When studying photography, we often look at images, but photography can be considered an industry. Indeed, many practitioners complain that it is difficult to make a sustainable income, that rates are under pressure, and that generative AI, as amateur photography, digital imagery, and digital manipulation before that, threatens the future of the medium. These complaints, however, have little to do with the iconography of images. It therefore makes sense to look into the workings of the industry. Can it indeed be argued that we can speak of a ‘photographic industry’? How is it organised, and how should we approach this sector when researching or discussing it?

In this paper, I take my report published in February 2025 ‘Fotografie en de Cultuurmonitor’ (Photography and the Cultural Monitor) on cultural photography in the Netherlands and how it can be quantified as a case study to answer these questions. (Prüst, 2025) In this report I identified indicators, or specific numerical data, that can be used to measure the state and development of the sector. Such indicators are the basis for the state financed Boekman Foundation to report on photography in their annual monitor on the cultural sector, the Cultural Monitor. Until 2024, photography did not figure at all in this overview. Indeed, photography is not considered an independent discipline within the Dutch government policy. Inclusion into the Cultural Monitor may be a first step to the recognition of the medium as a discipline. Upon the publication of the report, the Boekman Foundation indicated they intended to start reporting on the Dutch photographic sector.

The Visual Economy

There seems to be a mismatch between how photography is perceived and studied and how the photographic industry actually functions. I aim to understand how the photographic industry functions and do so by searching for a system that explains and clarifies this industry. Deborah Poole has offered a valuable format for analysing the industry with her book on historical Andean photography, and the term she coined: the visual economy. According to Poole the visual economy is a way to describe how different communities may have very different visual cultures but may still be part of the same visual economy. The term ‘economy’ also suggests that indeed there is a system that can be described and analysed. A visual economy consists of three levels in which photographic visuals accrue value. The production stage, the stage of circulation and that of appraisal. Each stage is ‘needed’ for visuals to gain, or loose, value. This analysis goes beyond the mere visual analysis of iconography but takes this division into these three levels as its starting point. (Poole, 1997) Value can be seen as economic value, or as social value, or ‘impact’.

The production stage includes the technical aspects of photography: the development of photographic techniques and how it has led to decreased costs of production and increased numbers of practitioners. The production stage of the visual economy is also concerned with the practice of taking photographs. It seems on the surface that this level has received most attention in research, but is also the main perspective when perceiving the photographic industry.

The second level is concerned with how photographs move in circulation. Several research projects have aimed to shed light on the functioning of this stage circulation stage, and have shown that, especially in photojournalism, it is not the photographer but the position of the ‘image broker’ that is crucial in bringing photographs into circulation.(Gürsel, 2016) (Bair, 2020) (Campbell, 2008) (Yuksel & Butter, 2020) The image brokers are crucial in assigning the photograph with value through this process. In my report I did not specifically look into the role or position of these image brokers.

At the third level of the visual economy, that of ‘appraisal’, images are discussed, judged, interpreted, and studied. The academic world that researches and describes photography as a medium and as an art is part of this level. Also, gallery and museum exhibitions that are discussed and reviewed in the media, discussed in art programs, can be considered to be part of this stage.

Poole’s system of the visual economy is a relevant tool to analyse the photographic industry and to identify that value accruement happens at different stages. This approach helps to distinguish clearly between production and circulation and indicates that to better understand the industry a study into the process of circulation, and not a study into iconography of visuals, is relevant. David Campbell has indicated such in his work into the visual economy (Campbell, 2008). This paper follows this logic and applies the visual economy concept of Poole and Campbell.

The Dutch Case: Aiming For Visibility Through the Cultural Monitor

Using my case study into the Dutch photographic industry, I test whether indeed the production level of the visual economy is indeed the main focus of the photographic research and analysis. I also analyse how the stages of production and circulation relate to each other specifically in the cultural sector and what conclusions we can draw on the realities of the sector when taking the visual economy theory as the framework for analysis.

When I started looking into the Dutch photographic industry, I realised there were practically no data available from the sector itself, there is no central point where data are collected for interpretation or usage by policy advisors or researchers. I therefore collected data myself to provide an insight into the photographic sector. The National Statistics Bureau (CBS) collects data on ‘photography’ based on branch codes (SBI-codes) and for the data until 2024 we can distinguish four branch codes concerned with photography.

46434: Wholesale trade in photographic items
47781: Shops in photographic items
74021: Photography
74202: Development stores
74203: Development centrals

Photography (with branch code 74201) is defined as the ‘taking of photographs for consumers and businesses’, it is a class that includes the making of imagery, only. Codes 74202 and 74203 are concerned with developing and printing of analogue photography. Taking a photograph was indeed an economic activity in times of analogue photography, which no longer is the case with digital photography.

With the CBS data we see that in the Netherlands most photographers are independent freelance photographers, that in 2023 there were almost 25.000 photographers with photography as their main activity, 15.000 of them work full time as photographers, and 1500 are employed. The vast majority works as freelance entrepreneur. The annual average income from photographic activities is 9700 euro. [1] The CBS also reports that in 2023 there were 100 wholesale traders and 250 stores in photographic items. Notably, the CBS has no specific branch codes for image brokers, or companies working in the business of photographic circulation.

Two unions for photographers exist in the Netherlands, one specifically for photographers working in news media, one for all kinds of photographers. Together they have a little over 2500 members, or 10% of all photographers with photography as main activity.

The development stores and centrals have become irrelevant as economic entities and as of 2025 they no longer appear in the CBS data.

No other data concerned with photography are collected by the CBS. To gain an insight in the institutions working with photography I collected alternative data. I focused this research on the institutions in the cultural photographic sector: museums, archives and collections, and platforms such as commercial and non-commercial galleries.

Using the annual reports of photography institutions, I collected relevant data that give an insight into the sector. I calculated that in 2023 the Netherlands had 6 photography museums, 30 museums with a photography collection, 34 museums with a collection and regular photography exhibitions. There were 8 photography festivals, 52 commercial galleries, and 8 non-commercial galleries. In total they organised 250 photography exhibitions, with little under 600.000 visits.

The research included several interviews with stakeholders from the industry. From compiling the report, I was able to make the following analysis.

The two levels of production and circulation are connected, but there is a distance between them. On the one hand we see the sectors for which the CBS collects data and provides detailed insights: the practitioners, film development (shops and centrals) and wholesale and shops in photographic items. These sectors are all on the production level of the visual economy. For the circulation and appraisal levels of the visual economy, no statistical data exist. We can however distinguish individuals and institutions within the cultural sector for which the CBS collects no data. Institutions such as museums, platforms, and galleries self-identify as photographic organisations and they considered themselves to be part of a photographic sector. On a governmental level however they remain largely invisible as they are not represented as a sector in reports or policy documents.

As photography is not a discipline, this has led to a mismatch in the Dutch situation of the cultural sector between funding requirements and opportunities for organisations and practitioners. Only state funding for visual art, applied design, or discipline specific projects such as film, exist. Photographers and institutions have therefore limited possibilities for funding for photographic projects, or institutional support. This means that photographic projects, both for production as well as circulation, such as exhibitions or books, are often not judged by photographic criteria, but by criteria of other disciplines. It also means that photographic projects that receive funding are not recorded as such, leading to further invisibility of the sector. A few private funds exist though that focus specifically on photography, they offer funding for the creation of new work by photographers. Specific institutional support for photography initiatives does not exist in the Dutch system.

This lack of financial opportunities from state funding leads organisations to focus on their own activities and financial survival. They are not in a position to gather data or organize themselves into joint lobby activities. We see little connection between institutions.

The linkage between practitioners and the institutions is limited. We see a distance between photographers on the one hand and presentation platforms, archives and collections, and museums on the other. Photographers are largely unaware of the criteria that are used by the institutions or the considerations by which they make decisions. Photographers’ union density of 10% further limits their clout towards policy influence.

Conclusion: The Perspective of Circulation to Enlarge Visibility

This paper examined the Dutch photographic industry through the lens of the visual economy, demonstrating the clear distinctions between production on the one hand and, circulation and appraisal on the other. The findings show that indeed we can speak of a photographic sector or industry in the Dutch situation but also of a significant gap between the realities of this sector and its recognition within cultural policy frameworks. The lack of statistical data, institutional support, and coherent representation within the cultural sector has contributed to the invisibility of photography as an industry in the Netherlands.

The research confirms that while production is well-documented through national statistics, the circulation and appraisal stages remain underexplored and under-supported. Institutions that facilitate the circulation of photographic works, such as museums, galleries, and photography festivals, operate in relative isolation due to the absence of a collective organizational structure or state support. This fragmentation limits the industry's ability to advocate for its needs, secure funding, and establish a robust professional framework.

Furthermore, the focus on the production stage of photography has contributed to a disconnect between practitioners and institutions. Photographers often lack knowledge of the criteria that determine access to institutional support, while institutions operate without a comprehensive understanding of the industry's broader economic landscape. The low membership rates in photographers' unions further weaken their ability to influence policy or negotiate better financial conditions.

By applying Poole’s concept of the visual economy, this study underscores the necessity of analysing the photographic industry beyond the production stage. A more integrated approach, one that considers circulation and appraisal as equally important elements, can help to develop a sustainable industry model. The recognition of photography within the Cultural Monitor marks a potential turning point in the Netherlands, but further steps are needed to ensure that photographers, institutions, and policymakers work towards a more cohesive and visible industry. Future research should deepen and widen the understanding of the sector, develop further the perspective of circulation, and aim to foster stronger connections between practitioners and cultural institutions. Addressing these challenges will be key to securing a sustainable and recognized position for photography within the Dutch cultural landscape.

[1] Median income in the Netherlands is 39,100 euro https://longreads.cbs.nl/nederland-in-cijfers-2023/wat-is-het-inkomen-van-werkenden/ in the same period (2023).

Literature

Bair, N. (2020); The decisive network Magnum Photos and the postwar image market; University of California Press.
Campbell, D. (2008): The Visual Economy of HIV/AIDS.
Gürsel, Z. D. (2016); Image brokers : visualizing world news in the age of digital circulation. University of California Press.
Poole, D. (1997); Vision, Race, and Modernity : a Visual Economy of the Andean Image World; Princeton University Press.
Prüst, M. (2025); Fotografie en de Cultuurmonitor
Yuksel, C. & Butter, E. (2020); Moslima, Een onderzoek naar de representatie van Moslima’s in de beeldbank van het ANP.