#stockphoto #stockphotography #stockfootage
I’ve been doing stock photography for many years. I do a lot of stock footage now. Why I think that stock footage now have more potential.
Please consider buying me a coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/vladimir...
Music by Epidemic Sound (www.epidemicsound.com)
Affiliated links for equipment:
Camera - Canon C100 Mark II - amzn.to/30K7HAs
Canon 77D - amzn.to/2SDJcAB
Canon lenses: 10 -18 mm zoom - amzn.to/2IbFeNK
18 - 135 mm - amzn.to/36LAqcf
70-200 mm - amzn.to/3daN7yo
24 - 105 mm - amzn.to/2SFva1B
Sigma - amzn.to/36L8F3v
Sony - amzn.to/313yQij
Lenses for Sony - amzn.to/36OGdh0
amzn.to/34y33H2
amzn.to/30OEBAd
Edelkrone - pan - amzn.to/33EJJZn
slider - amzn.to/30OWHC1
Click here to help me to create new video stories paypal.me/beekeeperstories
Reason number one. Stock photography has been around for many decades so volume of images created is significantly larger than video footage. Which means that there is much more competition for new images in stock photography then in stock video.
Reason number two. There are many more people doing stock photography then stock video. Video shooting is more complex technically than photography, and requires different set of skills with somewhat steeper learning curve. It also requires significantly higher investment in equipment.
Reason number three. Use of video in media is growing at a very fast pace right now, thanks to ever increasing speed of Internet. That was the major problem in earlier years for video on the web, but now with fast wireless networks 70 to 80% of my traffic on KZfaq is coming from mobile phones. Relatively recently all major social media networks pushed hard into video content.
Reason number four. Everything is moving to the web. From photography and video, to movies, to business, to shopping to whatever. However websites have limited real estate, meaning the actual size of the front page. Statistically most people don’t go deeper than one or two clicks from the main page. Which means that your first page of the website is the most important one. Space on this page is very limited and if you need to put the title, text and images you don’t have much room. First it was pictures, then came slideshows, now it’s time for video. If you look at all major media publications on the web, you’ll see front page populated with embedded videos. It takes very little space, you can easily make it full screen size, and you can put in anything from 30 second Super Bowl commercial to many hours of the Lord of the rings.
Reason number five. From the point of general information and storytelling in particular, video has an advantage. I am talking about sound. I am not saying that photography is better or worse than video. I am talking about different set of tools available. Of course for stock you are shooting without sound, it will be added by clients in edit.
All of the above tells me that video currently has better gross potential then photography. If you do micro stock you’ll notice that the prices for video footage at Shutterstock for example, significantly higher than for pictures. Of course you can say that there is more sales of pictures then video footage, and it is correct. However I feel that sales of stock video will be growing faster than sales of photographs. Of course it is my personal opinion.