aniMal
Well-known
Now, before I get attacked, I will have to say that I absolutely do not want us photographers to sell images for peanuts!
However, I think it would be useful to see the problem from the other side - that is the only way to really tackle it in the long run.
I make most of my money from web development and design these days. I am building a team focused on delivering high quality photography and video on web, and design with a high visual profile.
Sometimes I do need photographs that either would require a lot of work to produce myself, or that would be really impossible or impractical for me to deliver to the customer directly. Speed and cost is often what makes or breaks a deal, at least the initial stage when getting a webside online.
So, I sometimes let the customers browse stock photography on the net themselves, looking for something they connect with. This often is a good starting point for a design or illustration, and a few times we have ended up buying microstock.
Sometimes I have a photograph that fits in my own stock, and I then often include it in the total price - as the alternative would have been microstock anyway.
We are now planning to do a sales pitch to a shipbroker that is an important customer, and we then need a photograph of a lighthouse outside of Oslo. Which I found on flickr of course...
So, I contacted the owner - saying that I did not know if we were going to actually use it or not, but if so there would be a small payment heading his way.
What was the reply? We can use whatever of his stuff, no compensation whatsoever...
It is now wintertime, if it was spring, summer or autumn, I would have gone out in my boat and done it myself - and the quality would have been much better. I think I would have done it out of sheer spite - even if only for a sales pitch.
I have also decided that if I end up using this guys photos, I will insist on paying him something - and explaining why this is the way it should be.
Perhaps I should also point my customers towards sites like photographersdirect, which is not too costly - but still very different from microstock.
Microstock is here to stay, and when I have the choise of not getting good photos on a tight budget with a website or using it, I am afraid that I have no choise... And if anybody thinks selling yourself as a photographer is hard, you should definitely try webdesign these days
The bottom line for me is that I end up trying to explain the advantages of setting up photo-shoots with the customer, and that there will be a significant difference when they choose to upgrade the site with dedicated photography. But this is often the second or third stage, most customers want to start on the cheap. I think this goes for all creative work now, you have to do some explaining to customers to sell your work, and it takes time and patience...
Any other takes on this?
However, I think it would be useful to see the problem from the other side - that is the only way to really tackle it in the long run.
I make most of my money from web development and design these days. I am building a team focused on delivering high quality photography and video on web, and design with a high visual profile.
Sometimes I do need photographs that either would require a lot of work to produce myself, or that would be really impossible or impractical for me to deliver to the customer directly. Speed and cost is often what makes or breaks a deal, at least the initial stage when getting a webside online.
So, I sometimes let the customers browse stock photography on the net themselves, looking for something they connect with. This often is a good starting point for a design or illustration, and a few times we have ended up buying microstock.
Sometimes I have a photograph that fits in my own stock, and I then often include it in the total price - as the alternative would have been microstock anyway.
We are now planning to do a sales pitch to a shipbroker that is an important customer, and we then need a photograph of a lighthouse outside of Oslo. Which I found on flickr of course...
So, I contacted the owner - saying that I did not know if we were going to actually use it or not, but if so there would be a small payment heading his way.
What was the reply? We can use whatever of his stuff, no compensation whatsoever...
It is now wintertime, if it was spring, summer or autumn, I would have gone out in my boat and done it myself - and the quality would have been much better. I think I would have done it out of sheer spite - even if only for a sales pitch.
I have also decided that if I end up using this guys photos, I will insist on paying him something - and explaining why this is the way it should be.
Perhaps I should also point my customers towards sites like photographersdirect, which is not too costly - but still very different from microstock.
Microstock is here to stay, and when I have the choise of not getting good photos on a tight budget with a website or using it, I am afraid that I have no choise... And if anybody thinks selling yourself as a photographer is hard, you should definitely try webdesign these days
The bottom line for me is that I end up trying to explain the advantages of setting up photo-shoots with the customer, and that there will be a significant difference when they choose to upgrade the site with dedicated photography. But this is often the second or third stage, most customers want to start on the cheap. I think this goes for all creative work now, you have to do some explaining to customers to sell your work, and it takes time and patience...
Any other takes on this?
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
What you say makes sense.
user237428934
User deletion pending
--deleted--
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I'm with the OP and Mukul Dube.
The labourer is worthy of his hire.
Cheers,
R.
The labourer is worthy of his hire.
Cheers,
R.
f16sunshine
Moderator
+1
Evolve or become a fossil no time to waste contemplating what was or should be
Evolve or become a fossil no time to waste contemplating what was or should be
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
This is a well reasoned and thoughtful post- good stuff. I applaud your choice to insist upon paying if you use the pictures you found on flickr, and I'm glad you are doing your part to educate clients and photographers on this issue.
samoksner
Who stole my light?
Quality, thoughtful post about the use and place of stock sites from a different perspective, it's not just evil dictators enslaving photographers on there, people have a specific need for an image that might be very costly to commission.