MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Editorial on SS  (Read 24390 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: October 15, 2014, 03:46 »
-1
yep, this is the same sort of arrogant  post  that 'pros' used to blast at digital photo CDs (in the early 90s) and then microstock in general  (buggy whip makers probably had similar concerns)

evolution in action

Probably, and yours is the same sort of arrogant post that some amateurs used to blast at pros.


« Reply #51 on: October 15, 2014, 03:48 »
0
With my sport editorial I follow this principle :

Right after the even is shot  :
 - put it to local country news agency
 - put it to alamy
 - put it to my own stock database website

 - after some time I put it to SS. Because news after one week is worth only for stock :) noone even rememer it. Maybe I loose some cash here because it is not distributed asap, but what I see, Im selling there images half a year after the event happened.

So this is just my preference, to avoid selling hot pictures for nothing. :)

That's the right commercial way to everybody

« Reply #52 on: October 15, 2014, 03:52 »
0
Please, don't sell news on microstock agencies, we can't destroy photography and photographers more than this.

With respect this is 2014 not 1994
Indeed: in 1994 photojournalism was a serious matter

« Reply #53 on: October 15, 2014, 04:03 »
-1
Please, don't sell news on microstock agencies, we can't destroy photography and photographers more than this.

i don't think there will be ever space for News on micros as the money is just not there.

amateurs will upload the odd iphone shot here and there but will soon realize it's not sustainable moneywise.

Well, just to expose the problem: last year for a mistake, some of my pictures of a vernissage in an important museum, were uploaded on DP. They sold immediately three pictures for .60 each, and have seen one of them published in a magazine that spend not less than 130$ (regular base-fare) for a picture. I have informed DP, but they told me that was bought by the magazine under subscription. This is the trend: if magazine and newspaper can buy pictures so cheap from micros, well, the pros will go home.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #54 on: October 15, 2014, 05:10 »
0
That's right: I'm talking about "News" photography, and not generic editorial ph. News are the kind of photography that expire in a week or less their journalistic value.
That's not really what the micros can deal with. AFAIK, (most of) the micros don't have expedited inspection for news, nor do they push news images 'out there'. I doubt anyone would choose first to send a breaking hot news image to a micro. OTOH, if I ever happened to stumble upon a hot news event, I wouldn't have a clue where to send it, other than Alamy.

The newspapers round here are going down so fast, they're letting photographers go in rapid time and buying in from the main agencies, or if at all possible, using free images sent in from readers' phones. 'Free' trumps quality (obviously some phone pics can be really good, but this isn't always the case.)

Nic99

« Reply #55 on: October 15, 2014, 05:13 »
0
yes, send a hot news topic to IS and wait for a 3 week review. lol

Rinderart

« Reply #56 on: October 15, 2014, 11:26 »
0
Absolutely ... I had several rejected because I ended with the location before the date.  The caption has to be EXACTLY right.


Here comes my free editorial caption tool....
http://www.microstockphoto.co.uk/editorialcaption.html
sorry for pimping :)

To the original question... I've noticed as well that some editorial pictures sell well on SS; they are probably being so strict in requiring editorial even when it's not necessary*, that some buyers know they can use those pictures in a more liberal way

*such as stamps from many countries, or buildings in Germany which -afaik- can be photographed from a public point of view


It says your domain has expired. Looking forward to using the tool. Great help.

« Reply #57 on: October 15, 2014, 12:51 »
0
Absolutely ... I had several rejected because I ended with the location before the date.  The caption has to be EXACTLY right.


Here comes my free editorial caption tool....
http://www.microstockphoto.co.uk/editorialcaption.html
sorry for pimping :)

To the original question... I've noticed as well that some editorial pictures sell well on SS; they are probably being so strict in requiring editorial even when it's not necessary*, that some buyers know they can use those pictures in a more liberal way

*such as stamps from many countries, or buildings in Germany which -afaik- can be photographed from a public point of view


It says your domain has expired. Looking forward to using the tool. Great help.


just fyi - while handy, the editorial caption tool is a bit less important now that SS has eased the requirements for details & punctuation (and now allows 'non-newsworthy' editorials)

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #58 on: October 15, 2014, 23:36 »
+4
Indeed: in 1994 photojournalism was a serious matter

journalism and news photography are not a godgiven right.

they will exist only as long as somebody is willing to pay for it and this happens in every other industry in the world.

there's not one single reason for journalists to think they're a special case deserving any privilege.

there's a supply and there's demand.
if now they're all begging for money it means their product is no more in demand enough, simple as that.





« Reply #59 on: October 17, 2014, 07:47 »
-1
Indeed: in 1994 photojournalism was a serious matter

journalism and news photography are not a godgiven right.

they will exist only as long as somebody is willing to pay for it and this happens in every other industry in the world.

there's not one single reason for journalists to think they're a special case deserving any privilege.

there's a supply and there's demand.
if now they're all begging for money it means their product is no more in demand enough, simple as that.

Information is one of the main actor in democracy. The day when all (again: all) info will be manipulated, distorted  and organised to bring consensus to one part, without exception, we will understand that information isn't an industry or a business like every other. We are not too far from it

« Reply #60 on: October 17, 2014, 08:16 »
+4
Indeed: in 1994 photojournalism was a serious matter

journalism and news photography are not a godgiven right.

they will exist only as long as somebody is willing to pay for it and this happens in every other industry in the world.

there's not one single reason for journalists to think they're a special case deserving any privilege.

there's a supply and there's demand.
if now they're all begging for money it means their product is no more in demand enough, simple as that.

Information is one of the main actor in democracy. The day when all (again: all) info will be manipulated, distorted  and organised to bring consensus to one part, without exception, we will understand that information isn't an industry or a business like every other. We are not too far from it

Surely then it is imperative that everyone must have the freedom to submit their news/editorial/reportage images* wherever they want and in vast quantities to ensure that democratic flow of information remains constant and undiluted.....As opposed to leaving it to a few select and subjective photographers and editors to channel the flow for their profit.

* Some of which is first class by the way

Rinderart

« Reply #61 on: October 19, 2014, 13:09 »
0
"Dear Sirs - If you're going to take 80% I suggest you roll up your sleeves and bloody well earn it!"

Love this!!!

« Reply #62 on: October 19, 2014, 23:38 »
+2
selling editorial photos on micro sites is like shooting yourself in the foot, because you won't get high turnover and the price is so low. Put editorial shots where they belong in macro and place typical micro high turnover subjects in micro. The two are distinctly different although some subjects such as nature/wildlife can sell well in either platform

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #63 on: October 20, 2014, 22:33 »
0
Information is one of the main actor in democracy. The day when all (again: all) info will be manipulated, distorted  and organised to bring consensus to one part, without exception, we will understand that information isn't an industry or a business like every other. We are not too far from it

they don't even need to manipulate or distort anything, all they need is to not publish images that show a different story ...

MOST of the pics coming from war zones are never published and this is all you need to know.


« Reply #64 on: October 21, 2014, 02:19 »
0
Information is one of the main actor in democracy. The day when all (again: all) info will be manipulated, distorted  and organised to bring consensus to one part, without exception, we will understand that information isn't an industry or a business like every other. We are not too far from it

well if you think there has ever been a democracy in this a.C. world you might be right....indeed you're wrong  ;D
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 03:51 by mojaric »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3993 Views
Last post July 08, 2008, 16:05
by oboy
2 Replies
2662 Views
Last post March 07, 2009, 11:54
by vonkara
6 Replies
3701 Views
Last post June 28, 2009, 17:23
by cascoly
1 Replies
2572 Views
Last post July 01, 2009, 09:22
by willie
5 Replies
8705 Views
Last post September 07, 2010, 19:24
by RacePhoto

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle