> You forgot to note that the technology is what created the supply.
I mentioned that it could actually be a little bit of a reversal. I
got into stock photography with 35mm film. However, so did a shipload
of other people. All that Fujichrome was shot for a reason, and it
wasn't for good prints. We like to blame digital for the ills of
everything, but the stock industry was changing before that point.
So, what about the technology? I believe the technology is the
response, not the cause, when it comes to stock. People got into stock
photography because it seemed like easy money. For an average of 50
cents per picture, you could shoot, process, sleeve and mail a bunch
of pictures to an agency you were contracted with. There were a slew
of professional photographers that were specializing in something else
that got into stock just because they could. Then there were the
myriads of people, like me, that did because of we could. For 10
years, my business card said "Stock Photographer".
My agency asked that I convert from 35mm to medium-format film as it
brought in larger dollar amounts. I did some, but my return on
investment was never great enough to justify it as a matter of course.
When they wanted 250+ images per month from me, the cost difference
was staggering. But I did supply a bunch of 35mm 'Chromes.
I can pinpoint when stock photography "died" as we knew it. 1996-1998.
This was when we had a sudden and almost total conversion from
multimedia presentations and glossies to the Web. Web developers were
a different breed and generally wouldn't buy stock images and when
they did, they would hit the $1 CoralDraw files. The Multimedia
people, who almost entirely were using Macromedia, suddenly found
themselves on the outs. In less than three years, stock photography
changed. One could look to the Dot-Com bubble burst as the end of
stock photography, but it actually started earlier than that. We're
literally 15 years past the transition point and it has only gotten
worse. We had a bit of a buffer time as we waited for clients to come
up to speed with file delivery and image-handling.
The MARKETPLACE changed. The TECHNOLOGY came later. Once every
soccer-mom and her dog got Digital Rebels and discovered Alamy and
iStock, it saturation of images has completely destroyed any hopes of
making a living on stock. There are a handful of people, yes, but that
happens in every industry where 1% of the people make 99% of the
profit. I'm hoping that Tina is of that 1%.
I can't say when was the last time I encountered a professional "Stock
Photographer". Probably 2006.
AG
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|