Late 2008 I have started my stock photo business. At that time I decided I wanted to explore all options, microstock and macro stock, but also direct selling next to shooting for stock agencies. And I started with (only) shooting beauty images in the studio. I have learned a lot this year and now it is time to make some decisions on the way forward. This post is about my experiences in the microstock business and the decisions I have made in going forward.
This is what I did
I submitted some 100-200 beauty images to some of the most well-known micro sites. Istock, Shutterstock, Dreamstime, Fotolia, Veer Marketplace, but also Moodboard (as I submit also RF images to this agency). Some of these beauty images were the “timeless” type but also some images of the (beauty) glamour and fashion style type (typically the kind of imagery that traditional stock agencies don’t like).
This is what I discovered
My images submitted to iStock sell by far the best. I also like the submission proces of iStock and like the look and feel of the iStock site. The same collection on other microsites:
- Shutterstock brings about half of the iStock revenue. But I hate the subscription model selling all images for 25 dollar cents.
- When Veer started their microstock collection initially I made some nice sales but after a few months sales dropped down totally. Last few months I have sold nothing.
- I had some problems with Dreamstime – not accepting my model releases. Because they more or less push you to use Dreamstime model releases I stopped submitting.
- I also tried some Fotolia – much lower sales than iStock – and I simply don’t like the site and the keywording process.
- I also put some images online at Moodboard, no sales at all.
Initially I submitted a 100-200 images to iStock. I soon discovered that a lot of these images did not sell at all. So i deleted these images. Currently I still edit my collection, if an images has no sales after 6-12 months I delete the image. At the moment I have about 50 images online at iStock. About half of these images sell. On average each image is sold two times against a RPI of $1.50. So this microstock thing is currently bad business for me. When I am not able to shoot more salable images per shoot and not able to improve my RPI then microstock can only be hobby.
I found that
I am not a volume shooter. I guess successful microshooters will target for a production of 50 – 100 salable images per shoot. I am not that kind of guy. I don’t like it and I cannot do it. But earning money with microstock requires shooting high volume at low costs. Successful microshooters like Yuri Arcurs have set up their studio like a production machine. And they are able to produce successful microstock images at a very high volume against low cost. That makes you a kind of “production manager” and I really don’t want to be that kind of a photographer. My background is business management and don’t want to be a manager again.
I also found that shooting microstock requires a specific shooting style. You should shoot a lot of “cliché” images – typical microstock images. Of course you will see a lot of “quality images” on a microstock site but most of the images that really sell – like business teams images – are real commodity images.
It is also my analysis that a weak RF image – that will not sell as a RF image – also will not sell as a microstock image. If you want high volume sales you really have to adopt a “micro shooting style”. But weak images will not sell – also not at a microsite. You have to shoot micostock quality.
Selling beauty images at microstock sites
I think that selling beauty images at microsites can be done, but it is a very tough game. Maybe you read this article – in that post I have made my analysis what it takes to make money with beauty images in microstock.
If you have to invest in models and makeup artists then you need a very high volume to make a profit. Meaning you should have most images from a series selling. And most of your images of that series should have substantial volume – or you should have a few high sellers. When you look at the sales of top micro shooters they have a lot of “homeruns” – pics that are selling hundreds or even thousands of times. It all comes down to shooting mcirostyle quality. And you need a higher than usual Return Per Image (because of the investments in models and makeup artists).
Probably this will mean that very very few shooters will be able to make money with beauty in microstock. The dutch photographer Iconogenic is not only a fabulous shooter but also an outstanding retoucher. This way she is able to shoot in a small studio and produce a lot of different – and pics per shoot (she changes colours, backgrounds very easily). And she shoots with great models and very very good makeup artists. Resulting in very high quality images.
Currently my production volume is too low. My typical “yield” from a beauty shoot is maybe 10 images. With a typical micro RPI this gives me not even the revenue to pay a makeup artist. But I guess my first priority should be to produce better quality (I still have too many images not selling). Whenever you shoot a weak series – weak model, weak concept, weak makeup, or all haha- you will have many images not selling at all and down is your RPI. I also have noticed that if you shoot quality images that these images tend to have more large format sales, and this gives better RPI. Weak images most of the times have little sales and when sold only small formats.
So when I continue with shooting beauties for microstock I should first manage to improve the quality (having more selling images per shoot and selling more often). Gradually also my yield – number of salable images per shoot – should improve, but quality first.
I decided
to shoot my “timeless” beauty images – studio and outdoors – for RF, and if I can for RM. Micro is not “my thing” for most of my stock photography (timeless beauty and lifestyle).
I have decided that I will try to go for high-quality stock images and will pitch for either high-end RF or RM. I am not a volume shooter and I want to be proud at my images. I want to shoot something special. That means I have to push myself to be always on the look out for exceptional and distinctive imagery. I think I am moving towards an RM shooter (if I can manage to shoot that quality level).
But there is a segment of beauty images that I want to shoot and that is not popular in RF/RM – being the beauty glamour and fashionable beauty imagery. I do like to shoot that and I will continue to submit that to microstock sites. But I have to learn to shoot more salable images per shoot.
I chose to follow the leader in microstock
I also have decided that I will submit new microstock images only to iStock. I like the way the iStock site is set up, I like the pricing model, I like the brand, the submission proces (including the keywording), the opportunity to have images in their Vetta collection, being part of Getty images. And most important of all: iStock simply sells !! Other sites sell less or even nothing at all.
In this business climate you need strong sales channels. This can be established by either selling at multiple points of sale or by selling your images at one very strong stock agency. In RF/RM you either manage to sell your images at Getty or you find yourselves a stock agency that has a strong distribution network. In micro things are not different.
I am not prepared to submit to five plus microstock agencies (as most micro shooters do). I will not shoot high volumes for micro and all the work required for submitting to a lot of sites does not fit in a low cost scheme. So I chose to follow the leader. For me Istock gets the best volume and the best RPI resuliting in the best sales.
IStock is a very strong brand – with a great offering both to contributors and clients. Contributors can submit to an agency that really sells and clients find a large collection (with a lot of quality images). Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Fotolia might do reasonably well, but they follow the leader at some distance. And for the others ….from a contributors point of view it is a waste of time to submit images to these others. And for those agencies that mix macro and micro …sorry, but I don’t believe in mixing business models. It will not work – for nobody.
Way forward
RM (and RF for the moment) will be my main thing. But I will shoot beauty glamour and fashion style beauty images for microstock. I will submit only to the leader in the game and I chose not for submitting to a bunch of sites. I will have to find out what is really selling at iStock – and improving my RPI at this way – and I should manage to improve my yield from a beauty shoot. I guess I should produce at least 25 – better even 50 -salable images in one shoot. But my first priority is shooting more salable images – now I still have too many images that don’t sell.
