|
foeslts16
Jun 22, 2007, 4:09 AM
Post #76 of 120
(3962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: 210
|
deepplaymedia
might need these  to get your ass out of the hole you have dug yourself.
have a nice day.
|
|
|
|
|
deepplaymedia
Jun 22, 2007, 7:09 AM
Post #77 of 120
(3952 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 192
|
In reply to: yea we have the right to submit photos to your rag for FREE but you think we are chumps for accepting $200.00 from Mad Rock.
CRUX is not interested in random submissions from random people.
Local photographers & writers here are stoked on supporting a local community based magazine. It is *their* project, their outlet, their labour of love. Everyone involved (and many people that aren't!) regard the mag as a valuable contribution to the local climbing community.
If it ever evolves to anything more 'business oriented' than that (or if we happen to find a wad of cash in the CRUX drawers), we will figure out a way to properly financially reimburse contributors.
Savvy?
In reply to: LOSER OF THE DAY AWARD RIGHT HERE BABY
I'm really struggling to be offended mate...
As for pico's claims of my 'guilt', I'm not trying to hide anything. It is simply my preference to deal with people directly & privately. It allows certain things (specific figures, business particulars etc that are not appropriate to discuss in public forums) to be involved in the discussion & in this particular case it also allows people to speak their minds...
Old salt- I'm completely dig your approach to photos, nothing wrong with what you are doing EXCEPT for the prices. Put aside all the undercutting & industry standard waffle- what would you rather get for your image, $200 or $700? All it takes is confidence in the quality of your work & a couple of emails. Honestly!
I'm not going to be contributing to this thread any more because I see no valuable reason to. As I've said already, I can be contacted by email (or phone if you wish, my contact details are available on my website. Just remember the time differences)
Well that taken care of, now there's drinking, snowboarding & ice climbing to be done. See you nerds later! 
(This post was edited by deepplaymedia on Jun 22, 2007, 7:32 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
mshore
Jun 22, 2007, 12:11 PM
Post #78 of 120
(3924 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 18, 2002
Posts: 114
|
Alright. Take your ball and go home. 
Edited to add:
LMAO
(This post was edited by mshore on Jun 22, 2007, 12:12 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jun 22, 2007, 3:23 PM
Post #79 of 120
(3889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
yea, Don't forget to pm Deep play if you got some photos to give away they better be top knotch cause they don't accept free photos from just anybody.... You said your distribution is in the LOW TENS OF THOUSANDS?? that ain't all that small...... it aint big but it's big enough to at least pay what the dinky local newspaper pays.
|
|
|
|
|
winglessangel
Jun 22, 2007, 3:30 PM
Post #80 of 120
(3883 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 29, 2004
Posts: 459
|
are you guys going to stop this fight and give us the grace of seeing some poster quality picture??
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Jun 22, 2007, 7:46 PM
Post #81 of 120
(3862 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
winglessangel wrote: are you guys going to stop this fight and give us the grace of seeing some poster quality picture??
No doubt. I'm looking forward to seeing which pics get selected.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jun 22, 2007, 9:59 PM
Post #82 of 120
(3843 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
knieveltech wrote: winglessangel wrote: are you guys going to stop this fight and give us the grace of seeing some poster quality picture?? No doubt. I'm looking forward to seeing which pics get selected.
Me too.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Jun 23, 2007, 6:20 PM
Post #83 of 120
(3799 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
winglessangel wrote: are you guys going to stop this fight and give us the grace of seeing some poster quality picture??
post up, bee-otches!
|
|
|
|
|
karlbaba
Jun 25, 2007, 6:57 AM
Post #84 of 120
(3753 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2002
Posts: 1159
|
It's sad but inevitable that the digital revolution is going to affect photography in some of the same ways that globalization affects manufacturing in the US. Once folks who are willing to do things cheap have the ability to compete with expensive producers, things change.
After all, many hobbiests have natural talent, whacca gonna do? Can't blame the photogs for fighting this though. It's like trying to form a union to protect a living wage.
Now I don't think Mad Rock deserves props though. They are trying to get a quality image on the cheap. Can't blame em for that but it's not charity for the noobs they are offering but free publicity, goodwill, and a bargain image in the process. Good idea but not noble idea.
Peace
karl
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jun 25, 2007, 1:11 PM
Post #85 of 120
(3728 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
karlbaba thanks for your input. I just don't think the guy who stirred all of this is a professional photographer. I think he wanted to attack people on this forum and now he realizes that he didn't know as much as he though he did. From the private messages I am getting, a lot of people here know a lot more then he does and definitely a lot more than me. Now he is running away from could have been a wonderful discussion. As a teacher, I explain to my students that it’s great to express an opinion, but you need to have concrete facts to support your view. It’s amazing how much that helps in discussions like this.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with globalization. As an International schoolteacher, I work in the very same countries that these factories are being put into. Locals don't complain much. Actually, while in China, people were fighting and begging for the jobs foreign companies/factories offered. The hard reality is that foreign factories paid better then Chinese Factory and employers. We can not compare life in other countries to life in the States or Europe. For many workers in China, going foreign companies is actually earning a raise.
In this case, the profit from Royalty Free images is much hire then the profit from right managed to the individual photographer. I will agree that on a per sell is not, but generic stock sold as RF is much more profitable for me. The bottom line is more important then the individual sell to me.
Example: If I had to hourly job offers on the table. One paid me 10.00 an hour and the other paid me 25.00 an hours. The 25.00 an hour job worked me one hour a week and the other 40 a week, which job would I make more money with at the end of them month.
If professional photographers are worried about the product put out by "armatures," then I would say the professional photographers who's worried needs to put out a better product. The reality is that the market has room for both sales models. Both products are very different.
A single McDonald makes more money a day then a fine restaurant make in a month. They serve a different clientele and provide a different product. Neither are right or wrong for what they do. The fine restaurant doesn't complain about McDonald. Royally free images are like McDonald, fast, convenient and cheaper, while Rights Managed are line a fine restaurant more exclusive, more refined, and often over priced.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Jun 25, 2007, 2:36 PM
Post #86 of 120
(3706 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
$200 is a pretty low-ball shot for a poster, but I'd take it anyday...
|
|
|
|
|
uptick
Jun 25, 2007, 4:34 PM
Post #87 of 120
(3670 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2006
Posts: 78
|
It is not the premise of this thread but MadRock offering $500, $600, whatever in SWAG from their line-up may have worked for both parties.
The cost of manufacturing product is very little. Bumping up the payout and keeping it "in house" may have increased the perceived value while actually awarding the winner more than what they would have received in paying retail.
Yes, cash spends everywhere and maybe the idea was considered. People would have argued about that too...
Good luck and time to unleash the hounds!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jun 25, 2007, 5:37 PM
Post #88 of 120
(3644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
dbrayack wrote: $200 is a pretty low-ball shot for a poster, but I'd take it anyday...
The average photo liscense at Corbis is $250.00. When you consider that Corbis is the bigest, it says something. The photogrpaher only get his percentage of that sell, normally 40 to 60%.
Inflated photo prices are often spoken of, but rarely seen in the stock industry.
I sure like facts
(This post was edited by guangzhou on Jun 25, 2007, 6:54 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Jun 25, 2007, 5:40 PM
Post #89 of 120
(3641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Wait, are you saying that $200 for a poster isn't a low ball?
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jun 25, 2007, 6:50 PM
Post #90 of 120
(3615 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
dbrayack wrote: Wait, are you saying that $200 for a poster isn't a low ball?
I am saying a photographer sells a product and he can decide whether or not he want the fee offered.
In this case, a photogrpaher can choose to submit photos or not. A photographer with a photo that Mad Rock really wants, can also make a counter offer and Mad Rock can decide whether or not they like the counter offer.
Once I am home, I have several photos in my Stock files that I will submit for consideration. I will gladly accept the 200.00 offer if they like my photos.
(This post was edited by guangzhou on Jun 25, 2007, 6:53 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
grayhghost
Jun 25, 2007, 7:04 PM
Post #91 of 120
(3599 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2002
Posts: 444
|
guangzhou wrote: I sure like facts
http://www.fotoquote.com/
Then you had better get your facts right.
$200 is a lowball offer for a poster
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Jun 25, 2007, 7:11 PM
Post #92 of 120
(3591 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
The problem with trying to make a living through photography is that nowadays, any yo-himby with a digital camera can get a great image.
If this said photographer is willing to take, say a free rope for the photo instead of fair pay, then all of a sudden, it becomes more difficult for a photographer to make a living selling photos.
Basically, by taking lower offers or gear, you are under cutting a professional photographer's livly hood.
I'm not a professional photographer (actually, I'm that yo-himby with a amateur digital camera), though I've found myself walking away from deals based on the principles dicussed above.
That said, I'd totally take the $200 for a poster!
-Danno
|
|
|
|
|
uptick
Jun 25, 2007, 8:15 PM
Post #93 of 120
(3559 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2006
Posts: 78
|
...So. Everybody's situation is different and no right or wrong way to do it...
There is no good or bad, only the perception of good or bad.
|
|
|
|
|
deepplaymedia
Jun 25, 2007, 9:20 PM
Post #94 of 120
(3535 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 192
|
Ok THIS is my last post.... promise 
In reply to: I just don't think the guy who stirred all of this is a professional photographer.
You are correct, photography is not my only source of income nor is it the majority.
But I do send out enough invoices (yes, ones that I have negotiated) to have some idea what I am talking about.
In reply to: I think he wanted to attack people on this forum and now he realizes that he didn't know as much as he though he did. From the private messages I am getting, a lot of people here know a lot more then he does and definitely a lot more than me. Now he is running away from could have been a wonderful discussion. As a teacher, I explain to my students that it’s great to express an opinion, but you need to have concrete facts to support your view. It’s amazing how much that helps in discussions like this.
Holy shit dude, how did your divorce from reality go?
I wanted to attack people? I ran away from a wonderful discussion?
In reply to: A single McDonald makes more money a day then a fine restaurant make in a month. They serve a different clientele and provide a different product. Neither are right or wrong for what they do. The fine restaurant doesn't complain about McDonald. Royally free images are like McDonald, fast, convenient and cheaper, while Rights Managed are line a fine restaurant more exclusive, more refined, and often over priced.
McDonalds is shit.
Good luck to you Gungz!!
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jun 25, 2007, 11:29 PM
Post #95 of 120
(3516 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
deepplaymedia wrote: Ok THIS is my last post.... promise In reply to: I just don't think the guy who stirred all of this is a professional photographer. You are correct, photography is not my only source of income nor is it the majority. But I do send out enough invoices (yes, ones that I have negotiated) to have some idea what I am talking about. In reply to: I think he wanted to attack people on this forum and now he realizes that he didn't know as much as he though he did. From the private messages I am getting, a lot of people here know a lot more then he does and definitely a lot more than me. Now he is running away from could have been a wonderful discussion. As a teacher, I explain to my students that it’s great to express an opinion, but you need to have concrete facts to support your view. It’s amazing how much that helps in discussions like this. Holy shit dude, how did your divorce from reality go? I wanted to attack people? I ran away from a wonderful discussion? In reply to: A single McDonald makes more money a day then a fine restaurant make in a month. They serve a different clientele and provide a different product. Neither are right or wrong for what they do. The fine restaurant doesn't complain about McDonald. Royally free images are like McDonald, fast, convenient and cheaper, while Rights Managed are line a fine restaurant more exclusive, more refined, and often over priced. McDonalds is shit. Good luck to you Gungz!!
Shit or not, they are doing exactly what they are in bussiness to do. They are making money selling a product to the consumers.
|
|
|
|
|
mshore
Jun 25, 2007, 11:32 PM
Post #96 of 120
(3513 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 18, 2002
Posts: 114
|
DIE THREAD DIE!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jun 28, 2007, 10:45 PM
Post #97 of 120
(3387 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
Don't like the thread, stop reading it
|
|
|
|
|
akornylak
Jun 29, 2007, 2:36 AM
Post #98 of 120
(3362 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 9, 2003
Posts: 251
|
I dont like it, but I'm still reading it.
|
|
|
|
|
starkcontrast
Jun 29, 2007, 3:15 AM
Post #99 of 120
(3354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 20, 2005
Posts: 149
|
i am amazed anyone is still paying for photos in this industry. it seems like every time i check in to see what is going on, contributor rates are dropping and companies are playing the, "if you help us out this time, we will make it worth your while in the future" card. it is funny (read:sad) to me that climbing exceeds snowboarding in popularity but no one is making any money within the sport. i wish all of you the best. cheers, matt
|
|
|
|
|
stevenosloan
Jun 29, 2007, 5:24 AM
Post #100 of 120
(3336 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 4, 2006
Posts: 16
|
Well "a week or two" is coming up on 4 weeks.....will we ever know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
