Echo of Moscow: “Photo Banks: Easy Money or Hellish Labor for the Microstocker”

Stock Banks: Easy Money or Hellish Work for Microstockers

Recently, I read a rather interesting interview. In principle, I agree with some of the thoughts expressed, and disagree with others. Again, it depends on how to approach working with stock banks. If you consider stock banks on the internet as the main source of income, it is clear that it requires significant effort. Although working offline is often – hellish work, and for much less money than in stock banks. If stock banks are viewed as an additional source of income and a good supplement to earnings, then there’s nothing hellish about it. So everyone judges from their own perspective. If you ask me how I personally feel about it, I don’t see anything hellish in it. Definitely, it’s better to work for yourself, even if it’s hellish, than to work for someone else for 12 hours a day, constantly getting kicked and living with uncertainty about tomorrow.
Now, let’s actually move on to the interview on radio “Echo of Moscow“. In the studio was – Timur Anikin, photo editor of ID “Smena”. The host of the show – Alexander Plyushchev, co-host – Viktor Zakharchenko, director of development for the social network TooDoo.

PLYUSHCHIEV: Hello everyone. This is Alexander Plyushchev with you. Today, we will talk about photo stocks, stock banks – where to get, where to put, how to make money from photographs, and so on. Today we have co-host Viktor Zakharchenko, director of development for the social network TooDoo. Good evening, Vitya.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Good evening.

PLYUSHCHIEV: The topic of photo stocks and stock banks is announced. We have Timur Anikin, photo editor of ID “Smena”. Good evening.

ANIKIN: Good evening.

PLYUSHCHIEV: I will say that Viktor suggested this topic to me and I agreed without hesitation for two reasons. First, several listeners recommended it to us beforehand, and I didn’t know how to approach it. Second, our “Echo of Moscow” editorial team, specifically the web editorial, often faces the necessity of finding a photograph or something else, sometimes I am asked where to get it or how it relates to copyright. Since I’m not a lawyer, I can only give general advice. I found this topic quite interesting, and today we took it on. So, first of all, let’s define for those listeners who may be accidentally tuning in now, so they don’t switch off right away, what photo stocks and stock banks are and what they are needed for in principle.

ANIKIN: Stock banks are banks of digital photography. By visiting such a bank on the internet, you can, by paying a certain amount of money, immediately receive a photograph to your computer. Microstocks are a relatively new phenomenon. Previously, there were only traditional stock banks, where images were quite expensive – 200-400 dollars for one image. When technology became cheaper, there were more amateur photographers who could shoot well and grow professionally, microstock photo banks appeared in the early 2000s, where a photograph costs 1-10 dollars on average. In some banks, it’s 25 cents for the simplest license and 30 dollars for the most expensive license.

PLYUSHCHIEV: Well, here’s a question right away. I was in a strange place today – in a hospital. I just stopped by. And there, two patients were talking, and one said to the other: “Right now, the most advanced thing on the internet, he said authoritatively, is torrents. Everything is free there. I downloaded books, got “The Count of Monte Cristo” (and he’s an older man). And there are movies. I will say this – they will download it for me, they will bring it here on a disk.” I say this to point out that what’s the point of paid services, if there is a feeling, a habit among the population, including very professional populations that use photographs for professional purposes, that the internet is a place where everything is free?

ANIKIN: Well, let’s say, there’s self-respect. And there’s a term called penny-pinching. That is, the price of one sale, let’s say, mine on Shutterstock – I should clarify that I am not just a web editor, i.e., buying for the magazine, but also a microstocker, meaning someone who sells there, hence I know the situation from both sides. And the average sale price on a stock bank is often 10 rubles. So, stealing a photograph from torrents and using it in your commercial work as a designer is the same as pulling 10 rubles from a grandmother in the subway and earning several thousand rubles on it. So, it’s a question of self-respect. And the cost of the issue here is that…

PLYUSHCHIEV: But I think, you know, well, if it’s about solid, respectable publications, then yes, probably so. But we have plenty of online publications, a huge number, when you open news.yandex.ru, searching for some news, there are 552 links, for example, and such publications that you’ve never seen or heard of, and it turns out someone still reads them, and they all have photographs.

ANIKIN: That’s clear. The question is that for them, there’s, firstly, a legal opportunity to download photographs for free, that is, there’s a Creative Commons license on the same Flickr – you go in and you can use it for non-commercial purposes.

PLYUSHCHIEV: But accompanying it with an article that includes advertising, you are in any case using it for commercial purposes.

ANIKIN: Yes. That’s one. But in Russia, you know how it is with us and copyright. We’re not talking about the risk of legal prosecution, although there is one. For a photograph stolen from me, I can calmly sue and get more. It’s just that we lack what I would call a culture of purchasing. I’ll give an example to make everything clear. Recently, there was a media squabble in LiveJournal regarding the magazine “F5”. In its pilot issue, the magazine featured a collage of various Barack Obamas on the cover, meaning Barack Obama was the central character, and they took that collage from Flickr, where it was posted in high resolution for non-commercial use. And, as it turned out during the discussion, the author of that collage didn’t even know that his work was used by such a magazine owned by Mikhail Prokhorov, who had just become the richest person in Russia at that time. So, it’s hard for me to believe that these people couldn’t afford to buy that cover.

PLYUSHCHIEV: It’s easy to believe. Because the richest people usually have internet publications, which have no money at all. It’s a common story for us.

ANIKIN: But still, it’s hard to believe. At least, I was very surprised to hear how the editorial team of “F5” made round eyes and said – “We used this not for commercial purposes. After all, our magazine is distributed for free. So our purposes are non-commercial.” This, in fact, is such a mess that exists in their heads. And it’s not about those 10 rubles, which will still be found even by the most miserable site. It’s simply a matter of unwillingness to pay for the work done, for the fact that you quickly entered, typed a keyword, immediately downloaded, and in half a minute you have the photograph you need for two dollars. Well, if a person does not wish to appreciate the author, well, such a person is…

PLYUSHCHIEV: But that’s one side of it. But, I just thought – on the other hand, why do many still not buy from stock banks? Look. There are exclusive things that a personal photographer creates and sells exclusively to clients. Anyone can buy on the stock. Similarly, it’s possible to find a photo for free that anyone can take. No one wants to look foolish, right? Today I paid, and then I saw in publications that this photo was copied by 500 other people who clearly didn’t pay.

ANIKIN: Did they copy it from the website?

Plyushchev: Of course.

ANIKIN: Well, again, this is a question of conscience. Regarding printed products, especially advertising, there is the issue of high resolution. And high-resolution photographs necessary for printing are much harder to steal from the Internet. That is, you can’t print a billboard from a web preview of 300 by 400, which costs from $1 on the stock…

Plyushchev: You can’t print a billboard.

ANIKIN: Yes. By the way, I want to note that microstockers do not sell photographs. Microstockers sell licenses. The photograph comes free with the license. So, if someone buys illustrations for an article in a printed magazine and wants to post the same picture on their website, they need to buy the RF license a second time. There are just different licenses and different usage conditions. If a buyer wants to print it on t-shirts or mugs, they have to purchase it under an extended license for $50-100, from which the photographer will get $28 instead of 25 cents, and so on.

Plyushchev: I remind you that our guest is Timur Anikin from the Publishing House “Smena.” That’s all I wanted to remind you.

ZAKHARCHENKO: I wanted to clarify one more point. It turns out that we are now drifting a bit towards ethics. Because there is indeed this stereotypical perception of the Internet as a medium where everything is free. Sasha talks about the replication of photographs by the media – a typical situation where one publication buys it honestly, posts it in the news, and others then reprint it and, for example, link back to the original source, or rather, to the one who purchased it. In that case, is there a violation or not?

ANIKIN: Yes, undoubtedly. Because the link does nothing for the photographer. By the way, I wanted to share a funny case that illustrates that it’s not only in Russia that rights are poorly respected. Not long ago, on the largest site shutterstock.com, the American number one stock photo bank in the industry, there was a very amusing case and, again, a whole media scandal, when it turned out that…

Plyushchev: You obviously liked that word.

ANIKIN: Yes, I’ve been using it for a long time. Thanks to my friend Beryshid. When it turned out that the winner of one of the painting contests, a member of the American Watercolor Society, if I’m not mistaken, a well-known artist, somehow copied – well, not pixel for pixel, that’s difficult with painting, but apparently with some prints, with some thermal technologies, copied several stock images and presented them as her works. The similarity was such that there were no doubts at all – facial features, angles, lighting. The same face. And she received some medal for these works. There was, of course, a stir, a scandal, and she was expelled from that society. But such things happen. As for torrents, if I find my photograph on torrents.ru, although I won’t look for it because it’s very time-consuming, I will write to the administrators, and since they always remove such distributions at the request of copyright holders, they will take it down. The other question is that no one wants to monitor it constantly, track it, and so on. There won’t be enough time to photograph.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Well, I think torrents are not competitors to stock photo banks. After all, on the same stock photo banks, a certain part of the photo database is available for free. That is, for non-commercial use, please take it, no payment.

ANIKIN: And for non-commercial as well. There is a Royalty Free license, which is completely free.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Accordingly, torrents specialize a bit in different content. If we are talking about media resources, about the media, they would not be interested in clip arts that are posted with 1,000-3,000 images, which, roughly speaking, are static. And media resources are actually more interested in photographs tied to events, to informational occasions. And here, there is more competition not with the microstocks we are discussing today, but with the stock photo banks of the largest news agencies – Reuters, Associated Press, ITAR-TASS in Russia, which, in principle, do not specialize in photographing strawberries, butterflies, and webcams, but rather in capturing informational events that are their different sources of income.

ANIKIN: Well, I’ll add, Viktor, that stockers also engage in capturing informational events and sell those images under the Editorial license, which excludes their use in advertising. That is, Barack Obama is abundantly represented on the photo stocks.

ZAKHARCHENKO: I have no doubt about that, but I think that for now, at least, this is not competition. Although they say that blogs are competitors to traditional media, some movement has emerged here, but I think that for now amateur photographers cannot compete with the huge number of photographers who are allowed into events, given special permits, and they cover the events.

ANIKIN: Undoubtedly. I think there are definitely more stockers. 150,000, plus or minus several dozen. But, still, professional photographers who are on salary at Reuters, with whom I also worked and work, at ITAR-TASS, and other global agencies, there can be no competition with professionals.

ZAKHARCHENKO: How many of these stockers from Russia are there among those you mentioned?

ANIKIN: I can’t give a number, but by indirect signs, by the number of them in the top, that is, among top photographers, by their representation on the main pages of photo banks as “main photographer of the week,” “photo of the week,” well, I think that in the top three or four countries…

ZAKHARCHENKO: So what is the order? Is it a thousand people or ten thousand?

ANIKIN: It could be 10,000… from 10 to 30. Because stock photo banks are a business that allows earning, perhaps, not very large amounts of money with minimal investment, but for Russia, it is money and in hard currency.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Look, again, a question arises if we return to comparing photo banks and stock photo agencies. It turns out that a photo bank is a unique but expensive sale of photographs.

ANIKIN: A classic photo bank, yes.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Yes. And on a photo bank, you submitted 15, 20, 30 photographs, and they wait, and little by little, a small amount trickles in from each photograph.

ANIKIN: Yes.

ZAKHARCHENKO: From your perspective, particularly from the perspective of a beginner photographer who produces a quality product, taking that as a given, where should he aim – to a classic photo bank where there will be one sale but a pricey one, or to a microstock?

ANIKIN: I’ll start from afar to explain my position on this issue. When I started, I also primarily thought about money. Now I’m engaged in it mainly not for the sake of money. Because when you realize that you can make increasingly beautiful shots with the use of the camera and Photoshop, capturing people ever more beautifully, your vision simply changes… If a year ago I sat and simply saw Alexander Plyushchev, now I see both Alexander Plyushchev and how the light falls on him, the light spots, dark spots, advantageous and disadvantageous angles. It’s automatic. This change is just a photographic view of the world. And where a person should go depends on what he wants — whether he wants to make big money or if he wants to become a good photographer. If he becomes a good photographer, the money will definitely follow. If he works in the stock sector, that is, commercial positive photography, he will enjoy it, he will be rich, he will be happy. If he realizes that these clipart frames are too narrow for him, he can, having mastered the basics of photography, composition, and lighting, move into artistic photography and maybe into some classic photo bank.

ZAKHARCHENKO: So, it turns out that the monetary measure is, among other things, also a measure of your skill and artistry, since your colleagues can subjectively evaluate you on some site, saying — good, not good, give you a plus or a minus. That’s one measure. Another measure is when you receive an evaluation in currency.

ANIKIN: Yes, that’s absolutely correct. When I started on Flickr, I was happy with views, comments, and someone adding my work to their favorites. When you move to stock, favorites are certainly great and views too, but money is objective. A person who doesn’t know you evaluates you. Just today on our Russian-speaking microstock forum dolgachev.com, I read a story about a photographer from Kharkiv, Anton, a microstocker, who found a window display of a commercial bank in the center of his beautiful city of Kharkiv, which actually featured him because he shot himself with a clipart, uploaded it to a photo stock, the bank bought it, and here we see a photo — Anton standing in front of himself in the bank’s window. Roughly speaking, this is what many work for, besides money. To know that you are in demand among professionals.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Listen, I still think it’s a bit of a duplicitous position. Because there’s a great site — photosite.ru. I don’t know, I’m not a specialist in photo resources, but for me, it’s an old stronghold for photographers. People there engage in creativity, discussing aesthetic aspects of the works. There are no monetary relationships at all. And I understand that there is a very large segment of photographers who do this; they do not go to microstocks, even though their product is good. What stops them? I don’t believe that what stops them is the point that was a bit shocking to me when I got acquainted with the topic — that, in principle, if you photograph people, you need to negotiate with each one, sign an agreement with each person that you can photograph them and then earn money from them.

ANIKIN: Not only when photographing people. Even when you’re shooting toys — just this week, I photographed toys made by a handmade artisan; I have to get what’s called a property release, stating that I have this product…

ZAKHARCHENKO: That is, any product. What stops these people, who create quality photo products, from participating in microstocks?

ANIKIN: Well, everyone has their own issues. I also know people who are shy, who think — I can’t do it, it’s boring and uninteresting. In fact, what you’re talking about — creativity on photosite — and stock photography do not contradict each other. They are just different sectors of work. You can work in both. So, when I walk around and shoot black-and-white pictures of Moscow with my wide-angle Canon, I’m not thinking about stocks. I just enjoy making landscapes of Moscow. No one limits you to what you will do, and you can only do this. No. Absolutely not. It’s just that this is the segment where you are valued precisely for your ability to create commercial products, you know how to do it beautifully and in a way that amazes. Because among top stock photographers, there are many simply wonderful works.

Plyushchev: We have Timur Anikin, the picture editor of ID “Smena” with us.

ANIKIN: And a microstocker.

Plyushchev: Yes, and a microstocker. You can join us by SMS at +7 985 970 4545. There are already quite a few SMS messages, and I’ll read the questions a little later. Or go to plushev.com — there’s a chat where you can participate in some discussion; it’s become quite lively. I want to read one letter that came to us at echo.msk.ru. It’s long, but, in general, it’s not a question. I just liked the letter itself. You can comment on it — it would be great. Alice Fox, a manager from Russia, writes, although, as later became clear from the letter, she lives in England: “This is, in fact, hellish work. Anyone who engages in photography professionally, that is, wants to earn money from it, has to work a lot. Anyone who wants to earn WELL must work VERY hard. I’m an amateur photographer, and I’m trying to enter the professional photography market. Many will find my thoughts somewhat amateurish, but I’ll still risk engaging in the discussion. It happened that I was left idle due to the crisis and decided to pursue photography. It has always been at the level of “a family member taking travel photos from a car window”. Recently, I joined an amateur club and, after several months of winning prizes, decided to move further. When I typed in Google “How to make money from photography“, I came across several stock sites. Yes, the requirements are barbaric. You really need to have top-notch equipment, master Photoshop, and not spare time and money on shoots and trips. My summary: will I continue? Yes. Because it turned out that it doesn’t matter what kind of diploma a person has or how expensive their camera is. You need to be able to “see” the picture, create composition, and notice something funny and unusual in a “worn out” topic. You need to feel color, mood, atmosphere. Behind every picture, there should be an idea, a story, an experience, humor. If a person has nothing to say, they have no reason to engage in this work. If a photographer has a passion, they will always find their audience. So, what I’m getting at is that despite all the difficulties, I will definitely use professional stocks. It’s a matter of ambition and ambition — I have always achieved what I wanted. By the way, I live in England, and there are plenty of freelance photographers here. Capitalism, competition, and, as always, the strongest and most talented will prevail. I believe in my talent and abilities. Thank you in advance for your comments. I didn’t want to offend the professionals. Good luck to everyone.”

ZAKHARCHENKO: Timur, if you allow me, I’ll comment first. I think this is an excellent illustration of the idea of the “long tail” which Mr. Anderson popularized. Indeed, those people who are not professional photographers create that long tail of supply, which, in principle, creates competition for the market. If earlier photos came to the same media primarily from professionals, now, with the accessibility of technology… yes, indeed, the requirements for Photoshop, for processing, for setting light correctly are quite high. As far as I understand, at least half of the photos are rejected.

ANIKIN: Not exactly. I will comment on that a little later.

ZAKHARCHENKO: And, accordingly, it seems to me that this is indeed one of those stereotypes that need to be debunked. This is hellish work. Like any other job, it should be perceived. You can’t photograph objects with a shaky camera from your knees and expect to earn reasonable money for it. Yes, it can be a hobby. You might catch a lucky shot once every day or two. But, in principle, this is indeed hellish work, probably comparable to other forms of earning money online.

ANIKIN: Well, regarding Alice’s letter – I want to say that she’s doing a great job; she’s right about almost everything, I agree. Her perspective is by no means amateurish. She is wrong in saying that very professional equipment is necessary. It is necessary to earn a lot. And even then, not for everyone. Some people have a few thousand dollars, shooting with a mid-range camera and some minimal cheap lighting, and so on. And trips – if you are shooting what is called outdoor, that is, outside, then yes, trips are necessary. If you like to shoot subjects at home, as I do, then you don’t need to go anywhere. If you are photographing people, again, you don’t need to go anywhere. So, what Viktor was talking about – it’s hellish labor only if you want to earn a lot. Stock photography is great because it doesn’t obligate you to anything. If you want to have a steady but small income, you can reach that level and maintain it by uploading a little at a time. It’s certainly harder now – there are many people wanting to get in, but it’s still possible. If you want to earn a lot, then yes, the work is indeed hellish.

ZAKHARCHENKO: How much time does it take you to work on one photograph that gets accepted?

ANIKIN: Well, it depends on the photograph. Because if it’s, say, some kind of phone – and I love photographing landline phones, a strange hobby of mine – I shoot it on a white background with minimal editing. I can make a photograph in five minutes – considering I also need to write 50 keywords in English, provide a description, and submit it. 5, 10, 15 minutes. If it’s a landscape that requires color adjustments, or a photograph that needs significant retouching, well, I can spend up to an hour or more. When I first started, completely from scratch in Photoshop and photography, I mean, like a total beginner, it could take me an hour and a half to two hours. So I came to stock photography (this is in reference to Alice’s comment), without knowing anything at all. And I grew from there. Because, firstly, it’s a community that helps you, that is, friends who are microstockers, and secondly, there’s the excitement. When you enter this game, you see professionals around you and try to keep up. You read, you study others’ works, you watch, and you grow faster than if you were just shooting for yourself.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Listen, but friends… I find that a bit unclear. Isn’t it competition? The more of you there are, the more offers there are, and consequently, the less each of you gets.

ANIKIN: Well, on one hand, yes. Now, due to the crisis, maybe the number of buyers has decreased a bit, the number of photographs they buy. Whereas the number of photographers is only increasing. And the cream of that market was taken by those who came in 2004-2005. Back then, you could get quite a lot for relatively average shots. Now, when you look, there are 70-90 thousand photographs uploaded weekly on Shutterstock, and a total database of 7.5 million. That’s just one stock. And the leading five have similar numbers. It’s quite serious. To make good money now, you need to grow, compete, and small amounts will still be available to you. Regarding competition – well, the money isn’t worth killing each other over. Moreover, when you’re together, you help each other; it pays off. You know what to do on one stock, what to do on another, you consult with each other, you keep track of things. There’s still a synergistic effect here, I believe, more than a competitive one.

PLYUSHEV: Our regular listener, the recent hero of our program, Felix Muchnik, asks: “As the director of Soft-Key, I have a rough idea of the number of small programming teams in Russia, from 1 to 5 people, and how much they earn. These are quite acceptable figures, sometimes even more, for Russian programmers. How many amateur photographers do you think can earn and how decent a sum using a service similar to Soft-Key or Sound-Key, that is, if someone takes on the problem of contract negotiation, sales, and why?”

ZAKHARCHENKO: I would add here a question from Viktor Maslov, who signed as “photobanker, Moscow.” He specifically mentions that it’s not that easy to work with similar servers in Russia, as I understand it. Our legislation requires a contract to be signed on one side with the media that buys and on the other with the author who potentially uploads. Well, as I understand it, Western services operate on the principles of an offer, so no documentary paper confirmation is needed. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I will try to guess. In Felix’s question lies how realistic such a server would be that could resolve here in Russia the legal issues and would take care of contracts with authors, while also ensuring normal operation for the media buying. After all, we discussed why media outlets do not officially buy images, and for many it really is a headache – how to then proceed officially through contractual relations.

ANIKIN: Well, a skilled accountant, I think, will still manage it.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Russia is a country of skilled accountants, yes.

ANIKIN: Yes, necessarily. Let’s say Felix is a bit late, because there is already an official representative of Dreamstime, one of the big five stocks, and, by the way, the first image I found and used commercially was in the Russian segment, and I suspect it was bought through this intermediary service. And there’s one Russian photobank, more or less large, which is the microstock “Lori,” and they indeed provide all the necessary documents. They are slightly more expensive than the Western stocks, and they are oriented only towards Russia. That is, Western clients are unlikely to buy here. As for Western banks, when a photographer starts working with a photobank, they sign an electronic contract where they delegate all rights to their works and all possible types of their use; everything is stated there. In turn, when I, as an editor, buy a photograph from this stock, I also sign under certain conditions. That is, legally everything here is legal; there are no violations, and the only problem that may arise is precisely the imperfection of Russian laws that don’t account for this segment at all. I don’t think they prohibit anything. They simply don’t consider it. And since there is no fact of a violation here, there’s no plaintiff, I am unfamiliar with cases where buying from such banks has led to any problems.

ZAKHARCHENKO: The question is not even about a potential lawsuit but about the issue of money transfer.

ANIKIN: Well, these sums, as we’ve already mentioned, are not very large. Maybe tens of dollars a month. And the article under which they can be processed, again, I think a skilled accountant would find. I can’t imagine a lawsuit with the tax office over 30 dollars. If that happens, then the issue is really not about 30 dollars; everyone understands that perfectly.

ZAKHARCHENKO: Actually, when it comes to lori.ru, I know this project; it turns out that this is a forced measure because Russia has to operate on paper principles. As soon as a way is found to avoid this unnecessary, burdensome link in terms of paper contracts, the need for such a Russian intermediary will disappear accordingly.

ANIKIN: No. For two reasons. First, there is still a national specificity — some photos are only possible here. For example, when I worked at one of the publications in the province, I needed a photo of ice cream — a regular cup. I couldn’t find it on any Western stock. I could have gone to the kiosk, but time was running out. I quickly signed a contract with lori, paid in advance, and bought the ice cream. That’s one. Secondly, there is a certain percentage of photographers and a certain percentage of buyers who do not speak English.

PLYUSHEV: I suddenly thought — the photograph must have cost more than the ice cream itself.

ANIKIN: Of course. It cost 90 rubles.

ZAKHARCHENKO: How much ice cream can you buy for that!?

PLYUSHEV: Three portions, at least.

ANIKIN: Unfortunately, the number was given, and there was no time to run to the kiosk. So there was a certain percentage of people who do not speak English, for whom keyword writing is the main agony. And if your photo isn’t tagged properly, it simply won’t be found in that stream among millions. Therefore, writing keywords becomes the most torturous headache — worse than shooting, worse than processing. And such people, who aren’t overly concerned about making money and for whom this isn’t the only source of income, go to lori and sell some photographs — less than they would sell at Western banks, and generally, everyone is satisfied. So I think this resource will remain, and they did well to start first in Russia. I wish them all the best. And I think there may be some more banks appearing; they are even showing up now, but since it’s difficult to enter the market, which is already dense, competition is quite strong…

ZAKHARCHENKO: Well, regarding Felix, I wouldn’t be quick to say that Felix is late, knowing his capabilities. If we return to the topic of Russian-speaking specifics, what is the current user base of lori?

ANIKIN: Honestly, I don’t know. I’m not actively selling on this site and I’m not buying right now. Well, definitely several thousand people, I think. More than 10,000. If Alexander opens the internet, he will see it right away.

PLYUSHEV: Moreover, it is open, but on the site plushev.com, where the video broadcast is happening, and here in the chat, they ask you a question — I remind you, we have Timur Anikin, the photo editor of ID “Smena” and a microstocker, as we have already established. “I’m curious to know what services exist in Russia and how many there are and is there competition between services?” asks Sergey.

ANIKIN: Well, that’s what I was just talking about. There is one major bank — lori.ru; there are many small ones that have already closed multiple times because organizing a photo bank is very difficult. For example, on Shutterstock, there are over a hundred people who check all the photos. That is, each photo from these tens of thousands daily has to be checked. These must be people who understand what they are doing, who have an eye, who shouldn’t choose photos randomly. They need to be paid a salary, you need to write the website interface, you need links with payment systems. That is, organizing a photo bank requires significant investments. And the most significant investments will be in the promotional campaign. Because, look how many of these banks there are, and you try to lure me there to buy from you. I actually don’t predict that such powerful photo banks will appear in Russia unless someone wants to spend around 10 million dollars just to have it. Rather, there will be representations of other participants from the big five — like Istockphoto, a very powerful site, maybe from Shutterstock, and so on. So from Russian services, mentioned lori, and that’s it.

ZAKHARCHENKO: It turns out that in this market, traditional photo banks, classic ones, those same information agencies, are currently dominating.

ANIKIN: In which specific market?

ZAKHARCHENKO: In the market of supply. I’m not saying that users can upload their photos there. But the main offer actually comes from information agencies.

ANIKIN: In news photography — absolutely, 100%. As far as I remember, there is no editorial on lori. For clipart, all those who need simple thematic photos usually go West because the cost issue is such that it’s much better to learn a little English and buy than to pay a photographer.

PLYUSHEV: Now we will move on to your questions that have already come in via SMS +7 985 970 4545. I will ask a few. Also from the chat accompanying the video broadcast on plushev.com. The questions here are quite short. Some may seem not very relevant, but nevertheless, we will try to answer all of them. Dima asks: “Please give me a link to good motorsport microstocks”.

ANIKIN: Motorsport? There is no specialization in the microstock bank as a whole. There is a section, say, transportation, where there are a lot of photos of motorcycles, cars, and so on. They are available on all major stocks – dreamstime.com, Istockphoto, Shutterstock. So, there is a wide variety of themes, including motorsport, available.

ZAKHARCHENKO: I think we will prepare a list of links after this broadcast and publish it on plushev.com, which can be discovered there, including links to the largest photo banks.

ANIKIN: I will add, Viktor. If anyone has a question directly for the stocker, just type my name into Google or Yandex – all my contacts will pop up, and you can ask directly.

PLYUSHEV: Got it. Directly. Another Dima is asking how you evaluate istockphoto.

ANIKIN: I would like to talk about it a little. It is a very cool photo bank, it stands somewhat apart because they have the strictest requirements in the industry, they have upload requirements – for example, 15 photos per week until you sell a few hundred photos. Meanwhile, all others allow you to upload up to 500 per month. Shutterstock has no limit at all, dreamstime has a large limit, istockphoto – 15 and that’s it.

ZAKHARCHENKO: They were the first.

ANIKIN: As far as I remember, yes. Plus – they have very strict technical requirements. Those inspectors who sit and literally examine everything under a magnifying glass. At the slightest suspicion that something is off, that’s it, goodbye, upload again. And that doesn’t count towards those 15. And there is a peculiar feature here – there are a lot of exclusives, their exclusive photographers, who do not work on any other stock. This is a mandatory condition for this photo bank. Their photos rank higher in searches, they get a higher commission for sales. That’s why there are a lot of exclusives creating unique works that no one else has, and they only hang out on istockphoto. And as a buyer, I use istockphoto and dreamstime, although istockphoto is more expensive, precisely because there are just great photos, and the percentage of garbage is minimal.

ZAKHARCHENKO: A unique, bespoke product.

The second part of the interview will be posted in the next article. The materials for the article were taken from http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/tochka/608074-echo.phtml