> However, I did say that digital was a double edged sword. Please let me expand
> on that. In days of yore it was very difficult to "break into" markets which
> demanded a minimum of medium format transparencies, if not large format; picture
> editors would mainly deal with the photographers they knew and trusted, and if
> you did not live near major towns it was expensive and time consuming to post
> sheets of transparencies. With the advent of the internet and digital imaging the
> market has opened up, which I believe is a good thing, and everyone competes on a
> level playing field; if your images are good enough they are accepted. However,
> this has also led to more and more competition, and I am not saying that this is
> a bad thing, with a glut of images and especially similar images being available
> for sale. This has driven down the price of images, especially generics, and I
> doubt that anyone can argue that repro rates in magazines and books have not
> fallen in recent years.
Joe:
While I agree in principal, my recollection of the past is very different. However,
before I get into my comments about editors and agencies, I really want to stress
how much I agree with your points about how much more fair stock photo agencies are
to photographers than they were just a few decades ago.
The present system makes it so impossible for one photographer to dominate an agency
that newcomers to the industry can't even imagine what we're talking about. The very
nature of how our business is conducted today makes it impossible for one person to -
say - make half the sales of an entire large agency. (as was common 25 years ago).
It's much easier to get a foot in the door today than ever before.
Markets and agencies are two different things though and you confuse the two at your
own risk. If you think that being in stock photo agencies can help you break into
any market - you'd be sadly mistaken. Those editors who were hard to reach years ago
are still hard to reach - and you still have to reach them to break into the real
markets.
Worst and most facinating though is the way the internet brings hundreds or
thousands of people together in these discussions. This creates a whole mythology
intended to explain the present situation. Take it from somebody who was there;
there was no golden age of stock photography for most people. Tales of a glorious
past should be viewed with extreme caution.
Brian Yarvin
Author, Educator, Photographer
http://www.brianyarvin.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment