Louis Zaal

We asked three experts about the future of photographic agencies. First we turned to Louis Zaal, the General Manager of the Hollandse Hoogte agency in Amsterdam, to use his crystal ball. What, we asked, would be agencies’ strategies in the new digital world and how would they and their photographers need to adapt?

Said Louis: “Everything is economics.

Imagine you go to a shop to buy nails and are asked in which room you want to use the nails and how big is the picture you want to attach to the wall. Oh – and by the way - you are told you cannot take the nails to your second home in France and re-use of a nail is strictly forbidden!

Last year I made a comparison of prices, asking twelve picture sources for an image of a lonely tree at sun set. The pictures were almost the same. Prices were between 1 dollar and 330 euros. And for 330 euro, you were allowed to use the picture only once.

It now seems regular capitalist rules have entered the photography business. Ever heard of demand and supply which will always balance out?

For a long time Hollandse Hoogte, and other agencies for that matter, were able to behave as the grocery store in a small village; setting prices, providing friendly service and quality without question and a portfolio which reflected the preference of the owner.

As an agency was often the exclusive representative of a photographer or other agency in their own territory, they could set the rules for the customer without too much attention to the needs of that customer. In general, the market and the behavior of agencies did not change for many years. Hollandse Hoogte in 2001 was more or less the same as when it started in 1985.

But, in reality, the world had already changed enormously with devastating effects for many colleague agencies. Digitization, the Internet, fast and cheap computers and hard discs made photography a worldwide market.

New business models were developed, changing the position of the customer. No longer dependent on a small group of national agencies, he could shop anywhere. New price models made it possible to go for a better deal; royalty free, subscription models and microstock. Suddenly the agent could not dictate the price of a picture anymore as worldwide competition offered alternatives, for a much lower price.

Yes, I hear photographers and agency people say: “We have only quality, service, knowledge of the market.”

But is seems that is not enough anymore. We now have to deal with purchasing managers who ask why they have to pay more for a cover picture; after all, a picture is a picture.

Not only has supply changed. Demand also is different. Advertisement revenue does not flow easily anymore to the printed media. And I always shock our (would be) photographers by telling them that, in the end, we fill only the back side of the advertisement pages in newspapers and magazines. Fewer advertisements, fewer pages, less money. There are not as many general magazines. More special interest publications tailor content for very specific group of consumers.

What does this all mean? To agencies, photographers? Would-be World Press Photo winners?

There will always be a market for high quality journalistic photography - pictures which reveal what is happening in the world. Exclusive pictures. Ideas which turn into journalistic stories for magazines instead of general material.

The easy, worldwide usable picture has now eroded to a one dollar commodity while a personalized, regional, exclusive picture still can generate a high price. We have to combine the quality and intelligence of commercial photo websites with our quality of imagery. Stories, ideas, concepts, dossiers.

As far as other markets are concerned, there are companies, NGO’s, museums, books and the Internet all out there. There are assignments for international magazines who want complete freedom to re-use the work.

But this will also mean that we, the photographer and agent, have to give up our copyright or, at least, exclusivity to decide what to do with our pictures.

In order to survive, we will have to sell our material to the highest bidder and give up what we have lived on for so many years, our copyright.

But at least we do not have to fight for it anymore.”