MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Do you count on having microstock income in 5 years? 10? 20?  (Read 24013 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 09, 2010, 22:30 »
0
Lately I've been thinking about not just how much I can grow my microstock revenues in the short term, but also about whether I can count on it in the long term.

When I started nearly a year and a half ago, I set short term and long term goals for myself.  I recently hit my short term goal, and if my rate of growth holds steady, I could hit the long term goal (which involves making microstock my main source of income) in a few years.

But with all the recent changes in the industry, I'm wondering how realistic it is to think that a microstock income could last me well into my golden years (another 20 or 30 years).  Of course evolution will be constant, and this market may look completely different in just a year or two.  But I also strongly believe that communication will only become more and more visual, and images will be relied upon more than ever to convey ideas.  Therefore good imagery will always be needed, and thus, valuable. 

So here's my prediction:  Globalization and the race to the bottom will make our returns become smaller and smaller, but if the rewards of doing this work become so insignificant that talented artists (or even the copycats) can't justify the effort, then the supply and demand equation will level out making it worthwhile at least for those who can do unique, quality work in volume.  Today, of course, we all aim to do "good, quality work in volume," but I think the future will redefine the meaning of that (think 5x or 10x what it takes today to make a decent microstock income).

What do you think?  Does microstock have a decent lifespan in front of it, and if not, what might replace it?


« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2010, 22:40 »
+2
I'm fairly pessimistic about the long term.  The downward pressure on prices seems to be relentless.   

WarrenPrice

« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2010, 23:38 »
+2
First of all, I'm 70 years old.  I count by ones.  LOL
And, I think Video is the way to go in microstock.


« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2010, 23:51 »
0
...I think Video is the way to go in microstock.

I think you might be right.  With magazines and newspapers going the way of the dodo, we'll be relying on electronic media more and more.  And in the near future, instead of seeing still images alongside articles on the Internet, all those images could be animated to better illustrate the points in the article.  We're already heading in this direction... the new version of HTML (HTML-5) will make it easier than ever to embed video in a page, no troublesome plug-ins (Flash) required.   Hmmm... Warren, I think you just flipped a switch inside my head... for a while, I've been thinking I need to explore video, but now I'm convinced it's where I'll need to focus my efforts very soon.

« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2010, 00:59 »
+1
I'm confused by "race to the bottom" - I'm assuming you mean a downward trend in RPDL, and I'm not seeing that at all. I've been doing this for three years, and prices have gone nowhere but consistently and steadily up.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 01:28 by sharply_done »

« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2010, 01:36 »
0
I'm confused by "race to the bottom" - I'm assuming you mean a downward trend in RPDL, and I'm not seeing that at all. I've been doing this for three years, and prices have gone nowhere but consistently and steadily up.

I agree. I wonder where people are getting their stats. Yes, some agencies are squeezing for as much profit as possible, but prices still seem to be rising.

« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2010, 01:47 »
0
As far as the original post, it's hard to say. I assume things may not change too drastically in the next 5 years. Beyond that, I don't know. I think there is still a lot of room for growth in the microstock customer and contributor base.

I'd like to think that I'm still making money with my stock portfolio 10 or 20 years down the road, but who knows? That's a long way away.

« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2010, 01:50 »
+1
I disagree about video - I think it's a trendy fad that will quietly go away sooner rather than later. Those investing time and money into it are going to be very disappointed.

« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2010, 05:58 »
0
I disagree about video - I think it's a trendy fad that will quietly go away sooner rather than later. Those investing time and money into it are going to be very disappointed.

I think you are right about most things but I disagree with you on this one.  I am a complete amateur with video and I have uploaded a small portfolio to a few sites.  The sales are reasonable and the commissions are good.  It is worth getting in to, have a look at the number of sales some people are getting, I was surprised.  Wont most advertising be moving images in the future?  Print is dying, everything is moving to the internet and screen advertising.  I see more and more moving images taking over from stills.  I still prefer stills but what do the advertising people think?

None of us can predict the future with any real accuracy and I think it is sensible to diversify in to footage, there is a chance it wont pay off but it is just as likely to be the next big thing.  I also like the fact that it isn't as simple as taking a photo, most people can master that now.  Footage has a steeper learning curve and at the moment it isn't as easy to upload 500mb files.  There is less competition at the moment, that will probably change in the future.

« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2010, 06:45 »
+1
I disagree about video - I think it's a trendy fad that will quietly go away sooner rather than later. Those investing time and money into it are going to be very disappointed.


?!?!?!?!?!?

If you mean that microstock video is a fad and perhaps a flawed model in some way, that's a reasonable thing to debate.

But the presence of video in our everyday lives is in no way a fad, and we will certainly see more and more video on websites and in emerging media such as books and magazines reformatted for devices like the iPad and Kindle (future video capable versions of it anyway).  These and other expanding markets for video will create greater demand, and that demand will need to be filled, if not by microstock video, then by another model that will surely emerge.  Today's forward-thinking microstock contributors will be watching for that model and hopefully the first to profit from it.

« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2010, 06:55 »
0
I'm confused by "race to the bottom" - I'm assuming you mean a downward trend in RPDL, and I'm not seeing that at all. I've been doing this for three years, and prices have gone nowhere but consistently and steadily up.

In the "micro" view, I too have seen an increase in my RPI, suggesting that prices for my images are holding steady or even rising.

But I'm talking about the "macro" view... the big picture down the road.  Consider the current big discussions on this forum... ThinkStock's .25 commission plan, Fotolia's pricing direction, etc.  The big sites will be under more and more pressure to cut prices, and our commissions along with them.  Those pricing pressures, plus a rapidly growing base of contributors in countries like India and China who will be happy to work for tiny commissions, will tip the supply/demand equation so far that we may see commissions reduced to pennies.  It's even conceivable that images will be available free in a new microstock model that derives revenue from ad placements on the download pages.  In five years, we may look back at $.25 commissions as the lucrative days of microstock. 

I don't mean to be such a pessimist, but this is what is happening to every industry today, and there's no reason to think microstock will be immune.  In fact, this scenario has already begun playing out.

« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2010, 10:02 »
0
I understand that many people have seen their returns go up over the last few years. But this business is still new. There will be a shakeout, a loss of competition, and less interest in paying reviewers to screen new images.  Venture capital will stop flowing in, owners and investors will want to see bigger profits.  I expect to see subscription plans rolling over the landscape, along with other marketing tricks and obfuscations (such as at Fotolia) aimed at breaking the commission structure on the contributor side, and flattening the pricing on the buyer side.   Bottom line: oversupply, a buyer's market.

Disclaimer: I tend to be pessimistic - although I often think of it as realistic.


donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2010, 10:21 »
0
I agree with stockastic about this industry turning towards the subscriptions, but has any one taken into account the present economy? My sales steadily increase. This economic condition started back in 2002 for me and many of us got into microstock in 2005 - 2006. We don't know any different. I personally think once the economy starts to improve...sales will improve with it. I realize right now the market is saturated but I think once things get better those photographers that think they can make a thousand with microstock will fade away because they will have other places to make their income. Rather the stock agencies will raise our commissions...I don't know, but I do believe sales will increase when these ad agencies have a less tighter budget. I don't think they will ever go to the macrostock because its call profit and loss as far as a business and they will stay where they can get the cheapest images. That's just business. Only time will tell but that is what I think.

gbcimages

« Reply #13 on: February 10, 2010, 10:34 »
0
I've been doing this for over five years  and seen a lot of changes. I hope to be doing this the next ten,but nothing is for sure. All we can do is take it one day at a time and be thankful.

« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2010, 10:35 »
0
There is only over supply if you supply something that is already there or isn't of a high enough quality.  From what I have seen in the past 3.5 years, buyers love new images.  I can still spend a day doing searches and find things that haven't been done yet.  Can't see that changing, as there aren't many people that try and find new subjects.  There seems to be far more buyers now and I think as more people get websites, blogs etc, the demand will continue increasing.  There are always people in the forums that find it tough but that is good for the suppliers, it would be a lot worse if doing this was an easy way to make money, everyone would be doing it.

The sites are going to try and squeeze more money out of us but the way we have to upload to all these sites and they have to spend money reviewing and storing images is looking old, I am sure someone will come up with something better, that gives us more control and makes it cheaper for us to do business with buyers.

« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2010, 11:10 »
0
?!?!?!?!?!?

If you mean that microstock video is a fad and perhaps a flawed model in some way, that's a reasonable thing to debate.

But the presence of video in our everyday lives is in no way a fad, and we will certainly see more and more video on websites and in emerging media such as books and magazines reformatted for devices like the iPad and Kindle (future video capable versions of it anyway).  These and other expanding markets for video will create greater demand, and that demand will need to be filled, if not by microstock video, then by another model that will surely emerge.  Today's forward-thinking microstock contributors will be watching for that model and hopefully the first to profit from it.

Yes, I was of course referring to stock video, which is inherently dull and bland. While video may be the hot thing right now, I think that with time people will find it too intrusive and designers will find it too limiting. If there's a future in video for microstock, I think it'll be with designers using still images to create faux video - zooming and panning around an image before homing in on a "sweet spot". I'm seeing this with increasing frequency, and when it's done well it can be far more engaging than a static ad. And that's the whole point, isn't it?

I think, too, that iPad and Kindle will not be successful - I applaud the effort, but the technology just isn't there yet.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 11:56 by sharply_done »

WarrenPrice

« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2010, 11:55 »
0
YouTube is quite a success, I think.  It could be a "fad" but it seems to be for real.



« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2010, 11:58 »
0
YouTube is quite a success, I think.  It could be a "fad" but it seems to be for real.

You're missing my point: I was talking about commercial stock video, which YouTube isn't.

« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2010, 12:08 »
0
YouTube is quite a success, I think.  It could be a "fad" but it seems to be for real.

You're missing my point: I was talking about commercial stock video, which YouTube isn't.


Again I think the place for this is in the macro agencies where decent sales prices can make for a viable business model. YouTube as far as I have heard is a total money loser. Sure it has millions of users and videos but it makes NO money. That does not make it a success.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2010, 12:26 »
0
YouTube is quite a success, I think.  It could be a "fad" but it seems to be for real.

You're missing my point: I was talking about commercial stock video, which YouTube isn't.


Again I think the place for this is in the macro agencies where decent sales prices can make for a viable business model. YouTube as far as I have heard is a total money loser. Sure it has millions of users and videos but it makes NO money. That does not make it a success.

Sort of a "moving" Flickr?   :o

Maybe a forerunner to Getty/YouTube? 

Progress Marches on .. and on and on and on.   ;D

lisafx

« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2010, 13:36 »
0
Really interesting question, and one I have been thinking about a lot lately. 

I want to buy a larger house with more studio space, and with houses cheap right now I think it is feasible on my current microstock income. 

My dilemma is that, of course, the time it takes to pay off a mortgage is most likely longer than I can expect my microstock income to hold out, even if I keep adding images. 

I am thinking that if we can get a 15 year mortgage, then we will probably have a significant amount of the principle paid off in 5 or 10 years, and if the micro market has dried up by that time we can refinance the balance and be paying around what we are paying in our current small house.

So I guess my answer is that I am fairly confident I will be able to maintain my income for the next 5 years.  Hopeful about the next 10 years, and fairly certain it won't last 15 or 20 more years.   

« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2010, 14:10 »
0
Really interesting question, and one I have been thinking about a lot lately. 

I want to buy a larger house with more studio space, and with houses cheap right now I think it is feasible on my current microstock income. 

My dilemma is that, of course, the time it takes to pay off a mortgage is most likely longer than I can expect my microstock income to hold out, even if I keep adding images. 

I am thinking that if we can get a 15 year mortgage, then we will probably have a significant amount of the principle paid off in 5 or 10 years, and if the micro market has dried up by that time we can refinance the balance and be paying around what we are paying in our current small house.

So I guess my answer is that I am fairly confident I will be able to maintain my income for the next 5 years.  Hopeful about the next 10 years, and fairly certain it won't last 15 or 20 more years.   

Lisa,  I like what you say. What do think will happen in the next ten years that makes you feel you won't be able to make a living at it? After all in ten years of full time shooting and following the market you will be a qualified expert, if your not there already.

« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2010, 14:22 »
0
It is an interesting question and, for those of us that make our living doing this, one that is never far from our minds.

If I examine the data from my graphs then it is difficult to be overly optimistic about the longer term future. Although I've been doing microstock for five years my sales on most agencies grew consistently up until early 2006 and yet, despite more than doubling my portfolio since then, has stayed at more or less the same level. My income on the other hand has quadrupled in the same timescale. I haven't worked particularly hard though.

Essentially most of my growth in earnings over the last 4 years has come from ever-increasing prices but clearly that can't continue at the same rate forever. I think most people will find that eventually their sales and income will stabilise and then gradually start to slip downwards as the market matures.

The growth in new images will continue to increase and no individual contributor will be able to maintain their own share of the marketplace __ just as they haven't been able to for the last few years. I remember an interview with Istock's Hidesy a few years ago when she stated that her target was to maintain a 1% share of the total library. She'd have needed a portfolio with 64,000 images by now to have done so.

There will always be money to be earned from microstock but at some point in the relatively near future the income per image will progressively start to reduce. It will just become increasingly more difficult to earn the same money. Only last night I had 2 requests to join my CN at Istock __ coincidentally both from Chinese contributors. Think about it.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 14:24 by gostwyck »

« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2010, 14:46 »
0
Still though, the guy in China, who deserves access to the market as much as anyone, will not be able to shoot various ethnic groups very easily. It's easy for me, living in a large city, to shoot almost any ethnic group I want. It costs a lot that is for sure but I can it. Or does it matter. What I really wonder is what people are willing to finally settle for as a low enough income. That's what it comes down to really. When someone can't make enough to make it worth his while they quit and go to something else. Like everything I'm sure this business is self limiting. Eventually most of the rabbits die off and the cycle starts again.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2010, 14:48 »
0
This is THE question!

I have no answers of course, but a few random thoughts (mostly already espressed by the original poster):

- people will always need pictures, so microstock will last "forever" (=that is a few years at least); video may replace photos in certain uses, but not all;

- not every buyer is even aware of microstock, so the buyers' base will continue to increase for a while;
 
- more and more photographers will join as well; although new photographers may find it too difficult to start and leave;

- more and more pictures uploaded every day means it may soon become unsustainable: not enough time to shot and edit photos not to lose market share;

- whether it will be profitable for us photographer or not, it depends on whether buyers will outgrow photographers or not;

conclusion: I do not know, but every "real" job is even worse: we could get fired out of the blue, while - even in worst case scenario - microstock's fall will be a slow decay at least; in the meantime we'll find something else to do; I didn't even know about microstock 3 years ago: there was life before microstock and there will be after
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 14:58 by microstockphoto.co.uk »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
7281 Views
Last post September 07, 2010, 14:32
by Leo Blanchette
11 Replies
6267 Views
Last post July 23, 2013, 02:00
by MichaelJayFoto
17 Replies
6929 Views
Last post May 18, 2017, 14:29
by PaulieWalnuts
8 Replies
5247 Views
Last post March 29, 2019, 08:15
by quietfall
11 Replies
2591 Views
Last post August 17, 2023, 17:27
by SuperPhoto

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors