and design. Why not use that to sell the product in some more sophisticated ways, not just a home page showing a bunch of typical stock photos?
--- End quote ---
I think that would be excellent. Canva comes close to it, letting people design templates. It's pretty cool.
For me and my stuff it is less useful since the vast majority of uses I have seen online have been articles and menus (for my images). I rarely see mine "designed". But then, there are so many different kinds of buyers, I am less fussed about the advertising and design section of them. More and more of mine are those bloggers everyone loves hating. :) I find buyers are as diverse a group as us contributors.
I do think some enterprising agency will forget about competing with the big agencies and find a different "pond" altogether. Kind of how micro came about in the first place isn't it?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version