Rangefinder Magazine - The state of stock

of 2Next page
Displaying 1 to 20 of 35 matches.
tirc83
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 2:26PM
SoopySue
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 2:35PM
Interesting read. Tx.
Funwithfood
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 2:48PM
Makes sense.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 4:10PM
it looks like Lise probably made more than the average return for a photographer on Alamy. Every other photographer on iStockphoto is probably making quite a bit less.


Duh to the first, and pretty close to duh on the second.
Down2theXRoads
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 4:21PM
The article pretty much says what can be said about any business.....Ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

The images included with the article were stunning. If that's the direction stock is taking, it seems to open new doors for a lot of innovation, challenge, and artistic expression. I realize I'm the resident dumb blond, but it seemed pretty exciting.
PaulCowan
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 4:30PM

Doesn't the fact that it is utterly, profoundly ignorant about istock and its fee/licence structure make anyone think that the whole article might be a load of verbose crap? Anyone other than me, that is?


The opinions therein seem to relate to the woes of a certain segment of trad stock suppliers. There are some interesting observations but I feel that careful winnowing is needed to separate the wheat from the chaff.
StanRohrer
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 7:03PM
Jim Pickerell is a well known long term name in the stock photo pricing of traditional stock sales. I would say he knows very well the traditional market place as it has developed over the years. He regularly publishes pricing guides and observations of the traditional stock photo market.

Per this author, it seems to me that, like many traditional stock photo resources, the lid on the microstock is something they are just now cracking open for a peek. The traditionalists had not paid attention to the new kid on the block for a while. Now the new kid (microstock) is getting past the toddler stage and venturing out where the world can see. The old folks are taking notice and don't quite know what to think and the kids are raising a rucous, making noise, and having their irreverant adolescent fun.

So use views like this to see what the "old" folks are seeing in the microstock industry. Their influence will come but so will the influence of the growing microstocks. Some people, on both sides, will choose to adapt. Others, on both sides, will attempt to stay the course and perhaps miss their opportunities. The bottom line - how do each of us, on either side, read the market directions and position ourselves in the correct locations for an advancing market. Ah, the cloudy crystal ball - read it the best you can. This article is but a view from one side of the crystal ball.
CWLawrence
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun May 13, 2007 8:28PM
This is where my eyes rolled up and back into my head:
Jim had a very good run in the stock photo business in the 1980s and 1990s ... The slump began about 1996, when I basically stopped shooting and began to focus on writing and selling other people’s work. For some photographers, business was still good until nearly 2000.


Like Stan said above, these guys are just now taking a peek at the microstock model and have yet to realize that it is a viable business model, however different it may be from the traditional one they know so well.

The article is written by someone who knows very little about stock quoting someone who has been out of the game for SEVEN years! I wouldn't ask an expert with the Apple 2E to fix a Mac Book Pro... I'm certainly not going to pay much attention to a dinosaur of stock.
redmal
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 2:13AM

posted by sjlocke


it looks like Lise probably made more than the
average return for a photographer on Alamy. Every other photographer on
iStockphoto is probably making quite a bit less.



Duh to the first, and pretty close to duh on the second.


Yes, I was surprised to learn that I'm making quite a bit less than $6 dollars per image per year. What a Well researched article.


 
Colonel
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a Design Of The WeekAwarded to fabulous photographers with more than 100,000 downloadsMember has had a File Of The Week.
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 2:26AM

Posted By redmal:

posted by sjlocke


it looks like Lise probably made more than the
average return for a photographer on Alamy. Every other photographer on
iStockphoto is probably making quite a bit less.



Duh to the first, and pretty close to duh on the second.


Yes, I was surprised to learn that I'm making quite a bit less than $6 dollars per image per year. What a Well researched article.


 


You and me both!
davidf
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsMember is an InspectorExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 2:52AM

Posted By redmal:

posted by sjlocke


it looks like Lise probably made more than the
average return for a photographer on Alamy. Every other photographer on
iStockphoto is probably making quite a bit less.



Duh to the first, and pretty close to duh on the second.


Yes, I was surprised to learn that I'm making quite a bit less than $6 dollars per image per year. What a Well researched article.


 


Actually that's the Alamy figure. The photographer is supposedly getting 70% or $4.20 per image, per year - at his best estimate. I don't think I will be taking his learned advice and scoring a massive pay cut by putting my images on Alamy.
redmal
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 5:40AM

 by Davidf


Actually that's the Alamy figure. The photographer is supposedly getting 70% or $4.20 per image, per year -


Yes that's the alarmy figure and the article  said "Lise probably made more than the average return for a photographer on Alamy. Every other photographer on iStockphoto is probably making quite a bit less".

Hence the article infers that EVERY photographer on istock apart from lise is supposed to make Quite a bit less less than $6.
Down2theXRoads
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 10:48AM
Microstock has grown up, and it's a force to be reckoned with. Based at what some people hint at as their earnings, it's also becoming a legitimate career choice to be considered. There will continue to be articles like this with faulty information as long as writers have to keep guessing about the income of those involved with microstock. I hope people took the opportunity to set things straight by participating in the PDN survey.

It's routine for retired athletes to report on sports. I don't see why someone who has been in the business, but has now withdrawn to be an observer and reporter on it should be any less trusted than a sports announcer. It seems such a writer, with nothing to gain or lose by their perceptions, would be more ojective in their reporting and have less of a bias.

He's also stated that the supply of images outweighs demand. With each of the top sites adding 20K+ images per week, and all the photo sharing sites with thousands upon thousands of great images displayed without a price tag, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that bit of research. The market for digital camera *accessories* this year is estimated to be 9 billion. That's a lot of new folks entering the market with a lot of fancy toys.
Funwithfood
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 10:57AM
Every business has a lifecycle...even stock photographers (in contrast to "traditional" photographers) will have to adapt to inevitable changes in the market. It makes total sense that the huge/continual/almost exponential growth of (very good images) will result in less income *on average* for each Submitter/photo submitted. Basic economics.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 11:42AM

Posted By Down2theXRoads:
I hope people took the opportunity to set things straight by participating in the PDN survey.


I don't see any need to set things straight.
JoeGough
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 1:49PM
Posted By sjlocke:

I don't see any need to set things straight.
Is the right answer.
LPETTET
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 1,249 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer SpotlightMember has had a File Of The WeekAwarded to fabulous photographers with more than 100,000 downloads
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 3:11PM
The guy said we all need good luck to succeed in the stock business.......Call me crazy, but I think you need good pictures!

(Edited on 2007-05-14 15:12:21 by LPETTET)
Colonel
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a Design Of The WeekAwarded to fabulous photographers with more than 100,000 downloadsMember has had a File Of The Week.
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 5:51PM

Posted By LPETTET:
The guy said we all need good luck to succeed in the stock business.......Call me crazy, but I think you need good pictures!

(Edited on 2007-05-14 15:12:21 by LPETTET)




You're crazy!



..... but you're right....
jk7525
Posted Mon May 14, 2007 7:25PM

Posted By LPETTET:
The guy said we all need good luck to succeed in the stock business.......Call me crazy, but I think you need good pictures!

(Edited on 2007-05-14 15:12:21 by LPETTET)


...and a good position in the search results.
having the best stock shot in the world means jack if no one finds it.
Down2theXRoads
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Tue May 15, 2007 11:55AM

Posted By sjlocke:

Posted By Down2theXRoads:
I hope people took the opportunity to set things straight by participating in the PDN survey.


I don't see any need to set things straight.


But isn't that a little weird? Microstockers take offense at being called amateurs, yet they're not willing to do what it takes to establish the industry as a profession, or even a career path.

I don't think it's anybody's business how much an individual makes, but every other profession out there is able to state a wage range for those thinking of going into the field. There are even wage ranges for the different fields of photography, except for microstock.

You just don't want to blow the cover and encourage the competition, huh.
This thread has been locked.
of 2Next page
Displaying 1 to 20 of 35 matches.
Not a member?Join