2007-01-30 20:58:04 · 7 answers · asked by ctrl-alt-delete 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
Those stock sites are in two different fields. Gettyimages is more traditional stock and have high resolution photos that at minimum are 47.5MB TIFFs, which means you can usually expect clear and extremely high uncompressed pixel count images. This is useful if what you need is print quality photos for magazines, journals, or a publication as those usually require 300dpi prints. This is mainly for large companies that require high quality photos. Images also have to pass a very high standard review before even accepted.
On the other end is iStockphoto, which is a microstock, a new field that popped up with the advance of digital cameras. They also have professional quality photos, but the majority of them are from 6-8 megapixel cameras. This is more for web designers or small publishers that don't need extremely large photos since it's only displayed for the web, brochure, calendar, card, or basic magazines. Unlike Getty, the photos are jpeg (though you can also get TIFFs). The images also go through tough reviews before being accepted, but the rules are not as strict as Getty (but still strict).
They both have different audience targets and as such, have different pricings and photographers. Both sites have well known professional stock photographers, though they put different galleries in each due to the different market. Getty is tailored more for professional photographers due to pricing and also submission fees while iStock is more tailored for serious amateurs willing to try out the stock photography market and make some side income.
In the end, it depends on what you need and your budget. If you want extremely large photo files so you can print in magazines and other large format production and have the money to spare, Getty is a better choice. If you just need images for small publications or the web and money is an issue, iStock is more reasonable.
2007-01-31 06:34:54 · answer #1 · answered by David H 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There reason u pay more with gettyimages is because most of the ppl that use that service r professonail photographers and grapic artists that r looking for the high res images. The cost is nothing to them because the charge that to the customer or the company they work for pays the fee and then everyone (the artist) has access to the files. To be honest with you 150pr year aint that much because u can do one job and the fee is paid now u have access for a year for the other jobs u will do.
If u want an image and cant afford to pay for stock photography just shoot it yourself.
2007-01-30 23:34:10 · answer #2 · answered by KB48 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wulp, I was recommended this by a teacher. Get the cd that's about $395 from the website. This will come with 100+ images depending on the website ofcourse right? You're not paying for just one PHOTO...you're paying for THOUSANDS of images that can be used in photoshop. You can take bit and pieces from each photo basically. Rad idea huh?
2007-01-30 21:11:14 · answer #3 · answered by Sherry 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Prestige? Perhaps it's God's way of stopping you from spending that extra $149 on sinful items and activities.
2007-01-30 21:06:08 · answer #4 · answered by diuschris 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't see why you should.
2007-01-30 21:11:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i dont understand that. but i get high res photos for free at this website, because since i dont use them comercially i dont get paid for my tim so i dont want to have to pay anything lol. they seem to have almost anything your looking for an there huge photos piss on those guys who wants hundreds of $$$ lol!
http://www.sxc.hu/home
2007-01-31 01:28:11 · answer #6 · answered by peeps you 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it depends on whose money you are spending... if yours it is the $1 photo and if it is the company's money... who cares... right?
beaux
2007-01-31 00:57:19 · answer #7 · answered by beauxPatrick 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋