Alamy has released a Whitepaper targeted at helping to resolve: ‘THE STOCK IMAGE INDUSTRY HAS TO CHALLENGE THE STATUS QUO OF THE CURRENT PRICING AND LICENSING MODELS IF IT WANTS TO BE FIT FOR PURPOSE FOR 21ST CENTURY IMAGE USE’
(I have contributed to the discussion on this Whitepaper at the request of Alamy. Marco Oonk, editor)
International stock image company Alamy has published the results of an industry think tank looking at the way in which we pay for images and how photographers are compensated. The round table discussion, hosted by Alamy, had key decision makers in the industry debate image licensing and pricing. Participants included picture buyers, photographers, journalists and commentators as well as stock image providers. The key findings from the report are:
- Photographers are finding the current market hard
- Complicated pricing structures are a disincentive to first time picture buyers
- Conventional licensing models are complicated and outmoded
- Online image sharing is endemic and there is no sense of the commercial value in an image
- Technology has failed to solve the problem of unauthorised image use so a simplified system is needed
The consensus is that these are challenging times for the industry; especially for photographers. Commenting on the conclusions of the event James West, CEO of Alamy said, “While photographers’ production costs have increased, their day rates have decreased, and getting a good price for pictures is more challenging. The question is whether our industry adopts a strategy of reacting to events or becomes more proactive, by introducing new and innovative business models and licensing systems. By adopting the latter strategy, our industry stands a better chance of controlling quality and maintaining revenues.”
The white paper also questioned the reasons why image rights may sometimes not be properly acquired. And as Roy Clark, digital media and photography lecturer explained, “The generation that’s coming up, grew up with the internet, and the idea that the stuff is free is pervasive. It’s a huge problem and I don’t think we’ve reached the apex of the situation.” The three most common reasons why rights are not obtained are:
- Dishonesty – the perpetrator knowingly breaches the owner’s rights.
- Ignorance – the perpetrator is unaware of image rights.
- Misinformation – the perpetrator is aware of image rights but thinks that, for example, if you credit the original picture source or use the image for non-commercial purposes, then it can be used legitimately.
And the report also went on to identify a fourth category, which can be described as the “honest but hampered” customer. This type of customer wants to purchase images through legitimate channels, but finds the existing licensing system complex, confusing or cumbersome. The stock photography industry needs to ask itself: are we making it too difficult or complicated for customers to purchase image rights? And do we need to adapt to the needs of a new breed of customer?
There are signs that this is already happening. Microstock photography has emerged to offer customers a simplified licensing system for Royalty Free images, involving subscription or micropayment. These relative newcomers have thrown down the gauntlet to established stock photography companies and achieved impressive sales in the process. But this is at a price point that is not viable for the specialist photographer.
As Giulia Carnera-Secchi, senior picture editor Good Housekeeping, said, “Whenever I see a complicated pricing structure, I go elsewhere to get that picture.” And Marco Oonk, editor, Fast media Magazine and co-founder of Picturemedia agreed, “Our clients find it increasingly frustrating, because it’s hard to predict what you are going to pay when there are 40,000 price options.”
The report went on to state that “An effective image licensing system balances the needs of the photographer, supplier and client. Photographers want to get the best possible price for their pictures, especially if shooting them has been difficult, dangerous or expensive. Stock photography companies want to service the needs of both photographer and purchaser, and maximise their assets. Picture buyers are concerned with quality, rights usage and price.”
Whether it’s adapting the current licensing models, improving web interfaces for easier purchasing, or providing more information to buyers, few would argue that the existing image licensing system needs to adapt to today’s fast-changing imaging market.
Alan Capel, head of content at Alamy commented, “The stock photography industry has felt the impact of dramatic changes in technology, culture and economics. Digital photography has transformed the way images are created, stored and distributed. The internet is a global shop front that makes it easy to access and share images, but is also difficult to control and regulate. Image sharing is a pervasive online activity, made popular by social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, and photo-sharing sites like Flickr and Pinterest. The result is a generation of young people for whom image sharing is second nature and image rights are an alien concept. These so-called “freenagers” consider almost anything online – images, music, video, games, text – to be freely available and theirs to share.
‘The global financial crisis has seen many companies reduce their picture budgets, increasing the pressure to drive down prices. Added to this, print media – one of stock photography’s biggest customers – is suffering from declining sales, reduced advertising revenues, and readers switching from paper to screen for news and comment. Face with this, we, as an industry have to react to this new reality. It seems to me that the present image licensing model is outmoded and it is up to companies like Alamy to work with photographers and image buyers to fix it.”
To download a full copy of the White Paper and images associated with this article click here.