Web 2.0 blurred the clear delineations between content providers and content consumers, giving user-generated content equal weight with the type of top-down content dissemination that characterized the first incarnations of the Internet. That type of fuzziness between consumers and producers has carried over into many fields, but is most notable in the world of publishing and the stock photo sector. The borderless Internet means that anyone who wants to be a publisher can be. Instead of needing a printing press, reporters, and photographers, you can publish to your heart's content with only a domain name registration and a web hosting service. As a result, professional writers, designers, photographers, and artists often find themselves at various points on the spectrum, sometimes buying content and at other times generating content. In many ways, my situation is a prime example of this shift in publishing. As a writer, editor, and photographer, I routinely create material for print publications, online publications, and websites. As a magazine editor and as a webmaster of my own sites, I often purchase material - both writing and stock photography - from other writers, designers, and photographers. One of the issues that I always bump up against is that of finding great artwork to complement a project I'm working on. Another is finding an avenue to sell my digital photos that provides me with decent compensation for my work. The way the marketplace has evolved, there have essentially been two choices: macrostock and microstock. Macrostock consists of digital photos, vector graphics, and vector illustrations that can cost $200 or more (each). While the quality is there, that kind of budget is beyond the reach of all but the most elite publishers. Microstock, on the other hand, offers these same kinds of files for one dollar or less. That poses a problem on two levels. Having used microstock, I've found that it's either hard to find a decent digital photo or, if I do, I see it replicated on hundreds of other websites. As a photographer, I find it difficult to break into the macrostock world. On the other hand, microstock sites pay so little that it's not worth the effort to jump through their hoops and upload my work. That's why it's so thrilling to see that companies are entering the marketplace with what could best be termed "midstock" - providing quality digital products that are between $3 and $100. It's particularly rewarding to find midstock companies that act as global social marketplaces based on Fair Trade principles. In this arena, traditional royalties and rights management issues are flexible, enabling photographers, designers, and producers to set their own prices, and allowing graphic artists, web designers, art directors, and marketing professionals to find high quality digital photos and other media to enhance their projects. Virtually every publisher - regardless of the scale or medium of publication - is in need of stock photos, vector illustrations, and vector graphics. Thankfully, a new breed of company is filling the void in the market by providing both digital producers and digital consumers with both quality and affordability.
Please Rate this Article 5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5
Not yet Rated
