Professional designers using stock images in their comps

pontovic · 04-12-2009 05:27PM #1

Hello everyone,

I want to get the opinions of the web design and development community for a debate I was having recently.

As professional designers, do any of you use stock image icons in any of your designs or would it be better practice to design your own and deliver something fully bespoke?

A client of mine recently had a website professionally designed and had paid good money for it, and it transpired a lot of the icons on the page were licensed from iStock photo. They are quite annoyed at this and I think they are right to be.

What do you think ?

Liam Byrne · 04-12-2009 09:41PM

pontovic wrote: »

Hello everyone,

I want to get the opinions of the web design and development community for a debate I was having recently.

As professional designers, do any of you use stock image icons in any of your designs or would it be better practice to design your own and deliver something fully bespoke?

A client of mine recently had a website professionally designed and had paid good money for it, and it transpired a lot of the icons on the page were licensed from iStock photo. They are quite annoyed at this and I think they are right to be.

What do you think ?

Depends completely on the cost, and the style required.

100% bespoke from scratch would cost, big-time.

So it all comes down to budget, the need (or otherwise) for completely unique elements (as distinct from a unique overall look) and a few other criteria.

Doing up completely unique elements would add 2 - 3 days to a project (maybe more, if there were a couple of iterations in the design phase); within the existing market, very few people would pay the extra required for that.

You could argue the same re the photos used in the site; hire a professional photographer, model and stage the scenes (budget running into the high hundreds, at least) vs choose photos from iStockPhoto for €1 - €5.....

At the end of the day, it's the client's own budget that they're saving; they won't be charged for the extra 2 or 3 days that would be otherwise required.

Also, an architect wouldn't be expected to suddenly come up with a whole set of unique sockets and light fittings and whatever else - just source ones that match and don't look like they're bolted on; so why should a graphic designer ?

Of course, if they've paid a couple of grand plus for a really premium site, then I'd question whether the extra design time should have been included.

But considering the current market where people seem to want sites done for pittance - and in some cases have to be reminded that no, they can't just download images from somewhere else and use them - I can't see many paying the premium that unique icons would require.

Pixelcraft · 04-12-2009 11:23PM

Yup, what's 'good money' ? Icon design is extremely time consuming, and would increase a budget significantly.

04-12-2009 11:50PM

As the lads said - depends on the price.

In general, I like to work with personalized images of the client's business. Nothing personalizes a site like home made pics. Often I'll get a CD of images shot on a a digital camera from a client and they are unusable for various reasons. We work with semi-pro and pro photographers, and can usually quote a decent rate for photography, but often the client will want to save cash and use stock photography.

Also, for the metaphorical stuff ("I want a picture that represents success and washing machines"), it's much easier to trawl for stock photos than try to engineer an abstract photo.

On the other hand, designers do sometimes get lazy - that shot of the smiling Asian lady getting into a left hand drive Cadilac in a desert will look a little odd on the website of Lavery's Quality Used Volkswagens of Buttevant.

05-12-2009 02:43PM

pontovic wrote: »

A client of mine recently had a website professionally designed and had paid good money for it, and it transpired a lot of the icons on the page were licensed from iStock photo. They are quite annoyed at this and I think they are right to be.

Using stock content is very common, most likely the client didn't pay for custom icons to be developed.

I'd say you'd be talking about 600 euro extra for that service, would they rather pay that? Most web design jobs are relatively low budget so don't allow for the hiring of icon designers, photographers & illustrators.

I think it's a shame there's different expectations between client & designer, but that's all the issue is really. If you suggest to clients that you get all the artwork custom done, then they'll often say no due to the high cost. For some clients the extra cost is worth it.

Eoinite · 07-12-2009 08:50PM

I agree with the above comments. It all comes down to the budget.

I've used Stock Images before (quite often actually) but do always edit the images first to give it a "unique" look.

Professional designers using stock images in their comps

Comments