FOR THE SELLER, the advantage of microstock over traditional libraries is that
anyone can contribute; you don’t have to be specially selected, you needn’t be
a full-time photographer or using high-end kit and it doesn’t matter how few or
how many pictures you want to sell.
the
advantage of microstock over traditional libraries is that anyone can
contribute
There’s generally a simple sign-up process
where you submit an initial set of pictures for vetting. It’s pointless to do
this unless you’ve fully read and understood the submission guidelines; you can
always resubmit if you’re rejected, but there may be a waiting period. Once
you’re accepted, you can submit pictures whenever you like, although they’ll
still be subject to quality control.
The flip side of the low prices that
attract buyers is, of course, low fees for the sellers. While this may be
obvious, it comes as something of a shock to find out just how little of the
price that a buyer pays is passed on to the contributor. Around 20-25% is the
norm. Bearing in mind that the buyer will typically only be paying in the
region of $15 for an image, sometimes much less, it’s clearly not worth your
time to upload a picture that will only sell once.
The way to make money from microstock is to
create pictures that will sell many times. iStockphoto.com, for example, shows
icons above image thumbnails indicating their popularity; the bands are
>100, >500, >1,000, >10,000 and >25,000 downloads.
iStockphoto contributor Lise Gagne famously
gave up her job to shoot exclusively for the site, and has made a steady
six-figure income from it over a number of years, totalling several million
dollars. But her experience isn’t typical. In 2007, US magazine Photo District
News conducted a survey of stock image contributions. Among the 865
respondents, the average annual income from stock was under $4,000, and more
than 60% of respondents were making less than $1,000.
iStockphoto
Stock is most realistically seen as a way
for professionals to supplement their income from uncommissioned work ankd for
non-professionals to sell occasional pieces. ‘Sales of my photos and
illustrations through various collections have given me the freedom to
concentrate on personal artistic projects,’ artist and filmmaker Hannah Gal
told MacUser. ‘The safety net of regular royalty payments is priceless.’ But
even for experienced contributions, stock today is not an easy ride. ‘This is
not the exclusive club of ten years ago. Gone are the days where creators were
given the option of cash in advance or royalties. Today’s market is flooded
with cheap or free images, and there’s no escaping facing the new order head
on. Maintaining my level of income has meant sharpening my focus and being alert
to new styles and trends hitting the market.’
There’s something very attractive about the
prospect of uploading an image once and receiving a commission for the
foreseeable future every time someone buys it. But to get sales, you’ll need to
understand what buyers want. Take some time to study the various stock sites,
but there are plenty more and see the kind of word that’s featured. Most
importantly, check which images are actually selling.
START BY READING all the guidance offered to contributors. Not every image, however
beautiful or unique, is suitable for stock; guidelines will tell you what kind
of content is and isn’t welcome. A superb picture of your cat is unlikely to be
accepted unless something about it makes it good stock – for example, it’s a
pristine shot of an attractive cat in a classic pose against a white background
(even then, you’re pushing it with cats). Pictures of exotic locations aren’t
valuable just because they’re rare; do people actually need pictures of this
location?
Start
by reading all the guidance offered to contributors
Think as a buyer, not a seller, and look at
adverts, magazines and newspapers to see what kinds of pictures get used. In
general, designers and art directors need pictures that convey a recognizable
topic or mood in a realistic and familiar way, but without being overly
specific.
If a picture is easy to shoot, a hundred
people have probably already shot it. Photos of professional models doing cool
stuff and looking cool will sell well because they’re easy to use and difficult
to shoot. Don’t underestimate the latter. Consider the style as well as the
content; in staged shots, what kinds of people, clothing, scenes and
backgrounds distinguish popular pictures? Don’t waste time trying to shoot cute
friends who turn out not to be photogenic or are too self-conscious to take
direction. Know collaborators with the skills you lack – styling, make-up,
hair. Scout locations that will make a good picture great, bearing in mind you
may need permission to shoot, especially if the location will be recognizable
in the pictures.
Having created some pictures worth
submitting, get to grips with key wording. Again, there should be plenty of
advice about this on the site you’re planning to upload to. No buyer will ever
find any of your pictures except when the search terms they type in match
keywords you’ve attached to the image. So key wording is just as important as
the picture itself – arguably more so.
Learn from your unsuccessfully pictures. An
image that starts selling straight away may well continue to produce a reliable
trickle of income. One that doesn’t will tend to slip quickly off the bottom of
the search rankings and disappear from sight. Some libraries automatically
discount images that haven’t sold in a few months, meaning even when you do get
a sale it’ll make you next to nothing. Rethinking the key wording might help or
is there something that’s preventing people from using the image? A huge number
of stock photos have a glaring flaw that makes them almost impossible to use.
Be harsh in judging your own work; if you think something might be wrong, it
is.
Although it’s the most accessible market,
microstock isn’t the only option for sellers. More traditional high-quality
high-priced libraries still exist, but you’ll need to work harder to get into
them. ‘I would advise considering some of the independent collections. It’s
important to collaborate with one that best suits your style,’ says Hannah.
Perhaps surprisingly, Science Photo Library is her highest earner. The more
specialized the outlet, the more important it is to know your market. ‘The girl
using an iPhone is on every royalty statement, as is the blue woman with DNA
strands.’ What appeals to a cohort of buyers will sell again and again.
Conceiving the right pictures is the hard
part; don’t neglect the easy parts. Pro kit isn’t essential, but it helps, and
whatever you shoot with you’ll need to exceed your library’s quality threshold.
This may be fairly low in the case of microstock, but you’ll still need to
avoid noise (digital grain), typically a problem in shadows and low-light
shots; camera shake and unintentional motion blur; and what’s known in the
trade ad poor ‘image hygiene’, such as dust on still-life objects or bits of
stray hair over models’ faces. It’s quite acceptable to use Photoshop to tidy
up pictures, but your editing will need to be invisibly seamless.
Again, there’s no need to get any of this
wrong; just take the time to read the guidelines provided by the stock
services. When you do get pictures rejected – and almost everyone does – take
on board the reasons given. Occasionally decisions will be capricious, but in
general there’ll be something to learn from.
