Enter the era of affordable stock, and user-contributed photo sites. With digital camera prices reaching all-time lows, and the quality more than adequate, the average person can provide some very good shots. There are now hundreds of sites on the web that offer fantastic photography for little to no cost.
Some fantastic sites for affordable photography
I’ve put together a brief list of some of my favorites below, check them all out.
stock.xchng
Probably the first place to search for your photo needs. stock.xchng offers photos contributed by amateur and semi-pro photographers all over the world. The quality of the photos ranges from decent to excellent, and while some photos require you to notify the photographer if you wish to use the image publicly, most images are completely free.
Photocase
Photocase is a community made up of creative, ambitious users and photographers. Started by a small handful of designers, Photocase has gained a reputation for creative and high-quality photography. Images can be purchased using a credit system, not my favorite way to buy images, but they are affordable. (Photocase is an advertiser here at The Graphic Mac)
Freerange
Freerange offers a high-quality photos with a focus on quality and creativity. Because Freerange is so particular by the photos they shoot themselves, and receive from photographers all over the world, their collection is much smaller than competing sites. But if you’re looking for vibrant, interesting photos, Freerange is worth checking out.
Flickr
With one of the world’s largest photo collections, it’s unfortunate you can’t just use any old photo you find on the site. But you can use a decent amount of them free of charge, you just need to know how to find them. Back in 2008 I wrote a brief article letting you know exactly how to find images on Flickr that use the Creative Commons license. If you read the article, it’ll explain the various license options (they’re all free, but some have restrictions on use). Restrictions aside, Flickr is a great place to look for photos, especially since the keyword use makes it so easy to find what you’re looking for.
Crestock
I originally found Crestock because they offer a free stock photo every day. This eventually led me to making Crestock a regular visit whenever I need stock photos. Crestock allows you to buy individual images, monthly subscriptions or credits to purchase multiple photos. I’ve found the images at Crestock to be of very high-quality, and I suspect it will remain that way since they were recently acquired by Masterfile Corporation, an old-school stock photo house known for superior images. (Crestock is an affiliate here at The Graphic Mac)
Morguefile
Morguefile is a small stock photo archive, meaning photographers contribute the photos and allow them to be used by anyone for virtually anything. While they have a small collection (less than 10,000 images), I’ve found them to be particularly useful when you’re looking for photos of local areas. Doing a search for a city name usually yields at least a few shots worth using.
iStockphoto
Probably the most popular microstock photography site on the web, iStockphoto offers a huge collection of images, vector art, video and audio files to choose from. iStockphoto also offers a free stock photo every week just for signing up. Most of the free images are extremely useful images! Prices range between $1 and $24 each.
Stockvault
With just under 20,000 images in its collection, Stockvault isn’t the largest stock photo site around, but it’s about the only one I’ve come across that doesn’t force you to register in order to download their images. The site is very well designed, making it easy to find what you’re looking for. Most of the images are not suitable for high-resolution commercial printing, but they’re great for web and multi-media work.
This certainly isn’t an exhaustive list, but it’s a great start. Of course, a quick Google search will yield plenty more to choose from.
I see your point when you compare Getty’s prices to small, specialized photo agencies back in the day but I don’t think I was really being that critical of my comps. I was pointing out that you classified them as being affordable which you have now clarified a bit and I was saying that the first two, Getty and Istock aren’t seen as really being affordable anymore. In addition istock forces you to buy credit packages to purchase even a single image and if you don’t use all the credits on that one purchase (i think the smallest is like 15 bucks), the credits expire after a year and you lose them. I was trying to add more details to what you wrote and I guess I didnt do a great job of detailing it 😉
The reason why a lot of these microstock and free image sites popped up, in addition to some of the points you discussed about cameras and the rise of supply, was that Getty was too expensive and designers wanted images they could use multiple times and for a few bucks.
Do you have any data that shows that Getty was affordable besides anecdotal or was it just in comparison to their rights managed competitors? I am just asking and not trying to say I know everything. Their rights managed collection was never considered affordable for anyone outside of an advertising agency, publisher or corporation.
I wouldn’t start my article out about Getty Images as being a source for affordable images at one time and its even funny that you have three Getty owned properties linked to in affordable images. One is super expensive (Getty), one is getting much more expensive and screwing contributors commissions (istock) and one is free (sxc). Getty has never been or called “affordable.”
I would call your list a free or microstock listing of agencies and its a good list. Have you looked at http://www.cutcaster.com? Cutcaster offers both free and royalty free images and illustrations to the graphic design community and you can download high res images or detailed vector graphics for just a few bucks. If the price is somehow too high we have a bidding mechanism where you can state the price you want to pay directly to the photographer. We also pay some of the highest royalty commissions in the industry to our contributors.
But Getty Images WAS affordable back in the day, when compared to the old “stock” houses that would charge thousands of dollars for a single image that you could use one time. And that is the context I meant when I said that.
I appreciate your comments, but you have to admit that when you criticize other stock houses when you yourself work for one of their competitors, it doesn’t hold a whole lot of water.
I have never heard of cutcaster, but I will certainly give it a look.
I have a few others to add, I’m in the midst of microstock agency research right now. I’m an iPhone developer and graphic designer — easy to understand terms for print use, but for apps…it’s a complete grey area. I’m finding I need to contact all directly to make sure photos for app usage is in compliance with their terms. Anyway here’s a few more, all with various usage rights.
freedigitalphotos.net
imageafter.com
unprofound.com (not great photos)
grungetextures.com (texture photos, decent quality)
bigstock.com
fotolia.com
dreamstime.com
everystockphoto.com
Deviantart.com has so many talented artists, and worth a look. But do contact the artist, each may permit/not permit use.
Your istock pricing is a little off. Prices range from about $1.50 to a about $50 minimum for certain images.
Requiring credits is a sleazy business practice because we can’t buy the exact number we need. The result is always a few credits left over—but not enough for the next image, so we buy more and still have a few left over. On top of that they expire, so don’t plan on waiting a year (i.e., using other sites in the meantime) and applying your credits because they’ll be gone. iStockphoto, are you listening?
Like I said, I’m not a fan of the credit system – for the very reason you mention. However, if you’re working for a creative agency, design firm, or are a really busy freelancer, a credit or two left-over is the least of your concerns. And to be honest, you really should charge your client enough to cover the credits and your time for searching, etc.