One can blame microstock agencies for paying a small fraction to the contributors, but one can't blame them for "devaluation" of photographs. Photography is devalued because there is too much of it (thanks for the abundance of digital cameras, and for zero cost of making photographs once you bought the camera - no film etc.), so it is the buyer's market now (supply is much higher than demand). The Pixels idea is good, but it won't solve the "buyer's market" problem, perhaps it will make it even worse (if it becomes so popular that new photographers will start doing microstocks