Comments on: Why Corbis’ New SnapVillage Stock Photography Agency is a Bad Deal for Photographers

By: Best sites for stock photos

Best sites for stock photos — Sat, 02 May 2009 21:17:35 +0000

[...] 20-30 percent payouts as “a ripoff,” and wrote an impassioned piece last summer about Why Corbis’ New SnapVillage Stock Photography Agency is a Bad Deal for Photographers, though Zooomr is not yet in a position to serve as a people-powered stock photo [...]

By: Credit

Credit — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:33:00 +0000

Your site has very much liked me. I really appreciate it!

By: Virtual online internet casino gambling

Virtual online internet casino gambling — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:15:00 +0000

Your site is great and I really appreciate it! I have always enjoyed reading your site.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:28:00 +0000

Hi Thomas,

While I wholeheartedly agree with what you're saying here I do have another beef with all of the photo sites (and that would include Zooomr) and that is that the legalese regarding rights seems to indicate that in some manner I am giving my rights to my work up to the site that hosts my photos for sale, and in perpetuity. Thanks but no thanks. I'll sell my own stuff.

Morgan

By: Automatt

Automatt — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:38:00 +0000

Andrew, when will this market for stock photos launch?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 15:36:00 +0000

I totally agree with you, Tom.

I run a small stock site and we will be changing our site to allow photographers to change set price on each picture!

Constantin Moisei
http://www.goodstockimages.com

By: Capt Suresh Sharma

Capt Suresh Sharma — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:28:00 +0000

I am new into the field of still photography, just two years. I worked very hard and got a coffee table book, which is due for release on the 26th of Sep by the Defence Minister of India. I mean to say that your quality of work will attract people and can get you any price. I have been able to sell images for US $ 650, which thought may never sell, as these were simple portraits and were on Flickr for display. I negotiated hard. I knew the buyer is desperate and needs it for a campaign. I pity those who have no idea about how to negotiate and have sold similar images for one tenth of the price I got. Getty and Corbis are a rip off. They pay about US $ 13 per image to the young photographers, through agencies though, and sell each image for US$ 500, most of the times. I am starting a small co-operative to display images of quality of friends and sell at higher price.

Getty Images has its rep in India, named as Visage Images, they told me that I will be paid just 30% for each image sold, a rip off. I refused to go with them. They were pushing that they sell more numbers. I give a damn shit to numbers, how do I know.

Friends, each of your image is of high value, do not put a price cap on it, negotiate hard as per the price calculator, which is quite well known to all pros.

In the business of stock, no one knows the brand name of photographers, its the image and type of usage of the image, which determines the price. So, assess the situation and price your image accordingly. There is no fixed price for the next time, for the same image even. Its the market usage and your image quality which leads the price.

By: bryan_luckyoliver

bryan_luckyoliver — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:39:00 +0000

[I'm Chief Instigator of LuckyOliver]

Thomas, I love your energy. Bravo.

LuckyOliver is a new company in the space that already offers photographer the ability to price their photos (with no limit)- I think you have the right idea. The challenge is less about allowing people to price their work- and more about finding solutions for buyers. Midstock really is the future of the industry.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 03:48:00 +0000

I’ve been discussing this idea with my friend who has worked as an advertising director for many years. The reason they use Getty/Corbis is because they can find appropriate images quickly. That is the biggest single reason. If they have to browse through 100 pages then are very put off. If you want to succeed with this idea, and I hope you do because I’m an interested photographer, then you will have to find a way to reliably put the right images at the top of the list. You need a search engine not simply based on keywords but tuned to the needs a buyer can define for their sought after image.

I also would very much like to see a RM version of a system like this. I’m not at all thrilled about selling RF. I may never do that but I would certainly jump on board a RM way to offer my images with more control and better returns. The choices available to most of us “unknown” photographers are not that good right now. I look at a site like photographersdirect.com and it’s a good idea, but they are dismal in their search technology and buyers will not come back there after dealing with the poor focus of result sets for any particular search. It has to be better than that. Buyers are drowning in a sea of inappropriate images.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:04:00 +0000

While there are some good photos on Zoomer, there are also a lot of not so good photos. Consistency is the key to successful stock photography. If I can go to Getty and consistently find high quality without paging through hundreds or thousands of crappy images, then I’ve probably saved myself money. My time is worth upwards of $100/hr to my employer. She would much rather I spend one hour looking for an image and pay $500 than have me spend five hours looking for $50 image. The four hours saved can be used to generate revenue for the company.