I am curious to know everyones thoughts as to who is the largest purchaser of stock photos? Media Companies,  Web Designers or Individual Graphic Designers. When I look at Media Company Websites I can find Stock Images but when I look at some Individual Web Designer Sites and Graphic Artists I don't see very many if any as their work is more specialized to local small businesses who want work that reflects their own products or business. So who then is driving stock photography in terms of photo consumption or sales?

Thanks!

Web designers and graphic designers rarely buy stock. They don't have much of a budget, unless given one by their client. Media companies, technology companies, business organizations, food companies, healthcare companies and full-time bloggers are some of the biggest consumers of stock photography. I read a number of tech news outlets and I see a lot of SS images being used. Just yesterday, I saw a Rawpixel photo in a news story related to employment. I saw at least 30 technology images (photos and vectors) from SS on a website I frequent.

I want to try direct marketing to some of these places, how do you think one could go about direct marketing Bloggers besides using Google Adwords?

I'm a web designer and graphic designer and purchase stock for my clients.

I also used to when I took on client design work. Stock costs next to nothing so budget isn't really an issue. Even buying vectors you can create yourself in an hour two is often more cost effective.

Well, as said in another thread, we purchase a lot of stock for various design projects. Budget never was a problem here neither...

I think people are misinterpreting what I wrote. Of course designers download stock, but they're usually part of a larger organization that has a stock subscription or stock budget. If fact, I think designers download a good portion of stock, but they fall under a bigger umbrella, like a tech company, media company, etc.

Individual freelance designers from what I've seen don't download stock on their own because it's too expensive. I've done freelance design work and I'm usually provided images by the client. If a client provide a budget for stock, then I'll download, but if the client don't provide one and they want unique work, then I won't download any stock.

My clients dont provide me (freelance designer) with images, I buy all of them, and my clients dont have a budget. I buy what I need for the projects, and they trust me to bill accordingly. I understand what you are saying, though, and I think a good number of designers work for agencies or companies and buy on their behalf, but I think individual freelance designers make up a respectable percent of buyers, as well. It would be interesting to see an industry breakdown of who buys what, though.

I think people are misinterpreting what I wrote. Of course designers download stock, but they're usually part of a larger organization that has a stock subscription or stock budget. If fact, I think designers download a good portion of stock, but they fall under a bigger umbrella, like a tech company, media company, etc.

Individual freelance designers from what I've seen don't download stock on their own because it's too expensive. I've done freelance design work and I'm usually provided images by the client. If a client provide a budget for stock, then I'll download, but if the client don't provide one and they want unique work, then I won't download any stock.

I understand what you are saying, but I would say lots of individual freelance designers are downloading stock.

I do not think it is expensive at all - the opposite. I mean, for example I did a nice little WP page for someone long ago and got one backdrop image for the theme which was really striking. That image obviously made the client love the page. I purchased it for - if  I remember right - 3$. Nothing. Saved me hours. Why should I mail back and forth to whatever client when I just can download a suitable image in 5 min.? However, it is not always possible to find suitable material in stock - as said somewhere else, but for a average, generic site it is still best and easiest. If any freelancer cannot afford a image fora handful of bucks I would say he is doing something seriously wrong with his budget.