Mad dash for the stash

May 6, 2010 by pmelcher.

There used to be a time when stock photographers used to submit images to a stock agency. Long wait. Images sold, commissions were paid and the cycle would start all over again.

Then came the arrogant Getty. With the creation of Photographer’s Choice, anyone with a little bit of talent and some extra cash could submit images. At $50.00 a pop. Pay to play. This program is still operating apparently, although it is unknown if it anyone still submits.

Today, things have change, again. Corbis-owned Veer Marketplace, the microstock arm of the Seattle based Stock Agency is paying people to submit to them. Not much. Up to $1.40 per image. In this economy, it might more than you will ever make. Since you have to submit more than 400 images to get in this higher bracket of payment, that’s a whooping $401.40 or more.

So, you are a pro RM photog, you have to pay to play. You’re a bored housewives , you get paid to submit. Make sense, right ?

There is an explanation:

Veer is trailing behind its competition, badly. While they all navigate between 500,000 to  2 Million visitors a months, Veer has a hard time breaking the 100,000 barrier. Not good for a microstock offering. Unlike RM, microstock is a popularity contest and the more traffic , the more sales.

It is not unusual for a microstock to pay contributors to submit. However, up to now, it has been limited to start ups desperately trying to jump start their  offering. Up to now, all that have done so have failed and closed not long after. In an industry segment where the margins are so tight, it is not wise to squander them in content acquisition. Actually, it is because the content is free that microstock companies are able to make a profit.

Seems the super brilliant black turtleneck  Starbukcs Latte induced management of Corbis is going all out in a desperate effort to increase volume offering in a confused assumption that a cry of quantity will attract image hungry buyers. The results : at best, doubtful.

On another note on microstock, it seems that content offering is getting so diluted due to its popularity that income per  contributor is now falling. Some are reporting as much as 10% decrease year over year, careful, this doesn’t mean that microstock is doing badly, not at all. They are probably doing very well, at least for the top 4.  However, them cheering so loudly on how contributing to microstock can make you rich quick, it has reached a point where content increases faster by number of contributors than number of images submitted per contributor.

This is diluting the average income per contributor to a point that many have hit a ceiling  that seems to go down month after month . If this trend confirms, it will have the effect of making some contributors quit altogether. Will it affect the volume of content. probably not. Althought there is no public numbers, it is however very clear that new contributors joining highly exceeds those who interrupt their submissions.

Since microstock companies live on the Long Tail principle, it will not affect them. They do not care who submits, as long as many, many people submit. So, for those who can’t sustain their last year revenue, there is only one option : submit to Corbis Veer and get paid for doing so, even if they never sell your image.

The Veer Dash for Cash program here

The Getty Photographer’s Choice here.

Posted in No sense, license, technology, commercial stock, web 2.0, prosumer, getty, corbis, transaction, finance, Microstock | Print | 1 Comment »