Am 01.12.2011 17:33, schrieb Invisible:
> On 01/12/2011 04:26 PM, clipka wrote:
>> Am 01.12.2011 15:24, schrieb Invisible:
>>
>>> $8,000 is more money than I have ever owned at any time in my entire
>>> life. (I just changed the exchange rate. On 8 Nov 2007, that would have
>>> been £3795.07 - and that's the lowest it's been in the last 10 years.)
>>
>> I'm still waiting for an explanation where you got that $8,000 figure
>> from.
>
> Photography is expensive. That's why only huge publishing corporations
> can afford to do it.

Photography created specifically according to your specifications /can/ 
be expensive, yes. Depends on your motif though: Studio photography is 
pretty affordable actually. After all, the equipment is all there 
already, and all you need to pay is the working time of the 
photographer. With digital cameras, there's also virtually no material 
expense involved.

For example, a professional photo shooting (including makeup and all) 
for a photograph of yourself might come at around 50 €. Probably worth 
it when applying for a new job.

It's when lighting equipment needs to be deployed to some site, the site 
closed down for the shooting, or special props be available, that things 
start getting costly.

>> I bought a license for this photograph to put on both my website and my
>> business card when I was a freelancing embedded software developer:
>>
>> http://de.fotolia.com/id/4337839
>
> I'm quite impressed that you can buy a good quality image like that for
> less than a thousand dollars. Presumably the range of available images
> is highly limited, however...

*facepalm*

You have the website there. Why /presume/, when you can take a look 
around to /see/ for yourself?

You might of course want to try the English site at www.fotolia.com.

(Hint: They claim to have 15 million images available at present.)

Post a reply to this message