AI killed my stock icon business. What's next?
For about 10 years, I made my living creating icons for stock marketplaces (Shutterstock, iStock, Adobe Stock...). It was a pretty niche business, but it worked and I genuinely enjoyed it.
The first real warning sign came during the pandemic when Shutterstock changed its contributor payout structure. Other platforms introduced similar changes not long after. The strange part was that my downloads kept growing, but my earnings didn’t. I tried to compensate the only way I knew how: making more icons, covering more categories, putting in more hours - but it barely moved the needle.
Then AI-generated content started flooding the marketplaces.
Within a couple of years, the business I’d spent a decade building was effectively gone. The volume of content exploded, payouts dropped even further, and standing out became almost impossible.
What’s interesting is that AI never really solved the kind of work I do. It can generate endless illustrations, but creating large, consistent thin-line icon systems with proper geometry and visual coherence is still surprisingly difficult. The problem wasn’t that quality human work disappeared — it got buried. Some stock platforms have already started limiting AI submissions because of declining performance and traffic (Pixta). It seems the industry is slowly recognizing that more content doesn’t automatically mean better content.
Unfortunately, I couldn’t afford to sit around waiting for the market to correct itself. So I decided to try something different.
Over the years I’d built a library of more than 6,000 medical and healthcare icons, so instead of relying on stock platforms, I started building a product around them.
In April, I launched into something completely new for me: building a Figma plugin - GlyfiQ. I had zero development experience, so the entire thing was vibe coded with AI. What surprised me most was how enjoyable the process turned out to be. I’d describe a feature, make a few adjustments, and watch it come to life almost exactly as I imagined. The first version launched at the end of April with around 200 icons.
During May, I added another 200, bringing the library to 400+ icons today. The original archive is much larger, but every icon needs to be reviewed, adapted, tagged, and prepared before it goes into the plugin. I’m currently working on the next batch. A few days ago, the Framer version also passed moderation and went live. So far, the numbers are humbling:
• 33 Figma plugin installs
• 7 opens of the Framer plugin
• 0 paying subscribers
I knew building the product would be hard. What I’m discovering now is that finding the right audience is even harder.
The interesting thing is that these icons already have a proven use case. Over the years I’ve seen them used on healthcare websites, in printed materials, on brochures, flyers, and even on billboards for medical organizations. The challenge isn’t whether the icons are useful. The challenge is getting them in front of the people who need them.
At this point, I’m starting to think that waiting for organic discovery isn’t enough. I may need to reach out directly to healthcare companies, clinics, agencies, and independent practitioners who build medical websites and marketing materials.
I’m curious if anyone here has been through a similar transition: moving from marketplaces to selling directly and having to find customers from scratch. What worked for you?
Current status:
• 400+ icons available now, with 6,000+ planned
• Free tier includes about 10% of the library
• Pro plan is $10/month
• Pro subscribers can request custom icons, which I draw myself
The product exists, people are using the free version, and I’m still building.
Figma 👉 https://cutt.ly/NtLoworw
Framer 👉 https://framer.link/FySrYnW
This is a strong pivot, Alex.
I’d just be careful with one assumption: the problem may not be “getting in front of healthcare companies” broadly. The harder part is choosing the right first buyer, because the wrong audience can make a useful product look like it has no demand.
You have a very specific asset here, but the direct-selling path is probably very different from the old stock marketplace path.
I wouldn’t try to solve that loosely in the thread because the answer changes the outreach, pricing, and what you should show first.
If you’re open to it, share your email and I’ll put the tighter first-customer path together properly.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. You're probably right that "healthcare companies broadly" is too vague as a starting point.
I'd rather keep the conversation here in the open though — if you have a specific angle in mind, I'm happy to discuss it publicly. That way others in a similar situation might benefit too.
What would you define as the "right first buyer" for something like this?
Fair point, I get why you’d prefer to keep it public.
I just don’t want to give you a shallow answer here because the first buyer decision changes the offer, pricing, outreach, and what you show first.
If you want the proper version, send me your email and I’ll take a closer look. If not, no worries — I’d still avoid treating “healthcare companies” as one audience.