Here is a general question.
I suppose that I am showing my ignorance here... but why are vector graphics so expensive?

I was looking over at a few in IS and the minimum price that I see is 5 credits.
One I looked at goes for 15 credits. Only one size available, I assume that is because vector graphics are infinitely scaleable?

No offense to the illustrative artists meant, but why are photographs so poorly valued?

Factoring in our investment in equipment (cameras, lenses, lights, studio, props, computer, etc) plus the skills required to post process, not to mention MUA costs and model fees (if you use pro or semi-pro models).... photos should cost a lot more.

It would seem to me that the only up front costs a computer artist has is the computer and time.

So what? Am i wrong?

Anyone have the answer?

Artists just require a computer and software, and years of training and practice. But it's mainly reward for the time spent. Now I'm pretty slow in Illustrator, and pretty fast in photoshop, but I can do a shoot and process and upload a reasonable quantity of shots with an afternoon's effort, where I'd be lucky to turn out a single illustration (and that's an illustration where I already have a reference photograph to scan or a set of drawings/watercolor to base it on already done.)

So for 15 credits a designer is purchasing an image that would take them maybe 2-3 hours to construct themselves - in the case of the complex 15 credit vectors, maybe more.  I  don't know what the going hourly rate for a designer is? Maybe 25-50$ per hour?  Do the maths  as to why people pay the money.

 You also have a supply and demand thing affecting the price. Anyone with half an eye and a digital camera and Photoshop Elements can upload photographs to microstock (I'm not saying they will do well, but they do affect the total supply of images). There is a much smaller pool of suppliers who can use vector drawing software and can actually draw a bit.

As an artist I'm wondering why photo's are so expensive? Just buy a digi camera for a couple hundred bucks, point, shoot and wallah! Next, sort through the dross, do some auto levels with some pirated software, upload the images and keep your fingers crossed. Spray and pray. Who cares if the review list is weeks long. Fill that baby up, with dozens of similar looking images, hey they might accept them all! Woohoo!
Easy peasy. Like takin' candy from a baby. Don't know what the fuss is all about. what? Or am I wrong???

Now for a digital artist, you've probably been drawing since you were 4 years old, you develop some talent (hopefully), plus years learning design at college, then spend a blummin' fortune to buy the software and upgrades, many hundreds of hours learning multiple pieces of software, have a very high spec machine and OS that has to be upgraded frequently to keep up with that software.
Oh and the time. It normally takes me at least a couple of days to produce ONE image. ONE IMAGE! Then you gotta hope that an inspector doesn't turn down the image because they think its not suitable stock ('cos to be honest some inspectors DON'T like anything but photo's for stock, its true).
Grrrrrrr!

And for your information, I don't do Illustrator images by the way. All my stuff tends to be 3D, and are classed as photo's, so I get the same mullah as you photographer guys. Ain't microstock great?

Please take the above rant with a smile, and know I was being a bit sarcy, I've had a bad week (and its only Tuesday). Personally I think we should all be getting way more for an image. Have a good download day.

I think both type of images can be too time and money-consuming to obtain, and in those cases they can be very underpaid.  My type of vector, for instance, is very basic.  I don't hire models or have studio lights for my photos.

There are some amazing and complex vector images out there, and they do deserve a high payment.  One aspect however is that is very common to see the same basic elements used over and over to create new vectors, so this would be the equivalent of a photo series of the same subject under different angles. 

Here is my own example of vector "recycling". And  another example.

Regards,
Adelaide

Your supply and demand theory makes good sense and I will accept that as the definitive answer to my question.

Best Regards,

Joe

why are vector graphics so expensive?....
minimum price that I see is 5 credits.
One I looked at goes for 15 credits....

This is not expensive... even at 15 credits.

And yes, photographers are undervalued... But that's something we did to ourselves.

I registered in this forum only to tell all of you just one thing. Illustrator, Photoshop, 3D studio max or whatever it may be , all these software's pirated versions are available in my country, India. I have all of these pirated versions.I think we don't want to spend a single cent or paise  for these softwares. But Cameras are expensive.Really expensive. So i am not using one. I am with illustrations! haha

I think it ended quickly because the question was so clearly based on a false premise. Vectors are obviously not at all expensive for what they are.
Aside from everything else there's the fact that you can scale them to any size without any loss of quality. They need to be priced equivalent to the largest available photo size at a minimum.
I'm ignoring the disgusting post from Vivian.

I bet most of people who rant about pirated software use tools from their daytime jobs :-)

First of all vector art is not expensive. But I guess compared to digital photos you might say that. You could also say a rocket ship is more expensive than an airplane. The present pricing more than a buck because it takes time to make the files.

Probably one of the longest times for me to make a vector illustration for a client was 70 hours for which they paid $3500. Granted that was a custom technical vector illustration created from blueprints but to make great stock vector art is nevertheless a very time intensive process.

Try it. It is a very humbling experience. The skill takes years to master. I've been making vector art since 1988 and I'm still honing my craft.