NYT Demise of Gamma
- Thread starter FPjohn
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 9
- Views 1K
Leica All Day
Veteran
I am bummed....I signed a 5 year contract with them in 2005......sh@t.....I had my photos up on their main page for a week....(they gave me the whole page...4 photos)..they also sold some of my images to Paris Match (4 full pages of my work)........maybe now would be a good time to email my editor......oh well..what can I do....life goes on....I am still trying to get my brain in order after that Bangkok bikini model shoot that I just did....cheers, michael
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I thought it interesting that after declaring the news photography business dead (which it pretty much is) they said they wanted to focus on magazines?! Like there is a market there anymore!
Welcome to 2009, Gamma.
Welcome to 2009, Gamma.
ZeissFan
Veteran
I notice the article mentions French law, which requires a company to add an employee onto its payroll full time after using a certain amount of that person's work.
Jaans
Well-known
FPjohn: Thanks for posting that article - it was very interesting. It will be interesting to see how print media scrambles to encompass these radical changes that are happening in journalism as an overall genre.
However Pickett Wilson I do think that you are jumping the gun there a little. Magazines still represent a huge untapped market for this genre of photography and I think that with the advent of photo sharing systems like flickr etc there has been an unprecedented interest in photography as a medium. So, the potential to tap this somewhat young market is enormous. It will certainly be interesting to see how things pan out in the next few years.
However Pickett Wilson I do think that you are jumping the gun there a little. Magazines still represent a huge untapped market for this genre of photography and I think that with the advent of photo sharing systems like flickr etc there has been an unprecedented interest in photography as a medium. So, the potential to tap this somewhat young market is enormous. It will certainly be interesting to see how things pan out in the next few years.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Young market? There certainly is a huge interest in photography, it's just the making a living at it that has gotten difficult. Media outlets can get almost unlimited content for free these days. A camera phone or cheap P&S digital, and you're a photo journalist!
Jaans
Well-known
I think that the market is still scrambling to accomodate the radical changes that have taken place since the advent of digital technology. Once this is done there will be a recognition of photo-journalists and their skill set and a subsequent backlash against these camera weilding journalists that Pickett describes.
However, like I said earlier there I think magazines are still an untapped market for photography. The fact that the agency wants to concentrate on magazines is interesting. It would be interesting to know what kind of research they have done to support this claim as it stands against everything Pickett Wilson has predicted. I don't know where you are located Pickett Wilson, but this is a European agency so one would hope that you are taking into account that demographic before making such assertive unfounded claims. What is viable in one part of the economic world doesn't necessarily ring true for the other side.
However, like I said earlier there I think magazines are still an untapped market for photography. The fact that the agency wants to concentrate on magazines is interesting. It would be interesting to know what kind of research they have done to support this claim as it stands against everything Pickett Wilson has predicted. I don't know where you are located Pickett Wilson, but this is a European agency so one would hope that you are taking into account that demographic before making such assertive unfounded claims. What is viable in one part of the economic world doesn't necessarily ring true for the other side.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
I love magazines and even say that I do editorial photography (and I do, just not enough of it). Only a few years ago I would think nothing of buying $50 worth of interesting magazines every month or so.
Now I don't (and I have the cash).
The internet killed the market. It's been over except for an elite few and even they will feel the squeeze and drop off.
Who buys magazines these days?
The editorial marketplace is super tiny right now, and most of it is generic work like executive portraits and grip and grins.
Now I don't (and I have the cash).
The internet killed the market. It's been over except for an elite few and even they will feel the squeeze and drop off.
Who buys magazines these days?
The editorial marketplace is super tiny right now, and most of it is generic work like executive portraits and grip and grins.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I've made some good contacts by doing grip & grins, and that's led to some other types of photography. Still, a lot of the market has gotten where the client will live with a crap digital photo "because it's free". I wonder how much of this is due to the current state of the economy though.
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
Jaans
Well-known
Al that was an interesting point about the overall influence from the economy. Actually I am new to this rangefinder forum site, but I have been reading some of the threads for over six months now. I have always enjoyed reading your posts about your experiences with the medium. I often find myself inspired reading your posts along with other excellent authors on this website. Thanks for the insight.
Cheers.
Cheers.
