eric kim goes open source...

I think he makes more money from travel workshops than he does from his images so why not. His images are basically marketing material for his workshops.
 
EK is genius to make noise about him, with something more less obvious.
First time someone at P.O.T.N. told me about his steet technique at the time I started to take street candids with my DSLRs. Later on it appears this "walking like a goofgyptian" was done well before him.
Then I read how EK went to film. Appears to be common trend.
Now EK goes on Flickr, like almost everyone of us done a while ago.
:)
 
i agree with the sentiment that he's just a self-important "photographer" making himself seem more important by doing something most people already do.
but, good for him i guess.
 
"certainly don’t want to be a blood-thirsty capitalist."

That's fine and all, but if so, why do the workshops start at $800?
 
I wonder how successful it would be if the headline was "Eric Kim gives away pictures that no one wants to buy."
 
blue4130 said:
"certainly don’t want to be a blood-thirsty capitalist."

That's fine and all, but if so, why do the workshops start at $800?
Click to expand...

Al Patterson said:
I missed that, but $800 is fairly inexpensive as workshops go. You were expecting free maybe?
Click to expand...

It's OK, I'll confess too.
Last night I was .... Reading Steve Huff and Ken Rockwell!

"The 6-pointed stars are most useful for Christmas, ski and snow-boarding photography, mimicking snowflakes."
 
I happen to like Eric Kim. He started out his working career in marketing I believe, but always had a love for photography. Not many of us can turn a love into a career that supports oneself.

As for "open source", I don't think many of us need to worry about it. I find this discussion somewhat trivial, like threads that say "Post your recent film images from your Bronica..whatever". You digitized it. This is not going to release a flood of an already flooded visual media. If you post on the internet, no matter where, no matter how well your images are watermarked or embedded with your copyright in the metadata, or how you state their usage, they are already gone. Someone out there, if it fills their need, will steal it.

I think we'd be best to just do what each and everyone of us just do and not worry about it. Just take the images you enjoy.
 
Al Patterson said:
I missed that, but $800 is fairly inexpensive as workshops go. You were expecting free maybe?
Click to expand...


I am all for paid workshops from people that have been around the business and industry. In my opinion (just an opinion - not gospel or truth or any other meaning attached) workshops should be priced according to skill and real world experience. Eric's skill can be debated until the cows come home, but his experience in shooting can't. He picked up a camera a couple years ago and has been shooting film for about six months. For me, that is not enough time getting down and dirty for me to justify dropping $800. Just my thoughts.
 
blue4130 said:
He picked up a camera a couple years ago and has been shooting film for about six months. For me, that is not enough time getting down and dirty for me to justify dropping $800. Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...

I think he caters mostly to beginners who are trying to learn / learning photography from the internet (as opposed to college, assisting, etc).
 
I'm sorry, but this is just another opportunistic use of the concept of "Open Source"

Open source is not equal to "Free" or non-commercial, rather it emphasizes the open access to the source that made up the product.

One real result of the open-source concept is why we, today, have multiple versions of Linux -- a completely open source operating system, that functions just as well or better than "close-sourced" ones like Microsoft Windows or Mac OS X.

In fact your beloved Macbooks run an OS that benefits hugely from open source subsystems that was pulled out of a UNIX variant called FreeBSD.

So this Eric Kim should just announce that he's giving away his photos for free. But that won't be as catchy or trendy, I guess.
 
I work for a photo agency that the employees call the images "assets". It drives me crazy. We might as well sell widgets or undergarments. They'd call it the same thing.
 
i don't see why people are taking his concept of open source so literally and nitpicking stuff from his website. i don't like his style or shooting style at all but at least he is contributing new information and thoughts that people are willing to read.

i think it's great that he is able to run a successful photographic business in this new era, anything that promotes successful photographic business can only be good for our hobby. even if it means breaking apart some of the established business models.
 
If making money off photography nowadays involves styling oneself as an expert, running a tech-focused blog, and selling seats in workshops teaching basic skills to freshly-minted DSLR hobbyists who have money to burn, then I'm glad I'm not too concerned with making money off photography.
 
Personally I think it's not correct from his side to use pictures of strangers to promote his business by making noise on the web (shouting that he is giving them away in high res). I would sue him at some point if I would be on the photo. If he has their agreement than it's OK of course. I also think his choice of 'open source' wording is unfortunate.
 
hellomikmik said:
Personally I think it's not correct from his side to use pictures of strangers to promote his business by making noise on the web (shouting that he is giving them away in high res). I would sue him at some point if I would be on the photo. If he has their agreement than it's OK of course. I also think his choice of 'open source' wording is unfortunate.
Click to expand...

Whether or not you can sue would depend on the country I would think.
 
kbg32 said:
I happen to like Eric Kim. He started out his working career in marketing I believe, but always had a love for photography. Not many of us can turn a love into a career that supports oneself.

As for "open source", I don't think many of us need to worry about it. I find this discussion somewhat trivial, like threads that say "Post your recent film images from your Bronica..whatever". You digitized it. This is not going to release a flood of an already flooded visual media. If you post on the internet, no matter where, no matter how well your images are watermarked or embedded with your copyright in the metadata, or how you state their usage, they are already gone. Someone out there, if it fills their need, will steal it.

I think we'd be best to just do what each and everyone of us just do and not worry about it. Just take the images you enjoy.
Click to expand...

When a "pro" photographer or whatever offers up quality work for free it takes away some of the market or diminishes bargaining power for those who want to be paid for their images.

It's not like the paid photography market is increasing, being a small niche offshoot of the general art world. If the pie isn't getting larger, then a free work intentionally takes business away from paid work. Between the high-quality DIYers and commons offerings and this 'open source' supply, the market space for paid photography shrinks.

This type of market evolution is what gets under some people's skins as they have heavily invested money, time, and emotion in the concept of being paid for photos. Growling at the competition is the response. Others just do't like his work. Some are jealous. To him it is all advertising improving his personal brand promoting the workshops he sells.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom