Editorials
2007 predictions for the stock photography industry
2006 has been a really interesting year in relation to the stock photography industry-- companies being bought, sold and merged, entire new licensing structures being created, and more photographers than ever jumping on the stock bandwagon, Will this kind of activity continue in 2007? I've got a few predictions for what we can expect in the new year.
First, a few thoughts on the industry in general:
The status quo is done: Originality and creativity are important for staying ahead of the industry, and the companies that come out on top in 2007 will be the ones that have a stellar web presence, original content and images, and a team of people working with customers to meet their needs. Companies that insist on continuing in the way they've 'always done things' will find 2007 to be a rough year. In 2007 more images will be sold than the past 3 years combined.
And now, on to some more specific predictions:
The microstock segment will continue to grow faster than expected: And no, we aren't just saying this because we're in the space. I predict that microstock, or companies that help people sell images to other people, will continue to redefine what constitutes both a 'stock image' as well as a 'high-quality' image. Royalty-free doesn't mean the same crappy photos that it used to, and as more buyers start to realize their choices, many will choose the $1 microstock image over the $1600 traditional stock image. There are many more mom and pop shops that need a nice-looking photo for their brochure than there are Fortune 1000 companies who have to have exclusive imagery. Pro photographers will see the benefit of this model. I predict that 2007 will show extreme growth within the microstock industry, either in the number of providers or in the merger of traditional stock agencies with complimentary microstock providers.
Web portals and application providers will see the benefit of selling images: We're talking here about the big search guys, like Google, as well as the specialized application guys, like blogging platform provider Wordpress. The basic thought is this--if you're providing a service that facilitates the ease of publishing content online, it seems natural that you'd want to extend your market to provide your users with both free and 'premium' content. Web companies know that you can't give everything to everyone for free. I think we'll see at least one big name in the Internet world get into the microstock space during 2007.
Photo sharing will remain photo sharing: Yeah, it’d be nice to change a photo sharing site like Flickr over to a microstock site, but Flickr contributors have a totally different mindset from microstock or traditional stock contributors. No matter how much of a natural segue it may seem, you can’t just take millions of people and photos and institute a pricing structure on something that they never intended to sell. Flickr won't be selling photos in 2007.
There will be a shake-up in distribution channels: When setting up a custom photo shoot is as cost-effective as buying rights-managed stock photography, traditional stock vendors will have to provide added value to the photo buying experience in order to succeed. People want to deal with other people--they want a personal relationship. If you're selling both your own exclusive photos and photos belonging to other collections, the personal relationship you've created with your customers (through every touch point, from the content on your site to your customer service) will be imperative to continued success. I think Getty is going to have some problems because of this in 2007.
Content still rules: Sure, how you communicate with customers on your web site has been high on the list since the beginning of the web. High-quality images are important, but just as important is the way that you interact with buyers and sellers via the written word. Lots of sites have photos--in fact, many sites have the same photos. The stock sites that will flourish in 2007 are those that engage users with content and communication: we put our own LuckyOliver site in this category, in addition to iStockphoto and Veer .
More photographers will move out of traditional stock and will band together on their own: If you own the pixels, you have the biggest opportunity to make the money--if you know what you're doing. As web tools become easier to use and traditional stock photographers find it increasingly frustrating that they aren't selling as many images as they'd like, I think photographers with varying business talents will band together to actively sell and market their photos online with terms that are more beneficial to them. Photographers who are used to earning hundreds of dollars on a single photo may still look at high-volume, low-cost sales as a slap in their faces, so creating their own photographer 'teams' will be their next step. I think we'll see a continued increase in niche stock agencies in 2007. Middle tier companies will be squeezed.
Pro photographers will get even more competition: As technology advances and becomes cheaper, the difference between a pro photographer and an amateur is that the amateur just hasn't gotten paid yet. Pro photographers will be forced to create unique imagery at half the cost- the result however will be an incredible burst of new creative work. Limited budgets will force new thinking. In 2007, I think that microstock sites will increase their number of photographers, while traditional stock agencies will hold steady.
And a few more bonus predictions on the microstock/traditional stock space:
- Microstock will have moderate increases in pricing over the next year, but competition for market share will keep things stable. iStockPhoto will continue to be a guide on pricing.
- Traditional royalty-free pricing will be cut due to increased competition.
- Rights-managed pricing will stay consistent based on the need for original work, but agencies that lack focus will be hurt.
- Rights-ready and custom stock are too confusing for designers to quickly and effectively get up to speed on, so expect these areas to languish.
- Shutterstock's subscription model will continue to be successful at affecting change (and converting buyers) among agencies.
- Assignment work will get another boost from microstock--photographers who gain exposure through their microstock work will be tapped for custom work.
Bryan Zmijewski is the founder and chief instigator of LuckyOliver, a micropayment stock photography website. For more information about the author visit Bryan Zmijewski's Bio or www.luckyoliver.com.
Posted in: Editorials, Stock Art Buyers, Stock Photo Companies
Comments(5)
post a comment »Striver, November 27, 2006 [#]
I think you nailed it pretty good here, Bryan. The photography business has been a huge bubble for a long time, with people making $100,000 per year on small portfolios of 100 to 200 so-so pictures. The difference between amateur and professional was measured not in the quality of the work but in the cost of the equipment. With that cost plummeting quality once again matters.
But now the pendulum has swung the other way...as it always will. It will swing back again, of course. There are some incredible new talents in this business who are working full time for less than starvation pay. The thing that agencies need to watch out for is that there are always other markets for the greatest talent. If this situation continuous too long, microstock will end up with nothing but the dregs as the most talented move on to more lucrative markets.
I see this especially true with the highly ignored illustrators in this market. Note that they aren’t being ignored by the customers. Good illustrations are some of the hottest selling images in this market, right up there with beautiful ladies wearing headsets. But it is a much tougher art form than photography and hard to build a large portfolio. There are already more lucrative markets stealing the best artists from microstock. You snooze, you lose.
Alex P'ng, November 28, 2006 [#]
Isn’t it true that microstock is just a stepping stone to greater heights? It is in fact restricting if you think that people will stay in microstock forever.
They’ll use the money they get from microstock sales to buy equipment and lenses. Their skill too would be better honed and they know what sells and what doesn’t from a wide portfolio range. Sooner or later, they’ll be right up there with the rest. It’s always a process of continuous improvement.
With the continuous replenishment and upgrade of talents, eventually, it’ll be up to the photographer themselves to decide whether to go premium or remain in microstock. Which is the no brainer choice? Who knows?
John, November 29, 2006 [#]
This is actually probably a true prediction what everything I have been reading. I have recently started trying to create a website to market my work locally from as well as online, and I am just lost about where to even set my prices for online sales. Locally it’s easier to work within the budgets on people around you, but online is a whole other competitive world, and a scary one at that.
V/r,
John
Stock Japan
Bryan Zmijewski, December 01, 2006 [#]
Striver- You’re right on. It’s all about people!
Companies that can work with their photographers and illustrators to build a revenue stream will be successful, but keeping a strong relationship with artists requires being aware of market forces and customer desires. Not an easy task.
Business relationships go deeper than a check in the mail. There will always be ups and downs in revenue. Artists will continue to work with companies that provide growth, education, investment and opportunity. And if these are met?...money soon follows!
Microstock is a term that the Industry has given to companies that sell ‘low-cost’ images. Microstock, or companies that help people sell images to other people, is more about ‘a way of doing things’ than a price point. The companies that get this right will ultimately make their artists money.
Why do microstocks, or companies that help people sell images to other people, have so many amateurs? Equipment costs, access, and opportunity to make money are all in important factors, but amateurs are more willing to adopt ‘a new way of doing things’.
Thanks for the comments!
Monic, January 13, 2007 [#]
Hi I agree with you...However another interesting thing may happen too. When you say photographers and illustrators who gain exposure through their microstock work will be tapped for custom work, you are totally right.
The only problem is that the public that buy from microstock usually have a low budget for this type of imagery and also for custom work. So, basically in my opinion photogs will get requests for custom however they won’t be paid regular rates for the custom work. This is something that is already happening to me. I get a lot of requests for custom, however I never get my “regular” pricing accepted...I have always to do a huge huge discount, otherwise I don’t get the assignment. I’m sure if was getting exposition from a traditional stock company, I would get clients for custom that are higher paying clients. That’s my opinion.