Prompted by some of these exchanges, I have today signed up with
iStock; I uploaded my 3 images and am now waiting for the acceptance.
I have been on Alamy for a while, but I suppose the kind of images I
make do not sell well there. But even more annoying is the archaic
interface--until they see fit to give you upload "privileges" you are
forced to submit images by mailing them CDs or DVDs. Totally 19th
century. Compared to this, iStock is a breath of fresh air.
As for those who bemoan the new business models--they can stay on
their high horse. The market for stock photography has changed, and
trying to charge $500 for a generic stock image today is akin to King
Canute sitting on the beach and ordering the tide to stop. He got wet
On 28-aug-2007, at 14:31, Garth Wood wrote:
> AG Schnozz wrote:
>> Chris Crawford wrote:
>>> No. I refuse to give my work away while some big corporation gets
>>> rich off me work.
>> Amen, bro. No one raindrop thinks that it is responsible for the
> Er, iStockPhoto's a local Calgary company, and by no stretch of the
> imagination would I call it "big." More like "entrepreneurial
> And while some here on the List might sneer at such an effort, it's
> been truly helpful to some commercial photography startups --
> particularly in the former Communist Bloc countries -- in establishing
> themselves. Here's a good example:
> Much the same way that Renderosity or DAZ (for 3D artists and
> have helped many otherwise ordinary folk bust into the world of
> 3D modeling.
> I've never contributed anything to iStockPhoto, but that's only
> I don't think my images are anywhere near good enough. (I *have*
> contributed some free 3D models to PoserPros, though...)
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx