Microstock photography: Difference between revisions
Leetorrens (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Microstock photography''', also known as '''micropayment photography''', is |
'''Microstock photography''', also known as '''micropayment photography''', is a part of the [[stock photography]] industry. What defines a company as a microstock photography company is that they (1) source their images almost exclusively via the Internet, (2) do so from a wider range of photographers than the traditional stock agencies (including a willingness to accept images from "amateurs" and hobbyists), and (3) sell their images at a very low rate (anywhere from $.20 - $10) for a [[royalty-free]] (RF) image. |
||
A number of microstock sites also sell [[vector graphics|vector art]], and some sell Flash animations and video as well as images.<ref>Stephen Shankland, [http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6188197.html "With site revamp, Fotolia adds vector art"], ZDNet News, June 1, 2007</ref> |
A number of microstock sites also sell [[vector graphics|vector art]], and some sell Flash animations and video as well as images.<ref>Stephen Shankland, [http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6188197.html "With site revamp, Fotolia adds vector art"], ZDNet News, June 1, 2007</ref> |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The pioneer of microstock photography was [[Bruce Livingstone]], who created [[iStockphoto]], originally a free stock photo site that quickly became an industry phenomenon. Livingstone sold iStockphoto to [[Getty Images]] in February 2006 for $50 million US dollars. Many other sites sprung up in the years after iStockphoto's inception; some of the larger ones are [[Dreamstime]], [[Fotolia]] and [[Shutterstock]]. |
The pioneer of microstock photography was [[Bruce Livingstone]], who created [[iStockphoto]], originally a free stock photo site that quickly became an industry phenomenon. Livingstone sold iStockphoto to [[Getty Images]] in February 2006 for $50 million US dollars. Many other sites sprung up in the years after iStockphoto's inception; some of the larger ones are [[Dreamstime]], [[Fotolia]] and [[Shutterstock]]. |
||
After a few years of initial growth microstock industry stepped into phase of mergers and acquisitions. |
After a few years of initial growth microstock industry stepped into phase of mergers and acquisitions. The acquisition of [[iStockphoto]] by [[Getty Images]] in 2006 was followed by acquisition of [[StockXpert]] by Jupiterimages during 2006.<ref name="JUI_SXP">[http://www.webmediabrands.com/corporate/releases/06.11.07-JI_HAAPMedia.html "Jupiterimages acquires Stockxpert.com and Stock.xchng]</ref> Consequently Jupiterimages was bought by [[Getty Images]] in 2009<ref name="getty-feb">{{Cite web|url=http://company.gettyimages.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=192&isource=corporate_website_ind_press_release|title=Jupitermedia Announces Completion Of Sale Of Jupiterimages To Getty Images and Change Of Jupitermedia Name to WebMediaBrands|publisher=Getty Images|date=2009-02-23|accessdate=2009-08-13}}</ref> which resulted closure of [[StockXpert]] in 2010 because of being non-strategic for Getty compared to iStockphoto. [[BigStockPhoto]] was purchased by [[Shutterstock]] in 2009. |
||
Microstock industry isn't mature yet and continues to change. Starting from limited RF license all agencies added various Extended Licenses; sites based on "pay per download" principle introduced subscription and vice versa [[Shutterstock]] which was the only 100% subscription-based microstock introduced pay-per-download scheme and later acquired [[BigStockPhoto]] to extend their presence in pay-per-download niche. Newcomer Cutcaster.com extended the pricing model by introducing a model where contributors could set their start price or could choose to use a pricing algorithm and they allowed a buyer to pay the price shown or bid on the content and name their price. Microstock prices were significantly adjusted several times by the respective agencies in the last 3 years across multiple sites |
Microstock industry isn't mature yet and continues to change. Starting from limited RF license all agencies added various Extended Licenses; sites based on "pay per download" principle introduced subscription and vice versa [[Shutterstock]] which was the only 100% subscription-based microstock agency introduced a pay-per-download scheme and later acquired [[BigStockPhoto]] to extend their presence in pay-per-download niche. Newcomer Cutcaster.com extended the pricing model by introducing a model where contributors could set their start price or could choose to use a pricing algorithm and they allowed a buyer to pay the price shown or bid on the content and name their price. Microstock prices were significantly adjusted several times by the respective agencies in the last 3 years across multiple sites. Many microstock agencies started to sell video in addition to static pictures; and some started to sell sound clips. |
||
==Practices and controversy== |
==Practices and controversy== |
||
Each microstock |
Each microstock agency uses a different pricing and payment scheme. In some instances the same photo can have several prices. Photographers can upload the same pictures on multiple sites or, with some agencies, become an exclusive supplier and receive an increased commission and additional benefits.<ref name="NYT-06-05-07">Eric A. Taub, [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/05/technology/circuits/05syndicate.html?em&ex=1181188800&en=687225a44f80273c&ei=5087%0A "When Are Photos Like Penny Stocks? When They Sell"], ''New York Times'', June 5, 2007</ref> |
||
There is no fee to post photos on a microstock |
There is no fee to post photos on a microstock agency website. However, microstock agencies do not accept all submitters or all photographs. Each employs a team of reviewers who check every picture submitted for legal issues and technical quality, as well as artistic and commercial merit. Photographers add keywords that help potential buyers filter and find pictures of interest.<ref name="NYT-06-05-07"/> |
||
The mindset of microstock supporters is that quality will prevail and some photographers believe that they will end up earning as much income from many small sales as they would from a few large sales on a traditional stock photography site. Others participate simply as a hobby or for a side income. |
The mindset of microstock supporters is that quality will prevail and some photographers believe that they will end up earning as much income from many small sales as they would from a few large sales on a traditional stock photography site. Others participate simply as a hobby or for a side income. Although not many microstock photographers post their income levels online, those individual small sales multiplied by volume can add up to thousands of dollars.<ref name="MTT-11-06-09">Laryn Kragt Bakker, [http://microstock.larynandjanel.com/tips/how_much_can_you_make_with_microstock_sites.html "How much can you make with microstock sites?"], ''Microstock Tips and Tricks'', November 6, 2009</ref> |
||
Some professional photographers believe microstock devalues the practice of photography, since most pictures on microstock sites have been taken by non-professional photographers, and that the business model is unsustainable. Professional photographers see the growth of microstock sites as reducing their own incomes.<ref name="NYT-06-05-07"/> |
Some professional photographers believe microstock devalues the practice of photography, since most pictures on microstock sites have been taken by non-professional photographers, and that the business model is unsustainable. Professional photographers see the growth of microstock sites as reducing their own incomes.<ref name="NYT-06-05-07"/> |
||
Revision as of 18:30, 22 November 2010
Microstock photography, also known as micropayment photography, is a part of the stock photography industry. What defines a company as a microstock photography company is that they (1) source their images almost exclusively via the Internet, (2) do so from a wider range of photographers than the traditional stock agencies (including a willingness to accept images from "amateurs" and hobbyists), and (3) sell their images at a very low rate (anywhere from $.20 - $10) for a royalty-free (RF) image.
A number of microstock sites also sell vector art, and some sell Flash animations and video as well as images.[1]
History
The pioneer of microstock photography was Bruce Livingstone, who created iStockphoto, originally a free stock photo site that quickly became an industry phenomenon. Livingstone sold iStockphoto to Getty Images in February 2006 for $50 million US dollars. Many other sites sprung up in the years after iStockphoto's inception; some of the larger ones are Dreamstime, Fotolia and Shutterstock.
After a few years of initial growth microstock industry stepped into phase of mergers and acquisitions. The acquisition of iStockphoto by Getty Images in 2006 was followed by acquisition of StockXpert by Jupiterimages during 2006.[2] Consequently Jupiterimages was bought by Getty Images in 2009[3] which resulted closure of StockXpert in 2010 because of being non-strategic for Getty compared to iStockphoto. BigStockPhoto was purchased by Shutterstock in 2009.
Microstock industry isn't mature yet and continues to change. Starting from limited RF license all agencies added various Extended Licenses; sites based on "pay per download" principle introduced subscription and vice versa Shutterstock which was the only 100% subscription-based microstock agency introduced a pay-per-download scheme and later acquired BigStockPhoto to extend their presence in pay-per-download niche. Newcomer Cutcaster.com extended the pricing model by introducing a model where contributors could set their start price or could choose to use a pricing algorithm and they allowed a buyer to pay the price shown or bid on the content and name their price. Microstock prices were significantly adjusted several times by the respective agencies in the last 3 years across multiple sites. Many microstock agencies started to sell video in addition to static pictures; and some started to sell sound clips.
Practices and controversy
Each microstock agency uses a different pricing and payment scheme. In some instances the same photo can have several prices. Photographers can upload the same pictures on multiple sites or, with some agencies, become an exclusive supplier and receive an increased commission and additional benefits.[4]
There is no fee to post photos on a microstock agency website. However, microstock agencies do not accept all submitters or all photographs. Each employs a team of reviewers who check every picture submitted for legal issues and technical quality, as well as artistic and commercial merit. Photographers add keywords that help potential buyers filter and find pictures of interest.[4]
The mindset of microstock supporters is that quality will prevail and some photographers believe that they will end up earning as much income from many small sales as they would from a few large sales on a traditional stock photography site. Others participate simply as a hobby or for a side income. Although not many microstock photographers post their income levels online, those individual small sales multiplied by volume can add up to thousands of dollars.[5]
Some professional photographers believe microstock devalues the practice of photography, since most pictures on microstock sites have been taken by non-professional photographers, and that the business model is unsustainable. Professional photographers see the growth of microstock sites as reducing their own incomes.[4]
See also
References
- ^ Stephen Shankland, "With site revamp, Fotolia adds vector art", ZDNet News, June 1, 2007
- ^ "Jupiterimages acquires Stockxpert.com and Stock.xchng
- ^ "Jupitermedia Announces Completion Of Sale Of Jupiterimages To Getty Images and Change Of Jupitermedia Name to WebMediaBrands". Getty Images. 2009-02-23. Retrieved 2009-08-13.
- ^ a b c Eric A. Taub, "When Are Photos Like Penny Stocks? When They Sell", New York Times, June 5, 2007
- ^ Laryn Kragt Bakker, "How much can you make with microstock sites?", Microstock Tips and Tricks, November 6, 2009
External links
- Robert Levine, "Photo wars: A $2 billion business gets rough", Business 2.0 magazine, April 2, 2007
- Daryl Lang, "Is $7 The Magic Number For Microstock?", Photo District News, February 13, 2008