Они не работают с фотографами, которые выставляют свои работы на микростоках
Because you will always deal direct with clients when selling images through Photographers Direct, we are non-exclusive. This means we have no restrictions on photographers selling the same images through other agencies. The only exceptions are micropayment sites such as istockphoto, canstockphoto, shutterstock, dreamstime, bigstockphoto, crestock - we cannot represent photographers who market their images on these sites.
Потому что айсток и шутерсток разрушают рынок фотографий 
Why will Photographers Direct not represent photographers who have images on micropayment sites?
Because they are the antithesis of Fair Trade Photography. Micropayment sites (which sell Royalty Free images for 1 to 3 dollars) take advantage of the naivety of amateur photographers.
The only people who benefit from these sites are:
The site owners, because they make money from the images and do not care about the damage they are doing to professional photographers' livelihoods.
The buyers, who cannot believe their luck at being able to get images for a few dollars, and being able to use them as often as they like, for as long as they like, wherever they like.
The people who lose out every time are the photographers. Almost every photographer I have spoken to on this issue has expressed regret at placing their images on micropayment sites. Initially they are excited at people taking an interest in their images and paying for them. Of course they like the fact they are making an income from their images, but here are the facts:
The average fee for an image licensed through Photographers Direct is about 200 dollars, of which the photographer will receive 160 dollars. This is usually for a single usage license, NOT a Royalty Free license. The same image can be licensed again and again for similar fees.
To make the same amount through a micropayment site you will have to sell anywhere between 200 and 800 images. These images can be used anywhere at any time and cannot realistically be traced. You are not 'selling' your images, you are not 'having success'; you are giving away your images, and the buyers cannot believe their luck.
Imagine the day when you see one of your images on a book or magazine cover. You will probably be very happy and proud, until you realise you earned one dollar from an image that is helping to generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in publishing sales. Is this fair?
A lot of people will respond that this will not happen, that images off micropayment sites are only used by designers for layouts and by 'mom and pop' businesses who would never pay more for images. This is simply not true - a quote:
"SAA executive director Betsy Reid pointed out a discussion board on iStockPhoto where members were congratulating photographer Lise Gagne, who wrote that she had just seen one of her stock images on IBM's web site.
'Once you're done celebrating, is anyone going to stop and think that you got 20 cents for that image?' Reid asks."
Вход
Регистрация
FAQ
Поиск
