July 7, 2008 by pmelcher.

Barely waiting for the ashes of the CEPIC congress to cool down, Istockphoto descended on the island of Malta with a vengeance. In a quite ironical move, the microstock giant has picked the same location than the commercial stock industry association. The difference is that while one was only there to blabber endlessly about photography, the other supplied an opportunity for its contributors to mingle with each other and produce more images. Same place, same industry, two different approach.

Now, most people would react and think : all these photographers are shooting the same thing. What is the purpose? Well, those who have attended the Cepic congress before know that most of the agencies who participate in the congress also keep on trading the same images over and over : You represent me, I represent you, this guy represent us, we represent him, we all represent each other. One day, an agency will end up representing its own work without even knowing it, as it will come back through various representation under a different brand name.

So Istock has thousands of photographers shooting the same thing while traditional stock agency each all represent each other ad nausea. what is the difference ? As we know, volume, quantity, range, depth, millions are the buzz words of this industry, quickly followed by cutting edge, fast search, new website (always a new website), new servers, bigger files.

It used to be that grandad of this industry, Image Bank , claimed high and loud, with proudness and defiance, as badges of honor, the names of the photographers they represented . Today some Istock photographer are better known then any in the traditional world, most certainly the RF world. Lisa Gagne, Yuri Arcurs are better known than any JupiterImage photographers. Go ahead, name one…No, Banastock is NOT a photographer.

So who will criticize Istock for throwing a contributor lovefest in Malta?  Which commercial stock agency will dare throw the first stone, especially knowing that none have done anything equivalent. They throw sub agents lovefest,  a la self declared king of European stock, Alfonso Guieterrez of Age fotostock. Does any RM agency even know their photographers anymore ? I know RF do not, as they rebrand all their images under a theme rather than photographer. RF photo production reminds me of surrogate mothers. You pay someone to have your baby and then you never see them again.

Istock has innovated by creating a market for microstock . It has, however, not lost touch with who the creators are, probably because its founder was an ignored commercial stock photographer before. Lesson learned.

More on Malta Istock lovefest here

Posted in technology, commercial stock, Midstock, web 2.0, CEPIC, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

June 27, 2008 by pmelcher.

“We think Corbis has the resources and patience to succeed in the long-term. We will beat them with better [commercial] execution” Gary Shenk, CEO of Corbis to the Sydney Morning Herald.

There is long term and than there is eternity. Corbis is gambling that eventually, one day, when no one is looking, for no particular reason, ( probably because there is no one left on Earth), just like that, they will “succeed” and maybe post a profit along with it.

The SMH article is  about the rise of amateur photography and  Snapvillage, the Ireland based subsidiary of Corbis that the money loosing company has build to  compete with Istockphoto and other Microstock.

Posted in Midstock, commercial stock, prosumer, finance, corbis, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

May 23, 2008 by pmelcher.

Just imagine. Just imagine if a company like Google, or Yahoo, or even Microsoft put their hand on microstock and social photography. Not only Istockphoto projections of $171 million revenue within a few years would be pulverized into unknown heights but it would be the end of both RM and traditional RF forever.

Why ?, you might ask. Simple. Right now, the only reason Istock is not growing faster is its lack of reach compared to better known sites like Google. Given that firepower, there is absolutely no reason why the whole market not tip over into a microstock Tsunami.  Let’s face it, Rights Managed is a badly protected island. And part of its protection came from the purposely shallow amount of choice. A lack of choice is what makes  RM potentially valuable, or what others call “bleeding edge” photography. Thus, out of a pool of 10 images, it is important to secure exclusivity. Out of a pool of millions, who cares?

Furthermore, it would be so simple to “retire” an image automatically for a higher price, thus making that image exclusive by automation.

Why would anyone  consider putting their images anywhere else than on Google Stock ? Already, everyone, from photographers to photoagency are taking night courses in  SEO to pump up their ranking. Most will buy huge amounts of adwords. If Google opens the gates and starts welcoming images in order to license them, there will be no holding back. From no one. It would be an act of suicide not to be part of it.  And since microstock pricing has now set the tone for commercial usage pricing, everyone will seek the low-priced volume sale. And, besides the user generated sites, no one will survive.

RF would quickly become  standard and no one would even bother with any other of those complicated and boring licensing  models. The only way for agencies and photographers to survive will be to jump, or stay, on the assignment peak. Those who have created a market for their photography, their personal work ~ the way professional photography first started~will continue to be untouched by this whole stock mess.

Not sure this will happen ? Well, think about it. Why did Getty go private ? and more important, why do you think someone paid $2.5 billion for it ? So it can watch it grow slowly like a small pet kitten ? Not their style. And what do you think will happen when Newscorp, Google, Yahoo, AOL and others feel they have managed to control most of the channels. What will be their next target to increase their appeal to advertisers ? Content, you said ? Indeed. By having the most compelling content, eyeballs will be attracted. And who has the highest volume of well targeted eyeballs will sell the most ads. Like it used to be with the TV network. But this next battle is happening online and will include stills.

Hopefully, some will stop asking me why I think this industry has not yet seen the worst ( or best) of it. Why there is no more reasons to attend Cepic or PACA congress. The waters are retreating already and I am no fool.

Posted in google, Midstock, technology, commercial stock, web 2.0, CEPIC, Royalty free, getty, transaction, PACA, Microstock | Print | 4 Comments »

May 6, 2008 by pmelcher.

(credit : Creatista / Zymmetrical.com)

It’s like playing with a set of Tarot cards. Or looking down at coffee residue at a bottom of coffee cup. Or better yet, hopping that the big round glass ball will reveal its wonderful secret.

Running a photo agency is  just really a never-ending game of predicting the future. On any given day, one has to figure out what will be the next big story. Picking from a thousand of daily news items, the trick is to pick the ones that will last longer than the time it takes to read them because of national, if not international interest.

And everything is game : a local murder, a politicians comment, a weather system coming through, a celebrity that might get engaged, everything can be the next big story. And, in order for the images to be relevant, it also has to be timely. Too soon, no one cares, too late, it’s over and done. Thus, as much it is important to have the right pool of photographers that will add even more value to an event, it is the constant act of divination that is crucial.

Wire services have minimized the gamble to a minimum by covering everything and having photographers everywhere.  That is what corporations do : minimize and rationalize risk. The little and medium guys cannot afford to keep an international pool of photographers  always on the ready mode. So they have to carefully pick and choose.

Get it right once and it’s luck, get it right often and it is talent. Because there is even more  than just predicting what will everyone will talk about tomorrow. There is also predicting what the media will think is the next big thing. And they have their own vision of the importance of a story. So its not just figuring out what will be hot but what the medias will think will be hot and thus, make hot.

It is certainly not a science and can not really be taught by anything else than experience and an acute sense of human sympathy ( Etymology: Latin sympathia, from Greek sympatheia, from sympathēs having common feelings, sympathetic, from syn- + pathos feelings, emotion, experience). Knowing what people will care about tomorrow, not what is important.

Scarlett Johansson getting engaged is not important but everyone cares. Darfur is important but no one cares anymore. So what is a savvy photo agency to do ? Get images of Scarlett’s new ring, and forget Darfur.

Now, if it had been a really good photo agency, it would have known or smelled it, and would already have the picture, even before the story broke. How ? By brightly anticipating the engagement and having someone follow her for the last week.

This is just not in the celebrity world. It is useless for a small or medium agency to have 2 full time photographers follow Hillary and Obama everywhere in the hopes of getting a picture that will sell. It is, however, very important to read their schedule carefully and smell the right photo op. When and where will it happen ?

Same goes for commercial stock albeit in a different way . Trying to forecast the need of imagery is similar. The parameters are slightly different but the divination game the same. However, it is more a science when it comes to Commercial stock. Companies like Corbis and Getty will hire field engineers, card readers, to investigate the future. Others, who cannot afford to pay expensive fortune tellers will just put up as many images as possible in order to cover all potential needs now and forever. Nether approach usually  reap a lot of success. If it did, Getty would no longer have any competition, would they ?

A really good stock agency could make a fortune with maybe no more than 100 new images a month. A really good editorial agency could do with 10 stories a month. You have the 10 top stories of the month  every month over a year, and you will be making more than Getty Images.

But it is not because you have the divination gift that others do not, which makes it a tad harder. You can also  beat the divination game by having a better photographer, one that will make the better images even if they are not the first, making the event more caring. But that is beyond the point here.

So, while the Getty whale is about to sink deep into silence ( pay attention to Jamd.com and viewimages.com, two great divination tools) in its never ending quest for more revenue, that Jupiterimage will be the first let microstock merge with its traditional offering  ( announced in Russia this week), that traditional Commercial RF and RM are about to reunite in their last yearly bacchanal in Malta, that someone somewhere is about to launch the first model that will pay you to use their images (Picapp ?), and that about anything and everything is fair game these days, one should keep in mind that with no talent there will be no success.

PS: A big thank you to all those who have donated already. If you too want to keep this blog free, do you part here. The recession is coming and its my birthday soon.

Posted in celebrity, magazine, Zymmetrical, commercial stock, Midstock, photojournalism, news, editorial, wire service, getty | Print | No Comments »

May 4, 2008 by pmelcher.

“The big winner in these data are Internet design and development firms, whose purchases dominate the industry. But while these firms consistently hold the highest market share, both in terms of dollars spent and units purchased, their average spending per image was often lower than that for other segments, particularly creatives. These dynamics can have strong implications for producers and marketers of stock imagery.”

TrendWatch Graphic Arts_2005_

That was 3 years ago. The $71.9 million revenue of Istockphoto in 2007 is a clear proof that this study was correct. It actually did not reveal any secret but confirmed what everyone already knew. So, how as the industry reacted in the last 3 years ?

- The conservatives: Most have continued in their all too familiar ways, producing the same images for the same pricing, even when 90% are now being sold at microstock prices. Voluntary ignoring the microstock noise, that has now grown from a chatter to a scream, they believe that it is just a passing fluke that will die down when the party is over. Some even take a stand against this market by claiming loud and clear that they will NEVER surrender to such pricing model. As if high-priced images had any appeal to any image buyers.  They have the same images available on mid and micro sites, yet priced according to antiquated models. They have capture the attention of the medium mediocre pro photographers whose very livelihood is threatened by this sudden price drop. As the protectors of the pricing “status quo” they stand up desperately like little toy store owners in front of K Mart refusing to sell cheap chinese toys while charging 6 times more for the same products.

- The cold feeters : They understand what the market is up too but have a hard time accepting it. They have been in this industry for a long time with reasonable success and hate seeing prices go down. So they adapt. They either create new collections for these markets or “retire” images and price them lower. One foot in the water, one on land, they think they can continue doing what they know best without loosing on new pricing trends. They enter with little careful steps as walking in the waters of a cold lake, trying to organically figure out its temperature and if they will be able to swim. These agencies confuse their photographers tremendously as revenues become unpredictable.

- The passionate: They can’t get enough. They were early-adopters and cannot wait to do more. Some have caught the wave at the right time and are seeing good results, while others waited and jumped both feet at the same time. They are leaving familiar pricing territories and well know clients for hit and run sales. Less tear sheets but more volume. Less marketing intelligence but more sales data. Some have created their own micro/mid platforms and are hoping to catch up on the Istock wave ( Tsunami ?).

What is fascinating is when you see a traditional RM/RF platform asking their contributors for more “regular business images: people at their desk, answering phones..” . It is also laughable when others stand up on their soap box and say: “The answer is easy, my friends, create more high end RM images”.

Huh ?

When I was at Corbis, the term was “cutting edge” and even back then I was hitting my head against the walls trying to figure out what it meant. And more important, how it is made.

A stock image is by nature an image that is made to please a wide variety of clients. Furthermore, it has to be unfinished so that text and logos can be added. Even other images copied and past into it. Even with our world turning into a global village, local sensitivities are at skin edge. It makes it very hard to create images that will please everyone in the world.

So what is high end RM images ? I would like to see. Because, like the Eldorado or Atlantis before, there is a lot of talk about it but not much to see : Behold the savior of photography, the almighty cutting edge, high end photograph. The secret knowledge that will lead to the golden caves of fortune: How to create a high end image. If you possess that wisdom, that elusive stone, the magic wang that transforms a low end / medium end image into that legendary 6 figure image, then why in the hell would you stick it in a photo agency that will take 50% or more of your sales ?

Most commercial stock photo agencies, right now, should give their salespeople a substantial raise. Because the major reason their sales are still stable, if not rising, is because their client stick with them. Mostly because they enjoy the help and friendship with their contacts there . Its not the pricing, nor the images, those can quite frankly be found elsewhere, its that person on the other side of the phone. Yet, most go on a search for the elusive “sharp, cutting edge, high end” imagery soon to be copied by extremely web savvy microstock shooter.

A good salesperson will tell you exactly what images you need because they sell them everyday. Its not going to be a creative research ( shoot RV people !!, especially the ones being pushed because people can’t afford the gas price, says Corbis ) or keyword search analysis. Not even past sales data. It is going to be these guys behind their screens and desks, day in and day out that can tell you what you need. And they also, have no idea what a cutting edge image is, but they sure do know what an image that sell can be.

Posted in Search, Midstock, license, commercial stock, keyword, finance, Royalty free, corbis, transaction, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

March 31, 2008 by pmelcher.

While photographers trade organization are wasting their time fighting issues like the Oprhan Work bill in order the save whatever they have left, and while photo agencies association seem violently silent, the world of editorial continue its downfall.

According to Radaronline, Newsweek magazine got rid of 111 staffers last week ( didn’t even know they had that many)  and the newspapers of America had the worst ad revenue in its 50 years history, according to E&P.Worst than the 2001 slump. While analysts seem to confuse Getty going private with Getty shutting down, it is quite obvious that the tide is retreating before the big hit.

As previously written here, the editorial world will loose its dailies and weeklies in favor of the internet. It is not a question of if, but when. Monthlies will continue to thrive as long as they keep away from time sensitive news. The old ways will not continue.

While this continues, photographers and agencies will continue to bear the heaviest load as they will be asked to support the biggest part of theit cost saving initiative. A lot of companies will sink with the ships they will be trying to save. Those who will survive are those who are, today, turning to the new market. Companies, like Getty, that have understood that the future is on the Internet and create for themselves opportunities to be competitive.

Istockphoto, and other micro/midstock agencies are a good example of internet savvy photo agencies. Lean, mean, fast, cost effective companies that have learned to both cut their costs and leverage technology to its fullest. They can reach wide and far accross the world and up and down the client ladder. Others have jumped into new licensing models like Gumgum which  allows them to operate like a microstock on but a RM model.

The issue will be the relenvency of content. Currently, the internet is replicating the print editorial world. Some are adding video or multimedia, but it is still very linear. But that will change too as “born in the internet” art directors will re -invent  the web page and how we consume our news. Photographers will and agencies will have to reinvent their offering to match it.

Getty, by going private, will certainly take advantage of this new situation. They have already by acuiring Istockphoto. The celebrity photo agencies have also initiated the switch by producing videos and embrassing new licensing models. Others will probablly decide that book publishing, exhibits, grants are a better way to go and try to carve a controlled market. But, with schools already using Wikipedia and other National Geographic sites as references, how long will this market survive?

More technology based solutions are peeking out of the horizon that can help this industry  make a succesful transition. It is, a little, heartbreaking to see how slowly they are being ignored by the guardians of the old temple who beleive that saving what they have is better than growing in new markets.

Posted in copyright, license, Midstock, celebrity, magazine, Newsweek, gumgum, Zymmetrical, multimedia, TIME, editorial, news, getty, transaction, CEPIC, photojournalism, msnbc.com, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

March 17, 2008 by pmelcher.

It has been a while since I have wanted to write about a great plug in for Firefox hardly known in the photo industry. It has a lot of advantages and no defaults. For one, it is free, two, it can be installed on any image library, three, it is incredibly helpful. One can quickly and nicely browse through a lot of image, increase the interesting ones and download the best.

Zymmetrical.com is the first and only agency to currently test it live on its site and starting to get user feedback. You can see a screen shot here:

They have also added a link on their website where one can test it.

This a great example of a company leveraging technology for what it can bring to the user experience.

The Piclens plug in has been around for quite a while and works with Google Images, for example. It has gotten great reviews by everyone that has approached it. It is cross platform, easy and simple to install and to use. It is an incredibly useful tool for the image industry .

Posted in focus, technology, lens, Piclens, Zymmetrical, Midstock, web 2.0, Search, multimedia, slideshow | Print | No Comments »

March 11, 2008 by pmelcher.

This industry is whacked. Definitely, positively, completely and definitely. While some industry commentators are desperately trying to get attention to their new pricing guidelines in a last , useless effort to save the RM model, others have just thrown sanity up in the air.

Most commercial stock companies are still around, not because they are doing good, but because their operating cost are low. Like the store around the corner. No big revenue, but then again, no big cost. And that could last forever. Once a year, they all meet up a CEPIC, burning their hard earned savings, to congratulate each other on making it through another year, quite blissfully unaware that the storm has yet to come. It has just been bad weather up to now. The Hurricane has yet to hit.

And so, a huge amount of little store owners, more obsessed by cost saving then revenue making, gather around together for a few days, in a yearly bacchanal ritual of parties, drinking, table hopping and schmoozing, as if to give thanks to an indifferent God under some bored European sky. This year will be no different, as the island of Malta, lost somewhere in between its past glory and the Mediterranean sea, will host the secret and private gathering of the last believers.

Most have switch to RF, grant you, hoping that new fortunes will be made. Alas, too little too late. So in order to increase their offering, they exchange content, like kids with cards, or marbles. They become distributors of each others photographs, in a web of tangled relationships, trying to hide the frog in a bear’s costume.

They remain stubbornly confident that their model is the sole and only model and that new ideas are just hiccups. And so they sit in rows of chairs, listening to people who have never achieved anything in their careers, tell them how to operate their businesses hoping for redemption from these latter saint prophets.

Sure, there is fear and concern, but each one has its own “special” plan, carefully kept secretive and as powerful as a lottery ticket. It is most of the time disguise as a new website that will put the industry upside down, a miraculous search engine, or a new pricing scheme, that will revolutionize the industry forever. Most of the time, it is only just that, a lottery ticket.

“it use to be..” says the crowd, followed by a “remember when ?…” and ending as “ah well, what can you do…”. Getty and, although less and less Corbis, gets blame for everything, including if it rains on their little gathering. It is the cause of all evil, because God forbids, they are not the ones to revisit their decisions. It is the stubbornness of the assurance of things past. “It has worked so it will work” is CEPIC’s cry to the god’s of commercial stock. With a little adjusting of our pricing and a cool redesign of our website, we will see better future, better than we have ever seen.

There is more hope in these hearts and minds when they all leave to go back to the harsh reality of stagnant sales numbers. There is more conviction, because as a group, they agree. And we all know the majority is always right and that there is comfort in numbers . The election of George Bush as president of the United States is a living proof of that. There will be a huge celebration of conviction, an exciting confirmation of ideas past and the realization that change is just another word for stupid.

The imaginary gods of commercial stock photography will certainly be pleased as they wink to the new born microstock king.

Posted in Midstock, Zymmetrical, technology, prosumer, CEPIC, Royalty free, getty, corbis, Microstock | Print | 3 Comments »

March 8, 2008 by pmelcher.

I doubt I could have ever said it better myself…you will understand the reference..

Posted in Midstock, copyright, technology, prosumer, transaction, law, editorial, Microstock | Print | 1 Comment »

February 28, 2008 by pmelcher.

“my first (and probably my last, unless you tell me it is a good idea) guest post :”

How did it start?Was it the 1890’s ?Photographers took pictures, pushed the edge of the envelope but could not do everything, they needed agents.In the meantime copyright came along to try and stop the exploitation of artists, there where always those with money willing to exploit the talents of an impoverished artist.Come the 1950’sAgents came along and entered into a partnership with the photographers, 50/50 or whatever, photographers owned the copyright, agents sold and kept the collections in hard chemical form, their business grew in the center of cities, large amounts of real estate holding pictures.

Pictures where sold for 1st rights, 2nd rights, 3rd rights and so on, the sellers had a firm grip on the marketplace.

Photographers if they where good made money in editorial, rights managed, it was a financial meritocracy, the best made the most. Art and creativity was king.

Agencies like Sygma, Sipa, Magnum, Rex, and stock agencies like Tony Stone all flourished, not by employing photographers but entering into partnerships with photographers.

20 years went buy and they became big business.

It’s the 1990’s along came digital, Getty and Corbis.

Digital, binary code was an astonishing revolution allowing millions of images to be stored in a box the size of a car instead of a 10 story building, on top of that images could be sent thousands on miles in a few seconds and reconstructed to the original quality thanks to jpeg compression, opportunity was knocking and along came the bankers and big business.

Getty and Corbis knew with a few million spent wisely they could dominate the industry, they started their acquisitions

Most of the agencies sold out but this was the first knife in the back for the photographers, the content creators, whilst an agency owner pocketed the $ 20 million from Corbis the photographer got nothing and in Sygmas case an assumption by Corbis that they owned the archive!!! I think the lawsuits are still continuing. What did I last hear Microsoft has $ 40 billion dollars in cash, what chance does a poor photographer stand?

Getty, owned by bankers saw an opportunity for consolidation and cost saving, they also thought “ Art” could be created on a 9-5 hour day, a salary and no incentive. They went ahead and spent $ 500,000 million dollars acquiring photo agencies.

Bill Gates, he initially just wanted art on his walls digitally, constantly changing to fit his mood, this was when big screen plasmas cost $ 30,000

These where tough times for artists, creative photographers who ideas where stolen, their percentages crushed, financial ruin approaching.

The agencies new owners drove hard bargains and percentages to the photographers, if you did not sign, get lost, plenty to fill the departing artists shoes, plenty of styles to copy.

A typical business model bulk sold content on monthly deals, sending thousands of pictures a day to clients, 1st rights, 2nd rights, 3rd rights became a thing of the past, your pictures where likely to be bundled at a $ 100,000 deal a month for 200,000 images used, you do the math !

By 2000 the creative photographer had been destroyed, art had become sterile, its becoming obvious bankers are not good for art!!!

Mix with this through the late 90’s early 2000 the growth of Google, a search engine with a bland front end. What the hell was this and it was free!!!

By 2004 we knew what Google was, an advertising agency who had managed to optimize the Internet and its revenue through click through revenues and who was being screwed the most in this, as if in a double whammy, creative photographers and newspapers, in fact anyone who published!!!

Those bulk all you can eat deals really paid of for Google with free rights in perpetuity as they displayed the web pages of most of the publications in the World, blatantly using fantastic images for free to drive click through revenue to their advertisers. The poor old content creator ( photographer) got nothing

Catching onto what was happening the media industry jumped on the Google band wagon and followed Getty’s lead and obtained pictures under tough contracts ,  New York Times, Tribune Group, Associated Newspaper, News International and almost every publishing group in the World started their own web sites, using pictures for peanuts whilst lamenting, “ We are loosing Money” they continued to make money off pictures through CPMs, “ accidentally” using pictures without paying  or sometimes purchased for ridiculously low fees.

Then came the blogs who where inspired by Googles claim to free usage under the The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 and other internet users of pictures, all claiming they where making no money, whilst the poor old photographer where having to spend money to apparently make nothing
Then came blogs and other internet users of pictures, all claiming they where making no money, whilst the poor old photographer where having to spend money to apparently make nothing.

In 2007 the World implodes, what happened to the American Dream ?

In 2008 when Getty Images sells for $ 2.4 billion with a failing business model they still do not understand what they did and their errors. Quite simply they where conducting business using digital with analog business models, they distributed full resolution digital images on a daily basis to hundreds of users, millions of asset files that could be stolen and used by everyone for free, whilst those users made millions on click through advertising revenue in perpetuity.

It all seemed hopeless and then along came GumGum, and they have suggested a solution that could get the creators back in financial control of their lives and the industry back on a firm foothold.

For in the end it’s the creators of new art that drives the marketplace but the industry must change the way it markets images in this maturing digital age. The artists have to be paid and then the flow of great marketable images will continue and big business through shared revenue will make even more money and survive.

And I suspect Bill Gates will still be rich!!!!

Paul Harris

Pacific Coast News
Celebrity Home Photos
Pacific Coast News Video
United States Head Office
BWP Media USA Incorporated

Posted in Midstock, license, multimedia, Search, newspaper, copyright, idee, Pacific coast news, gumgum, technology, magazine, keyword, google, editorial, law, news, corbis, finance, PACA, web 2.0, photojournalism, wire service, CEPIC, getty | Print | No Comments »