MicrostockGroup

What I normally see is 400x300 (W or XS), 800x600 (S), 1600x1200 (M) then two or more sizes that vary between 3 and 5Mpix (L) and 8 to 12 MPix (XL).

It's curious that these sizes are in the compact cameras' 4:3 ratio, not the DSLRs' 3:2.  In IS the latter become 283x424pix (XS), 586x848pix (S) and 1132x1696pix (M).

So, now CC becomes microstock site?

They sell Royalty Free the same as the rest of the Micro Stock sites. Except you may set your own price the same as FeaturePics.
Was it RM (Rights Managed) before?

-Larry

would people be interested in some kind of opt out of creating and offering different sizes of their images on a site?

I'm sure that would depend on the price reduction offered for smaller sizes.  Personally, I wouldn't offer much of a break in price -- I'd think of it as a service offered.  Most small pix go onto blogs and the bloggers may not know how to resize.  Your doing them a favor even without any discount. (but I would off some discount, just not a lot.)

Yes, and furthermore you should be posing this question to buyers, not suppliers. That being said, image size should be tied to use: XS & S are primarily for websites, M and above primarily for print. If you're averse to asking buyers, a good starting point might be to check the size of ad slots on a few publications/sites and develop your sizing from there. Or just assume that your competitors have already done this research and use one of their models.

That makes sense. Considering anything digital would fit on an A3,A4, format, but not the other way.
Another way would be a size range of MP that entails the digital format and the standard print format.

yeah i have researched what other sites are doing and their sizes.  in addition i have been asking buyers what sizes they typically buy which varies obviously by industry and use. 

i like the idea of opting in or out of having your images resized and wonder if people would want that feature.  when i ask the buyers they say they want all the images to be offered in different sizes but want to hear what you guys think too bc you are half the equation and its your content. 

astrocady i think what you said is what we can do and will do.

thank you alias and sharply done too. 

do people like that option?  i wonder how many people opt out of having their images resized?

johngriffin, very nice to meet you. We've been discussing the multiple sizes for multiple price points over here at ClusterShot for a little while. The jury is still out on whether or not we'd ever implement it but here are a few of our thoughts:

- It seems weird to us to artificially create price points. We would actually be doing work (processor time to resize) to create "new" images to sell.

- At the core of the transaction we're not sure enough people really care.  Granted, this may be us being naive and sticking our heads in the sand.  We feel that when someone is looking for a photo they are just looking for a photo that will work (it does have to be big enough). If the price of the photo is right they buy it. For the photographer they just want to sell their photo for a certain price-point.

- Our bet, and it's a long one, is that most of the photos being taken today (literally) are by people who don't care about getting a certain amount per size (they also don't care about a lot of other things). They would just be happy to sell any image for any amount. This isn't referring to the dedicated group of photographers here, this is referencing the world at large. Surely there are a million monkeys with a million cameras out there. One of them is going to take the photo a buyer is looking for.

Off-topic: John you are some sort of internet superhero. The amount of honest communication you do on here is astounding. Keep up the good work.

GeoPappas,
To carry the Shakespeare/Typewriter analogy to its completion: No, you're not the monkeys, you are the Shakespeares who are bettering their craft. John Doe with his brand new Christmas gift Canon Rebel SLR who has no aspiration to become a photographer and snaps 3,000 photos while on vacation is the hypothetical monkey hammering on the typewriter.

My point is, to be very clear, that with so many people taking so many pictures there are bound to great marketetable photos being taken by not-so-great photographers. How you bring that into the market is one of the things we're experimenting with at ClusterShot. Our understanding is that those producers don't care much about resolution/price levels. They just see it as a nice bonus to sell a photo.

As with all metaphors and analogies they never apply 100% correctly .  Sorry if you read my previous post as calling you a monkey!