sale RF got more sales than RM these days?

[George Martinus]

Hello dedicated photographers!

 

This topic may have been questioned before long ago. But I need clearer answers based on your own experience, not theoretical one.

 

Is it right RF photos are tend to get more sales than RM these days?

 

Because I saw usual buyers are often from repeater companies, like The Sun, BBC, Guardian, and other media from British and Europe.

This makes me assume ordinary buyers from another countries are prefer to buy RF than RM.

What do you think?

 

Thanks

[Martin Carlsson]

5 hours ago, George Martinus said:

Hello dedicated photographers!

 

This topic may have been questioned before long ago. But I need clearer answers based on your own experience, not theoretical one.

 

Is it right RF photos are tend to get more sales than RM these days?

 

Because I saw usual buyers are often from repeater companies, like The Sun, BBC, Guardian, and other media from British and Europe.

This makes me assume ordinary buyers from another countries are prefer to buy RF than RM.

What do you think?

 

Thanks

 

Yes. One might not like it or agree with it, but in general RF is doing better than RM. Why - easy for buyers, unfortunately to our detriment. If revenue is the criteria, RF is the way to go. The visual licensing market is however overdue an licensing options overhaul IMHO, but the onus is on "us" to get that to change as RF works just fine for stock libraries and buyers, but of course is not very friendly to "us".

[chris_rabe]

8 minutes ago, Martin Carlsson said:

 

Yes. One might not like it or agree with it, but in general RF is doing better than RM. Why - easy for buyers, unfortunately to our detriment. If revenue is the criteria, RF is the way to go. The visual licensing market is however overdue and licensing options overhaul, but the onus is on "us" to get that to change as RF works just fine for stock libraries and buyers, but of course is not very friendly to "us".

 

I have always felt that the naming of royalty free what a big problem - conjures up the wrong ideas for people who already think everything on the internet is free

 

I'm not totally against RF as such, but minimum pricing it seems to be hitting, yes.

 

I have a bigger issue with subscription models of suppliers.

[Martin Carlsson]

47 minutes ago, chris_rabe said:

 

I have always felt that the naming of royalty free what a big problem - conjures up the wrong ideas for people who already think everything on the internet is free

 

I'm not totally against RF as such, but minimum pricing it seems to be hitting, yes.

 

I have a bigger issue with subscription models of suppliers.

 

Agree with the name issue.

 

Both these ways of licensing are old, before the internet age and doesn't really work well for creators in 2018. RF inherently is inefficient in harnessing income for us, especially when the pricing is leaning towards the low-end to enable to get as many buyers as possible, but that means leaving an awful lot of money on the table. Also the lack of control, difficulties policing mis-use - it just isn't creator friendly. Works great if you perceive images merely as commodities. 

 

RM better captures the connection between usage and price, but the numerous variables slows down the buyer.

 

So in a perfect world, a new license addressing all these issues would emerge.

 

Re. subscriptions - at the right price level(s) I have no issues. There are so many different types of customers that the more options available the better, but the price needs to be right.