MicrostockGroup

Hi-

Im new to these forums. But I had a question. I have had advice from one or two people, but I want to see what the majority says.

I am an exclusive contributor at DT. I have been thinking about branching out to other sites. Up until now (and this kind of still applies) I haven't really had the time to spend shooting stock and uploading, keywording, etc. As of right now I have 283 uploads and 168 sales, so I was thinking about moving on to another site. SS was suggested as well as Istock. (Of course, the big two). Long ago I was rejected from one of them (I honestly cant remember which one it was)...it was a long time ago and I think I could get in this time around.

What I want to know is...is it worth it for me to drop the dt exclusivity and try selling other places? If I stick to dt and keep my exclusivity, is it possible to do just fine there?

Depending on how many quality images you can produce per month, you might want to consider just dropping the exclusive contributor status.

You can keep what you have exclusive at DT and start with fresher images at the other sites. 

You've already made an impact on Dreamstime, don't dillute it by spreading those images everywhere else.

Good luck to you!!  And remember, the top four have strict applications, it may take you a few weeks to get in, DO NOT GIVE UP!!!!

Yingyang is correct on making more money across all sites rather than keeping images exclusive with anyone.  However it isn't $0.20.  That is the one time bonus given to exclusive photographers for each accepted image.  The 60% commission will remain for each exclusive image at DT, which is a healthy 20% (60/50) bonus over the standard.

That in itself is still not enough to warrant exclusive images, because just a few sites should more than make up for the 20% differential. 

However I have many exclusive images with Dreamstime.  Some are exclusive because they are editorial shots which I do not wish to offer to a pure subscription site or a start-up.   A few others are exclusive because, for whatever reason, they seem to do well at Dreamstime but not elsewhere.  I think there may be a "slight" search advantage to exclusive images too.  Nothing like Istock, but an advantage nonetheless.

If you can get into either Shutterstock or iStock, you are likely to be floored by the earnings.  I'll be surprised if your earnings are not at least 25% higher there than at Dreamstime.  Don't be shocked if it is much more than 25%.  I make good money with DT, and I love that agency.  But I make 60% more at IS, and 150% more at SS.  Yeah, it's worth getting in to those sites.

I remember Achilles confirmed a small advantage for exclusive images, which is fair in my opinion.

Go ahead. You're loosing money.

I don't see why anyone - other than admins or employees or others affiliated with a site - would go exclusive at DT or FT. They just don't have the sales to justify it.

The issue of exclusive vs. independent is a bit involved, but the issue of exclusive at DT vs. not is a no brainer. Upload to other sites and start with IS and SS where the bulk of the income (for most people, most of the time, YMMV) comes from. FT and DT have been much more variable (good for some, lousy for others), but FT would be worth a try.

Once you're independent, go for the sites where there's a decent number of people making good monthly payouts. I'd forget 123rf as they've never really done anything much for me, and BigStock has a 90 day hold on images and variable performance results (some people do OK, others never seem to gain traction there). The rest aren't worth the time and effort of uploading, IMHO.

just watch out for noise when submitting your shutterstock application.

Super picky?  That would be an understatement, especially on the application.  Try to give them a varied set of images, and make sure they are stock worthy and not a bunch of nature shots of a duck. 

Some have said they did better on the application by concentrating on over-white objects/people.  The idea being that you won't find background noise if it is pure white. 

I see no real advantage of being exclusive, either.  From what I've observed, the higher percentages on the sites don't equal the income from multiple sources.  Furthermore, my experience has been that the inspectors differ quite a bit on the various sites.  For example, the inspectors on DT will see noise and technical problems, just as they will on other sites, but not on the same photos!  It never ceases to amaze me how I can see no noise at all in a group of photos, the inspectors on one site will see noise on some of them while approving the rest of them, and another site will see noise in some of the photos approved by the first site, and see no noise in the others.  If you're exclusive with one of them, you're stuck with whatever they "see."

I've tried in vain a few times to get on as a photo contributor with istock (I do have several video clips there), but when they changed the deal, I stopped trying.  I don't see that it's worth the effort to get approved, to say nothing of the incredibly cumbersome and time-consuming upload / keywording process.  I do upload to Fotolia, Dreamstime, CanStockPhoto, DepositPhotos, FoxHoundPhotos, BigStockPhoto, IsignStock, MostPhotos, Snapixel, and MediaStock.ca.  I have videos on Pond5 and Shutterstock, and I'm still trying to get approved as a photo contributor on Shutterstock.  That's another post altogether!

OLD THREAD ALERT

Nice logo for a new stock site.

Very nice Pete.  Love the brown square.  Really reinforces the name. 

Why is it that the new members seem to dig up and respond to stuff from 2-3 years ago?