 Teri Soares |
Part-time Stock Photography Is anyone who is having some success with part-time online stock photography willing to share some of their success and methods with me?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
What I meant was would anyone be willing to share their success stories (as well as failures)? I'm interested in submitting images. I've been using a Pentax *istD DSLR for about 2 years. I'm planning to upgrade my equipment to the Canon 5D with an L series lens in the next month or so and it would be fun (and great economics) if I could make a little money from my images. It would be great to hear what others are doing, especially the part-timers. I've read all the threads at Better Photos and there is a lot of good information in them. I'd appreciate anything someone would like to share.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Hi Terri, Just my opinion, but if your intent is to earn some extra money in photography, there ARE better avenues. Do a search on stock photography and you will see what I mean. There are literally hundreds of thousands of photos available to companies in search of a certain photo..the chances of them finding you are slim to none. Sorry if I burst your bubble.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Hi Terri, Just my opinion, but if your intent is to earn some extra money in photography, there ARE better avenues. Do a search on stock photography and you will see what I mean. There are literally hundreds of thousands of photos available to companies in search of a certain photo..the chances of them finding you are slim to none. Sorry if I burst your bubble.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
Pete, Thank you for your opinion. I know stock photography is ultra competitive. I was thinking along the lines of the microsites. I chatted with someone from this forum who has about 100-150 images with a couple of microsites and she's earning $10-$12 a day. I know that would buy a peanut butter sandwich, but still, it would help with buying more photography toys! I work full-time and use weekends for photography. I'd love to hear about a better way to earn money! Thank you for your response. By the way, the images in your gallery are very impressive! Teri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Hi Teri, Free weekends? Sounds like a wedding shoot. LOL Seriously; there is a shortage of wedding photogs..an even more serious shortage of good wedding photogs. Start small, use word of mouth, and if you've not done one, just don't charge a lot at 1st. Another idea is to look at your local magazines that cater to your area only...product shots, event coverage etc... Senior portraits, school sports. Here's another that actually launched me into the photog biz many years ago. I once went to a bowling alley when the kids were bowling..took several shots of the kids rolling the ball etc..The parents loved the pics and of course asked "Can I get a print?" "Sure" I said.."I can even get you an 8x10 too!" Went to a golf course once..set up on the #1 tee and shot the golfers as they teed off. I advised them they could look at the photos when they came back to the club house. Ka'Ching! $$$$ I hope you see making money in photography is less about the photography and more about creativity and marketing. Yes; you should be a pretty good shooter, know an f stop from shutter speed and better than the snap shot person. Find a niche'...and above all, have fun doing it! Stock photography I'm sorry to say is just not for the average photog as you will be going up against the big boys in a already saturated market and will probably be disappointed & discouraged. If you wanna' give it a go, by all means, try it. I've simply seen too many budding photogs become discouraged when trying to get into an area of photography where the water is really deep. You mentioned a friend that is making $12 a day in stock. Without a giant advertising budget, word of mouth is like gold!..at least in my opinion. Start small, contact your perspective clients..call them, email them, write to them..followup with them..This is called salesmanship. :) Photography should be fun..when it ceases to be fun, it becomes drudgery..and THAT is NOT fun. LOL Shoot for money and shoot for yourself! There are so many more ways to make money in photography, my opinion is that stock photography just isn't it for people breaking in..perhaps others here will disagree. Photography; and making some money at it is no different than life itself, in that you should be bold yet not arrogant...be a people person. If you wish to email me and let me know what city you are in or near, I would be happy to tell you how and where to start out earning some x-tra money..for 10% of the gross of course. LOL All the Best, Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Yes, you CAN make money in part time stock photography on the microsites. As of today, I have made $1524.75, from a portfolio of less than 200 photos, and I just started with three photos at the end of April this year. These photos will earn me money month in/ month out, year in, year out, so with just uploading a few photos a week, I am truly growing a business. I disagree that 'it is all about the marketing', because I believe that if you love photography and continually learn your craft and refine your vision, you will be a success. The microsites will do the marketing for you, you then are free to concentrate on your work... I'm not interested in just clicking quick event shots of people to make money... I want to share my vision with the world, and apparently they (designers, web builders, book publishers, etc) like my work. My philosophy regarding photography: Technique and equipment are important, Don't listen to the naysayers...you certainly can make money in microstock photography. I make a super salary in my fulltime job, so it isn't about the money, although I do see this microstock as a business that I intend to grow and do in 'retirement' (waaay down the road, lol). You have some good equipment. But it's really more about what you, as a photographer, can do. Isolated shots sell well, people shots sell well, etc. I suggest Shutterstock as the place to start... they are the friendliest... but make sure your 1st 10 shots are your best and noise free... Here is a referral link for ANYONE interested (I 'may' receive 3cents if you join through my referral link, lol, so it's not about the money!). Seriously, check them out, and I suggest reading their Forums for lots of great beginners information. http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865 Many of the shots on my BP gallery are selling every day on the microsites :) Best,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Doug Stacey |
I have to agree with carolina, Ive had good sucess with microstock sites - especially shutterstock! http://www.shutterstock.com/?rid=55429
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerby Pfrangle |
Carolina and Doug I just signed up for the Shutterstock. It going to take me awhile to figure the site out but it sounds interesting. I have a few questions before I put any pictures on the site would you mind if I emailed and asked you. Thanks, Kerby
|
|
|
|
||
|
Doug Stacey |
No problem Kerby, Check your email for my address, Doug http://www.shutterstock.com/?rid=55429
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
Carolina and Doug, I appreciate your responses. Kerby, I hope you'll ask your questions here so we can both (and others, I'm sure) learn from them. Carolina, I've looked at your website and you have some great shots. Do you believe the nature of your images (medical) is part of the reason they are selling so well? Are you a medical professional and as such have access to operating rooms and medical supplies? If not, what did you do to gain permission/access? I think Pete has some good ideas, but as a true introvert, approaching strangers at a golf course or bowling alley isn't something I'm ready to do. I am building my nerve for asking for model releases from strangers "on the street," but that is a work in progress. What other ways do you get "people" pictures (aside from family and friends)? I am prepared to work (play)hard at this and, Carolina, like you, the idea of building something now for retirement is very appealing. As long as I can hold my camera, carry a tripod and press the shutter release button, I'll taking pictures. I love to hear more about this if you have the time! Appreciation, Teri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Doug Stacey |
Teri, Kirby In my experience with microstock sites the best thing you can do is to sign up with quite a few different sites as sales tend to fluctuate dramatically. (Usually when the site puts a cash injection into there advertising, or markets a new feature... If you are signed up with lots then I more steady income stream can be maintained. Also get a keywording tool, pixvue is a good one! Below are links to what I consider the top 4 sites. (well there the ones that have made me most cash!) the links below have my referal ID's on the end, means I get a little something for refering you :) (copy and paste) If you need any more info let me know. [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/?rid=55429[url/] http://www.istockphoto.com/index.php?refnum=MerlinPhoto http://www.canstockphoto.com/?r=12448 http://www.dreamstime.com/res86445
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
Thanks, Doug. I will look into he keywording software you mentioned. How is it different from Photoshop? Also, with pixvue, is the information transferrable to the microsite, or do you still have to re-enter the keywords there? Do you understand the IPTC (or ITPC - I can never remember which it is)? I can't quite get my brain around that one. What type of images are your best sellers? How can I find your work on those sites? By name? Is photography your full-time occupation? Teri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerby Pfrangle |
Hi Carolina and Doug I been gone all afternoon and I want to compose my thoughts before I ask alot of questions. I am not even sure my images are good enough to market or if they would be marketable. One of my main questions is What type of images sell the best? I do people and alot of Digital Darkroom type work. Are these types of images marketable? I will have some more questions after I compose my thoughts on it. Thank You, Kerby
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerby Pfrangle |
I thought of some more questions. How many buyers verses sellers do they have on the shutterstock. Do you sell alot of images each month to get a check or does it take several month to get paid? What can people do with your images once they pay the twenty cents to purchase the image? Can I post the image on Better Photo after it posted on Shutterstock? Are there any rules either way on this? I am sure I have more questions and I write them on this thread as I think of them. You post the answers on the thread it might help other people who might be thinking about it. I have not posted any images on Shutterstock I just signed up. They asked for a credit card but said it would not be billed. Is it FREE to post images on Shutterstock. I want to make sure that right. Thank you, Kerby
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Wellllllllll, I suppose I'm kind of one of the naysayers that Carolina mentioned. I've looked at all the posts on this thread and I notice one issue, among others, is conspicuously absent: copyright. So, without looking at Shutterstuck (or Shutterstock).com or any of the others that have been mentioned here, I gotta ask once you release the images to them, who holds the copyright on them and how much are they really paying you per image and for what usage rights and for how long? Do you have a written enforceable contract with them or just an unsigned e-mail policy statement? Can you take, say the same 200 images someone mentioned and submit them to multiple agencies? Who gets photo credit or the byline? What's that worth to you? Let's see, about $1600 bucks for 200 images works out to be about $8.00 per image used. Look kids, that's nothing...NOTHING. What do you get if a publisher buys your shot for use as a magazine cover that has a certified circulation of say 800,000 paid subscribers or more, like AARP? Eight bucks for a magazine cover? If so, you have gotta be kidding. Am I being cynical? No. I've made a fair amount on my stock images over many years, enough to put my kid through college, grad school and then some as I mentioned separately to Doug. What I'm recommending is that if you're really going into the stock biz, full or part-time or even just kinda dabbling in it, that you really need to be aware of how the business operates, starting with copyright laws, knowing how to formally copyright your images beyond the statutory, automatic one you're entitled to when you create the photo, to in whole or in part. Get a written signed contract from the agency owner or director. Carefully read the contract particularly as it pertains to usage and any agreements you make about multiple submissions and being able to take back submissions. If you don't understand parts of the agreement, ask someone who does. While it's true that a lot of "agencies" these days take these kinds of submissions, load them on a CD and sell them with unrestricted use to whomever buys them, and sure, many or most of the submissions may only be worth a buck or few. BUT, what happens if a pharmaceutical company gets ahold of one of these images some marketing guru decides to use your photograph to run an inter- national marketing campaign as full page images in medical journals. Aside from the 8 bucks, let's say, there's another word for what you got. And, to those who say that you'd never send in a "really good image" to these kinds of stock houses, how do you really know how good it is if you don't have the experience to determine the market for some types of images? Anyone read PDN among other publications. All I'm saying is know your market well, know your rights, know the legalities of what you're essentially contracting to do, and what the remedies are if one of your rights as a photographer (whether you're a full time pro or not) get stepped on. There. Was that too naysayer / cynical like? So, has anyone else thought about what I've mentioned here? Take it light.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
Mark, Thank you for your answer. Yes, I have read PDN. I had an offline with Doug as well and asked about where to find a good understanding of model and property releases. Also, all the other information on copyright and usage. What/where do you suggest for stock agencies. I understand that many or most want lots (200 - 500) just to decide whether they want you or not. As an amateur, I am building my image library, but I don't have anywhere near that many to submit. What are your suggestions? I think as far as "naysayer/cynical like," that it's more of a difference in opinion and accepting risk. Carolina has some beautiful images of medical subject matter. The way she chooses to sell them is a choice she has to make. She seems happy with her arrangement with the microsites and that is what is important. I understand your point of being protected and I'd like to know more about it. Is the best way to tell if your images are good enough to submit them and find out? Would you suggest trying the big agencies first, then submit the rejects to a microsite? Teri
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
All of Feldstein's questions can be answered with, all the images are royalty free and you over shot the math on pay. The pay out is 10 or 20 cents per picture download. It's the bargain way, but there's plenty of people who are having fun with it.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Maybe not all questions.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Some quick responses before I dash off to work... Your photographs remain YOUR copyright when dealing with an agency (at least make sure you read that in the contract), but that's the way most work, so you are free to try and sell them on your own (like prints, etc). I am a medical professional, so I do have access and a natural bent towards that type of photo. As long as I do not violate HIPPA, I'm fine, and I have the blessing of my institution. It would be hard for others to have that kind of access. But my best selling shot on one site is of a chalkboard... People shots sell best, but you have to go with your interests. I have very few people shots, but I still do well... Sure you can post on BP after uploading to a microsite... it's legal, there is no conflict of interest. [url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865[/url]
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Sorry, make that a copy and paste: http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865 I don't know how to make the link live... anybody??
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Hi Teri: There's a lot of information available at the ASMP.org site, (American Society of Media Photographers) including a number of publications for sale on business practices including copyright. You should consider trying to join as an associate (non-voting) member if you don't meet the criteria for regular membership. Also, you might contact SPAR (Society of Professional Artists Representatives). I think they have a list of member stock agencies that you'll find are all quite reputable. Now, I disagree with a number of things Carolina recently mentioned. First, if you're shooting in a medical setting and not only don't have the patient's consent under HIPAA AND a model release (assuming the people can be recognized) you can't use them for anything other than hanging on your wall. I have no idea why any medical institution, hospital, clinic, university, medical office, would ever give anyone an unlimited "blessing" or carte blanche to bring a camera in and photograph in the facility. As a case in point, I recently did a series for Yale University's Department of Surgery and their laparoscopic surgery program. For the entire project, my assistant and I were constantly accompanied their media relations rep who approved or disapproved of each scene we recorded, handled obtaining releases and interfacing with the patients and staff in and out of the operating rooms, labs, hospital scenes, outpatient clinics and staff offices. Another project I shot at Northwestern Med Center and the V.A. Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago was handled in a nearly identical fashion. In other words, their respective blessings were strictly on a scene by scene basis. Not all agencies are created or do business equally. Certainly, not all of them allow photographers to continue to use the images when they're accepted for representation. To do otherwise may impair the agency's negotiations to sell first North American rights to a publisher. It may also create a conflict of interest between the photographer and a secondary agency which may lead to the photographer losing representation by both agencies. And, again, I strongly disagree with Carolina's comment concerning who always retains the copyright when dealing with an agency. There are too many variables on this scenario to discuss, but some agencies (usually the ones that are lesser known) require the photographer to transfer and/or relinquish all copy rights when the work is accepted by the agency. Many photo contests do the same thing. One case in point is what AOL was doing with images submitted for photo contests and I believe they still are. Notice of copyright relinquishment was given in very fine, hard to locate, electronic print regarding entries to the contest. It then informed contestants (usually after-the-fact) that as additional contractual consideration for entering the contest, AOL, as an agent for Time Warner, retained all rights to use and duplicate, and alter the images for any purpose and the photographer relinquished all rights to the photograph once it was submitted to the contest. The images ended up as bundled photo-cd's sold by Time Warner and AOL for unlimited use by the purchasers of the CDs. The photographers got nothing. Nice huh? You don't think this STILL remains a common practice with stock agencies? Think again. Take it light folks.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
Mark, I cannot begin to say how much I appreciate the time you spent to share this information. I will reaseach the organizations you mentioned and be sure to read ALL the print, fine or not, before I place any of my images. Thanks again! Teri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Apologies if this is too long - its a response I've had recently from the representatives of Getty Images in South Africa - you might find this intresting! Gallo Images Digital Image Submissions – Requirements for Tiff files converted from RAW files 1. The required format is uncompressed RGB Tiff files.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
I'm posting the PDF from them in bits n pieces as its quite long, but I think you'll all find it interesting Getty Images RM Submission Requirements & Guidelines – Introduction
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Getty Images General Submission Requirements – Analog and Digital Presentation 1. All submissions require a cover letter indicating total submission count, your Getty Images Art Director's or Editor’s name and the collection and project you are submitting to. 2. You should record a unique reference number on all original material. In the case of images provided digitally, number both the case of the CD-ROM and its hard copy output. 3. You need to label all original material with your name, and ideally include a copyright notice and the year in which that image was created. 4. All images will be mounted in a way that provides them with adequate protection. 35mm transparencies, for example, must be put in standard clear, clean viewing sheets. Releases 5. Artists should ensure their submissions adhere to the contractual release requirements, as stated in section 6.3 of the Standard Terms and Conditions: 6.3 Releases. Except as provided by the terms of the Brand Agreement, Artist shall supply copies of valid releases where appropriate for each Image at the time that the Image is submitted to the Brand Company. Each release shall be identified by the reference number of the Image to which it relates. A Polaroid photo, spare transparency or print of the model or property shall be attached to the release by Artist. Upon request, Artist shall re-submit to the Brand Company copies of any releases. Artist shall not supply to the Brand Company any Image that requires a release and for which Artist does not have a release at the time of submission. Artist shall conform to the Brand Company’s submission requirements in effect at the time of submission regarding the sufficiency of releases in various countries. The Brand Company may revise submission requirements from time to time in its sole discretion on prior written notice to Artist, with such revised requirements applicable to Images submitted after notice of the revision. 6. Effective for all submissions from August 1, 2004, we require photographers to use Getty Images Mandatory Model and Property Releases as directed and supplied on www.gettyimages.com/contributors, with the exception of where shoots predate the effective date of the new releases or where images were originally shot as an outside assignment requiring the use of a client's release. We will reject any copy of a new release that is submitted without all the mandatory fields being completed. 7. It is mandatory that all fields in Getty Images releases are populated, with the following exceptions: • Model’s telephone number: recommended but not mandatory if not available; • Model’s E-mail: recommended but not mandatory if not available; • Ethnicity: strongly advised provided the model will agree to enter the information • Shoot Reference: if reference numbers aren’t used; • In the property release, only one information box need be completed depending on whether the property owner is an individual or a corporation. 8. Each Image for which no release is supplied, or all necessary releases are not supplied, must be prominently marked "No Release" at the time that image is submitted to Getty Images. Artist acknowledges that marking an Image “No Release” will lessen the chance that the Brand Company will accept the image. 9. Each image with all necessary releases should be marked as follows: "PR" to indicate full property release(s), "MR" to indicate full model release(s) and "R" to indicate any other releases.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Restrictions 10. When Artist supplies an image to Getty Images, Artist will inform Getty Images in writing using the Getty Images Restriction Report Form, available on www.gettyimages.com/contributors, of the following: (i) any restrictions on Getty Images right to license that image and the nature of those restrictions and; (ii) any unexpired licences or rights that have been granted with respect to that image and the nature of those licences or rights, including, without limitation: Use Industry Territory End date For more information on specific restrictions please see section: “7.9 Specification of Restrictions on Use.” and section “7.8 Use in Catalogs” of the Getty Images Standard Terms and Conditions. Artist acknowledges that providing restrictions or retaining rights to an image may lessen the chance that the Brand Company will accept the image (although this does not apply to the “No Use in Catalogs” restriction). Captioning 11. You must supply with each image an accurate, concise caption that meets Getty Images current Captioning Guidelines. Getty Images may revise such Captioning Guidelines from time to time. 12. Artist will notify Getty Images at the time an image is supplied if any electronic or digital technique was used to create that image. Original Material 13. All images must be delivered as original analog images, unless Getty Images has given its prior approval for delivery in another format. 14. Please note that original material that is accepted into the collection may not be returned until our contract with you is terminated.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Getty Images Analog Submission Requirements Imagery Requirements We accept several media and formats, listed below in order of quality preference for scanning, with explanatory notes: 1. Medium Format Transparency Note on quality: Still the best quality of commonly used film and format. 2. 35mm Transparency Note on quality: Reduced quality over medium format transparency, but still relatively good and problem free. 3. Medium Format Negative (with 8x10” reference print) We accept Medium Format Negative film speeds up to a maximum of 400 ASA. However, we do not accept Medium Format Negative over 100 ASA that has been pushed or pulled due to the subsequent adverse effect on quality. Must be supplied with a good quality reference print for selection and color management purposes. It may seem obvious, but a properly exposed negative, not pushed or pulled, is our best starting point. 4. 35mm Negative (with 8x10” reference print) We accept 35mm Negative film speeds up to a maximum of 160 ASA. However, we do not accept 35mm Negative that has been pushed or pulled. Note on quality: The latitude of a negative is very difficult to reproduce in the digital environment. This is most noticeable in an emulsion where there is either underexposure or extensive shadow or dark areas. It is particularly prevalent in 35mm emulsion over 160 ASA, scans from which will produce darker areas with excessive grain and broken up skin tones.. The effect with emulsions that have been pushed or pulled is sometimes so extreme that a 160 ASA original looks like it has the grain of an 800 ASA. Therefore, although we accept 35mm Colour negative, we would recommend you avoid it unless you have agreed with your editor and are producing a specific stylistic or grainy effect. If you feel it must be used, shoot at 160 ASA or less, without any pushing or pulling, as a safeguard. Additional Presentation Requirements • When submitting negatives with prints, please submit the exact cut individual negative frame and attach it to the back of the matching print for that negative. Please remember that we do not accept: 1. Prints without negatives, unless specific arrangement has been made for a submission with your Director of Photography. 2. Any 35mm Negative material over 160 ASA 3. Any 35mm Negative material that has been pushed or pulled 4. Any medium format negative material over 400 ASA 5. Any medium format negative material over 100 ASA that has been pushed or pulled.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Getty Images Digital Submission Requirements Imagery requirements File Format: TIFF, with .tif extension added at the end of the file name Colour Space 24 bit RGB Colour (8 bits a channel) Scan Quality: Drum Scan or professional equivalent (Imacon) Size: 48-52MB (flattened, with no layers or channels) Resolution: 300ppi (Pixels per inch) Media: All final digital images must be supplied individually on CD-ROM. (Mac/PC Hybrid - single session only: High Sierra or ISO 9660) • The original analog image should be professionally scanned with no USM applied and cropped to appear without any visible or black borders at the edges. The best original media to scan from are detailed in the Analog Submission Requirements. • RGB Values should be scanned with a white point of less than 252 and a black point no darker than 3. This keeps the RGB values of the file slightly less than the full 256 levels that would be possible if you were to set the values at 255 and 0. This is useful for limiting extreme highlight and shadow detail that will not print. It also helps limit errors that occur when values are pushed outside the 256 boundary of a 24 bit colour file. This can cause such common errors as banding and clipping in a scan that is not properly set up. Limiting the white point and black point to 3 and 252 helps combat this. • RGB Values for Digital Capture should also be limited between 3 and 252. This is very important for an image that has distinct areas that are either totally black or totally white. Of course, as in shooting with film, exposure should be calculated to render the maximum amount of detail in both the shadows and the highlights. No image should have large areas devoid of any information. • - Digital Capture, or the source data you use for a final image, should not dip below 30MB. Interpolating this image up to our 48-52MB requirement is best achieved using a Fractal algorithm like “Genuine Fractal Print Pro”. However, in some circumstances simply re-sizing in “Photoshop” is better. As such, it is important to experiment with different techniques. Ultimately, the quality of the final 48-52MB file you prepare for submission is your prime consideration: no noise, artifacts, distortion, or moiré should be visible. Remember the largest file size your image can be sold at is 300MB, so image integrity is critical when interpolating digital source material. • All images must be retouched before submission to be free of any visible imperfections like dust, hairs, scratches, excess grain, banding, pixelation, or unnatural color separation (see ‘Technical Glossary of Scanning Faults’ for other quality issues). • Image quality must be checked by enlarging the image on screen to 100% in PhotoShop. • Whatever color space you work in - whether greyscale or 48 bit color (16 bits a channel) -please convert your files to 24 bit RGB Colour before submitting and checking your file sizes. Note on color management: For Artists who use color management, if your submission is tagged with a color profile it will be uploaded to our website www.gettyimages.com in that colorspace as changing the colorspace will incur color deviation from the original file. If you have any queries relating to Color Management please visit www.gettyimages.com/color-resources. (Continued)…
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Getty Images Digital Submission Requirements Imagery requirements File Format: TIFF, with .tif extension added at the end of the file name Colour Space 24 bit RGB Colour (8 bits a channel) Scan Quality: Drum Scan or professional equivalent (Imacon) Size: 48-52MB (flattened, with no layers or channels) Resolution: 300ppi (Pixels per inch) Media: All final digital images must be supplied individually on CD-ROM. (Mac/PC Hybrid - single session only: High Sierra or ISO 9660) • The original analog image should be professionally scanned with no USM applied and cropped to appear without any visible or black borders at the edges. The best original media to scan from are detailed in the Analog Submission Requirements. • RGB Values should be scanned with a white point of less than 252 and a black point no darker than 3. This keeps the RGB values of the file slightly less than the full 256 levels that would be possible if you were to set the values at 255 and 0. This is useful for limiting extreme highlight and shadow detail that will not print. It also helps limit errors that occur when values are pushed outside the 256 boundary of a 24 bit colour file. This can cause such common errors as banding and clipping in a scan that is not properly set up. Limiting the white point and black point to 3 and 252 helps combat this. • RGB Values for Digital Capture should also be limited between 3 and 252. This is very important for an image that has distinct areas that are either totally black or totally white. Of course, as in shooting with film, exposure should be calculated to render the maximum amount of detail in both the shadows and the highlights. No image should have large areas devoid of any information. • - Digital Capture, or the source data you use for a final image, should not dip below 30MB. Interpolating this image up to our 48-52MB requirement is best achieved using a Fractal algorithm like “Genuine Fractal Print Pro”. However, in some circumstances simply re-sizing in “Photoshop” is better. As such, it is important to experiment with different techniques. Ultimately, the quality of the final 48-52MB file you prepare for submission is your prime consideration: no noise, artifacts, distortion, or moiré should be visible. Remember the largest file size your image can be sold at is 300MB, so image integrity is critical when interpolating digital source material. • All images must be retouched before submission to be free of any visible imperfections like dust, hairs, scratches, excess grain, banding, pixelation, or unnatural color separation (see ‘Technical Glossary of Scanning Faults’ for other quality issues). • Image quality must be checked by enlarging the image on screen to 100% in PhotoShop. • Whatever color space you work in - whether greyscale or 48 bit color (16 bits a channel) -please convert your files to 24 bit RGB Colour before submitting and checking your file sizes. Note on color management: For Artists who use color management, if your submission is tagged with a color profile it will be uploaded to our website www.gettyimages.com in that colorspace as changing the colorspace will incur color deviation from the original file. If you have any queries relating to Color Management please visit www.gettyimages.com/color-resources. (Continued)…
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Getty Images Digital Submission Requirements (Continued) Additional Presentation Requirements • Media must be presented with a clear visual reference, of A4, US Letter or 8x10” size. (Colour accuracy is important, since your visual reference is how we ensure the image looks consistant with the digital file supplied. • Artists must clearly label all CDs with the medium’s contents and Artist’s name. • With all submissions you must supply a hard copy of the image, preferably a full bleed laser print which fits in the CD-ROM case door or is securely attached to the CD-ROM slipcase. This is in addition to the main visual reference. • All files must be opened at least once to check for disk errors, transfer errors or corruption before submission. (Disk read/write errors are not uncommon with large amounts of data) Note: CD-ROMS will not be returned. It is the responsibility of all Artists to keep a personal copy of all work submitted to Getty Images. Please backup and make copies of all your submissions. Additional Background - Color Calibration on Monitors Getty Images recommends that you use color management to calibrate your monitor. If you are not, then these are the setting you need to use to emulate our color space: whitepoint set to 6500K and a gamma of 1.8 on a Macintosh platform, a gamma of 2.2 is required on a PC platform. ‘Pre-submissions’ / Works in Progress Though TIFF files are the sole standard for final submissions, preliminary work may be submitted as either JPEG, TIFF or as a PhotoShop Document. Getty Images encourages Artists to submit work in low format where applicable, and in these cases images should be supplied at low resolution, 500 x 700 pixels or approximately one megabyte in file size. JPEG is to be used when submissions are sent via e-mail. High resolution files are not to be sent via e-mail. (Unless otherwise discussed with your art director, it is not necessary to supply high resolution files at the initial/work-in-progress phase of a project.) PhotoShop Documents are submitted when "layers" are being used and your art director is reviewing your work by looking at them. We recommend that Artists discuss with their Art Director or Editor the best methods for submitting and reviewing work-in-progress. Canvas Sizes and Output Resolution Please use the following canvas sizes as a guideline only. The main requirement is based on the 48 MB file size used for High Resolution Web delivery. Beware! File sizes vary with the type of application and layers used. The following canvases are listed in pixels to help give the correct file size for an RGB TIFF flattened with no layers, and uncompressed @300 pixels/inch 35mm 3328x5040 6x6 4096x4096 6x7 3500x4792 4x5 4624x3625 6x12 2895x5790 6x17 7154x2342 Please note: The published file size on the web for a High Res asset is 48 MB. We will accept any file that is between 48 and 52 MB. Anything that falls below 48 MB will be returned to the Artist for re-scanning. File size and resolution is very frequently confused. When setting the output resolution to 300 pixels/inch do not resize the image.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Craig m. Zacarelli |
well Peter, I just read your postings and I gotta say, very inspiring indeed. I was reading somewhere about the micro stock sites and was convinved it wasnt too good. but, I know people are making $$$ at it so it cant be that bad. I cant rember where I read it or exactly what it said but I do remember it left me with a sour taste in my mouth for the whole stock photo thing... I am trying to come up with "other than wedding" ways to make some $$$ off photography and have a couple of ideas. We'll have to wait for the spring/summer though to see if they pan out! till then, I will practice, hone my skills and learn as much as possible. Thanks again peter, for the insperation! Craig-
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
You're quite welcome, Teri. As I think you know, my purpose in sounding off here is to educate and enlighten, not to discourage or be disconcerting. OK, so some of you have discovered Getty which also has office in the U.S. and slightly different submission criteria. Nonetheless, if you compare Getty with an outfit like Shutterstuck or whatever it's called, you can see a significant difference between the way the two firms do business. Getty is at the higher end of the stock photography food chain, as is Magnum, Black Star, among others. These outfits, along with others, are reputable, protect both the photographer and the buyer of their art work, and pay scrupulous attention to legal details of usage, etc. This is precisely what I was Look, I know that deep down inside, most serious non-professional photographers want to be published somewhere. Yeah, the first few times you see your byline is pretty thrilling. But there is a right way to go about this process. So, aAll I'm saying is that to do this kind of work, you need to be informed; you need to be careful on how you share your images and protect your copyrights; you need to be cautious in which stock houses to use and how you offer them to stock houses and for what purpose, and what restrictions, if any, you have in terms of usage, how much your images are worth in various usage situations and what happens to their value once they've been published anywhere. Take it light.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Mark, you're reading between the lines and making assumptions... I have all proper model releases where necessary... The 'blessing' I have with my own institution is that, unlike you beign a stranger, I am tested and my integrity is known... it is untested strangers like you who need the 'constant' supervision to make sure you don't violate a patient's right or the hospitals point of view. I meant to say, most microstock agencies, not most agencies,... and I did caveat that with ... make sure you read that in the contract.... Suggest you read closer yourself next time... http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865
|
|
|
|
||
|
Michael Warnock |
Hello, I see the use of the term "microsite" quite a bit in this thread. What exactly does it mean. What is a microsite? Cheers.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Roughly speaking, a microsite as regards the stock photography agencies, are those whose payments are way smaller per photo sold for royalty free photos, compared to the prices you would get from say, Corbis or Alamy. One thought is that a photo on a microsite can still earn an amount that makes a photographer happy, because it can make up for sales in VOLUME. An oft quoted figure for earning money in the stock agency world was $1 per image per year... I think I have seen a revision somewhere of $4/image/year... But my sales in the microsites (I've only been doing this for ~ 7 months, is already at $14.46/photo/year, and this is only my 1st year with less than 200 photos online. Shutterstock is probably the best to start with, because they have aggressive marketing, including advertising in Photoshop User, and they translate your keywords into Japanese, and Spanish, with plans to add French and German to market worldwide. This is already paying for my 'hobby' (hobby now, although I run it as a legitimate business, retirement down the road)... I most recently bought the Zoom Micro Nikkor 70-180mm :) http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
OK Carolina, you're absolutely right. I can see why whatever medical facility trusts you...not to photograph people, which, on the other hand, is what I'm paid to do. I just want to make it clear to you that media reps, ad agency creative directors, etc., working alongside and with the photographer on an assignment has nothing to do with trust or integrity as you so incorrectly state. If I didn't have the level of integrity I have and if my clients didn't trust me, they wouldn't have repeatedly utilized my services over the last over 25 plus years. Get the picture?(Remember, you started this Moreover, I'm grateful for the media liaision who, in those situations we agree are necessary, make my assignments that much easier by explaining to people why we're there, there, why the work is important and dealing with paperwork for these things while freeing my time up for my assistant and I to set up equipment, check lighting and shooting polaroid test shots before actually shooting. Still, I surrender. You're a much better micro-macro photographer than I want to be. Oh and btw, there's a difference between reading and UNDERSTANDING anything, including a contract. Check please. I'm outta here. If you want to discuss this further Carolina, drop me an e-mail. "feldstein@attglobal.net"
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Mark, Too bad you insist on continuing to make false assumptions... I do indeed photograph people as well (with the proper model releases), but I don't post them at BetterPhoto. I hope your photography is better than your judgement.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Interesting you should say that. Out of 130 shots on your web site, only two, arguable 3 are of people. None of them in a medical setting. If that's a false assumption, I don't see any evidence to the contrary. And if they're released, why aren't they on your web site? Now, that's not a judgment, just an observation. I'll let you know when I get to judgment. LOL !! M.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
People take microsite comments very personally I see.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Howard Sandler |
I've been in microstock since June 05 and now have about 180 images up. They're earning me about $120 per month which I think is competitive with traditional stock on a per image per year average basis. My best return per image is istockphoto, second is shutterstock. Bigstockphoto and dreamstime are running about 1/2 the return of the first two. I've put together a small sample of the kind of photos I have that sell on my pbase gallery with links to my full portfolio on other sites: http://www.pbase.com/hsandler/stock Finally, for more information on microstock sites I like to refer people to the microstock forum at yahoo: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/micropayment/
|
|
|
|
||
|
Teri Soares |
Howard, Thank you for your answer and thank you very much for the sample stock photo gallery; that was quite helpful. I am trying to understand the market and the types of images that are needed. I have a lot to learn about lighting since I'd like to do some home studio work. Any suggestions on resources for that sort of thing? I've bought lots of books, but most cover more "big studio" setups. Thanks again for your response! Teri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Howard Sandler |
Hi Teri. I have not studied any books on lighting for commercial photography, just experimented a bit. For most stock, objects isolated on a white background sell well, as the white allows for graphic artists to work text in around the object or easily paste it into other arrangements. For small objects isolated on white I've just been using a large tabletop with a large sheet of white paper gently curved to form a seamless "floor" and "background wall" for the object. I generally put a diffuser dome over my flash and fill in with white pieces of foamcore or a white reflector I have to eliminate most shadows. I try to overexpose the white background to blow it out, but if that isn't possible I select it and set it to white in Photoshop later. The transition from the pure white to shadows under the object is the hardest part to get right. The stock agencies are picky about doing good isolations without obvious poor feathering at such edges. A lot of photographers use a home built "light tent" to further soften the lighting and some use frosted plastic "floors" lit from underneath to eliminate the shadows under objects. Objects isolated against black backgrounds are easier for obvious reasons, but don't tend to sell as well. For black isolations, I try to suspend the object as much as possible some distance from the background on a small base in midair. That way, the lighting doesn't fall on the background and it's easy to Photoshop out the small base. There are some amazing food photos isolated on black from a master in this month's issue of Digital Photo Pro.
|
|
|
|
||
|
David Hudson Valley |
I found a great site that rates stock photography for the consumers. http://stock-photography-service-review.toptenreviews.com/ This is a link from www.toptenreviews.com this I ws wondering if any one has used www.punchstock.com?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ellen McKnight |
A lot of helpful information here. Does anyone know whether there is a downside to signing up with a microsite and then eventually trying to selling those same images elsewhere? For example, if you sell images royalty free on Shutterstock, would you not be able to use them if you were accepted on Corbis or one of the other leading sites?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kathleen Clemons |
Ellen- There are some agencies that will not sign you if you are selling to microsites.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ellen McKnight |
Thanks Kathleen. Your website images are beautiful.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Ellen, Kathleen is correct. Some agencies don't care, many are okay as long as images on microsites are not the same ones sent to them. One should never market a photo as royalty free at one place and the same photo as rights managed at another. I do not see that some agencies that will not sign you if you are selling to the microsites as a limitation at all. If I can upload the same photo to 10 or more microsites (which I do), that really maximizes my exposure on a GLOBAL basis. Many gauge success by the dollars/image/year. Even though I just started at the end of April 2005, I am currently at over $13/image/year and growing... My earnings as of today, starting with only 3 photos and still with a portfolio under 200 images, is $1711.38 Many agencies won't even look at a portfolio that small. Some photographers on Getty/Corbis spend thousands of dollars on one shoot, with no guarantee that the stock agency will even accept the finished work. My shots are for the most part 'free', as I carry my camera with me almost everywhere. The microstocks I submit to are in Canada, the U.S., Europe, Asia... they are aggressive in their marketing. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather earn hundreds and thousands of dollars and see my photos used by every walk of life, versus get a once a year sale at a few hundred dollars (MAYBE) from a bigger agency that sells for an ad. I have seen my photos on websites, and recently found one of my photos in a chemistry textbook. Most of the time you don't know how your photo is being used (website, brochure, book, ad, etc), but the buyers are often businesses that can't afford to pay hundreds of dollars for one image. Interestingly, there are more reports of buyers at companies being directed to look at the microstock agencies FIRST, because if they can find what they need there, of course it saves the company money. The microstock agencies are here to stay and even though there may be some consolidation in the next few years, if you get in now, you will be on the 'ground floor' so to speak. I certainly enjoy the regular paychecks I am now starting to receive, even though my portfolio is small. The Yahoo groups Micropayments group mentioned earlier is a good place to get a feel for what's happening the microsite stock world, it now has over 500 members. The standards of what is being accepted in microsites is continually being raised... because quality photographers are joining the microsites and also the buyers demand it. Shutterstock is still fairly easy to join. You always own the copyright to your photos, and you can pull out or move on at any time. http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ellen McKnight |
Thanks Carolina. It sounds as though this venue is working well for you. I'm still building my portfolio but was curious about the different options out there.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||