Crowdfunding - the new busking?

As the classic way of making a living as a photojournalist - selling pictures to newspapers and magazines - is dwindling many try crowdfunding as an alternative. There are different ways of reaching out to the public and many photographers have successfully raised an impressive amount of money. You can read more about varoius crowdfunding and even "crowdediting" in this Photoshelter Blog.

And at the time I am writing this fellow Panos photographer Patrick Brown is well underway to funding his campaigning photographic book called "Trading to Extinction."
I hope he reaches his goal, both the idea and pictures are great. It is an important issue (it really is - more on the word "important" later).

I have donated to such projects myself, which felt good. But in some ways I also find it troubling. Many of the projects I have looked at has been backed by a lot of other photographers. I am thinking : is this were we are now, photographers funding photographers? While it is nice to be supportive of each other it doesn't seem like a very viable business model, photographers swapping money with each others?

Ok, so the money is in, then what? This is a danger I see once the project is funded: The stories are are sold for pennies, so at least they are published. Becuse you told everyone this was an important story to "tell the world" when you asked people to give you 10.000 dollars or so. If the story only reach your 50 backers you really haven't "told the world" about your important issue, so you sell it cheaply. So in fact the photographic community (mostly) has sponsored the publishing media, often large media corporations, establishing even lower rates for stories. This in turn is undermining those seeking to get actual assignments or proper pay for their self funded projects.

Another concern is the approach taken by some photographers, where funding of their project have become so important it is the only thing we hear from them. Unless you pay them to get the "behind the scenes" story, that is. Personally I have endend some Facebook relations because there was nothing but endless calls for support and donations. Like a mariachi band you couldn't shake. Rather than sought after professionals, some photographers now unwittingly paint themselves as buskers. I fear it sends the wrong signals.

Some photographers certainly are not buskers, they are more like rock stars of our trade. I can understand why some photo interested people would back the latter. Famous by proxy if you like. But herein lies another problem: to what extent is the most "important" stories backed, that would otherwise go unmade? Are the " rock stars' " projects really the ones that need funding?

I see some names, and in their breif the list of clients include all the major publications of the world, Newsweek, Time, National Geographic, Geo, Der Speigel, etc. etc. And I am thinking: surely, if this is an important story one of these magazines would back it, have it made, and publish it? And if you are a well known member of any of the top pictures agencies, surely they would be able to sell your story through their channels?

So how, or to who, is the story important, if no publication wish to produce this story with its own money? Is it important merely to the photographer and the photo aficionados that is backing him or her?

One Facebook acquaintance of mine is a rather influentual photo editor, using many opportunities there to make calls for donations for various projects. It is very kind to spread the word, but after a while the phrase "very important project" has been totally watered down for me. I've had a look at many of these projects, they may be interesting, but I find few qualify as "very important". If they really were I'd also expect the photo editor to actully hire the photographers to do the job.

Now, this may sound as if I am opposing crowdfunding. For the record: I am not! I particularly like the fact that photographers can reach their audience unfiltered, and engage with people directly. And it is great that photographers can take charge over a story and bring it to the finishline themselves.

However, as this concept evolves I think photographers would be wise to carefully consider how they portray their projects and themselves in the pursuit of funding. And think twice about undercutting what market is left out there.