pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stock Photography Future  (Read 3835 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 12, 2020, 07:19 »
+5
Stock Photography Future
By Jim Pickerell Posted: 9/8/2020 Read Full Article (0 Credits) 1060 words 9/8/2020

A young man studying photography wrote recently and asked if I [Jim Pickerell] could supply him with some accurate stock photography analysis. I told him I could, but he wasnt going to like what I had to say.  (This article is free to all readers, but there are a number of links within the story that require payment if readers want more detailed information.) - Read the whole story...  https://www.selling-stock.com/ViewArticle.aspx?id=b865e98a-3320-4c60-89b5-574021525673


« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2020, 08:18 »
+3
Nothing earth shattering about that piece.  I think anyone who has been in the biz for a while knows the themes very well.  The one thing he states is the "internet scams" and he is right. I still see all these ads to make a good income from photography.  "We are better than Fine Art America" gallery sites, "we have an un-discovered photography niche", etc. They are really laughable and Jim is right in that the only ones who will make any money are those agencies who exploit photographers.


« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2020, 09:08 »
+2
Nothing earth shattering about that piece.  I think anyone who has been in the biz for a while knows the themes very well.  The one thing he states is the "internet scams" and he is right. I still see all these ads to make a good income from photography.  "We are better than Fine Art America" gallery sites, "we have an un-discovered photography niche", etc. They are really laughable and Jim is right in that the only ones who will make any money are those agencies who exploit photographers.

As someone who sells on Fine Art America, I know their deficiencies all too well and I'd be very happy to find another gallery site that's "better".  Who's making that claim?  I haven't seen the ads.

« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2020, 11:02 »
+2
this article was written in 2020 but if you had your eye on the ball it could have been written in 2010 with a similar synopsis.

« Reply #4 on: September 12, 2020, 12:49 »
+6
Thanks for posting a link to the article.

A couple of thoughts on the main article (I didn't look at all the linked stuff).

He suggests that video is a better option than photography. If you look at recent moves by Shutterstock that resulted in masses of extremely low (under $1) royalties for video (API partnerships), it's not clear that video is exempt from the same pressures on price & royalties.

He also suggests design as a way out of the conundrum. I don't think he realizes how many subscription sites there now are which either offer tons of templates so you can be your own designer (like Canva & its clones) or a real designer (I think all hired in low wage places) that works with you - Design Pickle, Penji, NLC and their many competitors. I don't know how much of a dent these (expensive) services are making, but they offer to take all the pain out of hiring designers :)

"Whether you have considered hiring an in house designer, tried to manage a freelancer, or even worked with one of those other design sites, we know it sucks. Design Pickle is all about making your life easier. AKA not suck. All for one flat rate"

All sobering stuff...

« Reply #5 on: September 13, 2020, 01:19 »
+3
"He suggests that video is a better option than photography." It may be for now but its destined to follow the same path. So heavy upfront investing would be very risky. To me the only future for microstock for the typical contributor  is to minimise cost and squeeze every cent out while minimising investment.

« Reply #6 on: September 13, 2020, 03:04 »
+4
"He suggests that video is a better option than photography." It may be for now but its destined to follow the same path. So heavy upfront investing would be very risky. To me the only future for microstock for the typical contributor  is to minimise cost and squeeze every cent out while minimising investment.

Agree 100%

Video is the worst thing to get into now as prices are falling even quicker than for photos. It is going to get unsustainable in no time and accurately calculating ROI is impossible.

Shutterstcok has done us a favour by showing what can happen. ROI is made over a number of years in this industry and the rug can get pulled out from under us in an instant if an agency is evil enough. For example exploiting contributors desperation in a pandemic (looking at you Stan you ******* sociopath)

EDIT: sorry just noticed, of course not referring to Stan the OP!
« Last Edit: September 13, 2020, 03:56 by Justanotherphotographer »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #7 on: September 14, 2020, 11:56 »
+7
"...there is already a huge oversupply of images relative to demand, and an ever growing number of people who are able to produce reasonably good images..."

Of course I agree, I've been saying that for over eight years now.  :)

Same for video and slightly less for illustrations. Illustrations, graphics, seem to be difficult enough and demand better skills and craft.

Mostly I don't understand why I see new people getting into the market, asking which agencies after the top four, when there isn't much from those four any longer? Not enough to live from, working the top agencies, why expand and support the market killers? Unless of course, someone lives where the cost of living is very low. When I see someone new from the UK or the US, for example, entering into the market and asking for how to improve, what to shoot, how to make more, I think they should have done the research to start with, and believed the advice from the forums.

Don't Do It! Find something else.

Those who have invested the time and effort, can at least gather some residual income, from the years of work.

The future market for Microstock and stock photography is flat. The international boom, the demand and rapid growth is over.

« Reply #8 on: September 14, 2020, 14:59 »
+2
Don't Do It! Find something else.

+1,000

Advice to eager newbies who may be lurking here:

Heed Uncle Pete's words of wisdom. He knows whereof he speaks, and so do all the rest of us old timers.

« Reply #9 on: September 14, 2020, 15:28 »
+1
As long as, continue the current trading system. I still think that the market will evolve towards associating collectives that erase the intermediary. I am convinced that there will be many groups that will coexist with AS in the short term future.

« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2020, 00:56 »
+1
As long as, continue the current trading system. I still think that the market will evolve towards associating collectives that erase the intermediary. I am convinced that there will be many groups that will coexist with AS in the short term future.
Do you have any evidence for that? From what I see the most succesful businesses these days are intermediaries from hotel booking sites to take-away apps. I really hope this changes but I wouldn't place any bets on it right now.

« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2020, 04:39 »
0
Exact. Internet evolves the market by sectors. Music, cinema, books, .....
Internet, customer service convenience. The hypermarkets ended with the retail trade, and the internet brings you home the plane ticket, pizza, sex, ...

The microstock has not changed, the client buys from the Agency. And the contributor does not receive a fair reward.

The difficulty of partnering because we are rivals, among other things, such as attracting customers in a pseudo-monopoly market.

It is a comment and my thought.

I lead a team focused on this issue. And I am convinced that once we break the system, imitations, copies, scammers, serious people, and a lot of competition will be born.

The Internet and the technology that exists now, facilitates change, evolution.

Tests? I am convinced that by eliminating the agency, the benefit remains with the content authors.

Not forgetting the enormous complexity and difficulty of this market, which has remained unchanged for decades.

It is not the end of AS, they will have their collaborators and clients. However, each collaborator will tell their adventures in each group where they have their files for sale, together with AS.

But it's my opinion and that's why I'm working on it.

The topic of this thread, should not motivate new contributors. It is true. My comment is, I am sure that in the short and medium term, the sales and marketing system will change.

I don't need to prove anything to anyone. I wanted to comment, my idea. It is something that the users of this forum already know and are waiting to throw my failure in my face and others in the hope that it is a reality.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2020, 11:41 »
+3
As long as, continue the current trading system. I still think that the market will evolve towards associating collectives that erase the intermediary. I am convinced that there will be many groups that will coexist with AS in the short term future.

You mean like Symbiostock?  :)

Don't Do It! Find something else.

+1,000

Advice to eager newbies who may be lurking here:

Heed Uncle Pete's words of wisdom. He knows whereof he speaks, and so do all the rest of us old timers.

Oldtimers Disease that's me.

Good advice is usually given by someone who was once a bad example. ?

Actually good advice is only of use, when it's taken and applied. Otherwise it's just words.

If I came to a forum about making money selling worms (this is much longer but just to make it simple... worm farming) and most of the posts talked about the downside of the market, how profits were dropping, how Worm Farmers were under paid and the product was over supplied, and the expense of producing, plus the competition was excessive. I wouldn't go into Worm Farming!

Yet people come here and the last of the active Microstock forums. They read the news that since 2012 has been disappointing, yet some made good returns. In 2016 we saw iStock cut commissions and revise pay schedules. Then other agencies dropped levels, restructured, lowered the returns. Finally in 2020 SS joined in and cut us from minimum or 25 cents to a subscription rate of virtually teen cents, 10c to 17c, for the most images download by most high volume buyers.

Yet new people show up asking how they should begin, what to shoot and what agencies. I guess when someone has their mind made up and they are blind to the facts, there's not much anyone else can do, even if we try to warn the beginners to look elsewhere?

Somewhere, someone is still telling people, this is a good way to make extra money? My view is, the agencies stopped doing that, if they ever did, about ten years ago, so the force and attraction is actually other contributors who are selling how much this stock photo business is good? I don't really see many of those people anymore, maybe new people are reading old advice?  :)

« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2020, 11:53 »
+3
Quote
  Somewhere, someone is still telling people, this is a good way to make extra money?

Yeah, all the experts with their how to blogs and books.  ;D

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2020, 12:42 »
+4
Quote
  Somewhere, someone is still telling people, this is a good way to make extra money?

Yeah, all the experts with their how to blogs and books.  ;D

Yup, I was being nice. That was the best free marketing that the agencies got. Referral links and people selling "How to make money with Microstock" books, blogs and websites.

Anyone here who used to be a coin or stamp collector? The dealers wrote the price guides.  :o With the Internet people can see real values. With Microstock, even the little poll on the right, sends a message. The people on the forum, and the ones who take the time to respond to the poll are often the best, most active and involved.

DT or DP, they make $25 a month? These people have thousands of images and are experienced and have been working for years.

A while back, I was writing my Step-Daughter about how good her photos were (and they are) and she could make some spare change, uploading to Microstock. Now I'd advise her that posting to Facebook and sharing with friends is more valuable.

History teaches. The future of Microstock is dim, especially for new people. I'm happy with the residuals and I upload photos that most of the time, I would have been making anyway. Yes I enjoy ideas and concepts, then I move on. Sure I like learning techniques and processing. But I'd never tell anyone that they should go out and invest in equipment, the software and their time, because they can make money from Stock Images. That time has passed.

« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2020, 12:44 »
+1

Yet new people show up asking how they should begin, what to shoot and what agencies. I guess when someone has their mind made up and they are blind to the facts, there's not much anyone else can do, even if we try to warn the beginners to look elsewhere?

Ignorance is bliss for as long as it lasts.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2020, 12:57 »
0

Yet new people show up asking how they should begin, what to shoot and what agencies. I guess when someone has their mind made up and they are blind to the facts, there's not much anyone else can do, even if we try to warn the beginners to look elsewhere?

Ignorance is bliss for as long as it lasts.

So you mean I could have saved a bundle and made the same living, if I didn't spend five years in college to get a couple of degrees that I never needed or used. LOL

I sold Amway once, not for long. If I need some LOC I'll call my Brother. Hey the stuff works, but MLMs are generally not a good business. Unless you listen to the people selling you on how great it is being a dealer?  ;)

On the other hand, people come here and ask people who are in the business, and most of us are seeing dropping income and not a very bright future, yet the new people don't listen. Go figure. Yet I have personally restrained myself from writing, "I told you so", partly because I still have accounts, still upload and I haven't dropped Microstock myself.

What's the line? Do what I say, not what I do?

July iStock. Yes, I stopped uploading, but these images have been there for a long time. Future?  Revenue 0.05 USD, Downloads 35 photos sold. Not claiming to be the top of the heap or best images, these are getting stale. But honest, 35 sales for 5 cents for the month? Just waiting for August numbers which should be coming in soon? Note: I make much more on Wirestock! That's sad.


« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2020, 14:52 »
+1
I want to offer a contrary point of view.  Have been in the stock photo market for more than 10 years.  I make more than $6500 a year but nowhere near 100,000.

But the real issue is what is your objective.  If your objective is to make a living in stock photography, forget it.  Back in my college days, I was a Photo major for one quarter.  Thankfully I got out early and then went on to be a lawyer.  I used my law earnings to fuel my passion.

Now in my retirement stock photography is a good gig.  I make enough to pay for my equipment and some travel costs.

Also when Shutterstock dropped its commissions, I had to decide what to do.  I stayed in because back in March, I sold a photo through SS Premium and my commission for that one sale was $1,000.  First sale through SS Premium and no sales since.

But I checked with SS Premium and every photo on SS can also be sold through Premium so I stayed in.

Moreover, I talked with a friend who is a middle person bundled in the stock market and has been in the market since the 1980s.  Her reaction to the SS Commission drop was What can you do?

Also when I mentioned the boycott and the contributors pulling out, her response was good, in effect less competition in the market place.

Bottom line again is what is your objective.  If it is to make a living in Stock, forget it.  But if it is to provide extra income, then it may be an option.

« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2020, 15:37 »
+2
Quote
  Somewhere, someone is still telling people, this is a good way to make extra money?

Yeah, all the experts with their how to blogs and books.  ;D

Don't forget about youtubers who say you will be rich with microstock bussines.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2020, 16:32 »
+4
Lost me at the Covid-19 comment. Future is fairly predictable because the current path has been the same probably since 2012.

  • Buyer growth is slowing forcing prices and contributor royalty percentage down
  • More competition from free sites forcing prices and contributor royalty percentage down
  • Exponential image supply growth forcing prices and contributor royalty percentage down
  • Contributor inability to consistently create a huge quantity of new images forcing earnings down
  • Convoluted secretive subscription programs forcing contributor earnings down

Pretty simple. Continue this path forward and stock sites will continue to earn a ton of money by paying contributors less.

« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2020, 19:53 »
+1
...

Now in my retirement stock photography is a good gig.  I make enough to pay for my equipment and some travel costs.
....
Bottom line again is what is your objective.  If it is to make a living in Stock, forget it.  But if it is to provide extra income, then it may be an option.

exactly, which is something that doesnt seem to sink in for the subset who declare you're either for the boycott or stupid, etc

« Reply #21 on: September 16, 2020, 06:45 »
0
As long as, continue the current trading system. I still think that the market will evolve towards associating collectives that erase the intermediary. I am convinced that there will be many groups that will coexist with AS in the short term future.

You mean like Symbiostock?  :)





No. I don't mean anything from the present or past. I mean the future. Far from the middleman approach. Clients and collaborators. Nothing else. It is not easy, and we are not going to invent the wheel either. We are simply going to innovate, with small details, but far from the Agency mentality. Client and collaborators. Many groups will come after us.

Because our mentality does not think of agency, which is the problem of the attempts of now and the past. Collaborators and clients. That is the project, and the time is right.

When it comes to the end of microstock, professionals can offer more than just the existing free market. And users need microstock. What is the end, is of microstock as we know it now.

In my opinion, only AS and the groups will dominate the market in no time. As long as AS continues with your head on your shoulders.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2020, 10:26 »
0
Imo the future belongs to programmers. Those that can create very very realistic models/animals and scenarios using CGI without leaving the comfort of their homes.

Imagine lifestyle photography without the hassle and administration to shoot models in fun scenarios.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/28/tech/ai-fake-faces/index.html

« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2020, 10:58 »
0
How something that is already part of the past can have a future?

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2020, 12:59 »
0
Imo the future belongs to programmers. Those that can create very very realistic models/animals and scenarios using CGI without leaving the comfort of their homes.

Imagine lifestyle photography without the hassle and administration to shoot models in fun scenarios.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/28/tech/ai-fake-faces/index.html

It's already beyond that. Maybe CGI for contract work like Ikea. But the future for stock people, objects and scenery will probably belong to AI.

« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2020, 16:39 »
+1
Imo the future belongs to programmers. Those that can create very very realistic models/animals and scenarios using CGI without leaving the comfort of their homes.

Imagine lifestyle photography without the hassle and administration to shoot models in fun scenarios.
...

imagine someone doing that work for pennies...

« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2020, 17:58 »
0
Yes, the technique evolves. Agency's squeeze employees, many workers, pushing each other to reach the goal. And the market has spent years, in the same direction, paying the minimum to collaborating microstock workers. Do great jobs or mediocre jobs, regardless of technique, time, resources,..... skill, talent, originality, ideas,.... of each collaborator.

If the quality of human faces is exceeded, economically, perhaps over time, you will place some fabulous models in non-existent spaces. But, most will not work in microstock, since the current market is not currently profitable to receive compensation according to the effort invested, except for a minority.

It's time to reinvent the microstock.


« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2020, 18:30 »
+1

If I came to a forum about making money selling worms (this is much longer but just to make it simple... worm farming) and most of the posts talked about the downside of the market, how profits were dropping, how Worm Farmers were under paid and the product was over supplied, and the expense of producing, plus the competition was excessive. I wouldn't go into Worm Farming!


Actually, if you spend a couple of months building a website/blog about Worm Farming, doing some basic research, strategically putting the information in, doing your SEO right, you'll be making more money after 6 months than you would in a couple of years of photography on microstock.


rinderart

« Reply #28 on: September 16, 2020, 19:00 »
+1

« Reply #29 on: September 17, 2020, 00:38 »
0
Imo the future belongs to programmers. Those that can create very very realistic models/animals and scenarios using CGI without leaving the comfort of their homes.

Imagine lifestyle photography without the hassle and administration to shoot models in fun scenarios.
...

imagine someone doing that work for pennies...
There will be a hand full programmers to create the ability then designers will use simple software to create images themselves.

« Reply #30 on: September 17, 2020, 07:08 »
0
Well, we will create files ourselves thanks to that group of developers. With the technology that is emerging and the possibilities and needs of each collaborator. I hope it is for a price that compensates the effort invested.

OM

« Reply #31 on: September 17, 2020, 20:05 »
0

Somewhere, someone is still telling people, this is a good way to make extra money?

Shutterstock is still trying to get contributors to go 'more pro'...see their 'Additional Resources' page on which they show all sorts of Hollywood film-makers 'secrets' for great footage! ;D Like you wanna do that for a dollar!

10 Types of Shots and Angles Every Filmmaker Should Know:

https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/10-types-of-shots-every-filmmaker-should-know
« Last Edit: September 17, 2020, 20:07 by OM »

« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2020, 00:51 »
+1
In my country there are youtubers telling how they make a lot of money in freepik or stocksy. They are pro with expensive stuff, studios and people working for them. You can see that they are able to spend a lot of money in production.

Looks like a pyramidal scam, I don't understand why they are telling this.



« Reply #33 on: September 18, 2020, 10:19 »
0
In my country there are youtubers telling how they make a lot of money in freepik or stocksy. They are pro with expensive stuff, studios and people working for them. You can see that they are able to spend a lot of money in production.

Looks like a pyramidal scam, I don't understand why they are telling this.
Which is your country?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2020, 10:22 by alexandersr »

« Reply #34 on: September 18, 2020, 11:29 »
+1
Spain.


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #35 on: September 18, 2020, 11:59 »
+2

If I came to a forum about making money selling worms (this is much longer but just to make it simple... worm farming) and most of the posts talked about the downside of the market, how profits were dropping, how Worm Farmers were under paid and the product was over supplied, and the expense of producing, plus the competition was excessive. I wouldn't go into Worm Farming!


Actually, if you spend a couple of months building a website/blog about Worm Farming, doing some basic research, strategically putting the information in, doing your SEO right, you'll be making more money after 6 months than you would in a couple of years of photography on microstock.

You totally missed the pint, didn't you?

Of course, true, there's more money in selling how to books and blogs and websites then there is in the businesses they promote.  :)

But what I meant was, we can tell people, that the boom is over, there's no growth, the likelihood of making money or a fair return for the investment, is nearly impossible, yet people still come, new and thinking this is something new? They read the forum and the honest complaints, and can read how commissions are being cut and how we get paid less and less, yet they want to know "What agency is best", and "What camera should I buy."

My most outstanding, illogical question is: After the big four, what other agencies should I apply to. When the obvious is, they can't even make money from the big four, why waste more time and effort on some small parasite agency?  :o

OK some day the business school version of the worm farm and the truck, up every morning selling them. It's perfect Microstock.

Maybe tomorrow.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #36 on: September 18, 2020, 12:06 »
+1

Somewhere, someone is still telling people, this is a good way to make extra money?

Shutterstock is still trying to get contributors to go 'more pro'...see their 'Additional Resources' page on which they show all sorts of Hollywood film-makers 'secrets' for great footage! ;D Like you wanna do that for a dollar!

10 Types of Shots and Angles Every Filmmaker Should Know:

https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/10-types-of-shots-every-filmmaker-should-know

Also true, but the main force in the early years was referrals by other photographers. Blogs, books, brags and what a great business this is.

Yes like MLMs there was more money in recruiting new members and the payback was a percentage of their earnings. Some people here, if they are willing to admit that, made more on referrals than they did on their own photos and work. I won't say who, maybe they will step up and admit that?

We could see the Microstock ship was turning and going to be in trouble, when the agencies cut the referrals.




« Reply #37 on: September 18, 2020, 12:09 »
+3
Spain.
Yes, I have seen them. There are a lot of them, there is a very famous one who has a very long beard and he spends his time traveling all over the world depending on why he sells stocks and pays them for travel. I speak spanish, i'm from Venezuela.

But anothers youtubers from Spain clearly said that uploading photos to Freepik and Shutterstock is no longer worth it.

Victims are naive people who want to get started in microstock. They act like "Wall Street Wolf".
« Last Edit: September 18, 2020, 18:20 by alexandersr »

« Reply #38 on: September 19, 2020, 00:06 »
+1
Spain.
Yes, I have seen them. There are a lot of them, there is a very famous one who has a very long beard and he spends his time traveling all over the world depending on why he sells stocks and pays them for travel. I speak spanish, i'm from Venezuela.

But anothers youtubers from Spain clearly said that uploading photos to Freepik and Shutterstock is no longer worth it.

Victims are naive people who want to get started in microstock. They act like "Wall Street Wolf".

Hola.

I have started two years ago, not in freepik obviously, and I can't see how you can start in this and make some decent money. I'm not a pro anyway, started trying to improve mi skills and make some cash for equipment... but now...
For selling for peanuts don't know what to do.

« Reply #39 on: September 19, 2020, 23:18 »
0
Upload a lot more photos.  I remember Lisa Gagne, a well known stock photographer, who said on this site her portfolio was 75,000 photos.

My portfolio is over 10,000 photos and I have close to 122,000 online.   Now I make some real money, but it is not enough to make a living from it.

« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2020, 03:36 »
+2
This ist not the way for me to upload more and more images. I have already closed my account at istock and Shutterstock.
My Goal ist to upload top 100 images at Adobe Stock every month. Its like in the old days of analog photography when i send every month some images to photography magazine competitions. I won't win prices at Adobe Stock. Its about a personal competition to create some top images every month.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #41 on: September 22, 2020, 11:19 »
0
Upload a lot more photos.  I remember Lisa Gagne, a well known stock photographer, who said on this site her portfolio was 75,000 photos.

My portfolio is over 10,000 photos and I have close to 122,000 online.   Now I make some real money, but it is not enough to make a living from it.


Just for fun:
IS June 2012


Now: iStock/Getty  Lise Gagne 10,771 Exclusive
http://www.lisegagne.com/

Yuri, I don't know where, but not on SS anymore: Images (27653) Videos (3595) 
https://peopleimages.com/



SS Feb 2012


Dec 2018
#   Author   Portfolio   Added per week   Country   Member since
1   Toluk      1506576   9269   Norway   2011
2   Africa Studio   1311737   16      2007
3   Rawpixel.com   1055601   30      2014
4   s_maria      922458   13322   Russian Federation   2015
5   best_vector   796714   14696   Russian Federation   2017
6   Aha-Soft      792012   0           Russian Federation   2010
7   Artist_R      682271   24008   Andorra   2016
8   Ivan Popovych   642922   25787   Ukraine   2016
9   lineartestpilot   632238   0           United Kingdom   2009
10   Rvector           545087   3291   Russian Federation   2012
11   wavebreakmedia   540112   0   Ireland   2006
12   antishock      537599   6454   Andorra   2008

Africa Studio has two SS accounts.

End of 2018 there were 17,877 SS contributors with over 1,000 images, out of millions of accounts. 2837 had over 10,000 images.

240,881,058 royalty-free stock images on the site at the end of the year.

SS today: 336,117,809 stock photos, vectors, and illustrations

Just pointing out the competition...  :)

« Last Edit: September 22, 2020, 11:44 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #42 on: September 22, 2020, 15:23 »
+2
I'm pretty sure I was over a million at that point. :)

Eta: I just checked, no I wasn't :P
« Last Edit: September 22, 2020, 15:27 by Sean Locke Photography »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #43 on: September 22, 2020, 16:10 »
0
I'm pretty sure I was over a million at that point. :)

Eta: I just checked, no I wasn't :P

I don't write these I just do the screen captures.  ;) But I'll admit, the save date on the file could always change and I'd be wrong. That one is the file name.

Great that you made 1,000,000 before they flipped you out the door for standing up for contributors rights, or at least open disclosure of how our images were being licensed. Also amazing if people think about it, that you did that 860,000 downloads, with only 11,941 images.

« Reply #44 on: September 22, 2020, 20:50 »
0
That is why Sean is a legend

« Reply #45 on: September 23, 2020, 05:55 »
0
Upload a lot more photos.  I remember Lisa Gagne, a well known stock photographer, who said on this site her portfolio was 75,000 photos.

My portfolio is over 10,000 photos and I have close to 122,000 online.   Now I make some real money, but it is not enough to make a living from it.


Just for fun:
IS June 2012


Now: iStock/Getty  Lise Gagne 10,771 Exclusive
http://www.lisegagne.com/

Yuri, I don't know where, but not on SS anymore: Images (27653) Videos (3595) 
https://peopleimages.com/



SS Feb 2012


Dec 2018
#   Author   Portfolio   Added per week   Country   Member since
1   Toluk      1506576   9269   Norway   2011
2   Africa Studio   1311737   16      2007
3   Rawpixel.com   1055601   30      2014
4   s_maria      922458   13322   Russian Federation   2015
5   best_vector   796714   14696   Russian Federation   2017
6   Aha-Soft      792012   0           Russian Federation   2010
7   Artist_R      682271   24008   Andorra   2016
8   Ivan Popovych   642922   25787   Ukraine   2016
9   lineartestpilot   632238   0           United Kingdom   2009
10   Rvector           545087   3291   Russian Federation   2012
11   wavebreakmedia   540112   0   Ireland   2006
12   antishock      537599   6454   Andorra   2008

Africa Studio has two SS accounts.

End of 2018 there were 17,877 SS contributors with over 1,000 images, out of millions of accounts. 2837 had over 10,000 images.

240,881,058 royalty-free stock images on the site at the end of the year.

SS today: 336,117,809 stock photos, vectors, and illustrations

Just pointing out the competition...  :)










Shocked. Thank you very much. Is there somewhere to find this information in the Agencies? I am impressed and this data provides a lot of relevant information.

Can this information be found somewhere? Number of downloads, number of files, number of ......

Since the early years of microstock?

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #46 on: September 23, 2020, 06:00 »
0
Quote
Can this information be found somewhere? Number of downloads, number of files, number of ......

https://microstockrank.com/


« Reply #47 on: September 23, 2020, 06:43 »
0
I go. Thank you very much.

« Reply #48 on: September 23, 2020, 06:44 »
0
How can Lise Gagne have only 17k pictures in her portfolio? Her production sessions are not less than 100-200 pictures, even more. I guess at least 500 images a month. Do these exclusive contributors have multiple portfolios on getty? Some kind of a deal?

« Reply #49 on: September 23, 2020, 13:46 »
+1
I am not sure if she is still exclusive.  She may be on multiple sites.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #50 on: September 23, 2020, 14:09 »
0
I am not sure if she is still exclusive.  She may be on multiple sites.
Apparently she is exclusive, at least up to a file uploaded on 6th September.
She, like all exclusives, can have different files available at RM outlets, but I don't know if she does.

Bizarrely, if you search Lise Gagne on SS, you get over 57k images, from various contributors, mostly looking like the sort of stock which was popular c2005; but I have no idea why they come up on that search (the ones I clicked on didn't have Lise Gagne in the caption or keywords).

« Reply #51 on: September 23, 2020, 14:50 »
+1
Bizarrely, if you search Lise Gagne on SS, you get over 57k images..

Literal English translation of her name = Lise Wins

I think the connection to the search results is having win or winner in the description or keywords

« Reply #52 on: September 23, 2020, 15:29 »
0
All I know was when some were complaining about low earnings, Gagne said you need more and then said how about 75,000.  I suspect she has a lot up somewhere.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #53 on: September 23, 2020, 15:37 »
0
All I know was when some were complaining about low earnings, Gagne said you need more and then said how about 75,000.  I suspect she has a lot up somewhere.
According to her own website she is exclusively on iS and Getty; the few random Getty images I clicked on are "E+ collection" so ported over from iS - but it was too small a selection to know whether she can also upload to G directly.


« Reply #54 on: September 24, 2020, 18:28 »
0
As long as, continue the current trading system. I still think that the market will evolve towards associating collectives that erase the intermediary. I am convinced that there will be many groups that will coexist with AS in the short term future.

this is a dream of bliss

What you can see in the reality is everything is being "commoditized" by someone else.

« Reply #55 on: September 24, 2020, 18:47 »
+2
I want to offer a contrary point of view.  Have been in the stock photo market for more than 10 years.  I make more than $6500 a year but nowhere near 100,000.

But the real issue is what is your objective.  If your objective is to make a living in stock photography, forget it....
...
...

10 km to my home I have friends making far more than a living, each, in microstock. Their month earnings have a flat growth rate, so they are a little worried.
But they earn 8000+ eur MONTHLY.

I can't even reach 300 eur with THREE agencies summed up, so I can't speak for myself as an example... but example is not always a best-practice: examples could be a case study about what not-to-do.
For example I shoot lots (LOTS) of materials but I am sort of lazy in editing, keywording and uploading them. As a result I have something like 30000 (thirty thousand) in images and videos non-uploaded.
Before starting to load my gun and aiming to my head I think I have to upload every single bit.
And remember I continue producing stuff.

Another thing you should keep in mind is that market has grown and "industrialized" ... so single photographers and video-makers that self-employed struggle to compete with sub-agencies. Group of people creating really high visually industry-standard images and footage. Really ready to be used in any kind of commercial, perfect, ready, as good as a non-stock product.
These are TEAMS, agencies, structured groups: when they don't have big-paying clients they could afford to produce stock product. Or they can do the old way: produce stock material WHILE they produce the client one.

and another one, crucial thing:

lots of people make money and are VERY silent. They don't explain. They don't tell. They work and never say something to competitors or anyone else.
We are here like beer-drinkers in a bar, moaning. Did you ever saw Bill Gates in a similar situation? :-D

Jim Pickerell (the author of the linked article) comes , as he stands, from a different past: "In my best year as a photographer I earned about $175,000. But in the last decade, or more, the industry has been in serious decline. Last year I earned about $6,500 from my newsletter and $300 from my photo archive. 2020 will be much worse as most photographers who used to read the newsletter have given up on the business and moved on to other things. They no longer need the information. " - this is not a loser, but a successful man that sees the times changing.

Even out of microstock agencies there are now intermediaries trying to grab the standard market of on-demand photography (the old times craftmen photographer! THE Photographer) ... Backbone -  https://backbonephoto.co/ Meero - https://www.meero.com  Shoootin - https://shoootin.com Snappr - https://www.snappr.com/ Splento - https://www.splento.com/ Lemonone - https://www.lemonone.com/ Boom.co , Wesual.co, Cliked.it    ... they all are using these "centralized negotiation" method, making the good old times photographer a qualified farm worker.  In some years I expect them to buy the gear, you enter, take the gear, go to shoot, go back to give the gear back to the agency, then return to your freezer.

Or

you can be the BEST ARTIST WITH UNIQUE SKILLS AND ... blah. you know.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2020, 19:01 by zorba »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4133 Views
Last post February 03, 2007, 13:22
by epixx
13 Replies
3993 Views
Last post January 08, 2017, 12:46
by cobalt
3 Replies
4558 Views
Last post March 02, 2017, 21:43
by michaeldb
12 Replies
5437 Views
Last post September 30, 2017, 11:05
by noodle
20 Replies
4198 Views
Last post October 23, 2018, 16:36
by gloch

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle