Fasten your seatbelts for globalization

FlemishDreams · #1 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 10:13 AM

What does microstock make for the plain mortals among us? A new lens now and then, a new cam in time? Except for the most successful photographers, microstock is just a nicely paying hobby.

Ever thought about this? I have been a couple of months again in the Philippines, where the cost of living is about 4 to 10 times less than in the industrialized world. With an income from stock of about 500$ per month, you can live very, very well there.

No, I'm not suggesting moving there. I'm thinking about all those eager "poor" photographers in those countries. They can get relatively rich by microstock as a full-time profession. Talents are spread equally over the world, so we'd rather be afraid of those artists from SE Asia, China, Latvia, Russia. They have the talent, the time, and they will earn a lot, speaking in local standards. Dreamstime started in Rumania, say no more. The only thing those talented guys don't have yet are good stock-worthy cams, since relatively speaking, cams are very expensive there.

When cams get cheaper and better, be afraid! Pixels travel with the speed of light over the globe and don't care for distance nor borders. The Ru$$ians are coming! ;-)

photovan · #2 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 11:16 AM

It isn't just the photographers in India or the Philippines, but the retired who just want a little extra money, the high school student trying to increase his allowance, and the amateur who is just thrilled that someone wants to buy a picture. Even without globalization, the problem would be the same.

And without globalization, we wouldn't be selling anything on Fotolia, or the Canadian sites either. Isn't IS Canadian? For that matter, if you are really Belgian, you wouldn't be selling anywhere but in Belgium. And as an American, I would be selling nothing in Europe. In fact without globalization as embodied in the WorldWideWeb, there wouldn't be anyplace to sell these photos, anyway.

Professional photography used to require a huge upfront investment, as well as talent and the will to work very, very hard. And even then, only a few people could support themselves other than by doing weddings and high school yearbooks. To be accepted by a stock agency, you needed a huge portfolil and had to be able to demonstrate that you would produce a large number of quality photos steadily over a long period of time.

Those barriers to entry have fallen, and new markets have opened up. The grandfather down the street, the teenager with the inexpensive point-and-shoot, all have a shot at the market now.

Microstock is not a market where very many westerners are going to make a living. As an adjunct to professionals with other photography income, it can be part of the mix. But as in the past, most professionals will still make most of their money doing the dreaded wedding shoot.

The whole, and I think brilliant, idea behind microstock was that there was this whole web market that most amateurs could fill if they just had a bit of an 'eye'. Web developers couldn't pay standard stock prices, the web was itself a great acquisition and delivery system, and there were lots of highly skilled amateurs out there playing with their new digital cameras.

OK, I got carried away here. The point I'm trying to make is that a 25 cent commission may mean more to an Indian than to an American, and more to an American than a European, and more to most Europeans than to someone living under the powerful pound, but we can't have globalization in selling without globalization in supply.

Maybe it's just that most of my meager sales have been in Europe? And that I'm in nice, inexpensive Thailand now?

photovan · #3 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 11:42 AM

My apologies for the previous post. I sort of tend to run off at the keyboard.

_Gudella · #4 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 12:59 PM

I don't know waht is considered goog income for someone living for example in the USA. I live in Hungary, here 500$ / month is an above-avarage income for a full time job. This is not an unreachable thing in microstock. The hard part of it, that cameras and lenses are much more expensive here (and not only in a relative way...)

Gracey · #5 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 02:00 PM

$500 per month :shock:

Where I live that would be incredibly low. My husband makes somewhat more than that in a week. On the other hand, the costs of living are quite high here too (housing, food, clothes).

thesupe87 · #6 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 03:24 PM

In my area people need to make at least $500 a week - at least...and that's even tight. People where I live can't even survive on that. I don't live in a mansion, and I drive a 20 year old car :lol: I try to keep my life as simple as possible. Because the more stuff you buy, the more stuff breaks, and the more stress it gives you. If I can get to the point where micro will pay half of my mortgage payment each month, I'll be thrilled! I'm getting close.

LockStockBob · #7 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 08:42 PM

When Im paying half my morgage todd, I'll be paying 5% of yours too from shutterstock referrals

Im up to about $410 this month on shutterstock, should close the month at over $430 tomorrow (just on shutterstock). Trouble is, im going to south africa for 3 weeks at christmas which will set me back two months. If I wasnt going, Id hopefully reach the $500/month mark, and if I REALLY worked hard part time, the $1000 a month marker after a year of shooting just part time.

edited to add... I dont have a morgage, I still rent.

CJPHoto · #8 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 08:55 PM

The problem with photags in the developing countries is they cant afford the equiptment. camera, lens, computer and internet. I read on a pro forum a pro from india asking if the new Nikon d40 would be good enough as he might be able to save up for it. Wheras in the US and the UK you get people complaining the 5D doesn't have auto modes!

The biggest threat I see is from students. Free internet at uni and probably computers. Get a camera for art class (student loan). beats working at mcDonalds.

$500 per month - I know people who charge that for a day! Different worlds on the same planet.

thesupe87 · #9 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 09:38 PM

That's double what I'm making on shutterstock each month, Bob - those are some nice figures! With a portfolio like that, get it across the rest of the "non-dud" sites and you should be seeing $1000 a month in no time

Easily.

eendicott · #10 (**permalink**) 11-29-2006, 10:58 PM

Photovan, I think your comment of "Professional photography used to require a huge upfront investment, as well as talent and the will to work very, very hard." is still true. If a person wants to become professional, then it does require a huge up front investment, a little talent, and the will to work hard - very hard. My stock portfolio is getting to the point where I am earning between $400 and $500 month. So what's next? Sit back, relax, enjoy the cash? Or, what I have been contemplating doing is renting some office space for a studio. Office rents in my area start at $300 for about 400 square feet. If I can take that $500, put $300 of it into studio space, then the rest into paying for models, lighting, supplies, etc., then I can increase my portfolio by more, giving me more income to be able to do more elaborate shoots that are more unique and that differentiate myself from other photographers.

Currently, I have a decent day job, I have health insurance (it isn't run by the government or the state), I have retirement money being stored away (the US retirement system is not as great as other countries), etc., etc. I'm not willing to make the full time jump yet, but I can tell you that if I get laid off, the separation packages where I work will give me up to a year paid severence. If I get laid off, I'm going to give stock a run for it's money and see if I can do this full time. Otherwise, I'll keep working at it as my "part-time" job and build that portfolio so that when I decide to retire (in about 20 years), I'll have a decent income from royalties to supplement my retirement income.