|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Hobostocker
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 29
301
« on: December 13, 2014, 04:34 »
Otherwise all these obscenely rich people may just go suicidal since they wouldn't know what to do with their lives... 
art is a luxury and in part an investment so they get an artwork they like and the option to make some profit after a few years, i can't blame rich people for diversifying their investments i would do the same. i don't think they go suicidal, i've met a few rich people so far and eventually they get bored easily but they all live a nice life in general, what is killing them is that sooner or later they tried every possible pleasurable thing, eaten the best foods, traveled in the best places all over the world, attended the most exclusive events, dated beautiful models, tried any drugs and any kind of entertainment, they reach the point where they ask themselves what's next and what's the meaning of their life. it can be shocking for us to read about people paying crazy money for a Ferrari or for a painting but these things become more valueable over time, they're not like a toyota camry or a 10$ stock image. anyone becoming a millionaire is not a fool and you can bet he spends his money wisely, if someone really paid 6 millions for a Lik there must be something dodgy going on behind the scenes.
302
« on: December 12, 2014, 22:59 »
Adobe will recruit Behance users to contribute stock images to its cloud subscription system, increasing our competition.
ultimately any digital thing should be available for sale online, there's no reason to keep it all in hundreds of different sites each one with different pricing and TOS. why as a buyer you should be limited in your choice ? the technology for storage, licencing, distribution, transmission, and online payments is up and running since more than 20 yrs now. ideally, i should be able to buy just anything i see on screen and to do it with a couple clicks without being locked-in with this or that company or service. sites like Alibaba.com are already showing what's possible at the moment and the sky is the limit.
303
« on: December 12, 2014, 22:54 »
This could be in response to ACDsee introduction of layers. as a poorman's DAM software AcdSee Pro 8 is great and i use it every day, it does many things you can't do with Lightroom, i would never use it for RAW editing but for each need you use the right tool.
304
« on: December 12, 2014, 22:50 »
Shutterstock is doing very well as a company. Just stay away from it's shares.
The financial bubble will explode in 2015 and we might even see fewer sales across the board.
Apple for example is worth 40% more than the whole russian stock market - it's laughable.
and so is Google and many others. but ultimately all these companies are able to make solid profits year on year, 20 yrs from now you can bet Adobe is still market leader no matter what if 2-3 financial bubbles will explode soon, Adobe in particular is among the top-3 software house in the world in my opinion, they'll be the very last ones to suffer from the next boom/bust economic cycle. SS is more vulnerable but still market leader in microstock. Adobe's buyout of Fotolia is just a promise that they'll do their best to keep Fotolia on track but as much as we know it could turn into a total fiasco so from any point of view SS is in a more stable and safe position at least until Fotolia will enter the CC service and we'll be able to get a rough idea of its performance and its contribution to the CC market and Adobe's profits.
305
« on: December 12, 2014, 22:44 »
The stock market fell in love with Adobe when the cloud subscription model was introduced and the love affair grows; Adobe beat earnings expectations and got a big bump in stock price last week. Now that Adobe and SS are competitors, expect the stock market to love Adobe at the expense of SS stock price.
they're both SOLID companies making solid profits, the market could say otherwise from time to time but it means nothing in the long term, as long as they keep doing their job they've nothing to fear from the vultures in Wall Street.
306
« on: December 12, 2014, 22:42 »
Shutterstock's stock price has dropped 13.3% to $62.85, almost a new 52 week low after the Adobe-Fotolia announcement. Do any image creators think Shutterstock is in that much danger, or is this just another example of the Stock Market being totally out of touch with the market for stock photography?
a 13% drop is normal fluctuation caused by day-traders and scalpers whenever a competitor announces something big. if SS was seriously F'ed up it would go down 20-30% and the loss will be consistent over time, besides SS is already overpriced so there's nothing strange if it goes back to a realistic market value.
307
« on: December 12, 2014, 22:23 »
Pepsi has lots of money but it doesn't necessarily mean that they pay millions for each advertising, actually they could pay less than the normal going rates for whatever reason because they're Pepsi and the AD agency likes to have famous clients for their portfolio.
308
« on: December 12, 2014, 21:56 »
The Guardian article is pretty nasty - I can sense the bitterness and jealousy of the author. You can have an opinion but why get so emotional about it?
i think it's all about money, unlike the other top photographers LIK is selling his stuff primarily by himself with his own gallery, he's not dependent on the art critic and art gallery mafias and that's why they're mad at him. the art mafia is pushing obscure stuff like Gursky or even selfies like Cindy Sherman, Lik instead is selling images that are easy and commercial for everybody especially those outside the art world. while we all agree his stuff is overphotoshopped and overhyped how can they justify paying millions for a Gursky ? Gursky is shooting food in supermarkets and a river in the countryside, Sherman is shooting selfies with a Polaroid, Jeff Wall shoots random people on the street with bad framing and bad focus .. the list goes on. modern art is 99% mumbo jumbo and they know it. this sh-it will never fly outside of the West and only recently this virus found fertile ground in Asia but just because of the big money involved in the industry.
309
« on: December 12, 2014, 21:45 »
For $ 6.5 millions I think that I could accept to be bashed all the rest of my life 
but their theory is that it's a money laundering operation or a PR stunt to raise the value of his works since none of his photos has even been sold for a high price in auctions like Sotheby's etc and they rightfully point out that his 4000$ prints can hardly be sold on art brokerage sites for more than 1500$ ...
310
« on: December 12, 2014, 21:41 »
I got a few accepted there years ago, but most of what I submitted was rejected for lack of 'emotion' or 'story'. I left. It's a bunch of artsy hipsters that like overblown Photoshop creations, spectacular shots of Iceland, and artificially grainy black-and-whites of lonely people on city streets.
maybe your images were not strong enough from their fine-art perspective but again where are the sales, do they ever sell or it's just a clubs for people masturbating with their Leicas and giving each other a pat on the back ?
311
« on: December 12, 2014, 21:39 »
Ohh, how you hate Leica people, I have something to show you, makes you feel better, enjoy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7ftLN3zxoY
i don't hate Leica at all, many of my favourite photographers shot with Leica in the past. but it's 2014 and as a guy with a strong technical background i just can stand all the hype surrounding Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Linhof, Rodenstock, Pinhole cameras, Polaroid, and so on. and the reason is all this hype is irrational and based on the fetish to belong to the exclusive Leica CULT ! most of these b/w street images can be done with a 500$ DSLR and a decent prime lens, and this is a fact. but no, the Leica cult members will be horrified at the idea and will insist you need an 8000$ Leica just to get the foot in the door. this is unacceptable, Leica is nr.1 only in a few niche situations where you really need the best quality lens, anyone claiming a Leica M9 beats a D810 is full of sh-it and their complaints against DSLR being not enough low profile, too heavy, and blah blah blah are equally full of sh-it, if you're a good photographer you will take the shots you need anywhere, just look at the shooting style of people like Steve McCurry or Bruce Gilden and see what i mean, these Leica guys are too shy and full of insecurities they should better go home and forget about dealing with people on the street if they lack the skills required. and yes, it's a full fledged "cult" just like Apple, there's no way to reason with them, it's like dealing with creationists or radical feminists.
312
« on: December 12, 2014, 10:20 »
313
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:44 »
If Adobe get this right it could be a massive shake up for the whole industry.
fully agree and they should have tried better years ago.
314
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:43 »
that they see their CC as being a marketplace.
as it see it, they should make a marketplace for pretty much anything digital and not just stock or services. we must reach the point of the so called "internet of things" sooner or later. anything can be sold online, discussed, etc .. why not adobe dealing with photographic assignments, photo jobs markets, all integrated into CC ... there's so much more it could be done, what we lack now is a decent integration, everything is spread on hundreds and hundreds of different sites, it's a mess.
315
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:40 »
Marketing expertise, in my example, far outweighed the quality and uniqueness of his images. He was a master at that and it got him fame and some fortune.
it's a gray area. as much as many will agree that the top photographers aren't doing anything exceptional to justify their market value in the end it's all a matter of giving buyers an emotion and a feeling strong enough to justify the sale of an overpriced product and this is very hard, god knows what goes on in the head of a buyer when he looks at a LIK photo compared to when he looks at a 1$ micro image ... ? i think 99% of his marketing is because of the way the product is presented, just as Apple and anybody else is doing with boutique stores, pricing their products at sky high levels and attracting like a magnet the kind of buyer with deep pockets and a big ego, i mean we should not forget that there are even buyers who love to spend more just to show off they can afford it, or for vanity, or out of boredom, or because whatever other silly reason that we poor devils can't even imagine .. a billionaire won't even think twice about spending a few millions on art pieces and to give a sh-it about what we're discussing here.
316
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:28 »
You just need to find the right type of buyers! 
he's validated by some of the top photographic authorities and for the gullible buyer that's all there is to know. in Europe presenting himself as "master photographer" would never ever fly ! same for his cowboy hat and all the mumbo jumbo he did on TV. but hey, at least his photos are great, he's not a total scam like Gursky & friends.
317
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:25 »
That's true - I've seen his galleries in Key West and Las Vegas (I think) and the images do look absolutely fantastic the way they're displayed. It's a large part of the selling technique I imagine.
it seems he's printing on Fuji Supergloss, he must use top notch lighting in his stores to bring the maximum out of his photos but it won't look the same in your home unless you redesign the lighting of your room which can probably cost an arm and a leg ...
318
« on: December 12, 2014, 05:35 »
The 35mm f/1.4 (also bought used) may very possibly now be all of the lenses which I need.
for no-frills street photography, yes !
319
« on: December 12, 2014, 05:27 »
I saw this in the TechCrunch article:
The company is also thinking about ways to connect Fotolia with Behance, its portfolio site, to give its subscribers new ways to monetize their work.
i wonder if Behance is profitable, it should be rebranded Adobe Portfolio in my opinion but if they don't it's probably because they never believed in Behance potential ?
320
« on: December 12, 2014, 04:17 »
At the very least, I would think that this will open up a very large sales channel.
yes, that's the point. Adobe is validating and adding a lot of value into stock photography because now micro photos are backed by the Adobe brand, now it's a serious thing and it will not be seen as a joke anymore, this will lead to higher prices hopefully and of course into a larger pool of buyers who previously wouldn't touch micros for whatever reason.
321
« on: December 12, 2014, 01:26 »
The work on 1x is immaculate. Submitted a couple of images but never got in. Incredible art and some bias, its a smug bunch of people
i don't care if they're a bunch of snobs with their 8000$ Leicas, i just can't see anything leading to sales over there, no forum discussions, no blogs talking about it, nothing at all, and this is bad sign.
322
« on: December 12, 2014, 01:22 »
Hope those fair prices include fair payout to content producers. Maybe they are smart enough to know that many of their client base are also stock contributors.
this is dependent on many many factors. if we look at the adobe marketplace i never had the feeling they're in the business of selling stuff at the cheapest price possible like Walmart or SS and this because there's a sh-itload of money going on in DTP and Design, it's not a cheap industry and never will, Adobe itself is always praised as one of the best company to work for, with great salaries and all, again because they're making fat profits and can afford paying fair salaries. will this apply also to stock ? we will see but it wouldn't make sense for them to keep Fotolia the way it's run now, Adobe has never been notorious for ripping off its suppliers, quite the opposite anyone dealing with them has been paid well as far as i know and the cottage industry around PS/LR plugins is a goldmine, no matter if Adobe could rewrite all those plug in-house or buyout NIK or Topaz.
323
« on: December 11, 2014, 23:46 »
what will the other players do now?
they will wait and see but i'm sure they're getting scared now, anything can happen, including a total fiasco if Adobe prices their new stock service too high or too low. however, i consider Adobe one of the best software house in history, it's still delivering fantastic products at fair prices and they've been consistent about this since 30 yrs smashing all the competition by winning on quality rather than marketing BS.
324
« on: December 11, 2014, 23:38 »
Check in next year and tell me how this has become a boost for Fotolia. Or maybe I should say, will this become a boost for any of us?
What will the others do now? DT will be next sold and the top four will all be, former independent agencies that are owned by large corporations. Then watch what happens...
very interesting. this could mean quite a boost for fotolia, to be part of the adobe creative community.
what will the other players do now?
there's nothing wrong with being acquired by greedy corporations as long as they have the means to boost sales. and while the other micros have to spend a lot of money in advertising Adobe control its own ecosystem and they've zero competition, it's a walled garden and now designers don't need to look outside the wall anymore when they need stock photos, it's all provided in the CC as a turn key solution.
325
« on: December 11, 2014, 23:17 »
that may become a game changer.
Adobe has never been synonymous with "cheap", while their goal is a subscription service it will be priced accordingly to being part of the Adobe ecosystem, the fact the same photos can be bought anywhere else for a pittance will be their little dirty secret and designers won't care too much.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 29
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
