Makes sense to me that as photographers and at a certain point and level of proficiency, we tend to amass a fairly large number of photos which would be considered quite good by many standards but perhaps still not the ones we choose to represent ourselves in our portfolios, social media, or commercial catalog. In that case, licensing for free use is not so far fetched. I am interested to find out more on why you chose ko-fi to sell your images rather than a site set up for licensing like Pixabay or Unsplash. I'm also curious how you promote these images or if you are getting organic traffic from ko-fi patrons?
Well, the CC-licensed photos are still ones that I personally like, they are no 'rejects'. But yes they may be not my absolute best (whatever that means because you're always improving on your photography, right? 😉). Like I said, its my way of giving back a little to generous communities that dedicate their time, money and effort in creating stuff I can use for free.
Anyway I don't use Unsplash (or similar platforms) since there you license your photos on a "CC 0" (or equivalent) license and that is a bit too 'generous' for my taste (basically it becomes public domain), plus platforms like Unsplash work with big brands, you know those who have tons of marketing budget so have ample possibilities to pay a few bucks for photos. I'm not judging, its their business model (those sites doesn't run on air of course), but I respectfully decline 🙂
As for Ko-Fi, its one of the many where you can ask for donations (like Buy Me A Coffee), plus they have this integration where you can setup a simple webshop for things like this. If Substack would have these tools, I would consider switching.
At the moment I'm not actively promoting my Ko-Fi page or my CC-licensed photos, well .. until this post here on Substack 😉
Really like the Light Streaks photograph!
Thanks! Yeah I liked how that came out as well. Originally white balance was more towards orange/yellow but I like this blue much better.
Makes sense to me that as photographers and at a certain point and level of proficiency, we tend to amass a fairly large number of photos which would be considered quite good by many standards but perhaps still not the ones we choose to represent ourselves in our portfolios, social media, or commercial catalog. In that case, licensing for free use is not so far fetched. I am interested to find out more on why you chose ko-fi to sell your images rather than a site set up for licensing like Pixabay or Unsplash. I'm also curious how you promote these images or if you are getting organic traffic from ko-fi patrons?
Thanks for your comments 👍
Well, the CC-licensed photos are still ones that I personally like, they are no 'rejects'. But yes they may be not my absolute best (whatever that means because you're always improving on your photography, right? 😉). Like I said, its my way of giving back a little to generous communities that dedicate their time, money and effort in creating stuff I can use for free.
Anyway I don't use Unsplash (or similar platforms) since there you license your photos on a "CC 0" (or equivalent) license and that is a bit too 'generous' for my taste (basically it becomes public domain), plus platforms like Unsplash work with big brands, you know those who have tons of marketing budget so have ample possibilities to pay a few bucks for photos. I'm not judging, its their business model (those sites doesn't run on air of course), but I respectfully decline 🙂
As for Ko-Fi, its one of the many where you can ask for donations (like Buy Me A Coffee), plus they have this integration where you can setup a simple webshop for things like this. If Substack would have these tools, I would consider switching.
At the moment I'm not actively promoting my Ko-Fi page or my CC-licensed photos, well .. until this post here on Substack 😉