< Back to all results

Stock photos are costing you qualified patients (and here's the data to prove it)

We've all seen it: another dental practice using that same stock photo of a perfectly white smile that every other clinic in a 50-mile radius is also using. It's bland, forgettable, and frankly screams "we couldn't be bothered to invest in proper marketing."

But here's the deeper problem: why would patients trust you with their health when you won't even show them real images of your practice or your team? When your marketing looks identical to every other clinic, what exactly are you giving patients to base their decision on? Price alone?

Those stock images aren't just uninspiring. They're actively undermining patient trust and costing you money. Real money. And we've got the data to prove it.

The research

Over the past two months, we analysed 364 Facebook ads across 12 healthcare practices. We compared three types of content: professional Ignite photography, client-provided images, and stock photos. The results? More revealing than we expected.

Stock photos typically cost 30-50% more per lead than professional content, but we've seen some campaigns cost 85% more when you include the real disasters. Some stock photo campaigns were spending £340 per lead while professional content was bringing in leads for under £30.

Yes, really.

The numbers don't lie

Here's what our analysis revealed:

Overall performance (all content types):

  • Professional (Ignite) content: £31.07 average cost per lead
  • Client-provided content: £31.26 average cost per lead
  • Stock photos: £47.31 average cost per lead

That's a 52% difference between professional content and stock imagery.

Picture performance specifically:

  • Professional pictures: £29.26 average cost per lead
  • Client-provided pictures: £29.95 average cost per lead
  • Stock pictures: £54.22 average cost per lead

But here's where it gets interesting.

Why stock photos fail (and it's not what you think)

The problem isn't that stock photos look fake (though they do). It's that they attract the wrong audience.

Our data shows professional content has the lowest click-through rate at 1.75%, but the highest ad conversion rate at 4.53%. Stock photos get more clicks but fewer enquiries.

What does this tell us? Professional content is qualifying leads before they even click. When someone sees genuine photos of your actual clinic and team, they're making an informed decision to enquire.

Stock photos cast a wide net that catches everything, including people who'll waste your time with price shopping.

The hidden costs you're not tracking

Beyond the obvious CPL differences, stock photos create hidden costs:

Budget drain: Higher cost per lead means your advertising budget doesn't stretch as far, reducing your overall reach and potential patient base.

Brand confusion: When every practice looks the same online, patients make decisions purely on price. Hello, race to the bottom.

Missed opportunities: While you're paying £47 for leads that might not convert, your competitor using professional content is paying £31 for leads that are ready to book.

What makes professional content work

Professional healthcare content does three things stock photos can't:

Builds trust immediately: Real photos of your actual facility and team create instant credibility. Patients can see they're dealing with real people, not a faceless corporate entity.

Sets proper expectations: When patients see your actual space, equipment, and results, they arrive better informed and more committed to treatment.

Differentiates your practice: In a sea of identical stock imagery, authentic content makes you memorable. Patients remember the practice with the gorgeous surgery photos, not the one with stock photo number 47,832.

What the numbers could mean for your practice

Let's look at a hypothetical example of how these performance differences might play out using data we’ve collected:

If you spent £2,000 on Facebook ads using stock photos:

  • At £47.31 average cost per lead = approximately 42 leads
  • At 2.72% average conversion rate = roughly 8.4 new patients
  • Average cost per new patient: approximately £238

If you spent £2,000 on Facebook ads using professional content:

  • At £31.07 average cost per lead = approximately 64 leads
  • At 4.53% average conversion rate = roughly 12.8 new patients
  • Average cost per new patient: approximately £156.25

Based on our data, this suggests professional content could potentially deliver nearly three times the return on advertising spend. Of course, every practice and campaign is different, but the pattern we observed was consistent across our sample.

The methodology behind the numbers

Our analysis covered the period from 1st April to 22nd May 2025, tracking campaigns across 12 healthcare practices. We measured leads generated, cost per lead, click-through rates, and conversion rates.

Yes, some stock photo campaigns performed reasonably well. And yes, we've seen some absolute disasters that skewed the averages upward. But across 70 stock photo ads and 89 professional content ads, the pattern was consistent: professional content delivers better qualified leads at a lower cost.

Making the change

The solution isn't complicated. Professional healthcare photography shows your practice as it actually is: a place where real people receive real care from qualified professionals.

It doesn't need to be expensive or disruptive. A single afternoon shoot can provide months of authentic content that outperforms any stock library.

The data is clear. Your practice deserves better returns than £47 leads from stock photos.

Ready to grow your clinic?

You’ve built a great clinic. Now you need to ​grow it. But you’ve been burned by ​overpromising agencies that under deliver. That’s why you need a marketing partner ​that understands your world. Someone ​with specialists skills who knows how to ​attract, nurture and convert the right ​people who value your treatments.

Book a Chat

You’ve got a great clinic. It’s time to grow it.

Book a Chat