Define The Term “Microstock”

Posted on 8/30/2017 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (0)

I was asked recently if I could provide a definition for “microstock.” The term is probably meaningless today.

I believe the term was first coined around the turn of the century by people who thought traditional stock photography was too expensive. They created online sites and made stock images available at very low prices, mostly via subscriptions or for around $1.00 per single-image-licensed. The initial leaders in this business were: iStock, Fotolia (now AdobeStock) Shutterstock and Dreamstime. Today, there are a host of other agencies that use similar pricing strategies and refer to what they offer as microstock.

Initially a significant percent of the images distributed were obtained from graphic designers who took pictures as a sideline, and photographers who were more interested in showing off their work and helping others in the creative community than earning any significant revenue from the images they produced. This was at the beginning of the “Everything on the Internet Should Be Free” era.



Because prices were so low these new agencies opened up a new market for stock photography. Thanks to the very low prices, a few image creators were able to make a significant volume of sales, but the vast majority made relatively few sales.

Traditionally, photographers trying to earn a significant portion of their livelihood from the images they produce charged much higher prices and tended to base their prices on the cost of production and the value the customer received from using the image. (The price for an image used in a small brochure with limited distribution was usually much lower than if the same image was used in a major national print ad. In the 1990s, and earlier, this was a very accepted method for pricing image uses.)



This pricing strategy has come to be referred to as “Traditional Stock Photography” in order to distinguish it from microstock. Given the higher prices traditional photographers tend to make fewer sales. Currently, at least 97% of the images licensed worldwide every year are licensed using a microstock strategy.

In the early years microstock images were often of inferior quality compared to those offered through the traditional market, but the overall quality of microstock imagery quickly improved to where the best of what microstock has to offer is of equal quality to images offered in the traditional market. (However, many microstock sites are much more lenient than traditional sites in their acceptance standards. Consequently, there is often a much greater percentage of low quality images on microstock sites than on the best edited traditional sites.)

Most of the people on the “Microstock” side of the business believe that all images – no matter the cost to produce – should be priced equally. Thus the only way to get increased revenue from an image is through sales volume. Those on the “Traditional” side recognize that costs to produce certain images can differ dramatically. They try to account for that fact in their pricing.


 
While initially the microstock philosophy was that all images should be priced the same, several microstock agencies now offer images in various pricing tiers. AdobeStock has a Premium collection, Shutterstock has Offset and iStock has a two tier pricing system. I suspect the number of images licensed at these higher prices are about the same as the number licensed at prices of $100 or more by Traditional agencies, but hard data is not available.

For the most part photographers have chosen to use one marketing strategy or the other. In the last few years an increasing number of “Traditional” photographers have chosen to make some of their images available in the “Microstock” pricing environment.

In some cases, these photographers will make the same image available in both environments, simultaneously. Given that customers tend to search in one environment or the other, but not both, and the volume of choices, seldom would a customer be aware that they might find the same image for a higher or lower price, if they did their searching somewhere else. While this is a way for producers to try to maximize revenue from their production, such a strategy is frowned upon by most distributors. On the other hand, many of the images in the microstock market are available via multiple microstock distributors at different price points.

Particularly since the 2008 recession, the quality of the Microstock offering has improved dramatically and those using the Traditional marketing strategy have been forced to dramatically lower their prices to compete. Based on a recent analysis of sales made by some of the major suppliers to Getty Images, 75% of their images were licensed for prices less than $20 and 50% for prices less than $10. In some cases, Getty licenses Traditional images for much less than today’s Microstock prices. (To understand how much traditional prices have declined it is important to keep in mind that in 2006 the average price of all RM images licensed by Getty Images was $540 and the price for an RF images was $275.)
 
Microstock prices have increased since the early days, but on the whole are still much lower than the average Traditional price. Very occasionally, a very small number of Traditional images are licensed for multi-thousands of dollars boosting the averages.

Accurate statistics are not available, but I believe that worldwide in 2017, more Microstock photographers will earn over $100,000 a year than photographers working in the Traditional market, but the number is infinitely small in both cases.

Thus, while the terms “Microstock,” “Traditional Royalty Free” and “Rights Managed” are still used they are not very meaningful given that there is so much overlap in the ways images are licensed in each of the categories.

And you wanted a simple definition!!


Copyright © 2017 Jim Pickerell. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-461-7627, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Jim Pickerell is founder of www.selling-stock.com, an online newsletter that publishes daily. He is also available for personal telephone consultations on pricing and other matters related to stock photography. He occasionally acts as an expert witness on matters related to stock photography. For his current curriculum vitae go to: http://www.jimpickerell.com/Curriculum-Vitae.aspx.  

Comments

Be the first to comment below.

Post Comment

Please log in or create an account to post comments.

Stay Connected

Sign up to receive email notification when new stories are posted.

Follow Us

Free Stuff

Stock Photo Pricing: The Future
In the last two years I have written a lot about stock photo pricing and its downward slide. If you have time over the holidays you may want to review some of these stories as you plan your strategy ...
Read More
Future Of Stock Photography
If you’re a photographer that counts on the licensing of stock images to provide a portion of your annual income the following are a few stories you should read. In the past decade stock photography ...
Read More
Blockchain Stories
The opening session at this year’s CEPIC Congress in Berlin on May 30, 2018 is entitled “Can Blockchain be applied to the Photo Industry?” For those who would like to know more about the existing blo...
Read More
2017 Stories Worth Reviewing
The following are links to some 2017 and early 2018 stories that might be worth reviewing as we move into the new year.
Read More
Stories Related To Stock Photo Pricing
The following are links to stories that deal with stock photo pricing trends. Probably the biggest problem the industry has faced in recent years has been the steady decline in prices for the use of ...
Read More
Stock Photo Prices: The Future
This story is FREE. Feel free to pass it along to anyone interested in licensing their work as stock photography. On October 23rd at the DMLA 2017 Conference in New York there will be a panel discuss...
Read More
Important Stock Photo Industry Issues
Here are links to recent stories that deal with three major issues for the stock photo industry – Revenue Growth Potential, Setting Bottom Line On Pricing and Future Production Sources.
Read More
Recent Stories – Summer 2016
If you’ve been shooting all summer and haven’t had time to keep up with your reading here are links to a few stories you might want to check out as we move into the fall. To begin, be sure to complet...
Read More
Corbis Acquisition by VCG/Getty Images
This story provides links to several stories that relate to the Visual China Group (VCG) acquisition of Corbis and the role Getty Images has been assigned in the transfer of Corbis assets to the Gett...
Read More
Finding The Right Image
Many think search will be solved with better Metadata. While metadata is important, there are limits to how far it can take the customer toward finding the right piece of content. This story provides...
Read More

More from Free Stuff