Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/07/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Accidental photojournalist
From: jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 21:46:35 +0530
References: <8D04613BECABE26-1A60-73F3F@webmail-m299.sysops.aol.com> <B32825F7-CE07-4046-92CF-794B868ACC8D@mac.com> <B07B856C-28EE-4876-9E27-A7A238C494A0@mac.com> <CAH1UNJ3+pBy3G0yPTg1O9rhCOd0uDa2DNDWAS_K2GUUMQ69Wcw@mail.gmail.com> <90B107BF-B6D9-41C4-A503-48D6F7FD4639@mac.com>

I agree with you on all the points. Every traditional business has a
laundry list of points like that nowadays, it is nothing special.

What really has happened to the photography business? It has changed from a
business built on expertise, in the film days, to a commodity business
today. Is it any different to anything else? Even manufacturing toothpaste
or spinning cotton yarn were premium businesses once upon a time. In fact
photographers are extremely lucky - their business model, based on film and
the darkroom, lasted over 100 years, which is rarer than hen's teeth as far
as business technology cycles go. Any business model that survives so
long,  without material change, leads to just one thing - hubris (check out
Kodak if you don't believe me). A tiny minority, however, see through the
fog and adapt (to use the same analogy, check out Fuji), and they will be
the survivors for cashing in big in the next cycle. Evolution, anyone?

The real trick, if adapting to a new paradigm is difficult, is to sell
these businesses before the facts become glaringly apparent, and not be too
greedy about the sale price - all you are doing is maximizing the value of
the goodwill before it plummets to zero. I did exactly that three years ago
with my stock brokerage business after running it for 22 years - if I had
waited till today, I could probably do a deal for 25% of what I got in
2010. No point getting sentimental about reality and hoping for the best,
it will, in all probability, just get worse.
Cheers
Jayanand


On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:23 PM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> 
wrote:

>
> On Jul 3, 2013, at 10:38 AM, Jayanand Govindaraj wrote:
>
> > Actually it has everything to do with decline of the necessity of using
> > newspapers as a news source for the vast majority of the citizens of the
> > USA, and the resultant collapse of the business model. It has not
> happened
> > here yet, but it is only a matter of time. Newspapers here are getting
> > saved by low internet/smartphone penetration for the time being.
> > Similar to the profession of a photojournalist, if you ask me....
> > Multiple new business models will be invented and sprout up, the majority
> > won't work very well and die, but one thing is certain - those
> > business/individuals who cannot adapt to the new paradigms are dead meat.
> > No point in crying for days gone by, look ahead always. And keep
> adapting.
> > Nothing else works nowadays, anyway.
> > Cheers
> > Jayanand
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:52 PM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Jul 3, 2013, at 10:10 AM, George Lottermoser wrote:
> >>
> >>> In my opinion it's the people who have screwed the creators out of
> those
> >> fees,
> >>> rather than the creators working to get compensated for use of their
> >> work,
> >>> who should be looked down upon.
> >>
> >> P.S.
> >> Newspapers firing their photographic staff
> >> has nothing to do with photographers selling "rights to use their
> >> photographs."
> >> It has everything to do with the overall devaluation of photographers
> and
> >> photographs.
>
> The devaluation of photographers and photography
> goes much deeper than replacement of newspapers with smart phones and pads.
>
> We must also consider that:
> 1) achieving a "decent" photograph by non-professionals has never been
> easier.
> 2) auto everything cameras put "decent" photography in the hands of anyone
> who wants it.
> 3) a definite decline in appreciation for using the "best"
> to illustrate your story or represent your product or service.
> 4) technology has put DIY (do it yourself) in the hands of any and
> everyone with a computer
> (this relates to photography, video, graphic design, editorial
> illustration, et al)
>
> And yes - 'tis just the way it is - figure out the models as appropriate
> and needed
> I agree - though those realizations don't make it any less painful
> to close down the family buggy whip business.
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Accidental photojournalist)
In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at aol.com (lrzeitlin at aol.com) ([Leica] Accidental photojournalist)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Accidental photojournalist)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Accidental photojournalist)
Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] Accidental photojournalist)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Accidental photojournalist)