I’m ambivalent about stock art. The purist in me feels that the designer, as an artist, should be able to create every aspect of a project from scratch. But the pragmatist in me knows that this point of view is unrealistic. Time and budget often stand in the way of the “purity of design.” For example, recent projects have required imagery from Hong Kong and Kazakhstan. Traveling to either of those places to take a few photos for a website is clearly insane. All the same, using stock art feels like cheating.
No designer I know is unaware of iStockphoto, the most popular in the new trend toward affordable, user-uploaded stock photography. I’ve been hunting through iStock and a couple of its competitors lately, and thought I’d post a quick comparison.
iStockphoto: As I type this iStockphoto boasts 4,705,000 stock files, and their advantage is in their volume: there’s a lot of chaff (in the form of weak illustrations and cheeseball photos), but there are enough files that it’s not hard to find quality images for just about any topic. iStock has 2 main disadvantages that I’ve noticed. First, their website often runs extremely slowly, and it is not uncommon for it to be down completely. Second, their prices are continually creeping skyward. When I first used the service 2–3 years ago, a dollar bought a credit and a credit bought a small image. Now, a dollar only buys a credit if you’re willing to spend $1500 up front. At the same time, the number of credits charged for images (especially vector illustrations) has shot skyward. As iStock becomes an institution in the field, for better or worse they seem to be creeping closer to traditional stock imagery in terms of both price and quality.
Fotolia: Fotolia’s prices are where iStock’s were a couple years ago. In a suspicious coincidence, Fotolia lists 4,705,741 photos. Perhaps this is because everyone who uploads to iStock is also uploading their photos to Fotolia. But regardless of the similarity in the sizes of their libraries, Fotolia’s search results tend to be less relevant than iStock’s. There are quality, usable images on Fotolia, but finding them is a little more of a chore. Fotolia functions well as a backup when iStock is down, or when you’re on a very tight budget.
Shutterstock: Compared to iStock or Fotolia, Shutterstock is a ripoff unless you purchase a monthly subscription. However, if you do need enough imagery to warrant a 25 image per day plan, Shutterstock is worth considering. With more than six million photos, they have the largest library I’ve seen of any site in the category. As with their competitors, a substantial portion of the images feel stock-y, but as with iStock there are plenty of quality images as well.
Veer Marketplace: Veer is the newest company to enter the field. As longtime purveyors of traditional stock imagery, fonts, and hipster graphic design merchandise (of which I admit to owning more than one item), Veer seems to be doing things a little differently with their new “Marketplace” site. Recently launched with 100,000 images, their library of affordable imagery is nowhere near as large as the competition. However, they make up for the slighter selection by having the highest quality of the bunch.
Next time I’m in need of stock imagery, I plan to try Veer first. I might not find what I’m looking for in their portfolio, but if I do I can expect it to be a great image. Plus, I like supporting Veer – they promote some of the best in new and edgy typefaces and their monthly mailings are always entertaining (I highly recommend signing up for their mailing list). When Veer doesn’t have what I need, I’ll turn to iStock and Fotolia. For me, Shutterstock’s monthly plans just don’t make sense.
Where else would they be?
I normally hate shopping for greeting cards. The designs are typically lackluster, and the copy is overwrought and too wordy. I’d rather write my own message, thank you.
So I was refreshed to discover Egg Press on my most recent card shopping excursion. Egg Press is a letterpress printing company that makes some of the best designed and most adorable cards I’ve seen. Most of their designs feature awkward-but-lovable animals printed in two or three colors. Text is limited or absent, making their cards versatile and allowing me to write what I actually want.
Love it.
They print their cards using antique letterpresses. Letterpress printing seems to be emerging as a luxury art-form; honestly, I’m much more excited by their designs and creativity than by their printing process. So go check out Egg Press, a company on the leading edge of the new American craft movement working out of an old warehouse on outdated-but-hip equipment. Why am I not surprised they’re based in Portland?
Finally, don’t miss their ridiculously awesome artsy-craftsy “stitch kits.”
I’d like to call attention to what I think is the next trend in package design: simple, “old-timey” labels covered with dense text. I started noticing this on the label of what is truly an amazing product: Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps. I have never used this product, so I cannot speak to how well it functions in its role as certified fair trade organic soap. However, in its role of making store shelves more interesting and strange, it functions magnificently.
Bronner's at a local Whole Foods, where it almost looks like it belongs
The labels are simple, printed in just one color. They have none of the slickness of most other brands of soap on the shelf, and that really makes them stand out. The label is covered with dense text running vertically and horizontally over every inch. My first thought was that this was a cute attempt to provide people with extra reading material in the bathroom. But rather than the cutesy marketing copy I expected, the text consists of a semi-coherent rant expounding the tenets of the All One God Faith. I take no issue with Dr. Bronner promoting his faith on his product – in fact, I think I prefer that to the usual salesy, consumery approach. Still, seeing this on the shelf at Target next to Dove and Dial is surreal.
But this wouldn’t be a trend if it were only one company. Meyer’s cleaning supplies have adopted a similar label, even using Bronneresque colors on their text-filled labels. Meyer’s looks a little more at home on the shelf of my local grocery store. It feels a little less new-age-hippy, and taps instead into a sort of 1940s, nostalgia-for-a-simpler-time kind of feeling.
Meyer's – it's like Bronners for normal people!
Of course, this trend can be traced back to some of the McSweeney’s covers, and from there to John Hodgman’s books and website. But I expect we’ll start seeing it a lot more. Within the next couple of years, I think we’ll see dense-as-newsprint labels move from cleaning products into every other aisle of the grocery store. It’s a look that feels un-corporate (at least, until big corporations start using it), so I think it’ll take hold especially among the ever-expanding all-natural/organic/cottage-industry set of products. I recommend reading glasses.
I’ve been a fan of Squidfire since I found out about them a couple years ago. I have several of their shirts myself, and I’ve bought quite a few of them as gifts – they always seem to be well received. Going back through my photos over the past couple years, it wasn’t hard to find their products popping up a few times in my snapshots.
Squidfire on me & my friends
I like how their designs feature interesting characters and drawings without feeling overly clever, ironic, or branded. They just released a new set of designs in time for holiday shopping, and I just picked up a few. Hit their online store and check them out while they’re still on sale!
