Posted by Dan Borzynski on November 30, 2006 at 9:17 AM
I suppose that this might make some sense if there was a specific marketing plan associated for just those images, but I just don't see it. If I understand what I am reading, you are paying money up front to make less money IF an image sells.
On a rare occasion, someone here or elsewhere willl describe something like this and ask if they should pursue it. The immediate response is almost invariably "SCAM -STAY AWAY!!!!". The only thing different here is the a respectable company is running it.
Looking at it from the perspective of the stock house, it's a tradeoff for the cost of staff time to do the sorting. Heck, if I was running a stock house I'd be tempted to offer this as an alternative to taking a larger cut and having my staff go through all the submitted images. Paying to submit should hopefully force photographers to be a little more selective up front.
But as a photographer? Nah. I'm not willing to share my income with anyone else, much less pay a fee to get in the door.
Posted by David Prichard on November 30, 2006 at 10:20 AM
It would appear from this article that stock photography may be coming a vanity industry. My understanding is that traditionally a stock image returns two dollars per year for a photographer. Due to changes in fashion, new construction, etc., many images become stale quite quickly. With a $50.00 licence fee per image and the ability to submit only forty images per year, how can a photographer expect an income?
At one time a stock photographer had to have a large quantity of quality images to make a living. From the article it appears that Getty has changed the business model so they will have a large quantity of stock photographers who will pay Getty to accept a few quality images. With the popularity of DSLR's perhaps it is Getty's hope that vanity and not income will drive many talented non-pros to submit.
After it's recent lay-offs, Getty seems to be scrambling to keep profits up. It will be interesting to see if this model works; both from a business perspective and one of sustained quality images.
Posted by Richard Wong on November 30, 2006 at 2:16 PM
This sort of thing reminds me of bidding on eBay for a chance to hang out w/ a celebrity. Waste of money...
Discussion
4 replieshttp://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003409178
On a rare occasion, someone here or elsewhere willl describe something like this and ask if they should pursue it. The immediate response is almost invariably "SCAM -STAY AWAY!!!!". The only thing different here is the a respectable company is running it.
Have I missed anything?
But as a photographer? Nah. I'm not willing to share my income with anyone else, much less pay a fee to get in the door.
At one time a stock photographer had to have a large quantity of quality images to make a living. From the article it appears that Getty has changed the business model so they will have a large quantity of stock photographers who will pay Getty to accept a few quality images. With the popularity of DSLR's perhaps it is Getty's hope that vanity and not income will drive many talented non-pros to submit.
After it's recent lay-offs, Getty seems to be scrambling to keep profits up. It will be interesting to see if this model works; both from a business perspective and one of sustained quality images.