Hello,

I am a 3rd year photography student at the University of Gloucestershire, UK. I am currently writing my dissertation exploring whether professional photographers are under threat from amateur photographers, and where the divide between these two categories falls, also considering the 'semi-pros'. As part of this I will be including a discussion of microstock photography and I was wondering if any of you could spare a couple of minutes to comment. I include a few sample questions, if you would be willing to respond to any of them or suggest anything that I haven't covered I would be very grateful.

Please note: I am not criticising microstock, only debating it from both sides so please don't take offense

 - Would you class yourself as a professional photographer, an amateur/hobbyist or somewhere in between? Do you earn money from your photography outside of microstock? Do you work on commissions for example?

 - Do you have any 'official' photography qualifications?

 - Do you believe that the images submitted to microstock are of comparable quality to those taken by professionals?

 - Is microstock your main source of income?

 - How would you respond to anyone who says that royalty-free stock is killing the professional photography market?

 - Do you think microstock is benefitting the industry as a whole? How? Do you think it is a good opportunity for people to get into the industry who may not otherwise have done?

All relevant opinions are welcome and gratefully received, as long as you don't mind me using them in my research.

Thank you for your time

Emma