August 30, 2007 by pmelcher.

” Remember that your aim is to achieve the highest dollar gross contribution margin, not make the highest volume sales. You would get 100% of the market if you gave the stuff away.” - Phillipe_M from WebmasterWorld

The economics of the photo industry are shifting rapidly and might seem, to some, out of control. But lets review the parameters for a little while, if you don’t mind.

In a perfect world, you would have 100% of market share and no competition. It’s not going to happen and even Getty Images knows that. If you are in the photo business, it is because others, before you, have found it a lucrative and interesting market to be in. Thus, you did not invent it, neither will you be the last to license images. You became a competitor to someone else. And if you are reading this, it is because somewhere, somehow you succeeded in creating a demand for your images.

The general feeling, I hear more and more, is that photography is becoming a commodity, that anyone, anywhere can take a great picture. If you really think that, you need to leave this business, now. Immediately. Because that means you do not even believe in what you sell.

If you believe , however, that there is that special magic, that “je ne sais quoi”, in every and all image that you have posted on your website than please read on….

There is a value to every single image that you have. You have images that someone would love to use. For different reasons: to add dimension to their product or services, to explain in visuals a news event, or to make their magazines something that people will fight to buy.

Here are the steps of photography : reality (the world around us) => A photograph (the perception of that reality by one individual) => The availability of that photograph ( the work of an agency) => the match between a need and a solution (the license).

You cannot affect reality unless if you decide to throw a bomb at a building in oder to create a newsworthy event. It is really, really not recommended. Don’t even think about it.

You can, however, with the photographer, really influence how reality is going to be captured. In the editorial space, for example, it makes all the difference. In commercial stock, it separates the every day shooters from the creative. If you want to be different, then you cannot be afraid to be different. The shooters will cover their (lower) back and shoot the same type of images over and over again because they have sold in the past. The creative will never shoot the same image twice. They take risks. They miss. But when they hit, they hit really, really hard. And an agency should support that.

Remenber Nonstock, Comstock, ImageDirect. Tony Stone, The Stock Market, Digital Stock, etc …. ?

An agency makes these images available. Adding keywords, creating relationships, listening to customers needs, storing, color correcting, understanding, cataloging…I could go on and on. Another added value from the plain reality we started from.

And finally, the match between an offering and a need . An image, like a wife or a car, only becomes perfect in the eyes of the beholder. Like a key in a lock. Photography opens doors, solves problems, supports and enhances a message, makes an article become true. The most extreme added value to reality.

The client, ultimately, decides the value of the image.

This is also why, ultimately , you started and why your are still in this business.

This industry lost its edge the day someone, somewhere decided there was truth in numbers. And with its edge, it has lost its value. Numbers, and the so called self-reassuring nature of it, has brought comfort to the meat eaters among us. AP, Reuters, Corbis, Getty work with numbers. That is their religion. The new members of this “we love numbers” club are microstocks. How many images they have, how many downloads, how many hits, how much contributors, how many .. and so on. They throw numbers everywhere.

But are any of these companies profitable ?

And the funniest part ? None of their contributors even think about numbers. They have no idea what an RPI is ( Return Per Image) . Nor do they care. But you do. This industry is not suffering from microstock shooters and their low prices. It is suffering because most photographers, helped by their agencies, have become accountants. Number crunchers. Bean counters. Expert in cost VS revenue analysts.

They are trying, in a word, to become what the Getty’s of this world has make them believe they should be : Surveyors.

Posted in finance, keyword, editorial, news, getty, corbis, Royalty free | Print | No Comments »

August 30, 2007 by pmelcher.

Bush wants $50 billion more for Iraq _ MSNBC.com. I Guess he did not see Mediastorm new multimedia. Could someone please send it to him ?

A good mutltimedia with a couple of weak points: too much video and too little on the children.

Avatar and company :

I am sorry but I cannot help it. This is too funny. A company that has lost money for the last 14 years has spend its valuable resources to create an on-line Gallery in “Second Life”, the favorite destination of millions of people who do not have any. I guess this is the secret weapon Gary Shenk has to make Corbis profitable. Albeit, you cannot license any images from their virtual store, but I guess their next move will be to post a virtual profit. Oh yes, and open a ride at Disneyworld.

Getty lower prices:

Older RF images are being bargained at $49 or less. As always, the industry is up in arms. Seems more like Getty is trying to find a real second life for images that are not selling so well anymore. The midstock sector, where RF images are priced higher than microstock and lower than tradionnal RF, is still an unchartered territory . The real question is why at punchstock rather than Istock ? One would think that the value conscious customers would be found at the microstock site. The intent is probably to merge both so that one would have a global RF offering that would go from bottom to top.

In the mean time, friendly Getty is helping Corbis license images while they are busy building a powerful virtual empire.

Posted in No sense, corbis, getty, Microstock | Print | No Comments »