I propose a discussion on the following subject:
What is the value of a digital image?
rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
JD750 wrote:
I propose a discussion on the following subject:
What is the value of a digital image?
I’m not sure there is any reason to limit the discussion to “digital images”, or to otherwise insist on a certain amount of detail.
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
JD750 wrote:
I propose a discussion on the following subject:
What is the value of a digital image?
In terms of money? If so, like everything else, what a buyer is willing to pay.
rehess wrote:
I’m not sure there is any reason to limit the discussion to “digital images”, or to otherwise insist on a certain amount of detail.
I definitely want to discuss digital images. Prints are something completely different. However digital images can lead to prints. There can be value in that.
TriX wrote:
In terms of money? If so, like everything else, what a buyer is willing to pay.
But what are they willing to pay for?
JD750 wrote:
But what are they willing to pay for?
There are two main uses for digital images. Use on the web, and for publication. Those are uses people generally pay for.
rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
JD750 wrote:
I definitely want to discuss digital images. Prints are something completely different. However digital images can lead to prints. There can be value in that.
and slides or negatives can lead to “images” - they really are the same concept.
Is the sky blue?
What is the cost of peace?
Do you want to be a millionaire?
What do you want to know, specifically? A silly question will generate plenty of silly responses. REF: rehess. Was that the goal?
Do you have an image you want to sell / license? Stock photos run $50 to $500, somewhat related to use, but really related to agency (source). If you can find someone who will pay $100, good for you. If you think you'll find someone who will pay $500, good luck.
What is the digital file worth to you? That's another way to gauge the value. I delete probably 95 digital images for every 5 I keep and edit. That makes 95% worthless and 5% that have little to no value as I 'sell' maybe 1 image every other year. When I get the actually money paid, that's an accomplishment in itself.
rehess wrote:
and slides or negatives can lead to “images” - they really are the same concept.
Except, until they reach a digital format, they're trash.
User ID makes more useful and on-topic contributions than you do. Think about that.
rehess
Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
CHG_CANON wrote:
User ID makes more useful and on-topic contributions than you do. Think about that.
That is a matter of opinion.
I propose pancakes and real Canadian maple syrup for breakfast tomorrow. Who's with me?
JD750 wrote:
But what are they willing to pay for?
If its your client, they pay for the creation of the image, which may include you traveling to the subject site, or you staging the subject. IOW the value is in your skill, talent, and time.
If no paying clients are involved any electronic image is worth whatever $$ you can collect for licensing its use.
Acoarst an electronic image, like various other images, has a non monetary value as a shared idea, expression, discovery, etc etc.
IOW it has "societal" or "cultural" value which may be very small and local, or may be broad or even global. Images can trigger political change or raise funds for charity or promote "the arts" or simply "open the minds eye".
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.