Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
Message:
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.
Attachment:
    

Topic Review
marymary100

[*] posted on 8-2-2011 at 16:16
Looks a pretty good camera though- but I can understand why a professional would be concerned about amateurs earning from photography.
Quaver

[*] posted on 8-2-2011 at 14:48
Good to know before I started:D
I'll stick to family pics thenkewl_glasses
Faolan

[*] posted on 8-2-2011 at 08:08
Oh dear.

Shall I start?

This is so old hat, plus the market is over-saturated. The chances of anyone making money any more is very slim. The heyday of getting paid for your shots is over, you're lucky to pull in anything unless you have a vast library of good quality or unique images. When I mean unique, I mean it in a commercial sense.

Plus you need decent glass/cameras for the quality otherwise it risks being unusable for a campaign.

Now the real elephant in the ring isn't stock imagery it's the lack of education of the amateurs, they don't how to manage Image Rights, Copyright or even Value. So agencies take advantage of this. A case in point an amateur could have been paid hundreds, if not thousands for an image only got $100. This was from Flickr and he only found out after when he came to brag about it.

The whole industry has become devalued where people don't appreciate the technical skill to produce images or cost of professional gear.

Digital photography isn't 'cheap' as people believe. The cost of storage can also be prohibitive when you have nearly 50,000 RAW files. Combine that with the RAW file sizes of a Canon 5D Mk II or a 7D and you will see what problems arise.
Quaver

[*] posted on 8-2-2011 at 07:27
Better start building up a nice portfolio:cool:
marymary100

[*] posted on 7-2-2011 at 23:21
Click