Friday, September 25, 2009

Help is on the way for micro submissions

A major problem with Micro stock submissions is that they are very labor intensive -- particularly if you are making submissions across 5-10 agencies, all with different needs and criteria. Recently, I tried running a submission of a hundred plus images through the beta version of a new micro facilitator company called, LookStat (www.lookstat.com). Once I signed up, I was able to upload my jpgs, model releases, and a list of the micro agencies where I have accounts to their ftp site, and they took care of the rest. They performed all the keywording and uploading of images. And if there were any problems with the submission, they took care of those, too.

Sure there is a fee involved, but when I factor in the savings of time and aggravation and apply that time to producing even more pictures, I probably come out ahead of the game. Plus, the guys at LookStat know their stuff, which makes things even smoother for having images accepted.

There is a free analytic dashboard service on their web site that provides you with personal sales data for your micro sales in select agencies. Currently it is set up with iStock and Dreamstime, but other agencies are planned to be added in time.

Service provider companies, like LookStat, are an indicator of the growing micro outlet. Any one submitting to micro stock on a regular, professional basis will need to add either in-house staff to handle the increased load of work, or find a service like LookStat to do it for them.

For me, the service is money well spent.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Don't Blame Micro

Microstock is often blamed as the cause of the lower prices and high levels of competition that have crept into the stock photo industry this decade. I happen to believe that microstock is not the cause of the turbulence, but merely one of the results of a process that began awhile ago. The seeds of change go back over ten years, before there was a microstock. What we are witnessing today – including the emergence of microstock -- is a series of aftershocks from the massive, catastrophic change of events that took place ten years ago.

At that time the stock universe as many of us old timers knew it imploded into a black hole, which then exploded to create a new universe of the stock internet. The dispersed matter from the planets that had been big agencies (Image Bank, Stock Market, Photodisc, etc. ) in their own right now formed together into new planets called Getty, Corbis, and, a few years later, Jupiter.

Today microstock is at the forefront of every traditional shooters mind. But it is not, per se, the cause of the current decline in the traditional stock market. Microstock is merely one of the results of the egalitarian use of images brought on by the pervasiveness of the internet in the global design community, and one of the aftershocks of the internet. Computers became easy to use. Digital cameras, which themselves can be construed as nothing more than image computers, made it easy for anyone to take a correctly exposed photo suitable for at least low level design -- and there is currently a lot of low level design out there, also due to the prevalence of the internet.

The point I’m trying to make is that what stock photographers are experiencing right now is not something that just happened yesterday. It happened over a decade ago ,and a decade ago – not now -- was the time to begin implementing and sticking to a plan dealing with the new universe of stock photography. Why is this important? Because change is disruptive, and constant change is even more disruptive. Devising a master plan and sticking to it is more conducive to success. Ever see someone constantly changing highway lanes in bumper to bumper traffic? They get nowhere faster, but they do increase their anxiety level. It’s the same thing here.

I’m not saying that a stock photographer shouldn’t make course corrections along the way. These will always be necessary as the new universe continues to cool down and coalesce – to refer back to my initial metaphor. But we should never lose sight of the initial plan. Constant, violent changes in reaction to every dip and dive of the stock photo market will make you crazy and probably render you impotent for producing and selling real money making content on a steady basis. When I lecture, I always warn new stock shooters that the biggest pitfall they face is being lost in the fun house. There are just too many options constantly popping up in stock photography leading to complete paralysis on the one hand, and over-reaction on the other. Steady as she goes is the name of the game.

This begs the question: How do we measure the success of our strategies in these turbulent times? RPI is the obvious answer, but here, too, we can be fooled by a number. In today’s universe it is less important to have a high RPI, than it is to have a steady RPI number. When your number is steady, you can perform sound business planning. When it is high but fluctuating wildly, you can’t. This is one of the reasons I like the RF distribution agencies like Tetra, and Blend. They are aimed at producing a steady RPI through a wide, global distribution of images. In the recent financial crisis I noticed that in the beginning the U.S. was suffering the most from the downturn while income shifted more from the European side. As the U.S. results began to improve, Europe went down. This helps smooth out the curve of my returns.

This gets me back to microstock and what we should do about it right now. The RPI from a quality image placed with all of these agencies averages around $5-8 per month. This has held fairly steady over the two and a half year period I have been examining the market. I should add that the micro photographers who have been involved from the get-go are reporting to me that the image life in micro diminishes rapidly – far, far faster than it does in traditional stock, from what I can see.

Since this RPI is higher than a photographer can expect from other stock agencies except for Getty , Tetra, and Blend, and perhaps other distributor agencies, you might wonder why I don’t jump in whole hog producing for micro. The answer to that is more complex and involves what I said about micro being just one step (aftershock) in a continuing evolving universe.

Without strong traditional shooters capable of spending a hefty amount on image production, micro will flounder. It will have to stay right where it is serving a low level client with cheaply produced images– or it will have to raise its prices. The micro world is already showing signs of shakeup with some agencies going out of business, while the smaller ones are no longer able to gain new ground, and new competition as the big agencies -- Corbis and Getty -- jump into a low price model. The gap between the five largest micro agencies is widening so that, here too, change will occur. Right now a micro shooter can achieve a decent RPI because images can be placed over a number of agencies. What will happen when one agency takes such a prominent lead that it can demand exclusivity from its contributors? Think it won’t happen? iStock is the largest micro agency, currently out-pacing all the others in growth, and is owned by Getty. Think again.

So what’s a shooter to do? If you had a solid plan that began 5 to 10 years ago and it is still working, stick with it. Keep a wary eye on what is happening around you, but don’t jump ship in panic. My own strategy began forming almost ten years and was solidified nine years ago when I left Comstock and all my analog photos behind me to begin anew in the digital age without a single image. I realized that the largest planets in the new universe, Getty, and Corbis, as well as the agencies that survived near death with the black hole would all need a new form of digital product for the digital age. I subscribed to the advice I give anyone starting out in stock, namely to find around three or four solid outlets for your images. Firstly, I formed Tetra secretly in a quiet corner of the internet, for I knew that project would take at least three years to get to launch with only me doing partial shooting for it. Secondly, I joined a few major agencies in an effort to find which one would be best and winnowed the list down. Thirdly, I jumped on the Blend bandwagon, for his plan already dove-tailed with my newly formed philosophy of marketing in the internet age. Blend was a brilliant move during this business climate, and remains so today.

And since then? Since then, I have remained steady to the course, making only minor corrections along the way to adjust to changing winds. I have been fortunate to see income increase steadily every year -- yes, even this year despite the downturn -- since the inception of this plan with good prospects ahead. I have aimed most specifically for a steady RPI, not just a high RPI. This has taken me into some esoteric topics and strange areas of agencies, but allows my growth plan to remain steady. I keep a lookout up on the masthead at all times watching for dangerous shoals, such as microstock. I have purposefully kept overhead low, a thing I find important in a rapidly evolving global climate, such as the internet. This involved out-sourcing instead of hiring, and running a virtual office instead of over-spending on rent.

We can look at the stock marketplace as a glass half full or half empty. An important thing to keep in the forefront of your thoughts, however, is that there is always water in the glass – meaning there are always people buying stock photos. They may not pay what they did in the past. They may not buy the way they did in the past. But they are buying images every day, in every corner of the world. I don't think I have to go out on a limb here when I say that I do not see this changing in our life time. So the real question you must ask yourself is how do you stay in the water part of the glass.

Saturday, August 1, 2009

New Nikkor 70-200mm lens announced



Nikon recently announced the a completely redesigned version of its 70-200m lens. This is the third lens in the lineup of professional zooms created to deliver the maximum quality with the digital FX cameras -- the D3x, D3, and D700. A 14-24mm f2.8, and 24-70mm f/2.8 were introduced concurrent with the advent of the D3 camera. The Achilles heal of digital full frame lenses, particularly wide angles, has always been the corners of the frame where they often go soft. These lenses have a breathtaking sharpness edge to edge. The wide zooms do exhibit spherical distortions, but this is easily corrected in post-processing software, whereas edge softness is almost impossible to overcome.

The older Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 G-AFS-ED-IF lens, while very quick to focus and dead-on sharp in the center, did exhibit corner softness on FX cameras, particularly at 200mm. The new AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II is purported to deliver edge to edge sharpness, 7 (instead of 5) ED lens elements, better contrast with Nano Crystal coated elements, a quieter motor, and an improved vibration reduction system, VR II, claiming to be steady up to 4-stops. What's there not to like?

Add a 200-400mm f/4 lens to this zoom threesome and you increase the continuous range of your focal lengths from 14mm to 400mm.

Nikon re-took the lead in professional cameras when it introduced the FX bodies. This complement of zoom lenses complete the package, making it the most perfect camera system I have ever seen.

I have my order in for a new 70-200m as soon as they become available in November.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

RM attitude

In the current downturn in stock sales, shooting what I call “me-too” images won’t make the cut. To be successful a stock photographer will have to go back to RM roots to produce unique images. It doesn’t matter if the images are intended for placement in RF or micro. It only matters that they are produced with an RM attitude.

I used to tell potential RM stock shooters that they needed to picture the sales process involved in the selling of their images. The selling price of an RM image is negotiated between a salesperson and a client. If the image is unique, for whatever reason, the salesperson could demand a high price and stick to it. On the other hand, if the image was good but something similar could be procured elsewhere, the negotiation process would stagger and the sales person would have to back down. Both the sales person and the client know the uniqueness of the images. That uniqueness is the crux of the negotiating process. Successful RM is a unique image.

Most images today are sold in an RF fashion – meaning no negotiating. Nonetheless, image glut (i.e. The over stuffing of similar images into the image marketplace.) has put severe downward pressure on image sales. The majority of image purchases do not need a “unique” image. In such cases micro has provided an almost free alternative to buying an RF shot. There is a lot of “me-too” imagery out there, particularly in micro.

Stock photographers who will survive the current financial debacle will need to understand and shoot to an RM standard. And the keyword, as mentioned above, is uniqueness. When you are looking through the viewfinder, ask yourself: If a salesperson was on the phone with a client, would he/she be able to ask top dollar for my image because it is unique -- or is it similar to one of a thousand others available elsewhere? If you can’t answer the question, you are in the wrong place. If you can’t answer it in the positive, you may need to rethink your career.

These are tough times. I am not being pessimistic here, just realistic. Quality, now more than ever, will out. Despite the doomsday attitude prevalent in the current financial crises, sales of stock images will not go away and some stock photographers will continue to make substantial sums, but an RM attitude is absolutely necessary to a "go-forward" successful career.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

File storage on the go


Tired of lugging a laptop with you on every location shoot? I was. So for a recent travel shoot I picked up a new card transfer and storage device. I had purchased several of these devices in the past, but was always disappointed by speed, reliability, and battery life. I was hoping that technology had advanced enough so these short comings would now be overcome. I was right.

The model I purchased is the new Hyperdrive Colorspace 0. This card reader has a 3.2” color screen that displays JPG and a long list of camera RAW including Canon CR2 / CRW, Fujifilm RAF, Konica Minolta MRW, Leica M8 DNG, Nikon NEF, Olympus ORF, Panasonic RAW, Pentax PEF / DNG, Ricoh DNG, Samsung DNG, Sony ARW. Backup speed is very fast on a battery life claimed to deliver 120GB per charge. An interesting feature is its card recovery tool for recovering lost or deleted images on a memory card. Fortunately, I did not have an opportunity to try out this feature. If I ever do, I will report the results here.

Hyperdrive comes with drive sizes ranging from 80GB to 500GB as well as a casing only model allowing you to add your own drive.

Monday, August 25, 2008

Image Half Life

Quite often I am asked how long a stock image will live. I have always had difficulty answering this question because, while sales from some images diminish rapidly, other images continue to generate sales for over twenty plus years. After some analysis, I came up with a concept of “image half life” to explain the rate at which stock photo income declines over time.

The term “image half life” is borrowed from physics where it refers to the unpredictable life span of a decaying atom. Similarly, in stock photography a body of work will not just stop earning at one point in time. Instead it will probably follow a course whereby it produces steady income for several years and then gradually begins to diminish over time. The rate of diminishing return varies with a number of circumstances – longevity factor of the individual image subject, the agency where the image is placed, changing photographic styles, changes within the stock marketplace, and numerous other factors.

Simply put, image half life in stock photography refers to the period of time over which the sales from a body of stock images will diminish to half of what it was in its first year of marketing. As an example, let’s say we have a body of newly produced images earning $10,000 annually. If in five years the same body of work is earning only $5,000, and five years after that (ten years from initial marketing) earning $2500, then the image half life is 5, for five years.

Why is image half life important? Stock photographers derive income from royalty payments over time. In order to predict income from a body of work in years to come, it is important to factor in image half life. For purposes of planning retirement income, for instance, you need to know how much income can be expected from a body of work receiving diminishing returns over time.


Once you do the calculations, you will find that it only takes a small percentage of new images added annually to the existing portfolio to maintain its consistent income over time.

Friday, August 22, 2008

Globalizing your stock images

In RF stock photography where the royalty rate is low the name of the game is multiple sales. Internet marketing has made this a breeze for photographers who put their images with agencies or outlets having global distribution schemes. Giving your images a non-specific country look can serve to increase sales globally.

Including any language in a photo is a sure way to localize it. So try to avoid the presence of words. For instance, when photographing a school scene with a blackboard, it would be far more generic to have math problems written on the board.

Check out uniforms, a European nurse’s uniform might be different than an American uniform. Perhaps all you have to do is modify the nurse’s cap. Pay attention to clothing styles and hair styles everywhere, and select your wardrobes accordingly.

Whenever I travel to a foreign country, I make a habit of visiting several large department stores to see what people there are buying and what images advertisers use in their displays. You might learn that including something as simple as a home phone in your photo is a quick give-away that the shot was done in the USA and not Europe, thereby hurting potential European sales of the photo.

Much of this seems obvious, but is often over looked by the stock shooter. Always try to imagine the end use of your images, and keep in mind that the use may be in a completely different part of the world. The more universal you keep the image, the more you increase your chances for multiple sales.