Earning Through Stock Photography?

[vincentt]

With a lot of people submitting to stock photography is the niche already saturated? Or can we still earn decent money from it? Also what are the best stock photography website?

Thanks will be waiting for feedbacks.

[andyw]

Originally Posted by vincentt

With a lot of people submitting to stock photography is the niche already saturated? Or can we still earn decent money from it? Also what are the best stock photography website?

Thanks will be waiting for feedbacks.

I would not call stock photography a "niche".
It has been around for many years, well before the interwebby thing came along.
We called them picture libraries in those days and actually sent trannies to be filed for years.
We got more money as there was no such thing as Royalty Free and buyers valued the images more than today.

Anyway, yes, it is still possible to earn decent money from it but you have to be prepared to put the work in, you also have to be prepared to make virtually nothing for a couple of years whilst you build up your stock with the various agencies.

There is no single "best" site or agency, you have to research the market properly if you want to get involved and make money.

If you want some information you could do worse than read this guys stuff
Yuri Arcurs - Home of the world's top selling microstock photographer

Also check out this list and look at the stuff which actually makes money (gets sales)
Contributor Charts iStockphoto.com

There are still "proper" picture libraries around (as opposed to the multitude of RF stock sites), most of which are more speci@list either by subject or markets. Get hold of the Photographers market handbook or the Freelance photographers handbook which have listings.

The "secret" (if there is one) is that you have to treat stock like a proper business not just stick a few images on a site and sit back. That means researching the market, shooting for that market and keeping the images current by constantly updating them, keywording them properly, spreading your work around a number of different agencies etc etc.

[John Hendry]

Originally Posted by andyw

I would not call stock photography a "niche".
It has been around for many years, well before the interwebby thing came along.
We called them picture libraries in those days and actually sent trannies to be filed for years.
We got more money as there was no such thing as Royalty Free and buyers valued the images more than today.

Anyway, yes, it is still possible to earn decent money from it but you have to be prepared to put the work in, you also have to be prepared to make virtually nothing for a couple of years whilst you build up your stock with the various agencies.

There is no single "best" site or agency, you have to research the market properly if you want to get involved and make money.

If you want some information you could do worse than read this guys stuff
Yuri Arcurs - Home of the world's top selling microstock photographer

Also check out this list and look at the stuff which actually makes money (gets sales)
Contributor Charts iStockphoto.com

There are still "proper" picture libraries around (as opposed to the multitude of RF stock sites), most of which are more speci@list either by subject or markets. Get hold of the Photographers market handbook or the Freelance photographers handbook which have listings.

The "secret" (if there is one) is that you have to treat stock like a proper business not just stick a few images on a site and sit back. That means researching the market, shooting for that market and keeping the images current by constantly updating them, keywording them properly, spreading your work around a number of different agencies etc etc.

Thanks for this post looking into this as well.

good stuff

[vincentt]

Originally Posted by andyw

I would not call stock photography a "niche".
It has been around for many years, well before the interwebby thing came along.
We called them picture libraries in those days and actually sent trannies to be filed for years.
We got more money as there was no such thing as Royalty Free and buyers valued the images more than today.

Anyway, yes, it is still possible to earn decent money from it but you have to be prepared to put the work in, you also have to be prepared to make virtually nothing for a couple of years whilst you build up your stock with the various agencies.

There is no single "best" site or agency, you have to research the market properly if you want to get involved and make money.

If you want some information you could do worse than read this guys stuff
Yuri Arcurs - Home of the world's top selling microstock photographer

Also check out this list and look at the stuff which actually makes money (gets sales)
Contributor Charts iStockphoto.com

There are still "proper" picture libraries around (as opposed to the multitude of RF stock sites), most of which are more speci@list either by subject or markets. Get hold of the Photographers market handbook or the Freelance photographers handbook which have listings.

The "secret" (if there is one) is that you have to treat stock like a proper business not just stick a few images on a site and sit back. That means researching the market, shooting for that market and keeping the images current by constantly updating them, keywording them properly, spreading your work around a number of different agencies etc etc.

Well i agree with you we have to "treat stock like a proper business..." Thanks so much for this information as it really gave me a good insight on how to deal with stock photography something that i would like focus on as my secondary source of income.

[andyw]

Originally Posted by vincentt

Well i agree with you we have to "treat stock like a proper business..." Thanks so much for this information as it really gave me a good insight on how to deal with stock photography something that i would like focus on as my secondary source of income.

Glad to be of help.

The reason I said "treat stock like a proper business" is that I see a heck of a lot of people (amateurs and pros) who think that stock is just sticking their second best shots on-line and waiting for the money to roll in. They then wonder why they only have 3 sales a year.

I am sure that is not the case with you and stock can be a lucrative additional income if approached properly.
There is an absolute multitude of total cr@p out there on stock sites (on a lot of the micro stock sites anyway) at the moment.
If you can stand out just a little bit from the crowd (quality, subject matter and keywording) then you can make sales.

Good luck with it.

[mshockley]

Originally Posted by andyw

The "secret" (if there is one) is that you have to treat stock like a proper business not just stick a few images on a site and sit back. That means researching the market, shooting for that market and keeping the images current by constantly updating them, keywording them properly, spreading your work around a number of different agencies etc etc.

You bring up such a good point with keywording. I think this can be where a lot can go wrong.
I would love your opinion on keywording. I've got some stuff on Fotolia, but I must admit, the keywording is an issue for me as I have a hard time with this. For example, the image below, maybe you could tell us what you would do with keywording in this one?

[andyw]

Originally Posted by mshockley

You bring up such a good point with keywording. I think this can be where a lot can go wrong.
I would love your opinion on keywording. I've got some stuff on Fotolia, but I must admit, the keywording is an issue for me as I have a hard time with this. For example, the image below, maybe you could tell us what you would do with keywording in this one?

I would do what I normally do and use Yuri's little keywording tool
Free Online Keywording Tool, IPTC editor, suggestions for photo tags

Initially it can take time if you are trying to do a load of different types of image but you soon learn the best words for certain types of images.


p.s. if that one is on fotolia then I could not find it with a number of different combinations?

[vincentt]

Originally Posted by andyw

Glad to be of help.

The reason I said "treat stock like a proper business" is that I see a heck of a lot of people (amateurs and pros) who think that stock is just sticking their second best shots on-line and waiting for the money to roll in. They then wonder why they only have 3 sales a year.

I am sure that is not the case with you and stock can be a lucrative additional income if approached properly.
There is an absolute multitude of total cr@p out there on stock sites (on a lot of the micro stock sites anyway) at the moment.
If you can stand out just a little bit from the crowd (quality, subject matter and keywording) then you can make sales.

Good luck with it.

As of now i am currently investing in stock photography, although i must admit that i still need to do some more learning...but thanks for you have given me the motivation to push through with my plan despite the nay sayers...

[Krusty79]

Here's an article I found to be informative:

I've moved the blog –> zackarias.com/blog Microstock :: SIM Cards in Cameras & Big Foam Fingers

[andyw]

Originally Posted by Krusty79

Here's an article I found to be informative:

I've moved the blog –> zackarias.com/blog Microstock :: SIM Cards in Cameras & Big Foam Fingers

That is a good article and mirrors a lot of my thoughts on the micro-stock industry.

That said, there is still a "speci@list" market out there with a number of good libraries and there is still a market for good stock photography.

I often put people onto Yuri Arcurs site as an example of someone who is a successful micro-stock photographer.
But....... as Zack says in the article, it is generic, repetitive photography.
Look at the amount of stuff he produces which is the same time and time again.
Bog standard happy smiling groups of business people, in a dozen different situations or bog standard happy smiling family groups etc etc ad nauseum.

Great if that is what you want to shoot day in, day out but not for me.

As with Zack, I have no problem with people who want to do stock and can be successful at it. It does not impact me because I shoot specific things for specific clients (their products, their staff, their business). If they just want a generic shot for a web site then I am not losing out if they go for a rf micro stock shot.

The world has become much more "visual" in the past few years and the demand for photography has increased substantially.
There is a place for micro-stock, just as there is for the "craigslist" $100 wedding snapper, but there still is and will be for a while to come, a place for properly priced professional photography.