Why 70% Of Images Licensed Are Microstock

Posted on 5/18/2009 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (6)

Many traditional sellers want to believe that all microstock is doing is stealing traditional customers. However, there is a lot of evidence that disproves that theory.

Get the Full Article (2 Credits)

Have an Account?

Access to this site is an exclusive benefit for you. Enter your username and password in the form above. If you don't remember your password you can reset it at any time.

Keep me logged in

Forgot your password?

New to Selling Stock?

Selling Stock is an on-line newsletter that reports on developing trends in the stock photo industry. It is updated at least twice a month. On-line subscribers receive e-mail notification whenever new stories are posted. Archives containing stories going back to late 1995 are fully available to subscribers.

Buy Credits

Copyright © 2009 Jim Pickerell. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-461-7627, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Jim Pickerell is founder of www.selling-stock.com, an online newsletter that publishes daily. He is also available for personal telephone consultations on pricing and other matters related to stock photography. He occasionally acts as an expert witness on matters related to stock photography. For his current curriculum vitae go to: http://www.jimpickerell.com/Curriculum-Vitae.aspx.

Comments

Jonathan Ross Posted May 18, 2009
Thanks for the info Jim,

I would love to see actual sales figures in dollars rather than percentages. I am licensed in all three models and my RM out sells my Micro by a very large amount per image. I have far less RM than I do Micro images in the market ( 900 RM and !900 Micro ) and my monthly return from RM is huge compared to my Micro. Of coarse this has to be offset by the production cost for each sales model and how many selects are being accepted in RM comparison to the open door of Micro. I made those 1900 Micro images in a month and a half it has taken me over a year to get my RM collection up to where it is.

Best,
Jonathan Ross

Bill Bachmann Posted May 18, 2009
The problem with advertising that SO MANY Microstock images are selling in NUMBERS is that non-experienced photographers jump onboard right away with Microstock. Then they find out QUICKLY that they can NOT make a living selling images for $1.00 (and getting 20 cents for a commission). So many many photographers flood the market with super cheap prices and then go and sell hamburgers somewhere with tiny commission checks coming in that could not even begin to support them.

I have been in the business a long time and seen so many people come and go saying they are "photographers". If they really want a CAREER as a photographer, and want to be respected as one, they need to go and shoot what they love really well, put the images into Rights Managed stock and make a REAL LIVING. You can not travel the world to shoot, pay costs of production, and sell them for $1.00 and expect to be a full-time photographer! I would put my yearly income (after expenses) from stock up against anyone in the world that claims he/she makes a killing in Microstock! Even the top producers of Microstock -- and I know them -- just run a treadmill of models holding phones, computers, etc against a white background and then brag that they are one of the most downloaded Microstock people on cheap cheap websites i the world. But what is the income they take home after rushing thru their shoots like assembly lines to get LOTS of images and selling for them one dollar (to take hoe 20 cents)? Look at my website, my books, etc and I do NOT sell ANYTHING for one dollar, have many, many, many $20,000 plus exclusive sales, and a fair price for my work being used each day of my life. Most of the thousands of photographers selling Microstock do not even take home $20,000 in a year. And even the ones that do could make so much more --- and be much more respected to themselves and peers -- selling the RM method and seeing those big sales on their monthly sales reports! Do you want to shoot beautiful images and be paid wll for them, or do you want to shoot LOTS of production, hope to sell many of them cheap, and try to make it up in numbers of sales??

The only problem I see in the business is the rates are falling sometimes because clients are getting spoiled by beginning photographers selling for one dollar and, in this bad economy, the bean-counters in the companies talk the creative people into buying CHEAP, NOT NECESSARILY GOOD! Most Microstock sellers (with the excepton of the big rushed production shooters) are just non-photographers who like to think they are "being published... Wow!" Ask yourself... do you want to be published many times in cheap, dollar sales to nowhere or do you want to see your ads in major publications each month and BE A PHOTOGRAPHER for a career??

Check out my website www.billbachmann.com and you can se you CAN make a good living seeing the world and shooting lifestyle without selling your hard-earned images for a dollar and HOPING to make a living! There are good shooters staying with Rights-Managed and making a darn good living selling at a fair price. I wish more people in our business cared to do it well rather than cheap.

Bill Bachmann
Orlando, Florida

Fred Voetsch Posted May 18, 2009
Bill Bachmann wrote:

"I wish more people in our business cared to do it well rather than cheap"

I don't see why as that would seriously increase your competition.

One of the reasons stock photography got as expensive as it got was the difficulty and cost in preparing an image for use in publication. That is no longer true and what has been exposed is how little real skill is needed to produce a typical stock photo now that anyone can push a shutter button and have a ready-to-use image. Ready for the vast majority of uses, that is. That says a lot abou the level of skill needed to be a photographer; if you are well above that level you have little to worry about.

IMO, photographers who complain about the vast number of photographers selling micro or RF should not be complaining about THAT but should be thankful that they were around during the golden age when the could make some real money without much competition.

...reminds me of the old man on his death bed who has lived a long life full of wine, women and song and instead of being grateful, curses God for bringing it to an end.

Bill Bachmann Posted May 18, 2009
Believe it or not, Fred, I try to help others... not worry about my competition!

I see so FEW photographers able to make a living because hey do sell out and go Microstock. So they do photography "part-time" and have a REAL job to live. If only they did realize that they could make a living at it if they had more confidence and would be paid much more for their good pictures than practically give them away.

I don't know if you practice what you preach, but I do! I do not sell RF or Microstock. I give seminars & write books to try to get them to see that they can make a living at photography. Sure, it does mean more competition for me, but it would INCREASE the Perceived Value of photography to the buyers.

And I disagree that it takes little knowledge to "push a shutter" to get a stock image. Maybe one that someone wants to pay $1 for, but not one that they want to pay a lot more or build an ad campaign around.

Yes, I was around for the Golden Age when we made money. But it was not because here was little competition.... it was because there was no CHEAP competition that clients could "make due" with a shot because it is only one dollar!

Look at your own photography, Fred, and see if it measures up. I am trying to get others to see that they don't have to sell cheap and do this in addition to two other jobs to make a living. What do you do? I am proud to say I am a photographer! Look it up, I am not afraid of competition at all and do write articles(one in Professional Photographer this month of May just out or look at my website www.billbachmann.com ) trying to help other photographers so hey don't get snowballed into selling so cheap thinking they HAVE TO!!! Jim Pickerill, who used to own and now writes for Selling Stock knows of my stock sales over the years.

I hope you hear the message and not shot the messenger.

Bill Bachmann
Orlando, Florida

Fred Voetsch Posted May 20, 2009
Bill Bachmann wrote:

"Look at your own photography, Fred, and see if it measures up"

I would say it doesn't, not to yours or to the best photographers I know. Nor does most of the photography out there, and that is really my point. To me photography is more of a fun, casual thing that allows me an excuse to take a trip to a place I've been too many times already.

Does that mean I don't have a right to sell my photography? Am I only allowed to sell it at a certain price? If so, who sets that price?

Micro is a reality brought about by technology (digital cameras and the Internet) and I am not personally responsible for it nor can I change it. BTW, I do not sell micro and I do not recommend to photographers entering the stock photography business that they sell micro to start if they are trained in photography and plan on making a living at it. In this we agree; a talented photographer with should be selling RM or should at least start out selling RM so as to give themselves the opportunity to sell fewer images for more money.

So I applaud you for pushing photographers to sell RM but I do not have a thing against the micro world and see it as one of the creatives forces driving the business forward. I believe that established photographers like you need to look at micro as a pro baseball team looks at a farm team; you should reach out to them, not with anger, as many RM sellers often do, but with the intention of educating the best of them and bringing them along to a higher level.

Seeing photography like yours is inspiring, Bill. Please don't reach out to the micro sellers with a fist but with a hand up. I see too many RM sellers do that and it drives them away. You can inspire them to better things and I think that only talented photographers like yourself can do so. Well, maybe money, but micro makes it awfully easy to get started and to get a bit of money rolling in and that is pretty enticing to most. The micro world feeds a hunger; there are lots of photographers out there; are you reaching them? iStock is.

And don't forget that many have no desire to do much more than sell a few images now and then and micro allows them a marketplace. I will always defend their right to sell or giveaway their images as they choose. What I think our responsibility is is to make sure they knows the facts and the fact remains that RM is where the money still is and is likely to stay. I believe that will be true well into the future and that those who believe in RM stock photography should work a little harder at reaching the masses if they want to not be seen as elitists.

Is that a challenge? Yes it is. Please join my Yahoo group, "Selling Stock Photography" at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/selling_stock_photography/ to spread the word, their are over 2,000 mostly micro sellers there who need to hear from people like you now and then.

Respectfully,

Fred Voetsch
Owner - Acclaim Images

Fred Voetsch Posted May 20, 2009
Jonathan Ross Wrote:

"I would love to see actual sales figures in dollars rather than percentages."

I agree. Only using percentages provides misleading data. If I am not mistaken RM sales account for the majority of sales in dollars even with a small percentage of the sales in images.

Post Comment