To sell or not to sell

[DAVID WILLIAMS]

I was only using farmers as a example to explain getting 10 pounds for a RM travel image is not enough to cover costs of production, nor is 25 cents from microstock.

To cover costs you would need 50 dollars for a eighth page at least.

[DavidC]

 

I disagree it costs just as much if not more to keep up with Cameras, Computers, Software, if you started in 2002 and used Pro Cameras you would have had to upgraded two or three times.

The same with computers and Software, it depends what of Photography you do, as for the real good pictures doing well would depend on if it was available as a 25 cent download.

 

Not to get into a spitting match, but comparing the cost of farming to the cost of maintaining camera equipment is laughable. Even the one cow farmer. Oh, by the way, I do both.

 

Upgrade equipment every two or three years is very inexpensive, especially for a lot of the people who sell on microstock.  What does it cost to upgrade software - $200 every 3 or 4 years.  And even your equipment, a thousand maybe every 3 or 4 years. Everyone has computers, so upgrading those too these days is super cheap.  And the average stock photog does not carry 4 or 5 of the most expensive lenses. Even then, those are long term nvestments. Heck you'd have to replace your one cow every few years as well. And one vet bill could buy me that Canon f2.8 70-200 I want so much.

 

The photographer's eye is still the best selling point to anything that sells, regardless of the equipment. And if you are a hobbyist with a good eye, then if you are smart, you will try and sell your vacation pics in Africa. Stupid not too if the market is there.

As one who has just replaced a drive-shaft on one of my tractors I sympathize with Jill's  farming economics - however she does highlight very effectively what has gone wrong with the stock industry - it is not that the 'smart' hobbyists are wrong in selling their holiday snaps - it is just the silly values that they are happy to accept that undermines and creates the low values which prevail today.

 

I agree that the costs involved in an amateur/pro outfit are low and the facility to place your images with an agency that will sell the licenses for just a few dollars has become so easy - but it kills the value of the images which are planned and costly to produce because it has now become a one-size-fits-all culture and the race to the bottom in sales values progresses apace.

 

There is no way that any of this can be reversed so I suppose protest is pointless - just moan a bit and find something else to do - anyone want to make me an offer for a few sheep ?

 

PS: the first poster to write "BAA HUMBUG !" will get a red arrow (and I normally don't do them.....)