istockphoto question

[yoch]

hi all

I'm planning to start sell my photos on istockphoto, but can't ask there, I need to create an account and get approved.
A question to istockers. If I see that user has 10 000 downloads, does it mean that he earned about 10-15k?
I hope this is the right section, pardon, if not..

thanks

[amfoto1]

Interesting question....

And, if the same user had 10,000 downloads on a "real" stock photography site, I guess that would mean they'd earned somewhere between $2.5 and $3.5 million, wouldn't it?

Well, I know for certain where I won't be offering my photos!

[Mike R]

There was a post here not long ago from a member who saw his photo (with credit) in an ad in a photo mag. The ad was for a photo workshop, sponsored by Nikon, among others. His photo was shot with a Canon! It turned out that the shot was sold by istock and he received nothing for it, he also thought that he canceled his istock account prior to this happening.

[ssim]

I have not uploaded anything to istock but did read through their information quite some time ago. I thought that they were/are selling x number of downloads for x dollars where the first x is high and the second one is not. In some cases based on this type of sale your specific photo had to be downloaded dozens of times for you to make even a dime. Remember, I am going from memory.

Some of the press releases that I have seen in recent months it looks like they are trying to up their prices, albeit ever so slightly. There are people that do well with stock agencies but those that do are probably offering the same image on as many sites as possible. There was a post last year that had a link to what the top istock performers made from them.

[azpix]

dont do microstock. that is what you will learn here.

[yoch]

thanks for replies! Andwhere should I sell my photos then? I'm doing macro, food, drinks, etc.

[robgr85]

try midstock/macrostock at the beginning, photoshelter or alamy would be nice start of that journey. Do not waste Your time for microstock.

Cheers,
Rob

[BCRose]

I sell on iStock...not serious about it, just opened an account one day to see what it was all about. This site is all about volume. You would need to have at least 1000 images on there to make a decent monthly income from it. The images can sell hundreds of times and you get paid a fee each time. Typically from .50 cents to a couple of dollars. The buyer has the option of buying the prints in many different sizes from web to high rez...all at different prices.

I do see that there are many people on iStock that sell over 200,000 images a year...which would bring in a very nice chunk of change.

[amfoto1]

I do see that there are many people on iStock that sell over 200,000 images a year...which would bring in a very nice chunk of change.


What a crying shame.

If their work is good enough to sell that well, they have enough of it to support that kind of volume, and they have worked that hard at editing, keywording and uploading their images... just think how much they'd be earning doing exactly the same thing with a "real" stock agency!

Maybe 100x as much per image?

Perhaps they'd only sell 1/10th as many images. Still...

Makes me sad to even think about it.:(

[cadams]

What is a "real" stock photo agency?

[ChrisRabior]

Photoshelter and Alamy are 'real' stock agencies. My last sale at Alamy netted me $115. That's between 100 and 500 sales at some of the microstock sites. So, you make the larger sum, and your image isn't used a million times (which means it still has life left in it, should someone else want to use it but have a concern about what else it had already been used for).

[plonker]

In order to "qualify" for alamy or other big players, you need to have gooood pictures, they are very strict.
I personally think microstock is the way to start, after when you see what sells, how and what to shoot, you can go for stronger agencies like alamy.
Don`t forget, there is not many of them who are selling hundreds of photos on micro and make loads of money, and also not many of them who are selling hundreds of photos on alamy.
You have to try anyway in order to know, maybe you won`t even qualify for the istock or shutterstock because you need to pass the exam in which they check your images (3 on istock to pass, 7 out of 10 on shutterstock).
Also don`t expect stock to bring you money for the first 6 months of work and at least 1000 good images in your portfolio. Just work, work and work...

[cadams]

I already was accepted to istock through but havent uploaded any pics yet. I would prefer to sell less quantity but I've had second thoughts about my images being had for so little money.

This isn't my full time job nor do I think it will become that. I just want a way to sell some photos or prints. I've done a lot of work for local businesses and restaurants but kind of want to expand a little.

Chris

[amfoto1]

In order to "qualify" for alamy or other big players, you need to have gooood pictures, they are very strict.
I personally think microstock is the way to start, after when you see what sells, how and what to shoot, you can go for stronger agencies like alamy.



Here's where your assumptions are a bit off track...

First of all, yes, there is some "vetting" of images at the more traditional stock agencies (at some of the micros, too), but that's a good thing, forcing you to think about and bring forward your best shots. Once you are in, some agencies are more or less selective than others (Alamy doesn't screen much after you are accepted, but Photoshelter does).

And, most of the work you do with your images is the same, whether sold through micro stock or traditional stock. Shooting, editing, keywording and optimization are all the same, either way. So you are investing about the same amount of time in each image you submit, with either type of stock agency. Considering the work is about the same, would you rather get a $1 sale for that (or 20 $1 sales), or a $100 sale (or 2 $100 sales)?

Micro stock is simply designed to take advantage of gullible amateurs and hobbyists. Once your images are put into the market that way, those particular images will have no value in a traditional stock agency. And, the dilution of value can carry over to all similar, subsequent work you do.

The traditional agency has to be concerned if their client buys an image for $100, but later finds that the same photo or a photographer's similar work can be (or previously was) bought for $1 or $2 on a micro site, possibly even Royalty Free. Guess who the client will be pissed off at. So, a traditional agency has very good reason to ask up front "have you sold your images at other agencies, and if so, who?" Guess who that's designed to weed out.

So it could be a "kiss of death" to an aspiring pro, to put their stuff out on micro stock sites "just to get started". Or, maybe not. Just be a little careful.

And, to make any sort of money at micro, you have to upload a lot of images, using up your personal inventory for very little return per image.

Most traditional agencies want a strong initial submission, say 200 shots, then a significant amount of fresh work added on a regular basis. That varies from maybe 100 a year to 200 a quarter, maybe more. Trying to transition from one type agency to the other, and continue to generate revenue from one while ramping up revenues from the other, which will need to be done with different images, will mean having to produce twice as much or more good quality work!

Besides, have you actually tried some of the traditional agencies and been turned down by all of them? If not, why not?

Look at it this way. If you were seeking a job and found one that paid $100 an hour while practically identical work at another job paid $1 an hour, would you just blow off an interview with the better paying one to only talk to the low paying employer? You may not get the high paid position, but isn't it worth a shot, before just "settling" for the low paying job?

[sfgp]

I don't want to try to tell you what you to do, just what I would do.

I would recomend that you read this page

http://www.photographersdirect.com/sellers/microstock_sites.asp

then think long and hard before you sell via microstock sites.

After long consideration (effort vs returns) do what you think is best
for your situation.

[plonker]

Look at it this way. If you were seeking a job and found one that paid $100 an hour while practically identical work at another job paid $1 an hour, would you just blow off an interview with the better paying one to only talk to the low paying employer? You may not get the high paid position, but isn't it worth a shot, before just "settling" for the low paying job?

Good point, and I completely understand, I just don`t think that my images are good enough for macro stock, so I settled for micro.
Plus stock is on my life priorities on the very good 6th place, after family and friends, taking pictures of my newborn baby and two jobs that I`m currently doing... basically I don`t really expect to much from them, especially since they introduced subscriptions and they are paying really really peanuts...

[burntpixel]

I have started researching this very issue and who to use for a stock photography sale.

You can see what I came up with HERE (http://www.paulcbuff.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5795)

Good Luck,
bp