Harry Lime
Practitioner
I'm not sure what you are trying to get at, but no one is calling for the regulation of the photo market or advocating that we all turn in to godless communists. (although the Chinese are making a killing these days)
The article is merely observing how changes in the market place are affecting the viability of a profession. On a personal note some of us are not too pleased to see this change; due to professional association with the field or not.
But as was mentioned earlier, if someone under cuts her while offering the same level of quality, she too will be dumped.
It's a race to the bottom and those who think they are immune to it will be it's victims tomorrow. That's what the Ayn Rand fan club always seems to forget.
Last edited:
MCTuomey
Mentor
i was maligned awhile ago on another thread for suggesting that photogs not dependent on photography for a living should consider refraining from offering zero- or low-cost photos when doing so would undercut working photographers.
a simple call to a form of oblige for those who really don't need the income, in other words.
there were no takers at all.
i know a number of photographers - commercial, product (automotive mostly), real estate, portrait and weddings - all now in their 40s and 50s. only one remains professionally involved in photography: now a medical photographer only (former photojournalist and studio practitioner).
it's a commodity market, i guess.
a simple call to a form of oblige for those who really don't need the income, in other words.
there were no takers at all.
i know a number of photographers - commercial, product (automotive mostly), real estate, portrait and weddings - all now in their 40s and 50s. only one remains professionally involved in photography: now a medical photographer only (former photojournalist and studio practitioner).
it's a commodity market, i guess.
Bill Pierce
Well-known
I wish I could say I’m joining this conversation late because I was working. Actually I was scanning some family portraits and reading a lot of emails from friends who had seen the New York Times article that started this thread.
You might think that photojournalism would be relatively immune to the downturn. After all, your neighbor who sets their digital to Program and takes outdoor portraits of children can’t get clearance to the White House or get embedded with troops.
Wrong. A quarter of a century ago, when things were a lot cheaper, I got anywhere from $300 to $1200 a day for editorial work, more for annual reports and similar work. I was reimbursed for all my expenses. Now, here’s the kicker. Time, Inc., which assigned and paid for much of my work, got first rights. But, after Time developed the film, someone from my agency was there, if the pictures were important, screaming for the editors to make their selects so the agency could sell the other pictures to other non competitive magazines outside the country. Future publications of the same pictures in Time, Inc. publications received additional pay. Time, Inc. also gave me an office and medical and camera insurance.
Compare that to the $250 a day for all rights that some major publications are now offering.
One major publication cut its day rate almost in half. I’m told that one of the business folk at the meeting that decided this said that the quality of the pictures would drop, but that the readers would get used to it. And once that happened, they could drop the rate even more.
I suppose I’m saying you get what you pay for. There are some excellent young photojournalists around. But, often, they can’t afford to stick around. They go into other areas of photography or leave it all together. I believe there are young photographers who are potentially as great as my heroes who simply will not continue their work as photojournalists.
I’ve got a lot more to say about this, but I’ve got to get back to the personal emails from other ex photojournalists.
You might think that photojournalism would be relatively immune to the downturn. After all, your neighbor who sets their digital to Program and takes outdoor portraits of children can’t get clearance to the White House or get embedded with troops.
Wrong. A quarter of a century ago, when things were a lot cheaper, I got anywhere from $300 to $1200 a day for editorial work, more for annual reports and similar work. I was reimbursed for all my expenses. Now, here’s the kicker. Time, Inc., which assigned and paid for much of my work, got first rights. But, after Time developed the film, someone from my agency was there, if the pictures were important, screaming for the editors to make their selects so the agency could sell the other pictures to other non competitive magazines outside the country. Future publications of the same pictures in Time, Inc. publications received additional pay. Time, Inc. also gave me an office and medical and camera insurance.
Compare that to the $250 a day for all rights that some major publications are now offering.
One major publication cut its day rate almost in half. I’m told that one of the business folk at the meeting that decided this said that the quality of the pictures would drop, but that the readers would get used to it. And once that happened, they could drop the rate even more.
I suppose I’m saying you get what you pay for. There are some excellent young photojournalists around. But, often, they can’t afford to stick around. They go into other areas of photography or leave it all together. I believe there are young photographers who are potentially as great as my heroes who simply will not continue their work as photojournalists.
I’ve got a lot more to say about this, but I’ve got to get back to the personal emails from other ex photojournalists.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
There's another darker side to this whole story and that's the outright theft of images from flickr or personal websites by journals.
I have had at least two instances of image theft reported to me. One I was able to document. The response from the Publisher was "oh gee, that's terrible. Let me talk to that bad art director" No apology, no offer of compensation, no film, no SD card, no photo credit ... no nothing.
I think the problem is greater than photography. We have a lot of sociopaths at the top who operate on the principle of "screw everybody and do it every day" and "if you're caught deny or blame someone else even the victim"
The idea that there is no worth to others work is a virus and it's basically coming from the senior people in industry.
I have had at least two instances of image theft reported to me. One I was able to document. The response from the Publisher was "oh gee, that's terrible. Let me talk to that bad art director" No apology, no offer of compensation, no film, no SD card, no photo credit ... no nothing.
I think the problem is greater than photography. We have a lot of sociopaths at the top who operate on the principle of "screw everybody and do it every day" and "if you're caught deny or blame someone else even the victim"
The idea that there is no worth to others work is a virus and it's basically coming from the senior people in industry.
Pickett Wilson
Mentor
I could care less of people steal my photos. They weren't going to pay for them anyway. I know many photographers store up copyrights like they were some kind of 401K, but the reality is that they are being devalued every day, and there is no way to undo that.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
wow.......
scottwallick
ambition ≥ skill
My secondhand understanding of this is quite different, Bill. My postmate from the Peace Corps, right after we finished in 2004, flew from Nepal to Kuwait, and then managed a visa to Iraq. He was embedded a number of times over about 18 months, and even later went to Afghanistan and was embedded once or twice more.
The only job he had prior to this was in the Peace Corps teaching English to school kids—never published a photo, never done any journalism. He liked photography and thought it would be an adventure.
When asked about how he got there, he says he had two qualifications: (a) being in Iraq and (b) passing the security clearance.
Funny in a way.
martin s
Well-known
That was a joke, a reference even. I should start using smileys or stop expecting people to watch popular TV.
martin
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Actually, filing for copyright is not a waste. I don’t threaten small house publications or websites with copyright suites and financial ruin for using my pictures without permission or payment. I do point out this possibility and then ask for the normal amount I would charge a small publication, a significantly lower sum. I am almost always paid. I’m not naive enough to think I have changed the heart and soul of a picture thief, but I am amazed at how many “professionals” and “academics” actually think picking up pictures from the web and publishing them does not break the law.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
And outsourcing.
Face it, when a job market is destroyed, it doesn't come back. I wouldn't want to go work for GM either.
monochromejrnl
Well-known
I'm just making an observation that the market forces that have caused this 'race to the bottom' is no unique to the photography market. Offshoring has decimated 'value added' manufacturing jobs in North America and Western Europe for hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of workers to low cost labour markets and we as 'consumers' 'benefit' from these market forces. ;P
I'm a lawyer and offshoring/outsourcing is affecting my profession as well (it's a profession that resists innovation and change to it's own detriment) and it's a profession that benefits/suffers (depending on which side of the bar you're on) from an extremely high barrier to entry.
Adapt or die. Or move to China.
I'm a lawyer and offshoring/outsourcing is affecting my profession as well (it's a profession that resists innovation and change to it's own detriment) and it's a profession that benefits/suffers (depending on which side of the bar you're on) from an extremely high barrier to entry.
Adapt or die. Or move to China.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
"I work as a freelance stock photographer and artist. I specialize in colorful photography with a unique twist, non-traditional stock photography, theme and concept photography, musician and band album cover art, alternative model headshots and unique portraiture. I am LGBT and family friendly."
She may be a stock photographer, but artist??? She ain't.
She may be a stock photographer, but artist??? She ain't.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
"Free for use My photos that have a creative commons license and are free for everyone to download..." Pink Sherbert
This, is a problem.
This, is a problem.
reala_fan
Well-known
Exactly correct!! They think "if they found it on the web...it's in the public domain"!!
I just had it happen to me, the other day, it's detailed here (I'm "Infrared-IR"):
http://www.flickr.com/groups/colorado_springs/discuss/72157623653128154/
Harry Lime
Practitioner
Oh, I hear you. I work in the movie business and if 10 years ago you had told me that films are no longer going to be made in Hollywood I would have asked you if you would like another drink.. ;-)
Adapt or die. Or move to China.
Maybe it's no too late to learn Mandarin after all...
charjohncarter
Mentor
That will never happen, unless Shakespeare comes back (hopefully, {please soon} that will occur).
larmarv916
Well-known
Ah society validates another step down....this is the same old scam that art directors and magazines have pulled over and over in the "new digital" age. That is if something is cheap enough or can be stolen and used the validation occurs "if" it gains publication by the mainstream media ! When it comes to advertising or photo journalism...it's only about the cost. Quality can be justified as...."it's good if it's Cheap"!! So now the ad agencies have teams that scour the net looking for "non-copyrighted" images to steal or modify.
The HD flash drive "video" will soon replace the TV station reporter! Will Big media care the unprofessional are giving them free content...NO. Or will they care if maybe the Video is distorted or bad quality... NO Advertising and media are all about money and only money. So some mom shoots marginal baby photos or anything else. It is the management of the media that is willing to sell anything that is free , stolen or just cheap. They pat themselves on the back and brag about cutting costs ... never once giving a damm about the end product. So again the self appointed "artistic" authorities... steering the creative public into thinking only they know what is best..... it's just crap!
The HD flash drive "video" will soon replace the TV station reporter! Will Big media care the unprofessional are giving them free content...NO. Or will they care if maybe the Video is distorted or bad quality... NO Advertising and media are all about money and only money. So some mom shoots marginal baby photos or anything else. It is the management of the media that is willing to sell anything that is free , stolen or just cheap. They pat themselves on the back and brag about cutting costs ... never once giving a damm about the end product. So again the self appointed "artistic" authorities... steering the creative public into thinking only they know what is best..... it's just crap!
charjohncarter
Mentor
I agree, by the way, did see who won Oscars this year? Not much there on the talent front.
csaunders
f8 and be there.
Exactly. And that's when the cycle will begin again.
And don't think that just because China has become the 'factory of the world' in our current epoch that it is permanent: this too will not last.
easyrider
Photo addict
I am afraid not. I worked in television news as a producer in the 1970s when something called ENG -- electronic news gathering, i.e. tape-- came in. Several film cameramen were convinced that it would not last because, they said, tape does not have the durability of film.
Studio technicians referred to the 3/4 inch tape as "toy tape" and always filled out a "fault report" when it was used in a program. I then had to write a note that the news value outweighed any technical deficiencies.
Needless to say, film never came back in TV news and the camera guys grumblingly retired except for a few who converted to tape.
Like newspapers and ad agencies photographers have to find new business models. People may shoot digital PS pix at an event but the selling point is still to have someone with experience concentrating on the event and guaranteeing results.
It is a harder sell but it is possible. There will also be high end fashion photographers with innovative ideas.
PJs may have to offer writing and video as well as still pix.
Like it or not, that is where it's heading.