 Tammy McAllister |
Selling Photos to Microstock Companies I would like to start a discussion on recent explosion of microstock companies into the market. I know that there is a lot of controversy in this topic as to whether it is good for the future of photography or not. I have been submitting to a few microstock companies like Shutterstock for about 3 months now and I have made some money there. I also have purchased a copies of the Photographers Market for the last couple of years and tried to sell my photos through there. I must say I have had more success selling through microstock than I have through Photographers Market. I have been able to market my images through both venues. I would like to offer this link to anyone who is interested seeing what Shutterstock is about. http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=11455
|
|
|
|
||
|
P Switzer |
I am on Shutterstock........it is very amatuerish...I have been disappointed with the site.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Well, PS., I'm not sure what you mean by 'very amateurish' (correct spelling). I shoot with the Nikon D2x (12MP camera), Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n (14MP cameras), a specially modified for InfraRed Nikon D100 camera, and I have made $1,142.06 starting with just 3 photos at the end of April 2005. My average size portfolio is ~ only 160 images currently. I do this only part time, and from the reponse of designers, have found that my images have been used for advertising, non profit organizations, websites, college yearbooks, etc. Microstock is here to stay, and buyers at the big boys are starting to look also at some of the microstock offerings. And the big boy stock agencies are even starting to buy or create their own microstock agencies. This is a great outlet for hobbiest photographers, especially BPers... I should know. BTW, a referal link *might* give a few cents income to the referring photographer (to make things unhidden), but will never hurt anyone elses potential/real earnings. So take a look if you want: http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865 You can also just look at my BP website and see what shots I have sold on the Microstock agencies. Best to all,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
I recently heard that companies like McDonalds and even Oprah Winfrey have purchased photos from the microstock sites. I also beleive that they are here to stay. Thank you for this response Carolina Tootles
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jennifer W |
For future reference, if I was interested in this and I entered Tammy's or Carolina's links and then joined from that link, she would get credit for that? Just clarifying. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Hi Jennifer, There is no 'automatic credit' granted to a photographer (who has the referral link) just for joining through a photographer's link. What might possibly come into play in the future, is that if a person signs up through a referral link and subsequently uploads photos that SELL, the photographer (who had the referral link) would get 3 cents for every photo that sold. But this in no way cuts into the new photographer's revenue. Whether you sign up through one of us or do it on your own, you will always get the same money per download. The 3 cents is a token thankyou to the photographers from Shutterstock who are willing to spread the word. Good question :) You can also get a good feel for the website by perusing the Forums. I would not be there if I was not making good money and I am a fairly cynical person in general, but this is a real deal and well run. Shutterstock is 2nd to iStock photo (much harder to get into, though I submit to them as well), currently, but their marketing is becoming much more worldwide (they just opened up Shutterstock Japan), and I actually make a much higher percentage of income from Shutterstock than iStock. I love photography, but I can only do this part time (a few hours a week), but I am building a business and reputation that I believe will very doable in retirement (more than 20 years away) as well. My current earnings over the last 6 months (average ~170 photos in my porfolios) is now $1147. I only have time to upload ~ 3 new photos a week! Many BPers here would do well, since I've been a member here since April 2004, I've gotten a feel for the work submitted here to the contests, and there is a lot of high caliber stuff that people are just letting sit on their hard drives that could be earning them real money :) http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865 Best,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jennifer W |
Thanks for the reply, Carolina; and thanks for mentioning this in the first place, Tammy. I went to check out the site. I signed up, but I honestly can't remember whose referral link I used. I figured I had a couple photos that looked like the type of some of the ones on the site, and I might as well give it a shot. Can't hurt anyway, right? :)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
I am wondering if there is anyone from BetterPhoto that has any input as to what they think about the introduction of these microstock companies? I agree with Carolyn, that many of the BP'er's would do well on these microstock sites, since many have quite extensive libraries of photos that are just sitting on their computers. Some suggestions before submitting....look into Neat Image, to remove noise (especially from blue skies, whites and blacks before submitting) Unsharp mask is not your friend with stock photos. You will find that you get rejections for this. Be sure to up your hue/saturation before submitting, they love your colours to pop. You need to have 7 of your 10 initial photos accepted or you will have to wait 3 months before submitting again. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me through my gallery and I would be glad to help you. Tootles http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=11455
|
|
|
|
||
|
Nicole Kessel |
Boy this question comes up a lot! Again, here is a valuable link on differing opinions. http://www.betterphoto.com/forms/QnAdetail.php?threadID=19389
|
|
|
|
||
|
P Switzer |
..carolina seems a bit too sensitive.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
Can you say why it is that you think she is too? You mentioned before that you think Shutterstock is amaterish...what about it is it that you find amateurish? Tootles http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=11455
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Think the idea that there's a lot of controversy is over blown. It seems to be aimed at less stylized stock suitable photos, like links to articles about coffee on your ISP home page and there's a picture of a coffee mug there. A bargain avenue was bound to come up sooner or later for those kind of pictures.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
Sure Gregory, there are a lot of "less stylized stock" shots on some of these sites, I am sure that some of mine are included. Just because an image isn't stylized, doesn't mean that it still doesn't need to be technically perfect. There still seems to be a need in the market for these images. Taking a photo of a coffee cup or an egg isn't going to require the same equipment or skill as taking an photo of a infected red blood cell. Why should they be worth the same thing? Tootles
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
How'd you go from stylized to red blood cells?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Anita Allein |
Hello! I've been selling my images via microstock for last half a year. I'm currently using mainly these three The way I see it - photo prices have always been outrageously overpriced and I have no moral problems making myself money on microstock sites and utilizing my small hobby. I may be rubbish photographer or maybe not, but the fact is that my creation sells and I feel good actually doing something with my --- In case you're interested - here are the links to these portals where I sell (with my referal codes in the end) http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=3525 http://www.dreamstime.com/res20742 http://www.bigstockphoto.com/?refid=6djkZEOYu9 --- Cheers, Anita
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Trying to get stuff cheaper is not a new market trend. "Made in Mexico", "Made in China"...photos shouldn't be any different. It's just a cheaper alternative to a part of stock usage, like text books, straight forward themes.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
I have never started a post on the forum on better photo before. I guess when I did I was being naive to think that it might actually be a place for members to go to get valuable information on the pros and cons of joining a microstock site. I can clearly see that this will not be the case and it will just turn into "literal" bantering back and forth and "one up-manship". I will no longer be participating in this dicussion.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sharon Day |
I found this interesting, Tammy! I haven't submitted anything to a microstock company, but if I felt like I had anything that would sell I wouldn't be above doing so. The professional photographers don't put food on my table so I would offer no apologies to them if I took the plunge. Realistically everyone does what they have to do jobwise to survive. I do think the microstock companies pay a ridiculously small price to the photographer. Does anyone know what they charge the customer for useage? Still, if anyone can make an honest profit from it more power to them!
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
She forgot to say tootles, whatever her problem is.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Einar Bo |
Here is another one
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sharon Day |
Just wondering if anyone has any updates? How much you made in 2005 on microstock?
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
There was a good pdf file on the asmp website about microstocks that explained how they can be bad for photographers and also problematic for the companies that use them.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Hi Sharon, Here is a link to Photo District News on an article published just today (05Jan2006) that talks about the microstock agencies. http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/features/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001806311 Also, in the a Yahoo Groups 'Micropayment' Forum member noted that he had received a poll from Adobe (they offer stock photos through their new Bridge (part of CS2)) asking which stock agencies from 'the list' did they use.... Guess what... Two microstock agencies made that list, both iStockphoto and ShutterStock. Now that is huge, and shows how the bigger microstock agencies are gaining prominence and and irreversable foothold in the stock image market. The PDN link above is pretty interesting too. As of today (05Jan2006), I have made $1,746.46 starting with only three photos at the end of April 2005. And my current portfolio is still under 200 images. I am looking forward to growing my portfolio and earnings this year. I love photography and continually strive to learn my art, improve my technique, and acquire more photographic equipment which will improve my capability. I have recently finally worked out taking photographs through my microscope, I'm teaching myself better postprocessing by learning about the LAB color mode, I plan on going to one photo workshop this year, and this week I will be the ecstatic owner of the Wimberly Sidekick to support my new Sigma 300-800mm lens. You can start from just about anywhere. But if you love photography like I do, continually strive to improve and learn new skills, take care in your composition and lighting, you can't help but be a success in the microstock agencies. It does increasingly seem that now is the time to join, because the standards are being raised... you can see it by just comparing the photo uploads each month... higher and higher quality. The photos I submit today will likely pay back for years down the road, especially since I don't shoot quick changing fads or fashion... but you should shoot what you love... and if you're good enough, you can find your niche. I find this such an exciting field... I still suggest ShutterStock as the best stock agency to start with... http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sharon Day |
Thanks for the response, Carolina! I still find them interesting although I have yet to submit anything to them. I shoot mostly for fun and the contest so I don't have good big files or I'd consider it more seriously. I do like keeping up with you guys though. Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Hi Sharon, You do not need large files to sell to microstock. Most of the files downloaded are for web use. And most of the microstocks have a minimum of files from only a 2MP camera. I would say that most of the uploaders are from the 4MP cameras at this time. Certainly, there is a gradual move to the 6MP cameras. But only recently did one microstock up the ante to 3MP cameras. But the rest (save one other agency which as a 6MP camera minimum requirement) still have 2MP cameras as their minimum. VERY FEW shoot with 12,14,or 16MP cameras , although you see a few more each month talk about upgrading their cameras to 6 or 8MP. File size is different... i.e., that would be talking about MB (megabyte), not MP (megapixel). Sharon, your portfolio is impressive and I really enjoyed looking at it. You would excell against the current main crop of uploaders on the microsites. http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
Sharon...you know I agree with Carolina too. Another big BPer recently joined as well and is doing excellent!
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Exciting for those joining in, but may not be exciting for the industry in the long run.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sharon Day |
Thanks again Carolina and Tammy! I remain interested. I just haven't taken the leap! I appreciate your updates :)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Lorraine Nicky Ryborg |
I've been recently thinking on joining one (or two) of the Microstock sites myself. I've found this thread incredibly interesting!! Thank you Carolina & Tammy for some great information! I have seen in many mags the mentioning of 'photographs provided by iStock'. It's nice to hear some feedback from people who have had success from these places. Perhaps some view the Microstock agencies are to the photographic world what Day Trading has been to the Stock Market. Sometimes you just need to take the plunge! Thanks again for the info!! :)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Einar Bo |
Try here
|
|
|
|
||
|
Howard Sandler |
I've been on several microstock sites since June 05. Istockphoto earns the most for me per photo but is strictest on image quality. Shutterstock is second. Bigstockphoto and Dreamstime are about equal for me and run about half as much income as shutterstock. Bigstockphoto is generally the most lenient in terms of what they accept. I made about $600 in 2005 from what has grown to a portfolio of about 200 photos. I expect to average about $6-10/image/year which I think is quite competitive to the returns from royalty free stock at traditional pricing levels of $100 per photo or so where maybe only one photo in ten licences in a given year. For what it's worth, I've got a shutterstock referral code too: http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=9126 Here's a link to my portfolio on istockphoto: http://www.istockphoto.com/hsandler
|
|
|
|
||
|
John Doe |
I have been doing microstock now for over a year, and it has been a good income earner. I find that shutterstock has been the best, but dreamstime and istock are also very good. It depends a lot on what type of images you have though, and of course how many. I have set up a message group to discuss and share info on microstock sites if you care to take a look it is located here.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Your group, John Doe, only has a handful of responders. I find a much better view point of what's going on in the microstock world is the Yahoo Groups titled 'Micropayment'. There are over 500 ACTIVE members across all the sites, including the big traditional agencies. In that forum, even the administrators of some of the microsites chime in. The discussions there have also led to better changes for the photographers. So IMHO, that is THE premiere and comprehensive (with no hidden agenda)place to see what's going on. I do agree that microstock can be a good earner. I have just 208 images online, and started at the end of April with only 3 photos... I only have time to add maybe a few photos a week. My earnings, as of today, are $2,281.62. Shutterstock is the best place to start, IMO, and you can get more info through copying in and pasting this link: http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865 Best,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
good post Carolina! - there is a lot of information to be had on that site! I just wanted to also say that just recently one of the microstock companies called istockphoto has been purchased by Getty...for $50 million dollars. To me, this signifies that the big stock companies are now taking the microstock companies to be a permanent, serious and valuable fixture in the stock photography market. I am not going to post my links...as it sometimes seems this gets to be less of an information post and more of a link war! Regards,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Brendan Knell |
I have also been considering uploading some pictures to microstock companies. One of my questions is about how long was it before you started getting downloads?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tammy McAllister |
I got my first download within the first hour of my initial submission being accepted. I also wanted to let people that were interested in videography know that shutterstock is know accepting video clips too. They are currently the only site that I know of that is doing this. http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=11455 Tammy
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||