MicrostockGroup

I guess if I was writing a blog, I'd have been there, and I'd have taken the photo. 
However, usage of RF images has very few restrictions, and from discussions on the iStock forums are very subjective (I can't speak about other sites).
Editorial would have to be much stricter, and much more carefully monitored. I can easily see why an agency wouldn't want the hassle at microstock prices.
 

I do write a blog and I purchase RF licensed images from Istock because they are affordable, and many standard microstock images are used in blogs already, not everyone who writes a travel blog is confident with a camera, even if they are there could well be an image that they missed or did not turn out good enough.

You are correct that RF images have very few restrictions, but they do have restrictions on use I cannot use a $2 download in a web template for instance, RF just means one payment then free of ongoing royalties for the specified use, but not free of restrictions.
RM means a payment of royalties for a specific, use, time period, sector and territory, this means any additional or repeat use should be paid for, it does not grant exclusive sector and territory use as many believe, and a history of use should be offered if asked for.

Why would Editorial need to be any stricter, and more carefully monitored, if you have licensed the image for editorial web use then that is the usage the license was issued for, the same as if I licence and download an RF commercial image, I am not allowed to sell downloads, prints, tee-shirts or any other merchandise.

Getty have included both RF and RM images in this usage, if someone purchases RM then the use is limited by license conditions, just like any other sale.


Once you have uploaded an image and the inspectors have passed or rejected it, the main supplier cost to Getty or any other website has been already meet, adding it to the database and storage is minimal, as you say the microstock model is to sell over and over again, what small percentage of the millions of images sell more than a few times 5% - 10%, the libraries need the other 90% to boast about the number of images they have for you to search through, this 90% of images have a cost but generate no direct revenue.

iStockphoto.com was founded in 2000 and many different models have sprung up based on the original concept, and now over nine years later they have changed the face of stock imaging, in doing this the enormous growth has now levelled out, there are no new microstock markets to exploit, they are the same as the photographer and need to generate a RPI, as the library and competition grows the revenue has reached a peak the RPI starts to falls.

Lets look at what they already have at no extra cost, millions of images, a customer base, infrastructure, all the tools they need to explore new markets, the first attack is on the Midstock website by creating a premium collection, these will not sell lots and lots will not impact the existing business but will have a higher RPI, now we look at the 90% of images that do not sell that much, shrink them in size and offer them all as website use, the sizes on offer will not impact existing sales, new buyers might be attracted by the low prices, and any revenue will be a bonus as there is no additional cost over what has already been spent.

Does web use including editorial come with any more risk, not really because they will clearly state the intended use, if someone infringes this it is not the websites fault as all the information about use was issued at the point of sale, anyway they already have a department that deals with infringement, this department does not actively look for offenders but responds to contributors who find an image in use where it is not licensed, vary rarely they will get to find out where a print run exceeded the license terms, so this is good use of resources and a winning situation.

Will blogger pay the Getty prices, maybe not personal bloggers, but corporate bloggers, editorial and advertorial article writers will, and with these customers any risk is again much reduced for Getty, and the whole libraries RPI is more healthy, but will another microsite look at this model we will have to wait and see.

I.M.H.O. This is one that no microstock photographer should sit on the fence with, as currently the supplier and digital asset growth is far more than the sales revenue growth, where this can only lead to a fall in RPI, new ideas and business models to open new markets no matter how small are far more important than new libraries that will dilute the existing revenue streams.       

David    

Hi Sue??,
The Getty Model is now supplying RM in these web sizes where the sizes and resolution limits the potential for miss-use, as for Istock who are owned by Getty and editorial images, they do not have the same library so there would have to be a lot of changes for them to accept editorial and it could change how they are positioned in the market, they are already looking at different ways to supply commercial images, this does not stop any other agencies with commercial and or editorial images from looking at web size image supply and different ways of delivery.

From the legal side Getty have done the risk assesments and seen fit to supply this market and they own Istock, the difference in the two models would be the customers, so maybe Getty perceive that there is a bigger risk with the type of customers, or for me more likely is the thinking that smaller web sized images offered on Istock may damage existing Xsmall and Small RF license sales.

Looking at the blogging, article writing and website authors, that would use these smaller images and wondering if the market is worth exploring we need to look at the changes since 2000, starting with the ease of setting up and becoming active in web design, blogging, social networking etc:, this market was not there or hard work when microstock was launched so as a viable market it was not considered, now the market has grown and matured it is worth a closer look, as a blogger I use a desktop application the latest Microsft Word or thier free Windows Live Writer, both can publish to my website articles, F.A.Q's. Forum or blogs, so I can compose everything to do with my website over any period of time, offline and on my PC before publishing, when ready I never have to login to publish or change anything just press a button, and the text and images are published to the web, so it is really easy to have an internet presence.    

How big is the blogging market alone and is it worth the effort the number would suggest they are:

To me that is a sizeable market that is under serviced for legal image supply, one that may have a bad reputation for image miss-use, but how much of that is just ignorance of where and how to get legal low-res and low priced images?

David    
  

@david :

you forget to mention that 99% of those millions of blogs are "spamlogs" created in bulk with automated software.

the biggest blogs, as you noticed already, are quite allergic regarding stock images, they usually scrap CC images from Flickr often without any link to the author or just steal pics from google images with no shame whatsover.

the only one i recall paying for photos and adding a credit line is the Huffington Post.
the other steal everything and never credit anything, even TechCrunch, of the top-5 blogs
on the web.

on the other side there's sure a potential market for mobile, tempate designers, and any small-sized application, it was time that a big agency like Getty moved in this direction and i hope the other RM will follow soon : there's no reason buyers should buy my pics (50MB, large 5000x4000px) if they only need a thumbnail or a small box on a book.

and don't worry, buyers are not paying for a photo, but for a solution to their needs !
never forget this key point.

as you rightly said, the editorial choice on micros sucks big time.
in fact i mainly do editorial, always and only sold RM, and never felt the minimum need to
try RF and micros nor ever will in the future.

and my earnings are rising, despite the 17 millions images on Alamy,
because editorial is a very huge field, it comprises any possible thing on heart,
micros by opposite are a niche, and all they do is mainly images about business, food,
cutouts, vectors, and the other usual boring micro-style imagery you see in any flyer
and magazine.

i think you're way too optimistic about blogs.

casual bloggers will never pay for images,
and in the rare occasion when they spend some
time searching for a picture instead of stealing
it right away from google images, they end up
on Flickr.

WHO told you they're ready to pay 5$ or even 1$ for
every image ? who ?

besides, it makes financial sense only for medium sized
blogs, and there are not many around.

also, most of their posts are about news events, sports,
politics, they need fresh images about celebrities and VIPs,
which in a perfect world would mean Getty, AP, AFP, etc,
but in this rotten world it means they just steal the picture
somewhere claiming it's "fair use".

not to mention most of these * bloggers have no idea
about copyright, go figure what do they know about RF or RM
or CC or ...

look around you : TECHCRUNCH is stealing EVERY other image they use, EVERY ONE !
and nobody complains.

they also rip a big part of articles from the net claiming it's a small "citation"
(40 lines is a citation ?), and when cornered they rant about "fair use".

now, fair use is only legal in the US, and it clearly states it's only
for NO PROFITS.

but anyway, you must a rare case of blogger who pays for images.

the music industry is doing fine, we should do the same actually,
but pays the bills for the lawyers ?
we should join a photo association that monthly scouts the net
for stolen images, send invoices to the thieves, and deposit
our fee in our bank account automagically.

that's a potential huge business hehehe ...



plugins :
there's an interesting automated addon for wordpress
that grabs CC images from Flickr and add link to author,
resize, etc

with a few tweaks it could be made to work for micros
if they support some APIs but you see everybody is expecting
everything for free so nobody will ever write such an app...

bloggers : wait a minute, it's not OUR fault if they steal
our images.

if it takes a long time to find a free and legitimate
image, so be it, it's not an excuse for stealing the first
good picture popping up on google images !

the bloggers' mindset is pretty simple : "i like this image,
i'll use it" and "nice article, i'll copy it and post it on my blog".

and then people is surprised when they receive invoice from
the RIAA or when Pirate Bay close down and pay millions in damages.

here in europe especially people consider their "right" to
download anything, we've now even political "pirate parties" in sweden, france,
and germany and they're spreading quickly.

thieves will always find a good excuse to steal.
now they rant against the copyright, it's the same old story.

we need more police and quicker ways to denounce thieves.

rockstars can pretty well live giving away their mp3s and
making money with live shows and t-shirts but we photographers
have no such alternatives.

and we're lucky because writers are in worse position,
text articles get stolen every day, or they rewrite
the story from scratch and voila' ... at least with photos
they can hard "re-shoot" the same image.