[STOCKPHOTO] Subject matter that sells...
Sean McCormick
Folks,
I'm curious to know what types of subject matter sell in today's market?
My photography tends towards rural and scenic fine art, and I've had
decent print sales from these subjects. The research I've done into the
high end stock agencies shows that they're mainly interested in high
fashion, upscale living, and sports photography. Not my usual stomping
grounds. :-)
Sean
--
Digiteyesed Photography
http://www.digiteyesed.com/portfolio
(Still renovating, expect broken links.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.cfm#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.cfm
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STOCKPHOTO/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STOCKPHOTO-...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Dean
In message <41AA0AB...@digiteyesed.com>, Sean McCormick
<se...@digiteyesed.com> writes
>
>
>Folks,
>
>I'm curious to know what types of subject matter sell in today's market?
Sean
A general agency needs one image of everything in the world. When they
have one they then need two..three and so on but they need more of some
images than others
>
>My photography tends towards rural and scenic fine art, and I've had
>decent print sales from these subjects.
I had a look at your portfolio and can see the appeal for wall art.
For stock you should concentrate on colour IMO. While stock images are
used as B&W they are often converted from colour. Shooting in colour for
stock should increase sales. We have one B&W image on our site because i
like it; the first buyer interested asked if we had it in colour. Many
of our images have been used in B&W or duotone but the originals were
delivered as colour. I know there is at least one B&W agency and a
market for B&W but our own experience is to lean heavily to colour for
stock
> The research I've done into the
>high end stock agencies shows that they're mainly interested in high
>fashion, upscale living, and sports photography. Not my usual stomping
>grounds. :-)
>
You need to be careful researching so called high end sites thinking
that the style on show is what sells. Many images may be on show to give
a feel of creativity. ie it looks pleasing so its a nice site to visit.
We have a few images on our own site because we like them (see above)
However the images that make the money may surprise.
Lifestyle images are the images most used. Its also the area of greatest
competition.
Don't try to pigeon hole your images as "editorial" or
"commercial/advertising". A good stock image is capable of many sales
over many years in multiple markets. Images of farm animals for example
can be sold for many surprising uses. Last week one of our goose images
sold for an invitation for a fashion show. We have a cow image that has
been used to sell everything from shipping companies to concrete and of
course the usual obvious animal feed and dairy products etc . The same
"good stock" images are also suitable for editorial uses with the
correct caption.
Finally don't think that your "best" images should go into RM and your
"seconds" should go into RF as some confused minds here would suggest.
Its likely only your best stock images will ever sell so you have to
make a choice (short term V long term). Do you want to sell your best
images as RF or RM? They would probably make the same money in either in
the short term. Some distributors would try to convince you its OK you
can sell both. You can make money in both . Per image per year is the
same so put 50% in RF and 50% in RM
If you can make the same money with your best images as RF or RM short
term then my response is to market only as 100% RM as long term
management and income derived from your intellectual property is more
assured.
Cheers
Pete
100% Royalty Free free
--
Peter Dean Agripicture Images http://www.agripicture.com
David Kilpatrick
There are entire picture libraries devoted to nothing but agribusiness
and the countryside. They just sell to that market.
The two 'night and flash light painting' pix I bought from you this
month are a really oddity because I don't know any market which would
buy them except paranormal/scifi mags, photo mags like ourselves, or the
card and poster publishing industry. Because they are Canon EOS 300D - 6
megapixel - the poster market is ruled out; the same shots capable of A1
poster size (on 5 x 4 film or maybe a 22 megapixel digital back) would
be worth sending (not letting sit in a library!) to major poster
publishers. I can see them being potentially good sellers as cards,
either postcard or greetings (not a common dual function).
David
Sean McCormick wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> I'm curious to know what types of subject matter sell in today's market?
> My photography tends towards rural and scenic fine art, and I've had
> decent print sales from these subjects. The research I've done into the
> high end stock agencies shows that they're mainly interested in high
> fashion, upscale living, and sports photography. Not my usual stomping
> grounds. :-)
>
> Sean
>
--
Icon Publications Ltd - f2, Master and Photoworld magazines
http://www.f2photo.co.uk http://www.freelancephotographer.co.uk
Stock images at www.alamy.com -
Icon Digital Featurepix & David and Shirley Kilpatrick
Peter Dean
In message <41AAF081...@btconnect.com>, David Kilpatrick
<icon...@btconnect.com> writes
>
David said
>There are entire picture libraries devoted to nothing but agribusiness
>and the countryside.
Right
> They just sell to that market.
>
Wrong.
Some agri images especially conceptual or anthropomorphic reach well
outside the obvious agribusiness market. It's what makes the business
interesting over and above any profits made.
Pete
--
Peter Dean Agripicture Images http://www.agripicture.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean McCormick
Peter Dean wrote:
>I had a look at your portfolio and can see the appeal for wall art.
>
>
I do fairly well selling prints and postcards at farmer's markets. I
wasn't able to get organized enough to offer a calendar this year, but I
have high hopes for next year. :-)
>For stock you should concentrate on colour IMO. While stock images are
>used as B&W they are often converted from colour. Shooting in colour for
>stock should increase sales.
>
All of my original files are in colour. I had a bit of a chuckle when I
went through the features of my new Canon 20D. It allows me to apply
colour filters to black and white images in camera, but I'm just
gobsmacked that anyone would shoot in B&W when they can arse around with
the channel mixer in Photoshop instead.
>You need to be careful researching so called high end sites thinking
>that the style on show is what sells.
>
This is what the agencies told me they were after when I e-mailed them
asking if they had any preferences for the types of subject matter I
should focus my submission around.
>Finally don't think that your "best" images should go into RM and your
>"seconds" should go into RF as some confused minds here would suggest.
>
>
If it's not my best, I don't want people seeing it. I'd like to develop
a reputation for quality rather than quantity.
>If you can make the same money with your best images as RF or RM short
>term then my response is to market only as 100% RM as long term
>management and income derived from your intellectual property is more
>assured.
>
>
This all makes sense -- thanks very much for the information. :-)
Best,
Sean
--
Digiteyesed Photography
http://www.digiteyesed.com/portfolio
Sean McCormick
David Kilpatrick wrote:
>Because they are Canon EOS 300D - 6
>megapixel - the poster market is ruled out; the same shots capable of A1
>poster size (on 5 x 4 film or maybe a 22 megapixel digital back)...
>
Argh. A 22 megapixel won't be in my future for some time to come,
unfortunately -- I just can't afford one of those beasts right now. I
guess it's time to look around for a used view camera. Can anyone
suggest a good place to find one?
And, boy, do you know how to depress someone. I moved up to the Canon
20D and I'm still left feeling 'inadequate'.
s.
--
Digiteyesed Photography
http://www.digiteyesed.com/
The online photographic portfolio of Sean McCormick.
bhhc
> Argh. A 22 megapixel won't be in my future for some time to come,
> unfortunately -- I just can't afford one of those beasts right now. I
> guess it's time to look around for a used view camera. Can anyone
> suggest a good place to find one?
>
> And, boy, do you know how to depress someone. I moved up to the Canon
> 20D and I'm still left feeling 'inadequate'.
Sean;
Because so many are dumping their medium and large format gear in such a
rush to buy a 1ds there is a small (yes small, not huge) glut of equipment
available. eBay is a good place to look, but research the gear available
before you jump in and bid on something you aren't going to be happy with.
Judging by what is on your web site you would probably be happier with a
field camera as opposed to a monorail. Toyo makes a great field camera as
does Linhof. The woodies (Wista, Zone VI, etc) are decent cameras but to my
mind have always seemed less "refined" (I am going to catch hell for that),
though they are well made and beautiful to look at, especially the ebony
wood 45 by Wista and of course the Ebony camera . . . both cost a fortune.
Keep in mind that the price of the camera will not be the end of it. It will
need adequate support (tripod and head), lense(s), film holders, changing
bag, (roll back?), hood, a decent meter, and probably a polaroid back. All
of that frequently costing more than your camera investment. Again auctions
are a way to go. As an example I bought a Gitzo giant studex and a compact
studex (both with heads) for the princely sum of $180 (worth about $1600
new) at a bankruptcy auction years ago . . . they had a lot of scratches,
but I was going to do that anyway . . . so.
Returning to your quip about the cost of a digital back . . . after nearly
thirty years of MF and LF polaroids I am sure that I have bought (my
customers at least) a couple of digi-backs . . . just can't find them
anywhere! ;-))
good luck
Paul Aparycki
Peter Dean
In message <MK9rGFDV...@deanteam.demon.co.uk>, Peter Dean
<pe...@AGRIPICTURE.COM> writes
>
> I know there is at least one B&W agency and a
>market for B&W but our own experience is to lean heavily to colour for
>stock
Someone asked which B&W agency
I was thinking of ibid
http://www.ibidphoto.com/
Looks like they are now also leaning toward some colour which makes
sense to me
Pete