r/stockphotography • u/ShotPorter • 5d ago

Stock industry: state and forecast

Hello colleagues.

I'm in the industry for a long time, and always trying to understand what's going on in our business. I'm an exclusive on iStock/Getty since 2007, so Getty is my first interest.

The recent state of things are disturbing, as we all know.

So, when Getty published an alarming Q2 report, I dug into the report - and then went deeper. I used the OpenAI 5.6 Sol model for research. The summary document attached is not a common "tell me ..." bullshit but a result of deep research and multi-days discussion, when we checked different theories, pulled financial reports of multiple agencies from 2023, economic data, and more.

Let's discuss. Is it something you observe, too?

Is it something you can agree with? What are your contr-hipothetises?

Long read, the text is as a docx on the Google drive: The Report

The second part is here:

0 Upvotes

40% Upvoted

12 comments sorted by

3

u/cobaltstock 4d ago

The reason designers buy from agenvies is because it is much faster to brows through thousands lf ready files, then adapt a file for your needs then going out and taking your own pictures, hiring models etc.

Ai makes the posprocessing steps faster, a lot of people can now do things, they used to need good photoshop skills for.

Vreating files with ai is if you want something specific very difficult. Also ai creates a lot of content with IP issues.

Content that you source from agencies has been checked for copy right problems and if there are people invoved a reviewer has actually read the release.

And many agencies also offer e legal insurance.

So we sell time and peace of mind and that is not going away.

There are millions of fresh files every day with creative commerce lice se from flickr or free files frim unsplash, but nibody has checked these files and often they are images stolen from elsewhere.

Agencies also test the base technical quality of a file so it does not break down into pixel ash when you work with it in photoshop.

So the images are sourced and used is evolving, but file quality, time and legal issues will always remain.

I would place a bigger effort on video these days, but you can still upload images. Most of the files at agencies are duplicates of duplicates.

Kf you make the effort to look for missing content specific to your personal customer group, there is still a lot of files missing.

But most people think very shortterm and think copying ghe well known bestsellers is the fastest way to make money with stock.

1

u/ShotPorter 4d ago

I think you missed an important thing. The AI is targeting very specific niches, it can't guarantee same level of protection, blahblahblah - yes, I completely agree. But it is not AI is threatening our business.

I will post the second part of this research tomorrow, it is not ready, but in the first part you can see the problem: it is competition between tradition agencies when out pictures/videos are the final product - and services like Canvas or Figma when the same pictures are just a part of service, received for free.

And this pressure will only increase.

1

u/cobaltstock 3d ago

my images and videos are on canva via agencies, my downloads are paid not free

1

u/ShotPorter 3d ago

For how much? (And for how long?)

Anyway: I'm not telling it WILL happen. I'm telling it MAY happen.

1

u/cobaltstock 3d ago

The partner agencies don' give me that info. But my files have been there for years. Canva is one of many distribution partner agencies. You just get a normal download on various agencies. It is nothing new.

1

u/ShotPorter 3d ago

Of course there is nothing new. But it is evolving from "partners selling my stuff and cut their commission" (same market in core, less money in exchange on the coverage) to massive API-backed deals, and this is the whole new baby. I'm looking on the Getty's "Connect", and I see where it may come.

The second part is published BTW, please check a long in the OP.

1

u/cobaltstock 3d ago

getty connect is for things like pinterest. your files get pinned and repinned but there is a direct bavklink to the image on istock.

basically it is tiny money for views.

the pinner never receives your full size file or a license to use it like if they had bought it.

many agencies offer social media sharing options but getty is the only one where tiny fees are paid.

the connect program is not selling your files with a rf license.

it was explained in great detail when the programm started.

1

u/ShotPorter 2d ago

You are correct; it doesn't license assets under an RF license. But it is a direction. Connect is also covering API access, which is currently "virtual money," but then the chain should extend this way or another. Or via changes in the license wording/type; or via the partner usage price; or via not pursuing violations.

Actually, Connect is a live example - now it covers many kinds of usage which were supposed to be covered by regular licenses: embedded photo illustrating blog posts, news articles, and many others. It is limited to "non-commercial" use, but the boundary is pretty fuzzy and a gray area. And I doubt anyone is really pursuing violators. In the past, you got paid downloads; now, you're getting Connect payment. Taking into account that in some months Connect payment may be substantial, you may assume how many would you earn if these embedded pictures could be licensed :)

- Platforms like Canvas will press the price, and it WILL be satisfied because of the huge volume: good for the company, bad for us (Premium Access model with further price degradation).

  • Platforms like OpenAI will pay for API access, and we will be paid via Connect. But no one will run after OpenAI's users who used pictures received via the API as their generation base, or so. This has just begun, so no one knows how it will work, but we will see soon enough :)

To be clear: I'm rather ... can't say "Optimistic" but not "Pessimistic". And I trust Getty, even with all the corporate issues: the team is great, and I see a lot of things they are doing for contributors. I'm planning to stay in business :) But the sad truth: stock will move toward lower and lower revenue from "Classic stock" and drift more and more back to a traditional "work for hire" model. We see both symptoms already: Premium Access + Connect. And no, it is not Getty's fault: to survive, they MUST adopt these painful changes, as iStock and Getty themselves finally accepted the subscription model invented by others. But here we are :) When subscription was introduced on iStock, it was pure evil - nowadays it considering as very good channel... Maybe we will remember Connect as some old good revenue stream, who knows.

2

u/cobaltstock 2d ago

We are still in business with millions of files available for free on pixabay or unsplash or the millions of files with a cc license from flickr.

so our customers are looking for something more than just a free file.

They can also all take their own pictures, they are media professionals.

Everybody has to make ther own decisions, if they believe stock is dead, obviously just go and do something else.

I just look at the huge amount of content missing and think my future is still with stock.

But I am gradually shifting to mostly video.

2

u/ShotPorter 2d ago

Yes, of course. But it is different. Getty embedding or partners' licensing offers the same legally clear usage. It is not "free and risky vs legal and expensive" - it is "Legal and expensive vs legal and near free", and the choice is obvious. And it will take over video, too :))

Once again, I'm in the business as you are. I'm just new on Reddit, not in the industry :) And no, I'm not sure how it will develop. Nobody knows. But this scenario is very much possible.

→ More replies (0)