Quote from: shudderstok on May 10, 2015, 01:32

Quote from: gbalex on May 09, 2015, 16:53

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on May 09, 2015, 15:38

I warned everybody over and over and over again years ago to prepare for what was coming. I wonder if anyone listened.

There are still a large number of people who will defend any action they take as you can see by the negative votes you received. It is called believing what you want to happen in lieu of looking at reality.

stupid is what stupid does

hmmm .. yeah ... but realistically without microstock the industry would turn to midstock or to some dollar-bin promotions and in any case you would have some form of Subs, not as cheap as they're now but still very cheap.

we can blame micros and greed but in the end the actual downturn is a mirror of the whole economy, the Editorial and Publishing industry is in dire straits since the 90s, it was in deep sh-it well before the internet, digital cameras, photoshop, the 2000 and 2008 bubbles.

should we bet on the final takeover of digital publishing in the next few years ? the death of paper news/magazines/books ? online web sites finally paying good money for quality images ?
this is the big question in my opinion, actually the KEY factor, if most of the content providers are not willing to pay and stick with the cheapest Subs who's going to produce new content, let alone making a living out of Stock ?

moreover, if nothing changes we should expect agencies balancing this dreadful scenario pushing for Midstock or selling non-RF licences, probably coming up with a new kind of licence designed for Online content as the whole idea of RF is totally obsolete nowadays and against the interests of photographers and agencies as well.

they've already squeezed us like a lemon, i say now it's buyers' turn to be scre-wed and if these cheap-as-s buyers expect a new wave of talented shooters in the third world willing to work for a pittance sorry but it's not going to happen as far as i've seen, they're too busy shooting weddings, events, etc no matter if now they've fast ADSL connection and bank accounts and can even write in broken english.

okay, so here we go...

the national inflight magazine of where you live (assuming you still live there) for example does not even publish in this so called third world you rant about. they do it out of country, they pay expats to produce, at an expat salary. now if they have a choice of which they do have, pay $1 or $5 or $50 per photo, which will they choose? they will still pay the expat 2-5K per month to make it look goose (sic) because they can. now the clowns that run that mag and airline have money, but they will pay for what looks goose (sic) but will also pay as little as they can to make money. so now lets talk their ad rates, do they charge in the local currency or in USD? a quarter page ad in the inflight in mention charges close to $1500 per issue, but will only pay pennies for a quarter page photo, that is unless they are client direct then they will pay $125 for a photo, of which they do cause they do have the budget. khao chai mai? this whole budget argument is off as far as i am concerned. the reality however is the valuation of photos has declined due to the fact images are a plenty, and there is no shortage of suppliers short selling their wares, and certain agencies that are aware of this and short selling a commodity in volume, hence making millions in the process.