Attached Link: Click here to get a bit of context on macro/micro stock

Lately I've been toying with the idea of submitting some of my work as stock photography. Yesterday after compiling a (currently rather short) list of shots I thought would work as stock, I had my first pics accepted at the two sites I've currently tried. One is 'macro' stock, the other 'micro' stock and this dictates what kind of portfolio I'll be compiling for each, based primarily on quality... I mean, I think I might find it a bit of a bitter pill to swallow to see a work I consider to be one of my better efforts going for as little as 10 cents a pop for unlimited licensing of the image...!

Anyway, to the point of the thread - I was wondering if any of you guys/gals have had any experience with selling stock and if the arrival of these 'microstock' sites like Shutterstock has been good or bad for you? Do you think they pose a threat to the traditional stock photography market? Do you find one style earns better than the other?

I remember reading someone suggesting it was a bit like Napster for the photography industry, and I think that could well be a fairly apt description, as people are getting online to get images they would previously have had to commission or pay a higher fee for. If professionals, or professional-standard photographers become accustomed to posting to these micro-stock sites, the quality in many areas may match that of the professional stock sites like Getty.... but the amount earned per sale certainly won't....

Some refuse to post their images to these micro-stock sites for fear that if everyone does it then they'll be out of a job as they'll have undermined their original market. But with many reporting equal or greater sales from these sites, is it maybe time for those more 'exclusive' photographers to get a slice of the action, or would they be doing more for their longterm interests from abstaining? .... it's a tricky one eh? Seems to me this trend in the industry must in no small part have been sparked by the proliferation of affordable good quality cameras, which allow an 'average' photographer to take a 'good' photo without necessarily knowing much theory or technical photographic aspects such as aperture etc etc.

Very interested to hear peoples opinions on this, and also warmly welcome any advice from seasoned stock contributors out there ;)

Adam

Adam Edwards Photography