is everyone using rex/shutterstock?

KIPAX

Seriously Likeable
Messages
20,971
Name
KIPAX Lancashire UK
Edit My Images
No
Buying OR Selling? Posted in sports/talk aS more relevant than talk/business IMHO

I keep seeing stories of photographers making less than £10 a picture published.. only slightly more for a full page pic.... I see nearly all the publications choosing rex/shutterstock pictures over far better and more pertinant pics... I see lots of big name photogrpahers supplying them and for the life of me i don't get it?

I know why the papers are doing it.. dwindling readership and a big cut on costs I guess.. But don't get why photographers are supplying them for those prices.

I would cry if I got a pic published in a national for a couple of quid.. My last one was £140 .. imagine how many rex/shutterstock you need to sell to equal my one..

it's a road I have not and will not consider as for the last couple of years anythign published in nationals is a small part of my wages and seen more as bonus payments.. But this season even though I get the shots.. OK it's league two I cover.. But I averaged a pic a month in nationals when the team doing well and there doing even better this season.. however its rex or nothing


So is anyone getting published in nationals (esp at lower levels) independantly.. NOT through an agency and deff not through rex type of cheapo agency ?


PS I work the games for my local paper so get lots published in regionals every week :) just my bonus nationals payments dried up...
 
Most regionals now have accounts with Getty/ Rex etc where they can pay (example) £5000 per annum and use any pics they want, so no need to pay individual photographers unless it a local pic.
 
With the Sun and Mirror both signing deals with Getty and Rex it has created another shift in the market really. You yourself have seen how many photographers can potentially turn up to lower league fixtures. If just one of those is with an agency syndicating to Rex then the pictures in nationals are going to come from that camera regardless of how good they are. I believe the deal with the Sun is based on a set fee for a particular number of pictures this season. There is certainly a quota on the number they have purchased but at this stage of the season taking a picture from one of those agencies is effectively a free photo. I suspect later in the season when they exceed the limit then you will either find they are more keen to purchase your pictures or they will simply negotiate again with Rex and Getty.

Why are the photographer supplying them? Same reasons as always of course.
 
I have got to agree but as long as people are willing to travel up and down the country for next to nowt it won't change.
If your boss said to you look Tony can you pop down to Walsall be there for 1:30 and don't forget to take your own tools hang about until about 6 sent a few emails in your phone which you will have to provide then drive back oh and by the way I might give you £20 for your trouble.
so why do people do it I've no idea!!!!!
 
If just one of those is with an agency syndicating to Rex then the pictures in nationals are going to come from that camera regardless of how good they are.

Absolutely 100% not true. Otherwise we wouldn't be getting published every week.
 
Absolutely 100% not true. Otherwise we wouldn't be getting published every week.


hence why I am asking.. i think league 2 is dead now.. Like I say I was getting fairly regular published but not this season even thought the team i do are consistantly in top 6 if not top 3... Only the SUN doing league 2 as such but it would seem not so much from independants so i was wondering if higher up the leagues its still worth it..

One thing for sure.. if (or when) my paper gives me up for league football then I wont be bothering with that side of it anymore.. i gave up on spec stuff a long time ago and theres not enough commisions for games about so probably have no use for a licence when that happens... But lucky enough I still get paid so.. :)
 
If your boss said to you look Tony can you pop down to Walsall be there for 1:30 and don't forget to take your own tools hang about until about 6 sent a few emails in your phone which you will have to provide then drive back oh and by the way I might give you £20 for your trouble.
so why do people do it I've no idea!!!!!

Tony's wife would never say that to him! :)
 
I have got to agree but as long as people are willing to travel up and down the country for next to nowt it won't change.

Still a lot doing it just for the feel good factor .... see them posting every week on social media about the prem clubs they go to but never see them posting anythign published.. just pics of there mates and stuff for facebook..
 
Absolutely 100% not true. Otherwise we wouldn't be getting published every week.

I can't speak for down South mate but North of the border the Sun publish only shots from their own two staff guys and Rex. Nothing else ever makes their paper. Plenty times have seen cele shots with the back of the scorer's head running away from the lens at the other end of the pitch in the paper, while the guys sitting in the corner getting the close up shot of face don't get published.

I'd be surprised in 2-3 years if it doesn't all go that way to be honest.
 
Last edited:
I can't speak for down South mate but North of the border the Sun publish only shots from their own two staff guys and Rex. Nothing else ever makes their paper. .

Your reffering to this season onwards? last season was great..loads of shows :) But this season no :(

I ahve a contact at the sun .. I ahve sent an email this evening asking for for clarification.. I will let you know if any response :)
 
This season onwards mate. I had an email from the agency about a month before the season started clarifying their position on what they were doing and why based upon what they had heard.

Would be interesting to see what your contact can confirm though.
 
Guess pictures are only worth what clients are willing to pay for them - but why are people going to games for £10 (well - guess many on spec togs are there for free as well) ... you would have to ask them.

Where as I don't like the fact that the market is squeezed by these cheaper images - it's just the unfortunate way it is.

Newspapers also do probably have to spend larger amounts of money in purchasing video content, which is getting more important to them.
So maybe 30 years ago it was special for a newspaper to have a photo on their front page from a game the day before... then it slowly moved having a photo during the same evening.. with the websites they started to need images quicker.. and now with the tech moving on.. it's not just the images the newspapers need to get.. it is the video that the readers want to see on the website. And the video should also preferably be there in about 2 minutes..
 
Guess pictures are only worth what clients are willing to pay for them - but why are people going to games for £10 (well - guess many on spec togs are there for free as well) ... you would have to ask them.

Where as I don't like the fact that the market is squeezed by these cheaper images - it's just the unfortunate way it is.

Newspapers also do probably have to spend larger amounts of money in purchasing video content, which is getting more important to them.
So maybe 30 years ago it was special for a newspaper to have a photo on their front page from a game the day before... then it slowly moved having a photo during the same evening.. with the websites they started to need images quicker.. and now with the tech moving on.. it's not just the images the newspapers need to get.. it is the video that the readers want to see on the website. And the video should also preferably be there in about 2 minutes..


Not really.. they still need the pictures and for next day.....the problem is people supplying places like rex knowing they are only going to get a couple of quid for a picture
 
I can't speak for down South mate but North of the border the Sun publish only shots from their own two staff guys and Rex. Nothing else ever makes their paper. Plenty times have seen cele shots with the back of the scorer's head running away from the lens at the other end of the pitch in the paper, while the guys sitting in the corner getting the close up shot of face don't get published.

I'd be surprised in 2-3 years if it doesn't all go that way to be honest.
Not quite true - They've had a photographer at every game I've photographed this season - most of them are freelancers on a shift - I've done a game for them this season - I've also had a fair bit of useage by the Sun through an agency (not Rex)
 
Last edited:
Newspapers also do probably have to spend larger amounts of money in purchasing video content, which is getting more important to them.
So maybe 30 years ago it was special for a newspaper to have a photo on their front page from a game the day before... then it slowly moved having a photo during the same evening.. with the websites they started to need images quicker.. and now with the tech moving on.. it's not just the images the newspapers need to get.. it is the video that the readers want to see on the website. And the video should also preferably be there in about 2 minutes..

Sky might have a little bit of a paddy fit if newspapers started hosting video of EPL/EFL matches!
 
Not really.. they still need the pictures and for next day.....the problem is people supplying places like rex knowing they are only going to get a couple of quid for a picture

But what if those photographers are ok with that price for their images? Guess there is the long held discussion... what is the right price to sell a photo? It might £10 for someone... and £1500 for another...
 
But what if those photographers are ok with that price for their images? ...

99% of the posts I see are people complaining at the prices..... hence my post and my comment that I don't get it :)
 
99% of the posts I see are people complaining at the prices..... hence my post and my comment that I don't get it :)

But there also must be hundreds of photographers who are happy with those prices... otherwise these agencies wouldn't have anyone working for them :)
And they must make some money out of it.. otherwise I wouldn't think they'd be at the games covering them...

Not too sure of agencies in question here, but many agencies these days also sell images abroad.. and Premier League definitely is one league that sells a lot.
So if the photographer goes to game and his images sell (so that he get .. let's say £7.50 per sale) to 150 countries around the world through the agency... there is a good chance that out of the thousands of clients his agency has.. he will make over £100 or on a good day over £1000.

And I would imagine that these agencies also work with agencies in various countries.. so that also widens the marketplace for their images.

Where as I would not really like to do it this way myself - and do like to keep my prices 'reasonable' for my own income.. I can also see that this way of operating can at times be practical for both the photographer and newspapers.

But your point of photographers complaining of the prices they get paid... yes, the price of an image has come down in the past years and when it is your living... it's not something that I like.
 
Considering the average foreign sale breaks down to somewhere around £0.50-£2.00 once it gets to the photographer, you're going to need an awful lot of those to make £100.
 
Considering the average foreign sale breaks down to somewhere around £0.50-£2.00 once it gets to the photographer, you're going to need an awful lot of those to make £100.

Very true, but still doable.. and much easier to get it done through an agency than by yourself...
Would be interested to know how wide these agencies have their networks and how many newspapers have an annual deal with them..
Also would be interested to hear from some photographers who work for agencies like this.. and what they think of it and whether they think what they get paid is 'enough'...
 
99% of the posts I see are people complaining at the prices..... hence my post and my comment that I don't get it :)

The problem is always going to go back to supply and demand. There is such an excess of supply that it creates a huge problem in the market. If there was an agreed minimum sale price on images globally then it wouldn't be such an issue however given the amount of competition there is always going to be someone who tries to undercut in order to make sales. As soon as one person is willing to drop their price you then have a problem as suddenly everyone else decides to do the same until you reach the stage we are at today where the product is massively devalued.

The likes of Rex/Shutterstock and Getty have added to the problem by creating huge platforms that the newspapers and media outlets can use to pretty much source whatever they want. Naturally if everyone stopped supplying them with images then they would cease to exist and the marketplace would open up again to more independents. However there is always going to be one person who will supply them simply because of the reach they offer and once that happens the downward spiral begins where everyone else jumps on the bandwagon. For me there is very much a Pandora's Box thing going on where now that it's open and these platforms have established themselves as the middle men, they simply are not going to go away.

It also doesn't help that there are an increasing number of people shooting who hold full time positions in other industries. In many of those cases the financial return from their images means a lot less than it does to those who need it. Probably not too dissimilar to taxi drivers who suddenly find huge competition from Uber drivers who head out looking to make a bit extra cash in their spare time at the expense of guys driving for a living. To the individual driving with Uber it seems harmless enough but to the taxi driver trying to ply his trade here comes yet another competitor undercutting his fare prices.

The current system is really built to take advantage of people and the way that they think. Unfortunately it isn't going to change and it'll be the guys at the end of the chain that continue to suffer most.
 
I am doing a league 2 match on sat of course.. and I wont even bother taking my laptop on the match... If somehting important happens or nobody else on the wire as happens then will send aftre the game.. otherwise will concentrate on the match and making sure i capture everything and do a good job for the local paper who at least are paying...thats me pretty much giving up on nationals .. too much time and effort for no return at league 2 level..
 
The problem is always going to go back to supply and demand. There is such an excess of supply that it creates a huge problem in the market. If there was an agreed minimum sale price on images globally then it wouldn't be such an issue however given the amount of competition there is always going to be someone who tries to undercut in order to make sales. As soon as one person is willing to drop their price you then have a problem as suddenly everyone else decides to do the same until you reach the stage we are at today where the product is massively devalued.

The likes of Rex/Shutterstock and Getty have added to the problem by creating huge platforms that the newspapers and media outlets can use to pretty much source whatever they want. Naturally if everyone stopped supplying them with images then they would cease to exist and the marketplace would open up again to more independents. However there is always going to be one person who will supply them simply because of the reach they offer and once that happens the downward spiral begins where everyone else jumps on the bandwagon. For me there is very much a Pandora's Box thing going on where now that it's open and these platforms have established themselves as the middle men, they simply are not going to go away.

It also doesn't help that there are an increasing number of people shooting who hold full time positions in other industries. In many of those cases the financial return from their images means a lot less than it does to those who need it. Probably not too dissimilar to taxi drivers who suddenly find huge competition from Uber drivers who head out looking to make a bit extra cash in their spare time at the expense of guys driving for a living. To the individual driving with Uber it seems harmless enough but to the taxi driver trying to ply his trade here comes yet another competitor undercutting his fare prices.

The current system is really built to take advantage of people and the way that they think. Unfortunately it isn't going to change and it'll be the guys at the end of the chain that continue to suffer most.
I'm retired from work now and one of my 'jobs' is doing sport for an agency on a commission basis. Mainly Premier League in the winter and top class cricket/tennis in the summer. I've made a lot of good friends over the years among similarly minded people who love sport and love photography. We're commonly referred to by some full-time rs as 'Muppets' or weekend warriors.

We've all paid our dues in the lower leagues and we're all decent togs whose work is published nationally and internationally, mainly via Getty or Rex.

There have been people like us at the margins of sports photography for many years - my own experiences goes back to the late 70s when most togs at top flight games worked for a paper with a few 'freelances' alongside. The old technology of film and having to physically deliver prints acted as a real barrier to anyone trying to 'make it' in sports or editorial photography.

Technology, of course, has transformed the equipment we use and gives anyone with half decent gear the chance to produce images of comparable or equal quality to full-time togs. The problem we all face is how best to distribute those images widely and quickly, especially when the guy sat next to you is transmitting straight out of the camera to his agency and doesn't even have to bother with a laptop. Distribution was an issue back in the pre-digital days, too.

We all would love to make more money out of what we do but the reality is that the money is spread very thinly and most of us are totally reliant on our agencies to get our pics distributed widely and relatively quickly. In the meantime, we do what we do because we love it. If I could find a way of making more money out of sports photography - and much of that seems to depend on where you live and what your local circumstances are - I would go down that route as well. We all make our own choices about what we do and why we do it, so good luck to anyone who can do this stuff well, enjoy the act of doing it and who can make a few bob along the way.
 
That's the worst excuse I've ever heard for submitting to low pay/Rex syndicating agencies. You are basically saying that you are shooting football at a senior level as a hobby.
 
If I could find a way of making more money out of sports photography -.

Thats easy.. stop selling them so cheap.. and sports photograhy isn't sitting at a premiership game making pocket money.. I do sports photogrpahy for a living and its about all manner of sport at all different levels.... YOU say your doing sports photogrpahy but your not.. your doing top level football making peanuts.. thats the bottom of the pile not the top...you could make more money. you just wont because you cant sit with your mates enjoying premiership football and make that money....
 
I don't get to choose what the various newspapers and websites pay for images. My choice is whether I work through an agency on a commission basis and then work hard to drive up the return I make per game. The day I don't want to do that I walk away and try something different. Each to their own etc but is everyone on this forum really getting paid match fees or shifts when they shoot their sport? Good luck to them but my experience is that there are lots of people who don't right through all levels of football etc. Doubtless the same goes for the likes of motorsport and rugby, too.
 
If you are working on a commission basis (ie fixed fee per match), then what the papers pay the agency is utterly immaterial - unless they are paying you an absolute pittance.

If you are working on an on-spec basis, then absolutely you have a choice. If you don't like what your agency is selling your images for, you either move agency or file direct (assuming you can get a DataCo licence).

Your argument doesn't make sense.
 
Low prices per image seem to be pretty endemic and what matters most to me - and most of the people I talk to - financially is total return. If I don't like the total return for my efforts for anything I do then I walk away and do something else. Presumably that's a choice we all make at some point.
 
Thats easy.. stop selling them so cheap.. and sports photograhy isn't sitting at a premiership game making pocket money.. I do sports photogrpahy for a living and its about all manner of sport at all different levels.... YOU say your doing sports photogrpahy but your not.. your doing top level football making peanuts.. thats the bottom of the pile not the top...you could make more money. you just wont because you cant sit with your mates enjoying premiership football and make that money....

Agree. When I spec'd back in England I had my best results (in terms of money) at Championship, League 1 and League 2 level.

Want to make a living out of it, you need to do more work away from the pitch, researching where the big matches will be, then look for matches lower down the leagues that are nearby and important as there won't be as many photographers at these - local derbies, top of the table clashes, and where the league characters will be - that guy who's just been convicted of drink driving, that chap who's up for GBH, or that Beast who can bench a small town. These people sell photos.

Before moving to Ireland I did very little spec'ing, only doing it if I knew I had no other job planned that day and no other way of making money. I'd even take jobs I didn't enjoy that much to make money, over sitting at a Championship match making nothing. No brainer.
 
I'm retired from work now and one of my 'jobs' is doing sport for an agency on a commission basis. Mainly Premier League in the winter and top class cricket/tennis in the summer. I've made a lot of good friends over the years among similarly minded people who love sport and love photography. We're commonly referred to by some full-time rs as 'Muppets' or weekend warriors.

We've all paid our dues in the lower leagues and we're all decent togs whose work is published nationally and internationally, mainly via Getty or Rex.

There have been people like us at the margins of sports photography for many years - my own experiences goes back to the late 70s when most togs at top flight games worked for a paper with a few 'freelances' alongside. The old technology of film and having to physically deliver prints acted as a real barrier to anyone trying to 'make it' in sports or editorial photography.

Technology, of course, has transformed the equipment we use and gives anyone with half decent gear the chance to produce images of comparable or equal quality to full-time togs. The problem we all face is how best to distribute those images widely and quickly, especially when the guy sat next to you is transmitting straight out of the camera to his agency and doesn't even have to bother with a laptop. Distribution was an issue back in the pre-digital days, too.

We all would love to make more money out of what we do but the reality is that the money is spread very thinly and most of us are totally reliant on our agencies to get our pics distributed widely and relatively quickly. In the meantime, we do what we do because we love it. If I could find a way of making more money out of sports photography - and much of that seems to depend on where you live and what your local circumstances are - I would go down that route as well. We all make our own choices about what we do and why we do it, so good luck to anyone who can do this stuff well, enjoy the act of doing it and who can make a few bob along the way.
How do togs "transmitt straight out of the camera to their agency"?
 
How do togs "transmitt straight out of the camera to their agency"?

Lots of agencies seem to do this these days... through WFT, WiFi or tethered to laptop.. .and straight to FTP which fires it off to the agency server where they get named and filed onwards.
Done few games for some agencies this way.. and they have been very helpful in explaining how to set-up the transfer from camera to laptop and then onwards...
 
How do togs "transmitt straight out of the camera to their agency"?

Shot a match last night like this. Did the 90 minutes downloading and captioning myself, then when it came to the trophy lift at the end, stuck a WT5 transmitter on the camera, turned the dongle on and voice captioned the celebrations and sent them in. Picture desk then captioned and sent them out. As a result we beat our rivals to the front page of their contracted paper.
 
Want to make a living out of it, you need to do more work away from the pitch, researching where the big matches will be, then look for matches lower down the leagues that are nearby and important as there won't be as many photographers at these - local derbies, top of the table clashes, and where the league characters will be - that guy who's just been convicted of drink driving, that chap who's up for GBH, or that Beast who can bench a small town. These people sell photos.

Just remind me...

...that's called journalism, isn't it? :D
 
Low prices per image seem to be pretty endemic and what matters most to me - and most of the people I talk to - financially is total return. If I don't like the total return for my efforts for anything I do then I walk away and do something else. Presumably that's a choice we all make at some point.


Yup, we've heard that BS before.

Your next post will be telling us that we need to 'up our game' in order to overcome those that file cheaply, or that we need to 'change our business model' to cope with modern times and technology.
 
Yup, we've heard that BS before.

Your next post will be telling us that we need to 'up our game' in order to overcome those that file cheaply, or that we need to 'change our business model' to cope with modern times and technology.
Agree with me or not, I'm not telling anyone how they should go about their business. I'm not looking for anyone to tell me how I should go about mine either so you'll excuse me if I don't lose too much sleep over any of this.
 
Agree with me or not, I'm not telling anyone how they should go about their business. I'm not looking for anyone to tell me how I should go about mine either so you'll excuse me if I don't lose too much sleep over any of this.

Actually, if you are part of a culture that fundamentally undermines sports photographers' income by supporting bare subsistence rates for image usage, then that very much is our business.
 
Lots of agencies seem to do this these days... through WFT, WiFi or tethered to laptop.. .and straight to FTP which fires it off to the agency server where they get named and filed onwards.
Done few games for some agencies this way.. and they have been very helpful in explaining how to set-up the transfer from camera to laptop and then onwards...
That is transfare from camera to laptop not direct to agency also I fail to see how transfare from camera is effective as it is far too slow.1 pic ever 3 to 5 seconds at best?

I have only ever seen one person try to use a transmitter on a camera at football and it was far too slow. Unless there is some sort of new way of transmitting photos from camera I cannot see how it would be viable at all. As I say what I have seen is 3 seconds per pic at best at 12 fps forget that!
 
Back
Top