Comments on: istock and shutterstock vs “pro stock” sites

By: Reggie Byrum

Reggie Byrum — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:57:34 +0000

It doesn’t matter what YOU think your photography is worth. You can put a million dollars on it if you want to, but you’ll be sitting on it until the paper turns yellow. Good or bad, the “high priced” stock agencies are going to die a slow, painful death due to iStock and similar stock photo agencies. Dan, 20 years ago is 20 years ago. Did you have iStock and similar companies selling photos for a buck back then? Did you have amateurs making decent photos with a high resolution digital camera 20 years ago? That answer would be no.

As an ad agency (which now deals mainly in web design and development), I have a choice to make – do I pay $450 – $800 or more for a photo – or do I buy something I like just as much for $1? You can base this on principle all you want, but wake up and smell the coffee – you “have to do, what you have to do” to keep you business afloat in this economy, and my clients aren’t paying $800 for a photo – PERIOD! They’re shopping services too, and if the agency down the street can give them what they want for $1000 less simply because they use iStock and I use Corbis – what am I going to do to stay in business? For me, the decision is simple – give them what they want at a price they can afford.

I still use local commercial photographers from time to time on product shoots, and when I need a special photograph – but those times are getting fewer and fewer. The photography profession is changing, and unless you change along with it like I did (going from a mainly print agency to a web development firm) you’ll be holding your $1000 photographs 20 years from now. But hey – at least you’ve got principles!

By: SYBILLE

SYBILLE — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 03:40:03 +0000

YOU ARE SOOOOOOO SMART. ARE THESE NEW FOLKS STUPID OR WHAT. WHAT’S GOING ON IN PHOTOGRAPHY NOW WITH STOCK AGENCIES. I’VE BEEN IN THE DARK FOR WAY TOO LONG. SELLING PHOTOS FOR 2 DOLLARS. I DON’T GET IT. ARE YOU THE ONLY ONE HERE THAT IS SMART?????

By: SYBILLE

SYBILLE — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 03:34:18 +0000

STOCK AGENCIES WOULD PAY A MINIMUM PRICE OF LIKE $80.00 FOR A CRUMMY IMAGE IN THE 1970′S 80′S. 10.00 DOLLARS IS A JOKE, REALLY. YOU ARE ALL LETTING YOURSELVES GET SCREWED.

By: SYBILLE

SYBILLE — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 03:21:27 +0000

WTF! IMAGES FOR FREE OR FOR A DOLLAR? YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME. YOU DIVE UNDER THE OCEAN AND TAKE A PICTURE OF A SHARK COMIN TOWARDS YOU THEN SELL IT FOR 2 DOLLARS. ARE YOU CRAZY????????????

By: Reggie Byrum

Reggie Byrum — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:10:53 +0000

I agree. I’ve work for ad agencies for over 20 years and most of the agencies that I’ve worked for are going to iStock. In over 95% of the time, we’ve been able to find a good, quality photographs that we could use. Times are tight, so long gone are the days when a small agency can pay $300 – $400 or more for a single photograph.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 05:09:43 +0000

what about us guys who dont care, and just want to upload a few photos for free money… sounds good to me.

By: Donncha

Donncha — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:41:27 +0000

Dan – somehow I think that was the exception, not the rule. Not everyone was earning 6 figure sums from their photography in the good old days.

I totally agree with you about the value of creativity and experience. Skills and knowledge are invaluable.

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:15:49 +0000

20 years ago, a young photographer could make between $100,000.00 and $150,000.00 a year selling stock. That was based on selling about 60 to 80 images. Do the math people. How many pictures do you have to sell now to make that same amount of money? Old photographers, who have already made their money and are living the high life, are watching these young desperate photographers give away their future. If you are selling pictures for $35.00 today…I guarantee, you will be selling pictures 20 years from now for $35.00 a photo. I made my money in photography and I am retired. I am scratching my head right now. Blackstar, magnum and the ASMP warned us about this 25 years ago. I blame the distribution of currency. Just because you are published for free means nothing. Do not put value on being published. Put value on your creativity and experience. You will sell your soul if you’re just trying to get published. I have never sold an image for less than $1500.00 for one time use on a (6) month term. What are these companies paying? What is your work worth?

By: cozmic

cozmic — Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:28:34 +0000

Well all i can says is that these two stites are good for me, I was with crestock and they never except pictures and when they do (6) no one seams to be selling. Their people that check the pictures and the admin are very rude.
If you check out their forum, I found it to very very negative from all that write on it.
So keep up the good work shutterstock and istock, you making me happy at the moment.

By: Belinda

Belinda — Fri, 05 Jan 2007 18:24:45 +0000

Hello Ive been interested in doing this whole istock thing and im wondering what happens to the rights of your photos in all these sights do you still own the photo once it goes onto a billboard or a bus. thats a lot of money lost if your photo gets used in that way. can anyone give me some pointers for putting my photos on these sites or statrting my own website so i dont have to read the many pages in the maze of rights on the sites.

thank you for your time

B…