Devaluing Your Images

Posted on 3/23/2010 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (2)

There is a persistent idea among many image creators that a photographer somehow devalues his work if he ever licenses it for low prices. Yet recent years have shown that volume can be as significant a factor as price, and there are numerous other considerations.

Get the Full Article (2 Credits)

Have an Account?

Access to this site is an exclusive benefit for you. Enter your username and password in the form above. If you don't remember your password you can reset it at any time.

Keep me logged in

Forgot your password?

New to Selling Stock?

Selling Stock is an on-line newsletter that reports on developing trends in the stock photo industry. It is updated at least twice a month. On-line subscribers receive e-mail notification whenever new stories are posted. Archives containing stories going back to late 1995 are fully available to subscribers.

Buy Credits

Copyright © 2010 Jim Pickerell. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-461-7627, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Jim Pickerell is founder of www.selling-stock.com, an online newsletter that publishes daily. He is also available for personal telephone consultations on pricing and other matters related to stock photography. He occasionally acts as an expert witness on matters related to stock photography. For his current curriculum vitae go to: http://www.jimpickerell.com/Curriculum-Vitae.aspx.

Comments

Paul Melcher Posted Mar 23, 2010
there seems to be a confusion between the value of an image and the value of a usage. The higher priced paid for a large circulation ( like the one million cited here) is not due to a customer thinking that this image has more value, it has to do with the fact that the higher the circulation the less change that image will ever be licensed again.
The pricing covers the potential lost of future income, not the value of the image.

Robert Dahl Posted Mar 24, 2010
I'm not a "behavioral economist", but it sounds like the photographer who works toward the one $7,500 placement may feel that he gets other compensation from that sale which he values at tens of thousands of dollars. Maybe it is the ability to charge higher prices to other customers. Maybe it just boosts his ego, or makes great pick-up lines at parties...

Post Comment