« Anti-piracy goals | Main | Crumpled Origami »
May 03, 2007
Creative disruption
Creative disruption: The Guardian points out how photography was once a specialized skill, requiring much training, and thereby supporting a small cadre of professional photographers. Now the general level of many photographic skills has been commoditized, and sites like Flickr are bankrupting some once-lucrative stock photo houses: "Perhaps none of these people [on Flickr] could make a living as a photographer, but few want to. Any money they make is gravy for them - and bread taken from the mouths of professionals." My initial reaction is that we're all richer as a result, and photographic skills need to advance, decade by decade, just as in any other field. But that's just my gut feeling. You have thoughts, observations, in this area...?
Posted by JohnDowdell at May 3, 2007 03:47 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/mtadmin/mt-tb.cgi/8687
Comments
It's evolution. Although certain stock photo sites came and went as a result I'm not convince that your highly skilled photographer that is also benefiting from the technological advances is feeling the pink from a library of quick shots any more than there are studios in a panick about their next blockbuster from YouTube.
If people dabbling are at the same level as one who lives and breathes a craft I suggest he/she pick up a couple of extra courses and step his/her game up.
Posted by: diamondTearz at May 3, 2007 08:31 PM
Hi, jd
Just thought I'd pass on these links to Register articles from January exploring similar territory:
Essay:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/29/photojournalism_and_copyright/
Readers' letters in response, with editorial comment:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/09/photojournalism_and_copyright_letters/
Posted by: Brennan Young at May 7, 2007 10:37 AM
Well I disagree, the flick R pictures are more of 1 off's by most standard, and no art director would really want to work with photogs if they can't trust them.
It's ok to c a picture and uses it for an ad or commercial, but for consistency they still have to use pro photographers.
The sort of money that is offered / saved on such small jobs, well I don’t think most pro photogs cant really work with that rates mostly.
Posted by: Rajat Ghosh at September 17, 2007 10:18 PM