Getting Photos to Market

Posted on 5/9/2008 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (1)

For photographers, there are three ways to showcase photos. The first is setting up a searchable site. This can be costly and only work well if the photographer has a broad niche image collection and a solid customer base. It helps to be recognized in a niche category.

Before deciding to build your own site, take a hard look at what,, and offer in your niche. If your imagery isn't a quantum leap better than theirs and you're not a recognized industry leader, don't expect much from your personal site.

To solve the technology barrier of building a custom site, take a look at:, and

Traditional Agency and Microstock

The other ways are traditional stock agencies and/or microstock. At first glance, it appears that photographers will earn much more by dealing with traditional agents because they charge much higher fees and usually pay a higher percentage of the use fee than microstock distributors.

However, sales volume and the real percentage of gross fee charged needs to be taken into account. With regard to sales volume, in 2007 iStockphoto licensed rights to 35 times the number of images that Getty Images licensed as RM and 18 time the RF images. In 2007, RM images at Getty licensed for an average fee of approximately $500, while the average for an iStock license was $4.10. Big separation, but when you factor in the 35 times, one $500 fee at Getty is equivalent to $145.50 at iStock. Getty photographers get 35% of the gross fee on average; iStock exclusive photographers get 40%. iStock's non-exclusive photographers get 20%.

Taking Alamy as another example, in 2007 the company licensed rights to about 169,000 images or one license out of every 64 images in file at year end. Average price for an editorial usage was about $133 (75% of sales), and average price for commercial was $370 (25% of sales). Alamy pays photographers 65% of fees collected. The numbers are now getting closer to one another.

More important than royalty percentage or unit price may be the number of sales you can make, compared to the number of images you have and the cost to produce those images.

Getting Images In Play

It still sounds like the best deal is getting your image accepted by a traditional agent, but it is getting much harder to do so. Also, I need to define "agent" and "distributor." Agents takes images from photographers, may make some sales directly to customers. They also may place the images with a distributor, who deals directly with customers and takes a significant percentage of the gross fee for his services. Some organizations serve as both agent and distributor. Many distributors only accept images from other agents and do not take in images from individual photographers.

The major agent/distributors have cut way back on accepting images directly from photographers. Now, due to the high cost of managing lots of individual suppliers, they are looking more to other agents, large production companies or consolidators to get the images they distribute. They want suppliers who can provide them with 5,000 or more ready to market, cleaned up and keyworded images on a regular basis.

Once, a photographer would put his images with an agent, and the vast majority of the sales would be made directly by the agent. Currently, most agents make a significant portion of their sales through distribution arrangement. Even Getty makes a significant percentage of its sales through distributors, so the gross fee they report, and use to calculate the photographer's percentage, is not always what the customer paid.

This means that most photographers must accept a second or third cut in the commission. Often, it's not easy to figure out how the chain works. If an image is licensed for $200 by a distributor, not the agent, the distributor takes 40% off the top and pays the agent $120. The agent keeps 60% ($72) and pays the consolidator $48. (In the case of RF, the agent sometimes keeps 80%.) The consolidator keeps 50% to 80% and pays the photographer between $10 and $24 for the $200 sale.

Copyright © 2008 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, 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:  


  • Tim Mcguire Posted May 21, 2008

    With your figures above an iStock photo sold 35 times for $4.10 per sale results in a royalty total for an exclusive photographer of $57.40 ((35 x 4.10) x .4). $28.70 for a non exclusive istock photog.

    A single RM sale of gross $500 results in a total royalty to a photographer of $175 on average, (500 x .35). $105 if a sub-distributor takes a 40% cut off the top.

    It does not seem realistic that one could do the volume needed with microstock to come close to what RM can do. It seems a microstock image would have to sell 70 to 100 times more to equal a single RM sale at Getty.

    What am I missing?

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