In late 2007 Flickr was strongly considering creating a marketplace where users could buy and sell photographs hosted on the service. It was to be called Flickr Stock.
Then-employee Sarah Cooper worked on the project and describes (Update: it has now been removed) it as “The concept of Flickr Stock was to create an online marketplace where existing Flickr users could offer photos for sale as well as purchase photos taken by others.” Cooper worked on the project in late 2007. She also published the screen shots included in this post.
Flickr Stock would have let any Flickr user sell their photos to others, something more than a few people think is a good idea.
But Flickr abandoned the idea in early 2008 and decided instead to partner with Getty Images. A just launched beta program lets a handful of Flickr photographers sell their images on the Getty Images website. That program is being expanded and should launch in the next couple of months, Flickr General Manager Kakul Srivastava told me this afternoon.
Frankly, Flickr Stock seems like a lot more fun to me. The barrier between professional and amatuer photography has steadily been eroded exactly because of sites like Flickr. Giving those photographers a chance to try to sell their stuff is a good way to generate even more growth. The Getty program is great but it effectively turns Flickr into the minor leagues where talent can be spotted and whipped away.
Update: From Flickr:
Just saw your post and wanted to clarify what our initial round of Getty invites has involved, as those who have received invites aren’t actually able to sell their photos yet.
The editors at Getty Images have recently sent a preliminary set of invitations to be part of the collection to a small group of Flickr members. The photos are being chosen based on Getty Images’ expertise in licensing digital content and insight into customers’ needs. The photos will be for sale when the full collection launches.
This is definitely a shame, score -1 for yahoo.
The beauty of Yahoo is their openness and creativity as a platform. Getty is cold and closed with limited flexibility.
This is the same thing as redbubble.com. All yahoo is doing is jacking the little guy.
Blog post pulled?
As a photographer, it would have been great to have Flickr as an outlet for my photography and as another potential source of income. Many of the sites dedicated to helping photographers sell their artwork at a reasonable price , BrightQube.com, Digitalrailroad.net and Photoshelter.com have all either folded or changed their business model so that they do not compete head-t-head with Getty and the like. These super larger Photo companies care very little for the photographer and pay them but a small percentage for every sale. More sites like Flickr Stock would have helped to level the playing field and given photographers an opportunity to get a fair price for their work while allowing the consumer the opportunity to find new artists, and new imagery at more resonable prices.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Good point!
I have been a flickr member for many years but only now am beginning to really take advantage of the service. If istockphoto was worth fifty million then I am sure that flickr would have added value to the company buy doing selling their top stock. Istockphoto’s prices have been goin up steadily ever since the Getty acquisition yet the photographers have not seen and of the additional revenue passed on. Istockphoto lowered the bar on the cost of stock and Getty is trying to bring it back up. I think flickr would have had a very viable model in the selling of photos. I am sure they had their reasons for opting out of the deal.
Let’s hope it is an open and dynamic relationship and not just a club for the flickr elite.
JP
What a shame this didn’t go ahead. I’m sure it would have gained a lot more interest/visits/users than using Getty (as good as those images are), people like the openness and ‘local’ feel of an online community.
Wow, those mocks are amazing. Sarah Cooper is so talented. And beautiful.
Where I work, we spend countless dollars on istock…. Sometime I find what I want deadon, othertimes not…. The look of this is so… right! I’d use it in a heart beat… They would have really beat out the fotolia, photosearch, dreamstime, etc.. Cause its Yahoo they would have build an API and opened it up to the world…. fotolia and the rest of those sites would have been powered by that api, with flickr at its hub….
Nothing new here. The 800 lb gorilla in the open photo source market place would be istockphoto.com. They were bought up by Getty and operate as subsidiary. FlickrStock will probably be rolled out based on istockphoto’s technology, as a niche platform.
Too bad Flickr didn’t pursue this idea.
Stock photography is a $2B industry. About half of that revenue is controlled by Getty, Corbis, and the other big players. The rest is highly fragmented. Flickr could democratize the market and, I imagine, grow it significantly. Even amateur photographers occasionally take a photo that’s print-worthy. When you combine that with Flickr’s volume (3 billion photos), real-time nature, keyword search, geo-tagging, and “interestingness” sorting, some fascinating opportunities open up for Flickr to disrupt the industry. For example, instead of a local newpaper sending a photographer to a local event like a political rally, they could just search Flickr, sort by interestingness, and buy a professional quality photo for a fraction of the cost. Meanwhile, the amateur photographer makes a few bucks they wouldn’t have made otherwise and their work is featured in their local paper.
I wrote about this on my blog back in May of last year:
http://joelaz.c...phy-marketplace
Fuck Getty Images!
Getty Images should rot in hell for their outrageous law suits against web site owners and developers. Boycott anything Getty.
More about their unlawful activity here:
http://www.exto...nletterinfo.com
I say decentralize anyway.
I say use sites like Flickr to gain exposure for your work and then set up your own websites where you’ll sell your stuff. In your description of the photos you put on Flickr mention your main website. If Flickr chooses to keep things closed up the way they are then we shall see which model does better.
Flickr Stock seems like a great idea, too bad it did not work out.
That’s a disappointing move by Flickr, although not altogether surprising. Flickr has seemed like a business lost at sea since the Yahoo acquisition with not nearly as much innovation as it once had going for it. The “old Flickr” would have pushed this out without going through Getty.
Perhaps with the economy sinking, and the tight purse strings I’m sure Yahoo has put on all departments, they decided to go with the cheaper, lower-risk play with Getty.
I don’t, personally, have a positive view of Getty and would be disappointed that Flickr members were pulled in to the Getty view of copyright protection of accuse and threaten first, confirm accuracy of copyright claim second.
Actually Yahoo knew what they were doing in this situation. 90% (just a rough estimate) of the photos on Flickr have no commercial value. So just take the top 10% and hook them up with proven system at Getty. Flickr is awesome for posting and sharing interesting photos but it is no place for pro photographers to try and make a living with.
I think the big lose here is pretty clear from Yahoo’s statement on this post: “The photos are being chosen based on Getty Images’ expertise in licensing digital content and insight into customers’ needs.” How about letting the community decide what fits their needs. I’ve come across some really great photos from “non-professional” photographers on Flickr. It a shame Yahoo doesn’t think I can make the decision of what fits my needs and provide a system where I can throw that “non-professional” photog a few bones. What a shame.
I agree that a Flickr Stock would have been way cooler.
Sounds a lot like Clustershot.
https://www.clustershot.com/ is Flickr stock without the Yahoo cock ups / indecision / strategy leg-hold traps.
It’s done by the guys from silverorange, who do the UI for Digg, Ning, Bebo, etc. Importing your Flickr photos is as simple as setting up an account and linking it to your Flickr account.
No wonder Yahoo is in as much trouble as they are. Whoever pulled the plug on this idea needs to be fired.
I think it is a no-brainer that flickr would be doing this, but a partnership with someone that already has a marketplace is a good idea.
I noticed that users were selling flickr photos for money so that companies could use them for advertising brands (virgin airlines, apple both did this) so created http://www.adography.com We just launched and are starting to promote. I have really been waiting to hear that Flickr had something in the works.
It makes sense to me that they would move slowly. Many people here seem to assume that if you take a photo, you can easily sell it professionally, but actually places like Getty bring a lot of value to the process, by making sure the images don’t run afoul of various rights. It’s one thing to take a picture of someone; another to post it on your Flickr site; and yet another thing entirely to sell that photograph commercially, and the companies that buy those images rely on Getty to make sure that the rights of the people in the photo (as well as buildings/signs/etc. in the background of the photo) are all secured.
It’s not as easy as it looks.
Screw Getty. They own istockphoto now too. This would have been a great piece of creativity fostering competition.
What gets me is that they didn’t try it first, before shacking up with Getty. If they did it, found it wasn’t generating enough interest, they could have then looked elsewhere.
The Flickr’s of this world seem to be in too much of a hurry to partner with the bigger boys, they didn’t even give themselves a chance.
I’m not surprised. Yahoo still believes in the archaic, illusionary line between “social” and “mainstream” media.
Blame it on years of working under that Hollywood dinosaur Terry Semel.
How hard can it be to implement a section where photos are for sale.
Major failure from Flickr this, they coulod have made an absolute packet by doing this themselves. If i was an investor, i’d be seriously pissed.
“The barrier between professional and amatuer photography has steadily been eroded exactly because of sites like Flickr.”
Wow…. really? This statement is a pretty big insult to professional photographers who have trained/devoted their careers to this skill and profession.
Why would you make such a blatantly cutting statement, Mr. Arrington? Unless of course, something different was intended from “barrier”?
I guess the big news these days happen when companies decide NOT to do something great that makes money.
How does Flickr not do this internally? I would be interested in buying from a Flickr marketplace.
Flikr, reconsider your position before someone gets fired over this bad move with Getty.
The professional never want to allow the amateurs into their turf. Tough! Times are a changing and if it isn’t Flickr then someone else…And that is where I’ll take my dollars to.
Just a shame. I think Yahoo would have dominated social photo sharing by letting often unseen, talented photographers shine. Keeping the good man down.
Jeez, what an all-time dropped ball. It’s like Tesla going through GM to sell their line-up.
I want better/cheaper stock photo!!! Now!!!!!!
Btw, Mikey, don’t you think a stock photo marketplace could eventually become a solid revenue driver for Facebook? Sure, it’d rile up the locals in the near-term, but long-term it could really pay off and also do some damage to flickr adoption.
I use SmugMug. The community’s not as large, but I can set my own price and know I’m not getting either filtered or told by someone like Getty what I can or can’t sell. Plus, I want to have full rights and control overall.
Flickr could pull this off, or they would have. Copyright for stock photography is quite a big deal. You can’t just sell any photo you shoot with your SLR….
Getty has all the processes in place and a team of lawyers to make sure both they and the photographers are protected.
get a clue…
Well, some of us amateurs just want to make a buck. That’s all.
You don’t deserve a buck, amateur. Get good at your craft and the money will follow.
Great article! And yes, there is no doubt this is where the market is heading. Unfortunately market leaders don’t always act as leaders, and that’s when they get into trouble (e.g. does anyone see Adobe in this space?)
To some extent iStock already provides this, but it just isn’t as mass-market oriented as Flickr. If Flickr doesn’t move here, others will. The web is reducing the friction between creators and consumers, and there is no reason why some middle party needs to play a major gatekeeping role in facilitating that transaction. Let the web facilitate community interactions that help validate the talent, and create the right kind of marketplace. Whether or not the creators are “officially Pros” is something no one will care about if the content is great. And just like we routinely see in the Olympics, large pools of talent (e.g. China, U.S., Russia) do help produce greatness.
As a long-time Flickr member, this is disappointing, not to mention a lost opportunity to capitalize on “the long tail” of photos. There are lots of great photos on Flickr that will never be “discovered” if there is a gatekeeper between the buyer and seller. Some amateur photographers may only have one or two photos that are truly outstanding. On the other hand, a potential buyer may be looking for something very specific and unique. It’s my understanding that it’s not cost-effective for Getty Images to stock such a photo.
Biggest missed opportunity ever. Oh woe.
@Dan Misener Thanks for clustershot.com
LOL @ “FlickrStock will probably be rolled out based on istockphoto’s technology, as a niche platform.”
Istock runs on creaky LAMP code from 2000. They got the best people in MySQL to try and help them repair their basic architecture problems and just barely got it hobbled together for the Getty-infused growth spurt.
How many other $51 million websites (with funding by Getty) do you know that have daily reports of outages by users?
Yahoo engineers are some of the best in the business and they wouldn’t touch that maple-syrup tainted code with a ten foot pole.
iStock admin: “Sorry xxx system went down again yesterday”
The iSheep: “Ohhh thank you! You’re the best!”
I think Stewart Butterfield actually said a little bit about this in a CNBC interview in the first half of 2007.
Case in point.. http://www.isto...?threadid=82858
Uploads and apparently downloads broken. What a world-class stinker of a site, considering they only paid 29% of revenues to contributors last year you have to wonder where the rest of the money is going to, obviously not IT.
Guess it is just another write-off for Getty.
seems like a lot more spammers on TC hawking their shit these days…
Same spammer seems to be targeting a few blogs over the last month: http://www.back...orgehu1@live.cn