With an ever-increasing number of information outlets the demand for images to accompany articles, journals, reviews, editorials, blogs, essays, spreads, etc has followed in recent years.
Images are now playing a more important role than ever in selling ideas or establishing opinions as our brains' attempt to process the relevant whilst discarding the rest.
Most designers know that more than 95% of the time an image has been registered before a word has been read and therefore an image is not merely a picture but also a symbol.
As the Internet continues to evolve allowing anyone to contribute to the information overload a genuine need has surfaced for more affordable images with less complex rights issues.
Despite a large number of microstock companies competing to pick up the scraps of the more established royalty-free stock photography big players, the gap in stockpile size, general quality and therefore sales remains significant.
It is a market like most that is driven by convenience and routine, which means that users remain familiar and comfortable with their traditional source of image supply.
Even more worryingly with search engines dominating user queries; their rankings are invariably determined by those that have the expenditure to invest in the techniques necessary to do so (search engine optimisation [SEO]) - meaning that this cost is passed onto the user.
In short: search engines will usually list the more expensive suppliers higher and therefore attract more first time users - it's a vicious cycle that further helps to sustain the 'big players' tight grip on the market and reduce competitive choice for the user.
So how do new suppliers compete with those already well established in the market? It is a dilemma felt by every start-up company across all markets inciting broader questions such as the competency of the Internet to facilitate fair-trading for all.
The problem however doesn't lie in the product itself but rather the ability to make anyone who may be interested aware that it exists.
Marketing makes up a significant amount of any company's revenue but you must have revenue or a large initial investment to begin with.
Unsurprisingly the percentage spent on marketing drops the more revenue that is generated, further indicating that companies know and act on the deduction that customer loyalty, once obtained, is the best marketing tool that they could have.
Take the corner shop next to the big supermarket - the supermarket will generalise applying its' proven business formula to each store, the corner shop will try to cater to the individual tastes of the local people.
Most will choose the supermarket where there is more space, more choice and they know what to expect.
Some may prefer the intimacy of the shop and hold a genuine loyalty for it, unlike the bigger supermarkets that have to offer cash incentives in order to retain customers.
These are what it should focus on - that which it can offer that the supermarket cannot - only like this can it survive.
The stock photography market is no different; more niche, less exposed companies must identify the weaknesses of their bigger rivals and seek to address them directly if they are to beckon customers into their 'shop' and convince them that they are worthy, reputable image suppliers with something different to offer.
- Large stock photography companies that try to cater for all can very often overlook those seeking a more subtle insight into a subject that only a specialised team can provide.
- They usually have sites that are difficult to navigate with a never-ending surplus of unrelated content distracting the user from their task.
- More importantly the costs of using such a company can stretch even the most tolerant of budgets as high admin fees and photographers' royalties push prices ever higher.