Author Topic: Analysis - Which picture agencies are used most in magazines (Read 14715 times)

fotorob · « **on:** August 08, 2008, 07:59 »

Hello,

I have done a research about which picture agencies sell the most pictures to magazines by looking at the credit lines in many magazines. You can see the results in my blog here:

http://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/2008/07/10/einleitung-fotos-von-bildagenturen-in-zeitschriften/

Sorry, it's in German though, but the agency names and numbers can be understood, I guess...

Most of the agencies are macrostock, from microstock most seem to use fotolia (which isn't surprising since I only checked german magazines)...

Bye,
Robert

kgtoh · « **Reply #1 on:** August 08, 2008, 09:07 »

Thank you for the detailed and interesting analysis.

It's quite interesting to see the very small number of microstock pictures being used by these big magazines.

Karimala · « **Reply #2 on:** August 08, 2008, 10:27 »

Quote from: fotorob on August 08, 2008, 07:59

Sorry, it's in German though, but the agency names and numbers can be understood, I guess...

Try Babelfish for translations...

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/

ericfoltz · « **Reply #3 on:** August 08, 2008, 13:11 »

It's important to keep in mind that most magazine use is editorial and the magazines like to have RM images so that they can be assured that the images they use don't show up in their competitors publication in the same month.

I'd be interested to know how many of the images used in the ads in those magazines came from micro vs macro.

Read_My_Rights · « **Reply #4 on:** August 08, 2008, 14:20 »

It seems shocking how little Alamy is beeing used by Non-english publishing journals. Wow. I would not have suspected this omission since they have many good pictures but perhaps the difficulty to search through the enormous picture heap is an effective deterrent for picture buyers.

fotorob · « **Reply #5 on:** August 09, 2008, 06:45 »

Quote

I'd be interested to know how many of the images used in the ads in those magazines came from micro vs macro.

I'd love to know that too, but unfortunately ads usually don't show their picture sources...

fotorob · « **Reply #6 on:** September 16, 2008, 04:54 »

Part 4 is online now as well...

Bye, Robert

Adeptris · « **Reply #7 on:** September 16, 2008, 06:39 »

Quote from: ericfoltz on August 08, 2008, 13:11

It's important to keep in mind that most magazine use is editorial and the magazines like to have RM images so that they can be assured that the images they use don't show up in their competitors publication in the same month.

Eric: with Alamy another factor is the price point, unlike commercial as you say a lot of usage is editorial, but often are just spot image size for a single publication, these do not need the higher cost of a RF licence for a single run use, as the price of RF in these cases is higher than RM, so they get to use the RM image for one run at a lower price point, and will pay for second use if they need to use it again in the future.

Over at Alamy the "Average image price" in the last quarter was RM=$147 and RF=$225, the RM values change between Editorial $116 and Commercial $383, as you can see it could be more price point than an RM vs RF licence issue, as we often see a same front page lead image.

Alamy percentage of image sales RF = 22% to RM = 78%
Alamy percentage of image sales Commercial = 27% to Editorial = 73%

David

Pixart · « **Reply #8 on:** September 16, 2008, 09:59 »

Welcome new member fotorob!

I am looking at your avatar and wondering if you are the photographer with the youtube video of a stock shoot with a blond on a lastolite? If you are I enjoyed that video - so much that I searched for it again just last week and watched it again. (I just looked for it to check and couldn't find - wonder how I found it so easily last week???)

If that's not you, welcome here anyway! (and please excuse me....)

fotorob · « **Reply #9 on:** September 16, 2008, 12:17 »

Hello Pixart,

yes, it's me and in case you need to find my video again, here's the link:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltpFFf59SGI[/youtube]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltpFFf59SGI" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltpFFf59SGI</a>

Oh, and by the way: Great blog you have! You've got a new reader...

Bye, Robert

Pixart · « **Reply #10 on:** September 16, 2008, 13:49 »

Thanks!

And yes, that's the one! Were those micro photos? Have they done well for you? And, has there been 40,000 copycats of your setups?

I must say that you are much more graceful with that Lastolite than I am. If I was ever shot folding that baby up it I'm sure it would be one of those videos that go viral. Watch as photographer goes insane packing up background....

fotorob · « **Reply #11 on:** September 17, 2008, 05:00 »

Hello Pixart,

no, these photos were mainly for macrostock agencies. I tend to do only little microstock. But yes, these images worked great for me. I worked many times with this model and she is quite popular with image buyers.

Bye, Robert

alpy7 · « **Reply #12 on:** September 21, 2008, 15:17 »

I did notice in my wife's Woman's World Magazine that credits are given on each page where a stock photo is used. I haev seen credits from SS, IS and DT. Also credits from some of the Macro sites. They even give credits to the designers and make up people. Even food makeup people. The credits aren't realy connected to the pics but it would be easy to find them.

LaoKao · « **Reply #13 on:** September 25, 2008, 04:24 »

Hi Robert,

Great job on your analysis and youtube video

Regards,

William

fotorob · « **Reply #14 on:** November 24, 2008, 05:26 »

Part 5 of my analysis is online now...

Bye, Robert

hali · « **Reply #15 on:** November 24, 2008, 08:06 »

cheers for sharing your knowledge, it's refreshing to see this.
and welcome !

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #16 on:** November 24, 2008, 15:00 »

I believe there is considerable use of free lance photogs used by publishing agencies. Most magazines are owned by a larger publishing agency which in turn is owned by an even larger publisher.
I free lance for one myself. Much of the photography in the magazines is on an assignment basis. An article idea is hatched, a photog is hired to shoot for it. I will get an assignment, go shoot a few dozen images of the subject of which a few to a dozen may be used in the story (depending on how many pages the article is to be). All images are my intellectual property, my copyright, and may only be used once except if used to advertise the magazine. I work on a half day rate. If asked by the art director or the author to go back to a subject and shoot even one more picture, it is another half day.
However, magazine art directors and editors DO pick through the micros. And why not? In this economy, it is far more cost affective!!! The editor I deal with on a regular basis and his art directors DO surf DT, SS, & IS. This is when they need only one specific image for a singular topic or small article. For larger articles, a photog is assigned.
Just recently, Forbes tapped one of my pix (a cityscapeJ) for an article. They purchased it from SS. I believe this will happen even more frequently with the growth of web-zines. According to the publishers I work with, the magazine industry in general is in a terrible funk. The competition for readers is extreme. Since the baby boomers, each generation is gaining less and less information from print. Hence many magazines/publishers are looking to the WWW.

Anyway, that's what the chit-chat is with the editor's in the local Starbucks. time will tell.

True, most of the images for magazines may still be coming from the macros.... but that will change just as the entire image buying industry has changed in the last 10 years.

=tom

fotorob · « **Reply #17 on:** February 12, 2009, 03:58 »

Part 6 of the analysis is online now here:
http://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/2009/02/12/teil-6-fotos-von-bildagenturen-in-gala-cosmopolitan-bild-der-frau-petra-brigitte/

Bye,
Robert

princigalli · « **Reply #18 on:** June 09, 2012, 03:30 »

Looking at most of these magazines, I don't see a clear advantage in going Macro instead of Micro. They probably have no budget requirements.

ShadySue · « **Reply #19 on:** June 09, 2012, 04:28 »

Interesting that you found so many.
In the small subset of UK magazines I see, being ones I buy or ones I skim at friends' or familys' houses (I'm a delightful guest), I'd say the vast majority of photos are commissioned for the articles (women's mags), or have arrived as a words/pictures package ('serious' magazines). Twice in the last couple of years I saw two start-up mags which seemed to use photos sourced almost equally from iStock and SS. Both of them had a very downmarket feel, though that didn't seem to be their target market, as the photos were very different in style, and there were a lot of random 'isolated in white' stuff just thrown in. I guess a good designer could have chosen better and have harmonised them more, but I guess that takes more time and money. Anyway, after the launch issues, I never saw either of these again.

A lot of publications send out 'want lists' to the agencies, which obvioulsy would be unsustainable for micros to service.

I was always, when teaching, disappointed how few Alamy photos were in textbooks. By far the lion's share of textbook pics were from Getty, and the rest were very, very thinly spread over a large range of specialist agencies. They definitely put out want lists. Latterly, I noticed that some textbooks were being illustrated by one artist for continuity in style, but my pupils didn't like these - 'fake'.

@ Adeptris: where did you get these average Alamy sales figures? They're way above my average gross (RM), and way above the general figures quoted by the very small proportion of Alamy contributors who post in the forums. Of course, a few very large prices can skew the average!

heywoody · « **Reply #20 on:** June 09, 2012, 06:31 »

Off topic - fotorob's posts where showing as ignored and, sure enough, there he was on my ignore list all on his own. This is very wierd as I've NEVER ingored anyone

fotografer · « **Reply #21 on:** June 09, 2012, 06:38 »

This is an old thread. The origianl post was nearly 4 years ago. Possibly a lot has changed in that time as the quality of micro has got better and better.

fotorob · « **Reply #22 on:** June 10, 2012, 08:06 »

Yes, this post is old, but for those who are interested, I keep analyzing the sales of stock agencies to magaines, you find the most recent overviews here:
http://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/category/zeitschriftenanalyse/

OM · « **Reply #23 on:** June 10, 2012, 20:04 »

Really excellent (hard) work. Thanks.

ShadySue · « **Reply #24 on:** June 11, 2012, 04:11 »

@ Rob: I know nothing about German magazines, but from the design of the covers of the ones you've featured, these would be downmarket women's magazines in the UK. Does that apply also to Germany?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Analysis - Which picture agencies are used most in magazines (Read 14715 times)

fotorob

kgtoh

Karimala

ericfoltz

Read_My_Rights

fotorob

fotorob

Adeptris

Pixart

fotorob

Pixart

fotorob

alpy7

LaoKao

fotorob

hali

a.k.a.-tom

fotorob

princigalli

ShadySue

heywoody

fotografer

fotorob

OM

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors