I’ve heard very big RU-vidrs state that a single picture made them $13K in stock photography; however at the end of the day they admit that was 10 or 13 years ago when this business model was not so saturated. Today there’s too much offer for the demand. You get paid peanuts as a seller because I can go online right now and buy stock pictures for $1 or $2.
Absolutely ismy, Rachel states it feel's great when you see you work used by these big companies that value your work. Realy! they valued your work so much they sent you 25 cents, this is instead of hiring you as a photographer to do a shoot for them. I would say they have attributed a value of stuff all to your work. So just like ismy alak, thank you Rachel for laying it out for us. I'll just go and shoot my back yard cause I'll get paid the same :).
This is a fair comment. I agree that the value, the payment, that they give you is awful. But if you’re looking for feedback on whether your images are good... having a company use them means more than your mom saying they’re good because she has to. 😂 I’m sure there are many stock images taken in backyards! 👍
That's the same reason I wont do it. These companies are robbing photographers. 33 cents for an image that cost the photographer a flight around the world, hiking 20 miles, having a good eye, knowing how to edit, and owning ten thousand dollars worth of gear. Good photos should sell for hundreds of dollars each.
I think most photographers overvalue their images. They feel special to the photographer but really there isn't much skill required to take stock photos. You're overthinking it
@@zacharydavis1137 oOOooOOoooo fuck meeeee from big Sackary struggling to sell his ppppprecious pppppictures that are sooooo hard to take. It takes sooooo much skiIiIiIillllll
I have made a total of probably $600 in the period of few years and that is when I realized that is not worth it. Photography is my passion and my hobby I want to keep it that way. If I want to make money, I will replace a ceiling fan or a light in your kitchen and make alot more money in just hours. Thank you for the video and the experience you are sharing with us. 👍
I'm an retired photography and have been through the mill when it comes to the photography business. I really appreciate your very honest evaluation of the stock photography business. I feel you hit the nail on the head in your statement that agencies are "stealing" images from photographers. Clearly, time and talent are not the issue as related to images generating income is concerned. Clearly good quality images are highly desirable in advertising, promotion, packaging and other commercial applications. Good images sell products or promote ideas and those images clearly do have tremendous value to those who buy and use them. From that point of view photographers are being ripped off. However, the trade off comes from having a legimate market which allows beginning photographers to get critical feedback on their work while also building a portfolio of commerically saleable images. The portfolio will become the photographers best sales tool when soliciting new clients, espeically for commercial accounts in the manufacturing or advertising segments of the market. Getting hired to be an account photographer for a specific assignment is no easy task. The portfolio is the single most important part of getting such jobs espeically if it demonstrates no only technical skill but also the ability to work out creative ideas. In some ways stock photography provides a valid reason to pursue, what might be called self assignments. Even when images sold to stock garner very small commissions they still have enormous value as providing an incentive to go out and shoot. Looking back at my career I wish now that I had sold more images as stock. I was a generalist and so covered a wide range of photographic catagories. In hindsight I might have used stock agencies to build a reputation for sepecific kinds of images and so have been able to focus (pun intended) on specialized areas, ie, food, architecture, landscape, executive portraits, glamour etc. I can see stock agencies as a value resource for any photographer who wants to build a portfolio around any specfic photography niche.
This is such an excellent comment... thank you for this. The learning and growth potential when pursuing this business is huge. Your point about a portfolio is extremely valid. I’ve also found that now that I’m in business for myself in other capacities I have my own library of images at my disposal for use. 👍
Well said. And to add to that, I know a few photographers in the LA area that use agencies to sell their images (mostly celebrity and high profile people) to publications around the world and some get paid thousands and thousands of dollars for one single image. Exclusive licensing even more. The agencies don't fool around. They dont sell them to stock companies, that's kiddie stuff.
Rachel, this is extremely valuable information. Thank you for sharing it. I spent most of my life trying to glean a living from photography, and now - in retirement, looking back over my life - I regret having done so. I would have been far better off to choose a field with a real paycheque attached to it, and kept photography as a hobby. And that would be my advice to anyone younger than I, and wondering what to do with their life. Look at the good paying professions, choose one that you don't totally hate, and do that. My sister was an artist at heart; but she was also smart as a whip, and extremely practical. So instead of studying art, she studied medicine, graduated near the top of her class, became a doctor - and that afforded her the income to take classes from the very best artists in the field, and buy the very best paints and brushes and canvas. She became well known, and was represented by a few galleries. When I compare her approach to my own, in truth, she was far more successful than I. You can still be an artist, using photography as the tool of expression. Just don't try to monetize it. >Charlie
I'm glad you're sharing your experience with us Charlie... it's so good to have information from people who have "been there done that" before we make decisions. Thank you!
I’ve been a pro photographer for 40 years. Never did a wedding, stock, or senior. Made $100k-$200k every year. I also did design work and billed $1,000,000/yr those years. YOU CAN MAKE MONEY IN ART AND PHOTO.
Well, Captain, perhaps you'd share your methods with us. Believe me, I'm interested. On my end, I ran my own portrait studio in a mall for 5 years. I've done hundreds of weddings, and many thousands of portraits. I've won my share of awards. And I've never made even 20% of the numbers you mention, nor do I know any other pro photographers who ever did. So please, share your story.
Hello Rachel. Watching this video gives me the distinct impression that you're sad to let stock photography go, at least for a while. And I can clearly see that your decision is a sound economic one. The fact that you've clearly moved on to more lucrative and satisfying challenges is for us all to embrace and to congratulate. Well done! Can I take this opportunity to thank you for such an honest and frank critique of stock photography. Keep smiling. You're a star.
Thank you for your honesty! I haven’t uploaded to my stock account for years because the pay was so depressing. Then I would hear other photographers talk about making money on it so I’m happy to have come across your video because I was thinking of starting up again. You just saved my HOURS of work! I wish other photographers would be more open about the time and work it takes to make that 33 cents.
THANK YOU for being one of the rare youtubers who does the description with conviction. Not a beat skipped; you included time stamps, product links and music credits. Solid A+
@@stopandthinkaboutit8636 yes, its a relatively easy job and fewer people get married and make it a big hutspa because its been recognized by more and more as just something vane or something you have to do to legalize your relationship... which by the way isnt true. Which is why people just register marriage without any ceremonies and go on with their lives. Weddings are just arbitrary ceremonial cost to feed money to the church and government. A ransom for feeling you did something "the correct way". And it makes it feel less and less correct and more and more cynical and corrupt to many young couples.
Thanks Rachel, I'm more determined to NOT get on the bandwagon of stock photography no matter how rewarding it can be. I get more more satisfaction when I give a print to someone and see their eyes glowing. It make me more humble and appreciative of my craft and vision.
That’s an awesome feeling Bernard and I totally understand. Seeing people’s emotional reaction to your work is more than satisfying... it’s truly wonderful.
I'm treating my stock shots as a completely discipline to anything that I would want to put on a wall. It helps me not get too precious about the shots, but makes me go out and shoot.
I think a lot of us who did stock photography came to this same conclusion. I do it for the fun, and..it's somehow less rewarding hearing someone say that you made a beautiful photo then someone who will actually pull his wallet and pay for it, even if it's only 33 cents. Thank you Rachel for putting my thoughts into words!
I was only ever innit for the money and the money was good in the years 2012- 2017 at SS. Paid for all my gear 3X over with stock income since 2012. Now it's no longer worth the effort. Far too many competitors. Far too many images for the number of customers. Everyone with a smartphone/camera is encouraged to upload to stock and submission review standards have deteriorated so much that even if you have good stuff, it will be buried under a mountain of lesser stuff and will never be seen... let alone sell! Now it's all crowdfunding and the only winner is the big corporation that organizes it......you're the slave labor! Do it for fun,kicks and pocket money but not for serious (dependable) income to pay your mortgage and put food on your family.
For the most part that is true. You can still stand out with good photography. However, SS is not my best earner currently. Since the onset of AI they are far too picky and reject for no good reason which discourages me from uploading regularly.
Agree completely with your assessment Rachel - thanks for sharing. I have done some stock for about 18 months and I can't say that I've poured my heart & soul into it by any means, but I have made sales. I do agree that the few rejections here and there really make you assess your skills, or at least the amount of attention you pay to creating your images. That is a valuable lesson in discipline. But as a source of income the balance is severely flawed. We invest thousands of dollars in gear and equipment, we spend hours on making great images, we invest ourselves in terms of not only time and energy, but the learning and perfecting the craft, the passion, the dedication, the late nights at the computer editing, uploading, keywording...ughhh! And then you get paid 25 or 30 cents for an image. It's crazy! So if income is what people are after, then I would suggest look for other ways of monetizing your creations because stock is taking advantage of photographers in a massive way. The only people really making money from stock photography is stock photography companies.
You nailed it, Rachel. It is so refreshing to hear such a frank and detailed appraisal of stock photography, as seen from our end of the camera, delivered with so much balance and open-mindedness. The stock agencies' loss is our gain.
I am doing stock photography for 2 years and its really worth in terms of learning and exploring new ideas. It gives you confidence and courage for exploring more unique ideas and concepts to shoot and learn.
The big companies don't care about our opinions because of the millions of photographers out there, there's always someone who will work for next to nothing. But the learning part you talked about is probably more valuable than the money part, isn't it. Thanks for the video!
Stock Photography is certaininly a huge waste of time, but Stock Video is very much worth it. If you can shoot professional quality video, give it a try. I'm averaging about $2500/mo. just at Shutterstock and I only work on stock a few hours a month.
@@frankb4793 Basically I am shooting whatever interests me and whatever I'll will have fun shooting. That's really why I got into stock in the first place -- the money was just an afterthought. Wildlife, landscapes, National Parks, cityscapes, planes, ships, sports, fires, etc. have all done quite well for me. Not everything sells, but more than enough sell to make up for the ones that don't. Next, I'm thinking about hiring models to do some lifestyle footage, but I have no taken that step yet. I might decide it is too much hassle and just stick with what I enjoy doing. If it becomes a chore to shoot for stock then I won't want to do it anymore and I don't want to ruin it. Some people like to go fishing, I like to go shooting.
I like your FS7 training video Doug!! Yes I agree. The race to the bottom was achieved a while ago in photos. I have 100,000 images from my career with no home for stock. Stock video is better, but right now business models are changing for payouts. Pond5 you choose the price and now they do 60% for the creator as exclusive. Videoblocks leads the race to the bottom in video. I make good sales in SS in video but as soon as they join the race to the bottom like videoblocks, I’m pulling my gallery. Pond5 is the best and fair deal for creator, middleman & consumer. CraftedShutter RU-vid channel is a good one to subscribe for video.
@@JonathanClark99 Thank you for the compliments on my FS7 training. A few months ago I released a series on how to make money shooting stock footage. vimeo.com/ondemand/sellingstockfootage I agree that Videoblocks is not a good thing for stock footage contributors. Adobe Stock is okay, but I only earn about 10% there of what I earn at Shutterstock. I have not submitted enough footage to Pond5 do give it a thumbs up or thumbs down. I intend on sending them a few thousand clips later this summer when I have time to deal with them. But in the mean time, I would caution you of making the assumption that bigger payouts for the contributor is necessarily going to put more cash in your pocket. 60% of a grape is ultimately far less than 30% of a watermelon. I'm less interested in the percentage than I am in the overall earnings in actual dollars and cents. Heck, I'd take 10% from an agency if I was sure I'd earn more money than the $2500/mo. I'm earning at Shutterstock.
Well, people upload photos every day to instagram and receive nothen in exchange, but likes and prestige. So uploading to stock can actually be a little more rewarding.
This was my reason for looking into this. What's a like on Insta when I can make something potentially off my pictures. I have hundreds saved that I'm rediting. I just started training for a job editing copywriting work and I'm getting more of an eye for what sells due to this, I recently started an Ebay store to sell vintage clothing. If all three can give me some income then I'll take that seeing as other than the freelance editing job I am currently unemployed lol
Good point. I have lots of photos I took for fun, on my hard drive which no one ever sees. Perhaps I should take the time one weekend to upload them and see if I can get some money to buy a bag of crisps. :D
Hello Rachel, I just found your channel and I've had the pleasure of watching a few of your videos. I really appreciate your willingness to share such vital information about the stock photography industry. I wish you the very best on all of your future endeavors... Be well and stay encouraged!
Thank you for the insights. After 54 years of photography, including stints as a "professional" photographer, I had thought of going the stock route with the hundreds of thousands of images I have accumulated (or millions), but now I know it is just not worth it. When you got to the money segment, I thought you were going to describe numbers 10 times higher. It is good to get a reality check regarding the stock business and have expectations set accordingly. Good video.
When Shutterstock opened they destroyed the profits for photogs, there was a heated debate about that. But now that everyone can snap with automated cell phones, no film costs, no darkroom costs or skills...there's a glut of images and no one wants to pay what they cost to make, for a working photog.
Thank you. I couldn’t get past the rejections. Glad I didn’t persist. I think you were being very kind in your feelings about money earned. The money you’ve mentioned wouldn’t come close to compensating for a fraction of the camera gear used.
Rachel, you have been a candid and truthful vlogger with a positive outlook on life. You will be successful in anything you choose to tackle. Best wishes always.
Thanks for this! I am a newly retiree who is a web/graphic designer. I have been developing my camera skills recently while honing my post processing expertise in Adobe Lightroom, On1 and Luminar 3. Retiring is a potentially ominous thing, no more reliable income. Would love to develop my photography to at least bring in a modest income. Again my appreciation for your input here.
You’re welcome Steven! I can really appreciate your position. One nice thing about stock is that once the images are uploaded, it’s a completely passive income.
Good video Rachel, and yes I agree, photographers are being robbed. After joining Shutterstock last year I spent some time on the contributor forums there and there was a lot of anger, especially from videographers who had invested a lot of time and money to make stock videos. Their videos were being sold for around 15 bucks and the contributors were earning peanuts in commission. Shutterstock makes a nice profit for not creating anything, apart from a website, but the people creating the content earn virtually nothing. The stock market is also oversaturated these days with millions of photos being uploaded every week. Yes, it does give your ego a little boost if someone actually pays money for your work (even if you do only get 25 cents per image) and yes, it does force you to hone your photography and post-processing skills, but as a way to make a passive income it is a complete waste of time for most people.
Hi Rachel, I just came across this video. Great job at confirming what I've always felt since the 90s. I'm much older than you but can tell you that photo fees back in the day was between $2000 and $3000 per day. Now photographers are a dime a dozen and so undervalued that it almost doesn't pay being a photographer. Rates have come down dramatically but expenses have gone up dramatically. ROI for stock doesn't pay anymore. Great job and keep up the good work.
stock photography guidelines make you a better photographer, one reason why i started doing. I just add out of habit, if you want to make serious money you need to just work locally and find clients.
I think different person has different mindset. For me, I just do stock photography as a side job. I have a lot of photos from my traveling (more than 100 GB in total, almost all of them in raw), and rather than sitting collecting dust in my hard drive, I upload them to Shutterstock. No matter how little money I get, I consider that a win (any small amount is better than zero). Also, I don't spend too much time editing my photos, because even if you spend a lot of time perfecting it, it still might not get sold.
@@Vladimiradventurephotography I admit the time spent doing those will be wasted if your images are not sold. Well we can't win everything can we? LOL. I think that's the only cons of doing SS with "side job" mindset.
I've been telling people for years it's a terrible deal and even worse now with sites like Unsplash which pay zero. However, I honestly never considered what you said about learning and honing your craft through making stock images. I can see using it as a motivator to improve, if as you said, money is not the main motivator. I really enjoyed your perspective and honesty on that. I hope people do remember what you said and it's the thing that gets me mad the most: these companies are paying pennies for hours and hours of your labor, and believe it, they are getting so much value and profit from the deal. It's a dead business model for photographers from my point of view. Anyway, excellent video and thanks for posting it!
Thanks Fred!! Yeah, I really do think it's wrong that photographers get so little, especially when they are creating the product for these agencies. I'd have to sell an image multiple times just to buy a cup of coffee. You're right - it's not a good deal.
You say photographers are being robbed. That is undeniably true. I have been a stock photographer for almost 25 years. Back in the day only a few stock agencies existed (e.g. Getty, Tony Stone, Masterfile, etc). Before digital, photos had to be submitted on chrome film only and images were much more highly valued. Single image sales of $500 or even $5,000 were not uncommon. So what happened? Two things. Digital camera technology and the rise of micro-stock agencies led to massive amounts of low quality imagery being created and micro-stock undercutting sales to as little as $1 per image. Once amateur and semi pro photographers (i.e. Millennial generation) jumped on the micro-stock bandwagon it was game over for a once profitable and creative business model.
Hello,i'm from Argentina. If i can reach this number of sellings is actually not a bad idea at all. U$100 are about $4500 pesos . Sorry about my english. Thanks for sharing.
You hit the nail on the head, Kevin. Stock photography now belongs to the developing world, and "first world" (hate that term) photographers are the ones hurting. The stock industry was always subsidized by the photographers, even in film days, but as standards of living increase in the developing world it will allow photographers living there to compete globally, as it is still economically viable for them. It's like factory workers in China and Thailand making cameras that everyone can afford - same phenomena, made possible by the global market. One day we will all be economically equal, hey???
Hi there Rachel......Honesty seems to be the recurring theme in many of the comments your latest Video has inspired. So I'll join the chorus and add my appreciation for such an honest and realistic view from your perspective, thank you.
Thank you for your total honesty, yes I agree with you completely, photographers are being completely ripped of, love taking photos, and mine are not snaps as they say, I always think the image through. 0.33cents for an image that a company can use to make them heaps of money, is a total insult to the photographer.
I used to do this for an agency for two years. He supplied the film and developed it. And sold the images to hot wheels, hot rod and car and car conversions magazines. He only wanted film images of cars. But shot in a certain way. Each month he sent me a list of what he wanted... eventually i would get a checque from time to time which was nice.
I'm so glad you made this video, really appreciate the info, but MOST OF ALL the MESSAGE at the end. I am so happy you called it what it is and stood up and said enough is enough. Thank you for this.
Hi Rachel, thank you for this video. With this, you are confirming what I was thinking for about 3 years. Long story short, here is my balance: Dreamstime: 3 years, total income: about 43$, Shutterstock: 8 months, total income: about 6$. So I can totaly confirm that uploading to stock agencies in a long term perspective is not worth it! But I recommend to do this for all beginners because of the learning effect, as Rachel mentioned it in the video.
Thanks for the candid exposition! I was thinking of putting in a month or so of effort so that I could get paid from passive income, but I didn't realize that consistency would make a difference for stock photography sites. I thought that was just for RU-vid. You saved me a lot of time and energy!
Planning to start stock photography and questions in my mind were all answered by this video. And reading the comments, I think it's not worth trying. Thanks for uploading Rachel!
Also one has to remember that the odd stock sites are linked to other sites, I also signed up on many stock image sites now I upload to just afew due to lack of or no sales, I can upload an image to say shutterstock and it's accepted then I upload that same image to another and it's not and vise versa. Your not going to be rich over night so don't give up your day job, I have approx. 300 images on an average I would earn $50us per month, most I've sold an image for is $72us and I sold 3 image that same day for $72 each, I haven't uploaded any new images for maybe a year.
I tried it and soon walked away from it , this is a really good and informative video Rachel and I think you've got all the points exactly right good or bad … Thank you
Thanks Ray! Yes, it's got it's good and bad eh? Important for each person to figure out whether it's worth it for them and if it fits in with their goals.
the problem is agencies like Shutterstock sell the images cheap and don't care about the photographer at all. It is volume. And so the problem is actually all of you who submit to these crooks. If you didn't do it they would not be in business and companies would pay more. So thanks a lot! The least I ever got was $15 and that was editorial. Average (TV, mags, books, & newspapers) for B/W $35, Color $100. Got more for special placement (covers front & back, centerfold "dps") I am totally amazed anybody would sell a photo usage for cents.
Thank you Rachel for a very open and candid conversation about your experiences. Stock video is also in the same category. Companies selling your videos are paying out minimal commissions. Thank you for this video.
Thanks Rachel for the info. I submit to stock and enjoy the passive income, although it is not much yet. I’m still working on getting to the 1000 images mark. One question - is there a way to find out who or which publication purchased an image? I would love to see how my images are being used.
Hi Stephanie. They don't tell you. But what I do is go to the dashboard in the agency website and bring up images that have sold. If you use chrome, you can right click and select "Search Google for Image". I've found many of my images in use that way. Let me know if you have trouble.
Great information. Thanks for taking the time to share your experience. One video tip; the use of a music bed is great for transitions, but while giving information or training, music is a distraction and really takes away from your presentation. The video is for information, in this case, not entertainment, so it takes more concentration to overcome the music. Great job, though, and again, appreciation for the insight and wisdom you shared.
Wow! Roughly $120 PM passive for 2000 edited images keyworded and uploaded? $30 per week after 6 months will deteriorate further as the images fall down the searches...that is erm......terrible payback for a ton of hard work.
too bad we can't get photographers to rally together and just stop uploading and demand more pay!! Photography is Hard work!!!! We love it but still would love to make money too!
Production costs are high, the payout just ain't what it used to be. Just not worth it for me anymore. $0,10 average per license payout from certain agencies nowadays...
Yeah what a horrible investment of be time talent you could make way more on Instagram by offering your services to small businesses that have shit photos on your IG you could kill it I'm sure
Thank you Rachel. Really the right clip for the right time. I still started to upload on 2 agencies after photographing for 20 years now. I have learned, that my own build private stockarchiv based on Creative Commons licenses with 2000+ pics brought me more jobs/workshops that Shutterstock will ever do. Happy easter!
Thank you so much for the honesty. I appreciate it. I started stock photography as a therapeutic coping mechanism against stress. I'm not after the money but seeing my images get approved is rewarding in itself. P. S. If I can't make much money out of my images, might as well use it some other way. 😆
Same with me🙏🏻At least i've something to distract my mind with. But honestly all stock photography agencies are really2 leeching from us. I still remember when i worked as a graphic designer, our studio had to pay LOTS of money for the visuals that we bought for our clients to create the advertising design. At that time i haven't involved in stock photography and had no idea that they paid unbelievably little comission for each visual/image sold.
I am getting back into photography after 15 years. I had my own studio etc and shot weddings and loved it. This is a great video because I was....was, considering stock but the time invested can be used elsewhere and the payoff will be greater. Thank you for a wonderful, helpful video.
You're welcome! I'm glad it was helpful. That's wonderful that you're getting back into photography! I had a similar story.. wrote about it in my book. I did weddings etc for many years and then took a break. Loving doing landscapes now. Nice to meet you!
yes you are very correct .. Photographers are being Robbed ... % of commission is very less .. it should be Opposite Ex. 60% Photographer and 40 % to seller.. This is my opinion..
I have sold images through flickr.com in the past, 2007-2012 via Getty Images. But the last sale was seven years ago. I’m not sure Getty is still in business. I have had images stolen though. Not worth the trouble.
I started to submit some photos, nature photos, and I do not expect a lot of income from them, but I like to photo nature sometimes. If I wanted to be a professional photographer full-time, I would see it as a way to get critiqued and to see what is popular, and build a portfolio--photos that sell one can show them in a portfolio, to show they were sold and used. The arts often do not pay well, that is why there are sometimes unions like the writers' union. I look forward to doing some more nature photos and perfecting my skills and style. I am 60 years old, and this is just something that I enjoy. I am happy that I can place them with a stock photo online place. In the past, I worked for private marketing companies and did photo-journalism type of work, and keeping one's skills up to date is probably important for many. Now, I can do the nature photos!
I first joined a stock agency many years ago and it was 50% . Even then I thought the agency took too much! And now, what with having to take images, perhaps editing on the computer, then all of the meterdata for the image and stock agency search engines, do you really think it is worth it? Open your own gallery shop and sell your own images! The more good, photographers, stop uploading to stock agencies and these stock agencies are left with poor photographers then they might up their rates...
Rachel's message is truly prescient. She posted this over a year ago. It was true then and it's astounding in it's accuracy today. With Shutterstock now paying 10 cents a picture photographers have a sure fire recipe for starvation.
@@tiberiu_nicolae the main issue is the lack of proper policing of copyright coupled with a ton of third world pseudophotographers willing to work for peanuts, using the advantage of low living costs and problems with international policing of copyright.
good evening thank you for sharing with us your experience of one year on different platforms .. and it's been a long time since I wait for this video of you .. and I have the same problem that you a lot of images and less money . the problem is that we chose to do the pictures of landscapes and longexpo .. so we have to change a bit like for example photographs the events the evenings .. of all .. editorial and commercial.
I totally hear you. When I saw the payout threshold and realised how little I would get for the time I put in I was like...woah!! If I can line up a passive income then I'll be cool with that because I can't see me busting my guts on a regular for that type of pay-out. Thanks for posting this.
