Re: "Professional" Photographers , sold artwork hanging in buildings and Nikon D800E
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
I\'d bet that the framing cost about the same as the stock print.
Yes, it\'s interesting that the material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a framer is offset with real $$$.
Yet, the same aspects of material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a photographer are perceived (by many) as nearly worthless (i.e. expectation of \"free\"), when a prolific vastness of images are offered up at a \"loss\" by the masses. Sadly, the masses continue to do so by virtue of their lack of business consideration, perpetuating the whole.
What the market will bear ... and as long as the market has \"free\" and \"very cheap\" offerings from sellers of their goods, there will be buyers looking to do business with them in a perfunctory realm. For those looking to be sellers of something more, it\'s a challenging market to contend with.
I\'m not saying that there is only \"doom & gloom\" for the industry ... but I am saying that the tenets of talent vs. the tenets of business are not as \"equitable\" as the OP\'s questions would suggest they should be. One is idealistic ... the other is realistic. We can hold on to ideals, or contend with reality.
My reality is that if I wanted my images in the hospital on display, I was going to have to give them away for free. My ideals deterred me from doing so ... good move vs. bad move ... debatable for differing points. But, that\'s a reality that exists in my \"neck of the woods\" ... elsewhere, things may be the same or different, but I share it for some perspective.
It was definitely a \"one way\" street ... and people seem lined up to join the party ... but those people (imo) do not care \"two-hoots\" @ sustainable business endeavors.
Funny thing ... I\'m going out west and have to pay $$$ to be able to take a picture @ Antelope Canyon, yet no matter how talented of an image I return with, there will still be thousands of other pictures of Antelope Canyon that can be had for virtually zilch (i.e. LOWER than the cost to produce). Yup, the fortunes of the gold rush is in selling picks & axes.
Oh well ... maybe by getting so much \"free\" artwork, the hospital won\'t charge $32 for an aspirin anymore ... unless of course that\'s what the market will bear.
Re: "Professional" Photographers , sold artwork hanging in buildings and Nikon D800E
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
I\'d bet that the framing cost about the same as the stock print.
Yes, it\'s interesting that the material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a framer is offset with real $$$.
Yet, the same aspects of material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a photographer are perceived (by many) as nearly worthless (i.e. expectation of \"free\"), when a prolific vastness of images are offered up at a \"loss\" by the masses. Sadly, the masses continue to do so by virtue of their lack of business consideration, perpetuating the whole.
What the market will bear ... and as long as the market has \"free\" and \"very cheap\" offerings from sellers of their goods, there will be buyers looking to do business with them in a perfunctory realm. For those looking to be sellers of something more, it\'s a challenging market to contend with.
I\'m not saying that there is only \"doom & gloom\" for the industry ... but I am saying that the tenets of talent vs. the tenets of business are not as \"equitable\" as the OP\'s questions would suggest they should be. One is idealistic ... the other is realistic. We can hold on to ideals, or contend with reality.
My reality is that if I wanted my images in the hospital on display, I was going to have to give them away for free. My ideals deterred me from doing so ... good move vs. bad move ... debatable for differing points. But, that\'s a reality that exists in my \"neck of the woods\" ... elsewhere, things may be the same or different, but I share it for some perspective.
It was definitely a \"one way\" street ... and people seem lined up to join the party ... but those people (imo) do not care \"two-hoots\" @ sustainable business endeavors.
Funny thing ... I\'m going out west and have to pay $$$ to be able to take a picture @ Antelope Canyon, yet no matter how talented of an image I return with, there will be thousands of other pictures of Antelope Canyon that can be had for virtually zilch. Yup, the fortunes of the gold rush is in selling picks & axes.
Oh well ... maybe by getting so much \"free\" artwork, the hospital won\'t charge $32 for an aspirin anymore ... unless of course that\'s what the market will bear.
Re: "Professional" Photographers , sold artwork hanging in buildings and Nikon D800E
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
I\'d bet that the framing cost about the same as the stock print.
Yes, it\'s interesting that the material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a framer is offset with real $$$.
Yet, the same aspects of material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a photographer are perceived (by many) as nearly worthless (i.e. expectation of \"free\"), when a prolific vastness of images are offered up at a \"loss\" by the masses. Sadly, the masses continue to do so by virtue of their lack of business consideration, perpetuating the whole.
What the market will bear ... and as long as the market has \"free\" and \"very cheap\" offerings from sellers of their goods, there will be buyers looking to do business with them in a perfunctory realm. For those looking to be sellers of something more, it\'s a challenging market to contend with.
I\'m not saying that there is only \"doom & gloom\" for the industry ... but I am saying that the tenets of talent vs. the tenets of business are not as \"equitable\" as the OP\'s questions would suggest they should be. One is idealistic ... the other is realistic. We can hold on to ideals, or contend with reality.
My reality is that if I wanted my images in the hospital on display, I was going to have to give them away for free. My ideals deterred me from doing so ... good move vs. bad move ... debatable for differing points. But, that\'s a reality that exists in my \"neck of the woods\" ... elsewhere, things may be the same or different, but I share it for some perspective.
It was definitely a \"one way\" street ... and people seem lined up to join the party ... but those people (imo) do not care \"two-hoots\" @ sustainable business endeavors.
Funny thing ... I\'m going out west and have to pay $$$ to be able to take a picture @ Antelope Canyon, yet no matter how talented of an image I return with, there will be thousands of other pictures of Antelope Canyon that can be had for virtually zilch. Yup, the fortunes of the gold rush is in selling picks & axes.
Re: "Professional" Photographers , sold artwork hanging in buildings and Nikon D800E
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
I\'d bet that the framing cost about the same as the stock print.
Yes, it\'s interesting that the material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a framer is offset with real $$$.
Yet, the same aspects of material, equipment, training, experience, talent and overhead of a photographer are perceived (by many) as nearly worthless (i.e. expectation of \"free\"), when a prolific vastness of images are offered up at a \"loss\" by the masses. Sadly, the masses continue to do so by virtue of their lack of business consideration, perpetuating the whole.
What the market will bear ... and as long as the market has \"free\" and \"very cheap\" offerings from sellers of their goods, there will be buyers looking to do business with them.
I\'m not saying that there is only \"doom & gloom\" for the industry ... but I am saying that the tenets of talent vs. the tenets of business are not as \"equitable\" as the OP\'s questions would suggest they should be. One is idealistic ... the other is realistic. We can hold on to ideals, or contend with reality.
My reality is that if I wanted my images in the hospital on display, I was going to have to give them away for free. My ideals deterred me from doing so ... good move vs. bad move ... debatable for differing points. But, that\'s a reality that exists in my \"neck of the woods\" ... elsewhere, things may be the same or different, but I share it for some perspective.
It was definitely a \"one way\" street ... and people seem lined up to join the party ... but those people (imo) do not care \"two-hoots\" @ sustainable business endeavors.
Funny thing ... I\'m going out west and have to pay $$$ to be able to take a picture @ Antelope Canyon, yet no matter how talented of an image I return with, there will be thousands of other pictures of Antelope Canyon that can be had for virtually zilch. Yup, the fortunes of the gold rush is in selling picks & axes.
May 15, 2012 at 11:29 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #10637067 « "Professional" Photographers , sold artwork hanging in buildings and Nikon D800E »
