- alexa (6)
- Aurora (7)
- Canada (9)
- celebrity (100)
- CEPIC (29)
- Cnn (6)
- commercial stock (135)
- copyright (71)
- corbis (127)
- Corpocrates (1)
- Cosmos (3)
- digg (4)
- E Reader (10)
- editorial (304)
- filter (30)
- finance (113)
- flickr (83)
- focus (28)
- france (42)
- getty (220)
- google (55)
- gumgum (11)
- HOLGA (10)
- idee (15)
- IPTC (28)
- Jupiter (26)
- keyword (62)
- law (52)
- lens (37)
- lensbabies (8)
- license (170)
- magazine (169)
- Magnum (16)
- mediastorm (17)
- Microstock (153)
- Midstock (35)
- msnbc.com (14)
- multimedia (76)
- news (155)
- newspaper (70)
- Newsweek (16)
- No sense (56)
- PACA (26)
- Pacific coast news (6)
- photojournalism (214)
- Photoplus (3)
- photoshop (11)
- Piclens (3)
- pictogram (2)
- picturemaxx (2)
- Plus (8)
- prosumer (78)
- Royalty free (98)
- Search (86)
- SIPA (12)
- slideshow (66)
- Social Media (1)
- technology (201)
- TIME (31)
- transaction (129)
- Tweet (1)
- Uncategorized (26)
- Waste of time (1)
- web 2.0 (142)
- wire service (37)
- yahoo (14)
- Zymmetrical (6)
- July 29, 2010: Message in a Bottle
- July 26, 2010: Crowdtaste this !
- July 22, 2010: In search of Goodenough
- July 19, 2010: A genius talks
- July 15, 2010: I and them
- July 13, 2010: The Future of Photojournalism (Fixed)
- July 12, 2010: It's Official : Media and Photography Break up !!
- July 8, 2010: Getty hits a bump (and runs away)
- July 6, 2010: Of unintended consequences
- July 5, 2010: Photo burqa
Blogroll
Important Destinations
Subscribe Here :
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
Flying solo
Anyone can take a picture…that is the lesson Flickr and Microstock has recently taught us with a “pie in the face” method. It doesn’t take that much skills to create images that could use for licensing by someone else. Much less then painting, writing music, writing ( properly) or any other creative activity. Furthermore, technology has really improved the ease of access. Most images that we see today, even taken by pros, could have never existed 15 years ago because cameras, lenses and everything around it was just not that good. However, as much as photography is becoming more and more accessible, great images remain an act of creative magic. And its a talent, if not a gift.
The same goes for licensing images. Everyone claims they can sell pictures. However, it is not true. let’s take a few example, if you don’t mind. Microstock shooters. Sure they can take equivalent quality pictures as your average traditional RF/RM guy. But can they sell it ? Nope. They have to rely on the savvy tech marketing magicians of microstock sites like Istock or Dreamstime to make that happen. They could start their own microstock site with only their image, priced at even lower than any competition and yet see nothing. Ok..not convinced. Well, let’s jump into photojournalism. We are all familiar with great images that never get published. Why? Because images do not sell themselves. It’s a tragic myth.
More and more, one can see popping up all over the internet, sites build by young geeky entrepreneur offering to let photographers sell direct and cut the “middleman” or agency. They make people beleive the age old myth “if you build it they will come”. The more independent photographers create independent selling websites ( not the portfolio kind), the more they dilute and isolate their work.
Why do you think a lot of these database site scream high and loud how many images they contain ( 15 million, 43 million, 5 petratrillion..) ? Because they understand that the promise of a wealth of content is more important to most buyers than quality. They are looking for a solution, not a great image. Something that will fit well and appropriately in that space. They couldn’t care less if it was used before, like they couldn’t care less if their care is mass produced and others have the same model with the same color.
Think selling images in a big database is the solution ? wrong again. You can try, but there is no guarantee. Furthermore, the bigger the collection, the more chance your images have to be ignored . Great IPTC info ? Depends on what you call great: what you put in or what those guys in Bangalore put in ? Or those so self proclaimed expert? Mmm.
So what is it ? Great marketing ? Sure…but do you know what that is ? and how to achieve it ? Probably not. If you did, you would not be reading this but instead, be enjoying a nice coktail on the porch of your summer house looking at the sunset dip into a deep blue sea.
Admit it. You don’t know. You have no idea how to sell images. It takes talent, like shooting great images. Whether learned or natural, it’s not something most photographer have. Great athletes have agents, great actor have agents, why do you think photographers don’t need any ?
Because building a searchable website with a shopping cart is easy, and cheap ? And that, with a kick-ass SEO strategy will make them millionaires? Well, let’s think of who have succeeded up to now…What? no names come to mind? However, photographers with crappy websites ( or none at all) that are doing very, very well…many.
So, next time someone comes to you with a turn key solution that promises to cut the middle man and make you truly independent, you can beleive them, because that is exactly what it will do for you. And nothing else.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
