Choosing For the Future of Stock Photography

Confusion and lack of clarity make decision-making and choices for the future of one's stock photo career difficult.

Social Networking, Stock Agencies and a Whole Lot of Images

I have recently been conducting searches on Getty, Corbis, SuperStock, BlendImages and iStockphoto to compare their offerings. In the case of the above-mentioned “traditional” stock agencies, I chose them because they carry my work. I chose iStock because it is the first micro agency most people think of. In many cases the images offered by iStock are far greater in both numbers and in creativity than the photos I could find from the traditional stock agencies. Look up “social networking” on Getty, for example, and you get 84 results. Do the same search on Corbis and you get 92 results (interestingly SuperStock came back with 238 images and a surprising variety to choose from). Blend Images has 21 images, which considering its smaller and more-targeted collection isn’t bad. Look up social networking on iStock and you get 2,443. Yeah, there are some sketchy images there, but there are a whole lot of great pictures as well…and Corbis and Getty also have their share of junk. On iStock, however, you get a much, much greater range of photos to search from.

Hundreds of Thousands of Shooters and Greater Choices

Increasingly, at least as far as I can see, the micro sites are offering greater choices, and, at least in some cases, better choices as well. It seems logical…hundreds of thousands of shooters contributing photos to an agency as opposed to thousands. So if you are an art director, art buyer, designer or even small businesswoman (or businessman) looking for images, and you can find more and better ones (not to mention less expensive) at micro sites…wouldn’t you go there? Am I missing something here?

Traditional Stock, Micro Sites and a Strategy

One strategy for us traditional shooters might be to begin to put images up on micro sites and to start to build a presence there just in case that scenario actually happens. For me, it is really hard to pull the trigger on that. I am still doing quite well in traditional stock and as I create relatively few images, I still feel that I am better off now in the RM and RF markets. But what about two or three years from now…will I wish that I had created a body of work that could have been moving up in the search results all this time?

Room For A Higher Priced Offering

Apparently the upscale Vetta collection at iStock is doing very well, fantastically well even. The higher prices seem to be no deterrent to those licensing micro stock. I don’t find that terribly surprising…micro prices started at such low levels it makes sense that there is room for a higher priced offering. In traditional stock it has always been a given that price was not the determining factor in the licensing of an image…but rather the photograph being the right one.

Lesser Images and More Competition

If I do eventually cave in to my fears (or logic?), and overcome my ego problems with placing a low monetary value (at least per licensing) on my imagery and begin to contribute to micro sites, should I do the same kind of work I am doing for my RM and RF agencies? There is the temptation to contribute “lesser” images to micro, and yet I suspect that doing so would condemn me to failure in micro. After all, in micro there is even more competition…and the added problem of, as a beginner, not having high rankings in search returns. Too, while some of the most popular photographs and illustrations on the micro sites have some pretty phenomenal download rates, it seems (at least to me) that the number of images that return stellar and even reasonable returns falls off rather quickly. 

High Volume and Higher Price Points

Wouldn’t it be nice if there were a way to tap into the high volume of micro with a higher price point? Micro stock agencies are leaving a lot of money on the table…money that could go a long ways towards moving stock photography back in the direction of profitability for photographers.  There are a lot of very smart and talented people in this industry, so it isn’t far fetched to think that just such a scenario might be right around the corner. 

What Do You Think?

OK, this is an off-the-cuff look at the situation. Not having any work in micro limits what I know…and I haven’t spent hours and hours searching. So I am curious…what do those of you reading this blog think? What does your experience tell you…particularly those of you with both macro and micro experience? Is it time to step into micro…is it a better idea to wait a bit longer in the hopes a better scenario does come around? I would really like to hear from you!

The Continuing Challenge: RM, RF or Micro?

I am not cut out for producing large quantities of images. My love is for producing highly Photoshop-manipulated concept stock photos. I am guessing that eliminates me from Micro stock…so if anyone reading this has experience that would suggest otherwise, I’d love to hear from you!

I am in stock photography for the money, for the freedom and for the fulfillment of creating images that I want to create. Most of the stock photos that I make require a lot of work to think up, hours of Photoshop work to complete, and a fair amount of capital investment to produce. I know from experience that some of these images can earn just as much in RF as in RM.

I also know from research that some of the best selling Micro images can earn enough to justify putting images into that category. However, in RM I have often had the experience of having an image languish for up to three or four years before suddenly earning thousands of dollars. An image that is not a best seller can still bring in thousands of dollars. I also know that there is no way to predict whether a given image will be a best seller. It seems to me a much bigger risk to place the few images I create into a Micro market.

The image accompanying this blog, an image of the earth as a globe covered in freeways, has been up on the Corbis site for six months without a sale yet. I thought it would be a runaway best seller, or at least sell a couple of times a month. Oh well.... But I trust its time will come. The photo is an example of the kind of picture I love to create most. It’s not like a lot of other images out there. Given the right headline it can have a clear and strong message. It makes a striking visual (if I say so myself). Whether it ever sells or not, it is an image I am proud of.

A disadvantage of Rights Managed photography is that many buyers feel they cannot afford RM and limit themselves to RF or Micro. I think that is unfortunate as I can attest from my sales reports with Getty and Corbis that RM images can be had at VERY affordable prices. I have long said that with RM images you can always undercut RF! I have to admit that I also have an ego bias towards Rights Managed. I even have a hard time contributing to RF for that reason. It is about valuing my work. Of course, I have far more images in RF than RM and those images have done very well for me, particularly with Blend Images. For business reasons I think it prudent to be involved in both models.

When I hear from some of my friends about how well they are doing in Micro, it makes me anxious. With all of the buzz about micro, I keep feeling like I should be participating. And yet, every time I come close to submitting images to Micro I just can’t pull the trigger. I certainly don’t begrudge those who do choose to shoot Micro, and someday I may yet end up with images in Micro. But for now I am limiting my submissions to primarily RM with RF as a continuing hedge.

Rights Managed, Royalty Free, or Micro Stock?

The Choice Between Rights Managed, Royalty Free, and Micro Stock

Recently a friend of mine, Greg, a man who owns a house painting business in my town, requested that I create photograph for him to run in a direct mail piece. Greg was familiar with my Animal Antics® series of images in which I anthropomorphize cats and dogs putting them in funny human-like poses. He asked that I photograph his own two dogs and utilize them in a similar way…put paint brushes in their hands, and have them
appear to be actually painting a house.

Greg told me that it was the first direct mailing he ever did in which not a single person requested to be removed from his mailing list. He was ecstatic with the results. Why do I bring this up? Because it is an example of how the right picture can make a huge difference for small and large businesses alike.

Are people willing to pay for quality?

As a stock photographer this is a huge issue. I know the right picture can indeed make a significant impact. But perhaps a bigger question is, are people willing to pay the premium for such pictures? I suspect that the answer is that knowledgeable people will recognize the value, and those who do not realize the cost benefits of quality imagery will opt for the less expensive options.

I firmly believe that as time moves on more and more images will be searched for and found on the web outside of the traditional channels of the stock industry. I want to be prepared for that. As I plan for the future I run into the question of whether to put my images into the Rights Managed category, the Royalty Free category, or the Micro Stock category (which seems to me to just be a lower priced Royalty Free model). I believe that the Rights Managed category is most appropriate for the bulk of my stock photos. Yet if I stick to that category I might be shooting myself in the foot. If it does come to pass that eventually the majority of picture sales come from individuals outside of the traditional stock industry, I don’t see them calling up Getty and negotiating rights for an RM image. The most compelling reason to put images in Micro Stock, for me, is the sheer number of people who are looking at those images. But, if people are searching and finding my images via Google (or some yet-to-appear search mechanism), then the appeal of Micro Stock simply becomes one of lower price.

At this point I am counting on creating stock photos that are strong enough that a potential buyer who sees them is willing to either pay Royalty Free rates, or to pick up the phone and negotiate for an RM image. I am not yet ready to put material into the Micro Stock business model. The recently abandoned (modified?) Rights Ready model championed by Getty seemed interesting to me in that it created a higher-priced category that also seemed reasonably simple to license. There still seems to me to be merit in that strategy so perhaps we will eventually see it evolve to the point where it truly works. I would love that!


Where to put stock images?

At least one industry pundit has suggested to me that the migration of sales outside of the normal stock industry channels means that it would behoove me to quit submitting my images to the agencies and license them all myself over my web site. Maybe someday that would be a good strategy, but I think that day, if it ever comes, is still a long, long way off. Despite the industry problems, my stock sales remain strong. Buyers within the stock agency channels are still willing to pay for a quality image. Every month I have multiple sales in the $1,000.00 and up range (and yes, Getty sales in the 40 cent range too). Hey, apparently one of the great things about RM is that it can actually undercut RF and Micro prices! However, for now I am going to concentrate my web site stock efforts on increasing the exposure that my “agency” images have and directing potential buyers to the appropriate agency where they can license the image without my having to get involved.

If any photographers who might happen to read this have any stories of images that have made a difference I would love to hear about them. It might help us all if we help educate the market place and the consumer to the true value that a great image can provide.

Time to Be Shooting!

It seems that a lot of photographers have cut way back, or have stopped shooting stock altogether. I can understand that. Every time I turn around I hear bad news for the economy and threatening news on the stock photo front. Today I happened across a micro stock blogger who was pretty pumped up that after six months of dedicated work, he had just earned a new monthly high of over seven dollars. Is that depressing or what? BTW, no offense intended to all you micro stockers. I encourage micro stockers to learn as much as they can about the other areas of stock. The market embraces all the forms of stock and all of us need to know as much as we can.

In my opinion though, now is a great time to be shooting micro or macro. I can’t help but feel the weight of all the bad news and it makes me want to conserve my money. But I haven’t lost sight of the fact that almost every stock shoot I have attempted has turned a profit. Seriously. And in this economic environment there are deals to be had; it isn’t hard to find people willing to work at bargain rates.

Great images rise to the top

My approach is to put extra effort into coming up with shoots that either cost me little to nothing, or that I am super excited about both in terms of the shots themselves and in what yield I believe they will return. Of course, I pretty much believe that if I am really excited about creating a stock image it will naturally end up turning a nice profit. Great images rise to the top. I have a number of images that to this day I can’t figure out how people use, but I was excited about creating them, and I still love to look at them (one of my big vices is staring endlessly at images I have created). And many of these ideas have brought in thousands of dollars. A quick example of an image that cost nothing but has returned thousands: a close-up image (RM) of an airplane lavatory sign indicating, “occupied”. Now don’t go and copy it…it still sells!

Creativity is the answer, again

Creativity is the answer, as it usually seems to be. Creativity not just in creating the shot, but also in coming up with photographic ideas, and in coming up with ways to create images that don’t require a lot of money. I keep a list of hundreds of ideas. I am constantly adding to this list. I can now go through that list and filter out the ones that can be executed with little to no expense and bring those to the front. It is a creative challenge. I am actually having fun with it!

One great benefit from these times is that I am fine-tuning my process; becoming more efficient and less wasteful. These processes not only serve me well now, but also will serve me well in the future. Already I have benefited from relying less on employees. When an assistant recently moved on I resisted replacing her. Not only does that save me some overhead, but also as a result of it I have learned to use programs myself that I used to relegate to others. Ultimately I not only save money, but I am also in more control of my business. It’s all good!¬