Quote:
Originally Posted by louoates
The logical extension of current trends would be to have web sites offering FREE images to customers on web pages containing advertising. With no subscription necessary. Photographers would be paid on a small percentage of each "click through", from the ad revenue. I expect the current format of iStock and similar sites to be history within the next year or so.
|
There were some sites trying that approach already. It's even been discussed on these forums.
Microstock is getting more and more photographers because the mass numbers work. you sell thousands of images a month.
I'll NEVER go for that model. I'd rather flip burgers at McSomething or SomeKing.
About the BBC Report:
I'm always amazed how journalists refer to microstock as a place to earn a buck or two with your point and shoot or even a family photos selling place.
It's always a surprise they can't admit there are professionals doing this for a living and succeeding. Some of them doing a better job than the so called "I sell nothing for a lot of money" pro photographers.
A PRO is someone that makes a living from something. It's not necessarily a better producer. Sometimes people forget that.
Microstock is just a different business model and people have to get out of their comfort zone and make different approaches. whining is not going to sell more photos. Microstock, midstock, macrostock, vectorstock, moviestock... the world is changing and global is the way to think. Things are faster and constantly evolving. Sitting down thinking "I am so good at this, I can't be bothered" isn't the way to go...