Stock vs MicroStock

[Redneck]

I'm thinking about diving into stock photography on the side since I already have lots of equipment and my own studio and still have time to spare. I just want to get as much as possible out of my investments and hate to not use what I have.

While I'm already convinced that I'll do stock photography, I'm still wondering which route has the best earning potential - stock or micro stock.

Getty for instance, as the father of stock photography, promises pretty good earnings but wants exclusivity of the images. (Do you really have to upload 50 MB files?)

The micro stock players, like istockphoto, fotolia, bigstockphoto etc don't pay well but your images get spread and you can use them with many agencies.

Can anybody compare stock and micro stock from personal experience?
I'd love to hear opinions, especially from those who do stock photography.

[Tom]

Everything I've heard says that stock is really dead unless you really have a great niche in something. I think Getty takes a 70% cut of all their stock images now. I also know it is extremely difficult to get accepted to any of the stock or microstock agencies.

[Redneck]

Yeah, I've done some research and I already got accepted by the big ones. I know lot of people believe it's dead but I'm willing to take that risk.

[Tom]

Congrats! Good luck.

[jeffclow]

I have stock portfolios at all the major microstock agencies - ShutterStock, iStock, Fotolia and Dreamstime. I also have 500 images represented by Getty.

In my experience, Getty has the best "return per image" - I consistently get over $10 per image per year. That said, they are very hard to get in to directly. They approached me due to their Flickr partnership a couple of years ago and they invited about 70 photos I had up on Flickr into their portfolio. Since that time they've taken hundreds more - but have rejected 70% of the stuff I've submitted.

What makes Getty so great is their worldwide relationships with major ad agencies and major corporations. I've sold images via Getty to IBM, Microsoft, Disney, Time, Fortune and many, many others. Getty keeps either 80% or 70% of the fee and you get either 20% or 30% - depending on whether the image is Rights Managed (RM) or Royalty Free (RF). They decide - you don't have a say.

The microstock agencies are much easier to get in to as a new contributor - you submit a series of your best shots, an editor reviews them and if they are considered saleable, you're invited to be a contributor. The catch is that most of their images sell for $10 or under and thus your commissions will be in the 25 cents to $4.00 range.

One Getty sale can net you $60 or $70 and it takes 30 to 50 or more sales at a microstock to equal that usually. My return per image on microstock is about $4 per image per year.

It is a fair amount of time investment to upload images to microstock, keyword and caption them and be sure they are noise free and model released. The good thing is that after you do all that, they can earn money for years. I have a shot I took of my wife in a hammock in front of two cruise ships that has sold over 2000 times and earned over $3000 in five years on four microstock sites.

What sells best? Lifestyle and travel shots seem to be in the most demand with attractive people that are model released. Landscape and nature do sell - but at a much lower level than the others.

I would suggest you jump into the microstocks first and also see if you can get accepted at Getty after you've dipped your toes in the water. It is VERY hard to make a living selling stock these days, but you can definitely makes several hundred dollars monthly if you work at it and get a portfolio of several hundred images approved and up and running for sale.

[Redneck]

Thanks Jeff, great advice already.
Is it true you have to submit 50 MB files to Getty? Considering my 300kbps upload potential, that would be a no-go for me.

What makes you (personally) decide if you upload an image to Getty or to the micro stock sites?

[jeffclow]

The link below will show you the shot I reference above - my wife in a hammock that has sold thousands of times on the four major microstock sites:

Photo: relaxation view © Jeff Clow #116771

It is considered a travel and leisure/lifestyle shot and it has been used for magazine covers, print ads, brochures, online ads and marketing materials. With microstock, my average commission per sale is low - but it sells almost every day and earns a buck or two.

[jeffclow]

Originally Posted by Redneck

Thanks Jeff, great advice already.
Is it true you have to submit 50 MB files to Getty? Considering my 300kbps upload potential, that would be a no-go for me.

What makes you (personally) decide if you upload an image to Getty or to the micro stock sites?

Once I got accepted at Getty, I pulled all my best stuff off the microstock agencies and started submitting it to Getty - they will accept stuff that has sold at other agencies previously but you do have to grant them an exclusive for two years. With new stuff, Getty gets first crack at it and if they pass, then I will send it over to the microstock agencies.

And no, through the Getty Flickr partnership a photographer can upload images as long as they are sized 2000x1500 minimum - there is no 50 mb requirement.

[jeffclow]

You have to be a member of Flickr, but you can get a free membership and then post images in this group below and hopefully they'll catch the eye of a Getty editor and you'll be invited to join.

One caveat, the review times are VERY slow - expect to wait 10 to 14 weeks before an editor will review your images.

Flickr: Getty Images Call for Artists

[Redneck]

Thanks for your advice, much appreciated. And yeah, I can imagine that your "vacation" picture sells very well.

I've heard medical and wellness industry pictures are in demand, too.

[jeffclow]

Originally Posted by Redneck

Thanks for your advice, much appreciated. And yeah, I can imagine that your "vacation" picture sells very well.

I've heard medical and wellness industry pictures are in demand, too.

You are welcome. Despite the proliferation of digital cameras and the fact that microstock has made a $10 sale "common", the fact of the matter is that there is still a tremendous demand for images. If you have a decent size portfolio (hundreds of images), you can earn a nice chunk of change that will buy you a new lens or a new body or finance a trip or two a year.

And if you are lucky enough to have a portfolio of several thousand approved images for sale at agencies, then you can realistically earn in excess of $10,000 per year.

[Redneck]

Yes, it's going to be hard work and a long way to go until someone can make considerable money. I know all that. You know, living in a very rural area (my cities population is 76, the whole county doesn't even have 2000 citizens) makes it very hard to earn a living from photography and I hate to do nothing but whining about how hard it is.

[jeffclow]

Originally Posted by Redneck

Yes, it's going to be hard work and a long way to go until someone can make considerable money. I know all that. You know, living in a very rural area (my cities population is 76, the whole county doesn't even have 2000 citizens) makes it very hard to earn a living from photography and I hate to do nothing but whining about how hard it is.

Great attitude. Something tells me you'll do just fine with microstock and stock.....

Here's a forum for the microstock shooters that has some good advice for newcomers:

MicrostockGroup

[Tom]

And you might find some things that are unique to your area that would make for good stock. Probably not a lot of stock photographers out there.

[jeffclow]

One other thing we have in Texas that is not available worldwide is the Texas lifestyle with ranches and horses and cowboys. Considering that you've probably got those type of shots in your backyard, you might want to target that as a niche market for your stock images.

Here's another stock image of mine that has been a big seller over the years that features the western/southwestern lifestyle:

Photo: bluebonnet lady and her horse © Jeff Clow #91385