Stock photos, does amateurs have a chance?

What is a realistic range one can make from stock photos? Other than the professions, any hobbist here have tried selling their shots? When I counted my stuff yesterday, I realized I've spent 2.5k on this hobby in the last 6 month. It'd be nice if we can get some of those back.

I doubt anyone has much of a chance in stock photography in the next few years. So many free websites or sites like iPhoto which offer stock images for less than 5 dollars are popping up and becoming commonplace that alot of stock photographers are really starting to feel the pinch

anyone can technically make it, but its an uphill battle. Like Rich mentioned, theres a lot of stock agencies that are selling images for nothing, and amatuers get excited that they can make anything, which then kills the market for the pros.

In a real agency, you have to have an incredible portfolio and demonstrate a clear understanding of what sells and how to take iamges for stock work. You can't just take a pic that you like and expect it to sell.

There are smaller agencies that you can front with, as they then send your images to Getty and Corbis and the like, but then your rights and fees are less.

So realisticlly it would be easier for you to start your own business and make money by selling prints to an actual client.

If you truely want to pursue it, start by taking some classes or workshops on it and get a good foundation in. And when you see these microagencies, ask yourself if your image is really only worth $0.20

I think it was the 80s-90s when stock photographers made a killing. Then the concept of Royalty-free image came and cheap image licensing, and now we have free photo sites.

On a website I designed back in 2000, we/client licensed an image for 1 year of online use... paid several hundred dollars for the right to use it. Just a few months ago, I found a pic I like for use on the same website, emailed the photographer and asked for permission, and she gave it to me free. Cost: $0. I think knowing her photo is being used on our website is enough compensation for her.

>So realisticlly it would be easier for you to start your own business and make money by selling prints to an actual client.

I agree. So far, I've recovered about 25% the cost of my 30D selling images and prints, but I've only been selling for (1) month. www.lightningbugimages​.com

Ouch $0.20. Sounds like the story about selling pick-axe during gold rush. Now why can't Canon just lower their lens price.

Thanks fivefish! I took a look at your gallery and they are great shots. Are those by client request or just shots you took on your trips? How do you advertise your website?

Check out the Online Proofs section... those are the money shots.

The Gallery is just for posting shots I play around with (or for linking here to POTN).

>How do you advertise your website?

Not much... word of mouth basically... it's mostly there so they can look at the pictures online.

I also link to my website from the Equestrian school where these kids go to. It helps that I'm the webmaster for the other website too (doing it for free, design, host, etc.... then I give the instructor a small percentage.)

Last month, I just used the website for parents to preview the photos. (No online ordering.) Then they print the order form, write the photo #s they want, and how many of each (8x10,wallet, etc) and they either mail the check and order form, or give it to us personally when we see them at the horse farm.

This month, I'm still allowing them to do ordering via postal mail, or hand-delivered, but I'm starting to accept Paypal. We'll see how it goes.

Most of my orders come in this way though... I printed a proof book and left it at the barn, where parents can look at the book while they wait for their kids to finish their horse lessons. They write down the ID number of photos they want (of their kids), and they'll write a check, and say they want this and this and that. Next week, my wife brings the pictures.

The instructor loves us because the good pictures bring great publicity to her business, and more clients for her, and a little percentage... and the more clients she have, the more pictures we take, the more orders we get. It's a nice relationship.

Some of the parents liked our photos and wants to hire us to shoot their kids.. basically, a photo shoot session. They bought their kids horses or ponies, and wants pictures of them.

I've been only doing this (selling prints) for the past 2 months. And frankly, I'm surprised to how well it has taken off! I never intended to get into this business (I already run my own home business)... I just got volunteered to be the photographer because I had the camera and my kid also takes horse lessons at the barn.

Thanks fivefish for sharing your experience. And I am glad it worked so well for you, but does look like you make most of your money per clients request (or at least of the clients). You should be considered semi-pro rather than a hobbist

>You should be considered semi-pro rather than a hobbist

I still consider myself an amateur. I don't even have an L lens .... yet!

My most expensive lens is the new 10-22mm.

The other lenses I have are the $80 50mm and $100 kit lens, and the $150 zoom lens.

Someone posted this link a while back. It's a very well written article about the whole microstock debacle.

http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/m​icro-payment.shtml

You can make money, a little or a lot.
http://submit.shutters​tock.com/?ref=12035
The more pics you submit and get accepted the more money you can make.

There is a good write up in the August issue of Popular Photography about stock. Also do a search here, there have been a few threads about it.

Eagle wrote:
You can make money, a little or a lot.
http://submit.shutters​tock.com/?ref=12035
The more pics you submit and get accepted the more money you can make.

There is a good write up in the August issue of Popular Photography about stock. Also do a search here, there have been a few threads about it.

is your time really worth .25 a shot? thats whats wrong with the industry. its killing the market for the pros that really know what they are doing. selling your rights to something for that cheep is insane

I am not a pro, that is I do not shoot photos for a living. I am happy at .25 a shot, the end of the month I will get a check for at least $100 from SS. Some get way more than that. Not bad for a hobby I enjoy. I'm not going to get rich but I'm not planning on it either. It is a totally different market than what the pros that you are refering to are in.

The following is copied from a microstock forum:
---------------
I know what they do, but maybe some new people to the stock world dont? How do they use our images? What REALLY are they looking for? What could they use more of? What do they REALLY think about the quality on RF sites as compared to RM sites? Please show us some of the things you've created with our work. Thanks Laurin ---------------
Good question. I'm interested in hearing some responses as well.

For my day job, I work for a small non-profit organization whose membership consists of a certain county-level government agency within the state of California...50 members in all. I'm responsible for maintaining the organization's website, and for us, RF is the way to go. The simple fact is that RM imagery is too expensive on our limited budget (under $300K per year). The member counties with websites and newsletters also use RF for the same reason. Imagine the uproar from taxpayers if they heard a county spent $300 for a single image to use on their website for three months or $100 for an image used in a flyer that went out to only 50 people (see my pathetic example of one of our low budget flyers using an RF image -- PDF format). RF is perfect for small non-profits and government agencies alike.

In my example, if I'd had a choice, I would have used an image that included a disabled person. Unfortunately there aren't any images of disabled people at work or in business available on the microstocks yet, and I'm not about to pay Getty the big bucks for anything in their outdated collected. That's something I'm looking for, and even posted a request months ago on SS's forum to no avail.

The counties use images in their newsletters of healthy food, the elderly and disabled in both healthy and caregiving situations, images depicting payroll and taxes or the subject of an upcoming training in caregiving, etc. I've also seen a few flowers used just to cheer things up. I'll post some links once our website comes back up (grr). ---------------

IMAGE LINK: http://submit.shutters​tock.com …topic.php?p=122​037#122037

thats great that it works for you, the problem is that it kills the market for the rest of us. the larger companies can't compete as they once did, so royalties go down. Then companies decide that they can no longer spend the cash they once did, so they look to the micro agencies and abandon the major ones all together.

Think of micro agencies as the wal marts of the photo world

please read this with an open mind. http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/m​icro-payment.shtml

this is a HUGE problem in the industry, and not to be taken lightly at all