Sadly, until the time passes when they realize that it doesn't produce the same as the better milk that was offered, the bargain of the free cow suddenly isn't the bargain it was first thought to be.
If they're willing to accept inferior images, they're probably accepting inferior marketing products across the board. Unfortunately, they'll probably never see the specific connection between poor images and poor sales.
RDKirk wrote:
If they're willing to accept inferior images, they're probably accepting inferior marketing products across the board. Unfortunately, they'll probably never see the specific connection between poor images and poor sales.
If I can give my humble .02, I believe that there is a serious issue going on with the lack of understanding how licensing works. I blame this mostly on all of the "Professional Photographer Teachers" that are budding up all over the place. You can see 1000 videos on how your camera to your flash works, a ton of marketing tips but nobody talks about licensing.
You have to stick to your guns and not give away the farm as they say. Licensing is extremely important, and if the company that hires you wants complete access without licensing then they are simply not worth dealing with in my opinion (I know this can be hard especially if you are in need of putting food on the table).
Those who are giving their work away will eventually take the road of every other bankrupt photographer out there. Give it all away, make no money!
