Lots of opinions there. A discussion is often the solution.
I often say that successful people are those who move quickly and reach a destination. Those who stand still are just trampled.
I disagree in much with Peter, but I like to see PD as an opportunity, not a destination. It has its faults, but nothing in this world is final. Nothing in this world is so perfect that it can't be made better, and the most positive i see is that someone will stand up and voice his opinion, especially sales site owners.
I strongly disagree though with any content rating system that is done at the sales sites. This is a global village with too many markets and too many needs. Even the most technically crappy photo can have a great news value in one place, be banned in another and be useless in a third an unusable for anything else than news.
It is also up to us photographers to make a site successful. If we supply raw unedited bad quality images, the site will get less visitor, means less sales. I see too many bad images on some sites.
As for commission, make the following mental experiment. If ten people pay a sales site 10% commission, they all make the same revenue, but as most expenses are with the photographer, cameras, lighting, studio, travel, computer, software, etc. The sales site makes the real money, a computer, much less software, storage, and bandwidth are cheap today in comparison.
Now increase the commission to 50% (either way) and consider 1,000 photographers and go on with 10,000. Now we have another picture, it looks at least to me as a real rip-off deal.
Add a common scam that some sites offer some real good photographers to sell their photos free as a bait system, even maybe pay them for selling their images, and then pushing those images specifically to customers, just to make it look like it was successful. (no finger pointing intended here)
Could I suggest PD to ask every photographer to choose 15 images they think is representative for them, and then let other photographers on the site grade the page, maybe also customers, and do a statistics based on region (where the photographer is based) and on his/hers own background (as new, travel, food, etc.)
It is much up to us photographers to support sits that work for us and make them successful, and boycott sites that are not. Photography is not really about taking pictures, but more about selling them. At least if you want to make a living out of it. Just my view.
On 12-Jan-2011 3:25 AM, Fred wrote:
This reply is posted on behalf of Chris Barton, who is having trouble getting it posted on his own because of the weirdness of Yahoo Groups:
In response to Peter Forsberg, I don't often take part in these discussions, even though I often see errors, but when someone for no apparent reason sends out a diatribe of half-facts, personal attacks and pure fabrications, I think I need to respond.
Peter Fosberg has stated that: "Barton has made more money through selling disc space and people putting up their portfolios on his site than through selling photos."
- The rental of disc space is a 'legacy' feature, which is largely irrelevant as we reward extra space when images are rated well, and when images sell (thank you to Luis Dafos for correctly pointing this out to Peter). I would now like to disclose that, in 2010, 'Barton' earned approximately 330 pounds from 'selling disc space'.
Peter Forsberg has more than 16,000 images on Photographers Direct. Peter has NEVER been asked to pay a penny for the disc space for these 16,000 images. I hope he is a big enough man to confirm to you all that this is infact, the truth.
- The annual fee for having a Photographer Portfolio is also a legacy system. The system is now based on a 10% commission on assignments earned, and the annual fee is only available to photographers who previously paid for it and wish to continue (rather than paying commission). These legacy Portfolios annual fees amount to a few thousand pounds a year.
If, as Peter alleges, we make most money from 'selling disc space and portfolios', then from the above figures we would be in a very sorry state.
Peter Forsberg has both 'Photographer' and 'Stock Source' Portfolios on Photographers Direct. Peter has NEVER paid anything to have these portfolios on our site. Hopefully he can also confirm that to be true.
In the past year Peter has received about half a dozen assignments offers through his Portfolios in his area of Prague, Czech Republic, including the sites of a German manufacturer of solar parks, a cookbook cover shoot, a formal event shoot and a wedding anniversary shoot. He has updated every single one on our website as 'cancelled' without providing any further details. Maybe they were just time wasters? However, in comparison, a photographer in a neighbouring Central European city received about the same number of assignment offers through her Portfolio, and she has earned more than 5000 dollars from these assignments. This came to mind as she emailed me this week to just say
"Thanks so much for providing such a great service :)"
In fact, in contrast to Peter's representation of what Photographers Direct is about, almost every service on Photographers Direct is available to photographers on a commission-only basis with no upfront fees.
To finish, from his complaints about the rating of his images, it appears that Peter feels that we do not recognise the quality of his work and that it is underrated. To try to rectify this, I am presenting here his recent submissions which he feels are 'underrated' by us.
http://www.photographersdirect.com/buyers/search.asp?lb=13443
Hopefully the publicity will help him to sell these images.
best regards
Chris 'Barton'
Managing Director of Photographers Direct
--- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Forsberg" <peter@...> wrote:
>
> I haven't met Chris Barton but I can say he doesn't know much about photography and esp. selling photographs. His arbitrary rating system has caused a lot of grief among many, and I have heard numerous big time stock shooters saying they often get grade 6 for photos that have made thousands in the course of years. For my part I can say that I get grade 6 almost without fail for each and every picture that AGE Fotostock chooses into their precious collection. Now, if I put Chris Barton and mr. AGE against each other... Well, anyone who knows anything about stock knows who is who and these two characters can't even be compared. Barton has made more money through selling disc space and people putting up their portfolios on his site than through selling photos. Gutierrez is responsible for selling more photographs than perhaps anyone single-handedly is on this planet.
>
> I think P.D. is a classic example of a failed stock photo opportunity. It could have gone somewhere but it embraced the wrong market and made all the classic mistakes. I am sure it won't be around for long, but I do value the "fair-trade photography" aspect - it's something that could be pushed on this forum too but I guess web marketing and selling stuff for a buck a shot is the way to go here.
>
> Peter Forsberg
>
> --- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com, planetearth zero <planetearthzero@> wrote:
> >
> > cute:)
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, sjlocke <sjlocke@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com<selling_stock_photography%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > "Fred" <freddyv@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
> > > > --- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com<selling_stock_photography%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > planetearth zero <planetearthzero@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris Barton is a great guy! Spoke with him a few years back, very down
> > > to
> > > > > earth and very pleasant.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm sure he is, though I've never met him. But keep in mind that even the
> > > worst people (Sean, Me and Hitler come to mind) can seem pleasant much of
> > > the time. Sorry, Sean, but I thought you might get mad if I didn't group you
> > > in with two of the greatest villains in History. ;-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > LOL
> > >
> > >
> > > > BTW, Sean, is this your blog?
> > > > http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/
> > >
> > > Yep, that would be me. Primarily targeted at iStock buyers, but generally
> > > useful occasionally... :)
> > >
> > > Sean L.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If, so you should feel free to post a teaser with a link here on a
> > > regular basis. We could use the activity.
> > > >
> > > > Fred Voetsch
> > > >
> > > > Group Moderator - Selling Stock Photography
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/selling_stock_photography/
> > > >
> > > > Owner - Acclaim Images, LLC
> > > > http://www.acclaimimages.com/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
0 comments:
Post a Comment