eric kim goes open source...

[tunalegs]

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.

Except of course putting photos on flickr isn't really giving photos away for free. If this guy were going in to a job and saying "you know what, don't pay me, because the exposure is payment enough" - then he'd be diminishing the power of other photographers to get paid.

 

[kbg32]

The market has been declining for years. Bargaining power for photographers has diminished since at least the late '90s. Kim has nothing to do with it, but he is part of it.

As technology becomes cheaper and cheaper, and easier for the layman to use it, the notion of the "pro" has gone. If it isn't already done. I am not going to give my work away for free. If Kim wants to, that is his decision, no matter how he supports it.

I am just going to continue the work that I do.

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.

 

[FA Limited]

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.

if people are participating and seemingly getting value out of these seminars then i don't see what the problem is? there are lots of these types of courses now out there even locally, why not learn from someone whose photos / videos / website you like rather than somebody you don't know from the local college etc.

 

[Griffin]

Forgive me if this was posted already, I haven't seen it, but I think it is important to read the full article from Eric Kim himself, not a paraphrased version from Petapixel -

http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2013/08/29/my-vision-of-open-source-photography-volume-2/

Thanks for that. It explains better why he's going open source. It seems quite a few here don't understand his motives.

 

[kbg32]

Thanks Griffin. Agree. I don't think everyone that posted here has read Kim's article for themselves.

 

[kbg32]

“I spent a great deal of my life being ignored. I was always very happy that way. Being ignored is a great privilege. That is how I think I learnt to see what others do not see and to react to situations differently. I simply looked at the world, not really prepared for anything.”

- Saul Leiter


Wise words from Mr.Leiter. I understand that we can't live in a vacuum. Instead of concerning ourselves with what others do, even if it does not affect our lives, I think we should concern ourselves with making our images from where we each stand as individuals. That alone will eventually separate us from the chaff.

 

[aizan]

if people are participating and seemingly getting value out of these seminars then i don't see what the problem is? there are lots of these types of courses now out there even locally, why not learn from someone whose photos / videos / website you like rather than somebody you don't know from the local college etc.

not knocking his workshops, but i'd take a course at a community college instead, no contest.

 

[FA Limited]

not knocking his workshops, but i'd take a course at a community college instead, no contest.

i would probably too but there seems to be interest in his online courses. all credit to him if he is able to make it successful. people throw around the word marketing like it's a bad thing, i don't get it. if you run your own business you need to market your work / product.

 

[Sunti]

It was probably a calculated move on his part. The question is how 'open' is open. If he shares most but holds back the 10% of his best or even one picture, then he isn't really all-the-way open, and who's to know that?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

i would probably too but there seems to be interest in his online courses. all credit to him if he is able to make it successful. people throw around the word marketing like it's a bad thing, i don't get it. if you run your own business you need to market your work / product.

A lot of marketing is designed to manipulate people into buying things of questionable value. Some would say that anyone stupid enough to be taken in by such marketing deserves to be fleeced. Even if we accept that premise, that doesn't mean we have to respect the snake-oil salesmen who fleece them.

 

[starless]

Now if only his pictures were not so boring ...

 

[VF101]

I think the open source analogy is really good. A lot of people earn money writing software, most of them employed, some as entrepreneurs. And some write software and give it away for free. These people brought us Linux and Firefox, GIMP and Open Office and so on. So, if you are a norwegian company selling browsers, you're not very happy that there are people giving Firefox away for free. Or a german company selling a photo editing application, you won't be to happy that people are working for free on GIMP. But that's the business and you have to cope with it. Thus Opera changed their business model and now earns money through ads and selling their software to device producing companies. The makers of Photoline on the other hand are still following their usual business model and try to be better than GIMP: For example, Photoline offers 16 bit editing and is way faster than GIMP.

What has all this to do with Eric Kim and him giving photos away for free? The traditional photography business model no longer works as simple as it used to work. So, photographers have to change their business model or to be better than the ones giving away their photos for free.

No one should therefor blame Eric Kim for his move as he just does what is necessary. And no one who's using Linux, Firefox or Open Office on his computer, or running his website on Wordpress, Drupal or Typo3, on Apache, PHP or MySQL should criticize that free images make the market smaller as the usage of this software reduces the market for software developers.

 

[Pioneer]

Tough crowd here. I read his blog entry and I respect him and his motives. Personally I think he feels much was given him and he is simply trying to give a little back. It would be nice if there was a little more of this in the world.

If you don't like his pictures don't print any.