Macrostock...hows it work for ya?

KonaHawaii

« on: November 24, 2009, 14:26 »

#link

How has macrostock been working for you guys? Any reports?

I was thinking of making some special stuff for macrostock to try it out...unfortunately I don't know anything about it. I heard a rumor that they treat people nice.


	Ignore \| Logged

PixelBitch

« Reply #1 on: November 24, 2009, 15:08 »

#link

You can be more adventurous and take more risks shooting for Macro stock...they appreciate it...and they treat you like an intelligent being and not a supplier of fodder for the machine.

Give it a try...you'll like it!

Quote from: KonaHawaii on November 24, 2009, 14:26


	Ignore \| Logged

sjlocke

« Reply #2 on: November 24, 2009, 18:33 »

#link

Getty sales on my smallish portfolio are uneven and mostly disappointing, with royalties sometimes under $1.


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #3 on: November 24, 2009, 18:36 »

#link

Quote from: sjlocke on November 24, 2009, 18:33

Getty sales on my smallish portfolio are uneven and mostly disappointing, with royalties sometimes under $1.

i would've thought your portfolio would get lots of love. are you creating something separate for macro?


	Ignore \| Logged

KonaHawaii

« Reply #4 on: November 24, 2009, 19:01 »

#link

Quote from: sjlocke on November 24, 2009, 18:33

Getty sales on my smallish portfolio are uneven and mostly disappointing, with royalties sometimes under $1.

Hi Sean,

During the "there is a sucker born every minute" conversation you had mentioned that supplying macrostock is like playing the lottery. )I hope that got resolved with a group hug btw.)

Anyway, I'm looking for insights. If anyone is finding macrostock a success, I'd be surprised if they wanted to broadcast it here. I'm just looking to diversify. The golden rule for an nonexclusive person is to keep finding new baskets for their eggs (even if you have to make some special golden ones Cheesy

)


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #5 on: November 24, 2009, 19:13 »

#link

Quote from: KonaHawaii on November 24, 2009, 19:01

If anyone is finding macrostock a success, I'd be surprised if they wanted to broadcast it here.

Oh I wouldn't be surprised if someone does come along here and tell you how wonderful his RM is doing on macrostock Roll Eyes


	Ignore \| Logged

PixelBitch

« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2009, 19:17 »

#link

I can't say it is doing that wonderfully...down like the rest of the market for stock images...but it is a good long term investment...images I shot in London in the mid 90s are still coming through every couple of months with high sales...RM doesn't tend to get swallowed up by a mass influx of new images like RF does.

Quote from: RT on November 24, 2009, 19:13

Quote from: KonaHawaii on November 24, 2009, 19:01

If anyone is finding macrostock a success, I'd be surprised if they wanted to broadcast it here.

Oh I wouldn't be surprised if someone does come along here and tell you how wonderful his RM is doing on macrostock Roll Eyes


	Ignore \| Logged

KonaHawaii

« Reply #7 on: November 24, 2009, 19:24 »

#link

I'm probably going to experiment a bit with it. What places do I apply at? Any advice would be great.

Leo


	Ignore \| Logged

Jonathan Ross

« Reply #8 on: November 24, 2009, 20:19 »

#link

Hi Leo,

I would not step outside of these groups myself. Getty, Corbis, Masterfile, Blend, Cultura, Image source, Superstock. That would be my first choices. I see some people here who have done really poorly on their sales at Getty. I don't get that myself, my Getty way outsells my Micro by a mile. Much less than what I made 3 years ago but that was almost illegal we were making so much on our returns. Now I would say you can count on a well produced image at Getty making you about 400 dollars in it's shelf life ( about 3-4 years ).

Hope this helps,
Jonathan


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2009, 20:55 »

#link

no mention of alamy? Shocked


	Ignore \| Logged

KonaHawaii

« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2009, 21:10 »

#link

Thanks -- I'll start looking into it.

I don't need a novel-sized run down (there's a lot to say on these subjects) but is there anything different about the image subjects produced? Or is it just same image types but constrained to different market? If I made a special orange man series dedicated to that, would it flop? Renders, illustrations, etc?


	Ignore \| Logged

qwerty

« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2009, 22:07 »

#link

Quote from: Jonathan Ross on November 24, 2009, 20:19

if your returns we're "almost illegal" what would you call the 80% getty made ? Wink


	Ignore \| Logged

Jonathan Ross

« Reply #12 on: November 25, 2009, 00:56 »

#link

Good Point Leo,

Everyone was making so much money that we didn't complain about the percentage, 1500 dollars on a 50 dollar investment was like printing money in the basement. That's where they got us we just were happy with our cut, didn't think much about the future. Live and learn. I know several agencies that offer higher returns than 20% in Macro that still make good money for their photographers as well as the agencies. I believe in a 50/50 split and if I owned an agency that is what I would offer.

Best,
Jonathan


	Ignore \| Logged

KonaHawaii

« Reply #13 on: November 25, 2009, 01:33 »

#link

Microstock has been an interesting experience for me. The true benefit which I will always be thankful for is it has allowed me to be home with the family and work mostly on my own terms. Having to bite my tongue in the forums under power tripping admins is a far lesser evil than dealing with workplace dynamics in an underpaid environment. The eighty percent thing is something I have not questioned, because I'd rather be home with my toddlers and wife during these most precious years. It has served its purpose, and to be anything less than thankful would be an ugly thing.

I do hope though that these microstock companies can do something to keep their artists interested. The constant influx of new people and millions of images will have an obvious, easy to predict outcome for the contributors. It is already being felt.

Back on topic though...this business has given me a career. Soon I'll have to change directions. I'd LOVE to hear some suggestions, because as I said, I'm nothing less thank grateful. Macrostock seemed interesting to me.


	Ignore \| Logged

hqimages

« Reply #14 on: November 25, 2009, 09:07 »

#link

* sigh

If you upload the same stuff to an RM site, that you have on istock for 1/10th the price then no, it won't work for you, and you're also giving company 2 a bad name, since a client really doesn't want to pay out all that money, and then come across the same image on an rf site at a much cheaper price..

Pick a price for your individual and unique image, then go find the sites that reflect that price..


	Ignore \| Logged

PixelBitch

« Reply #15 on: November 25, 2009, 11:15 »

#link

RM images are generally placed on an image exclusive basis, that is the whole idea behind RM, exclusivity,...to try and place those same, or similar, images on a micro site is not only irresponsible but also a potential breach of contract with the rm agency.

Quote from: hqimages on November 25, 2009, 09:07


	Ignore \| Logged

hqimages

« Reply #16 on: November 25, 2009, 11:59 »

#link

Quote from: PixelBitch on November 25, 2009, 11:15

Quote from: hqimages on November 25, 2009, 09:07

I would hope so, but then there are pricing discrepancies across the board for the same image, but the guys head is turned slightly to the left or whatever (it doesn't break the rules, but still why is the client paying extra $$ for something that is almost identical as another image in the photogs RF portfolio).. or if you make vectors, you would make a new one for RM, that in reality looks the exact same as what you already have on RF..

The image exclusive standard has been made a lot more flexible on RM in recent years..


	Ignore \| Logged

Zeus

« Reply #17 on: November 25, 2009, 12:07 »

#link

Quote from: hqimages on November 25, 2009, 11:59

Quote from: PixelBitch on November 25, 2009, 11:15

Quote from: hqimages on November 25, 2009, 09:07

A recent survey indicates that many clients want better service and are willing to pay for it. Hard to believe but not everyone has to have everything for a dollar. This alone justifies a much higher price. Usually if there is not a market for something at a particular price things won't sell for that price and no one will buy it. It has nothing to do with some client have bad feelings.


	Ignore \| Logged

PixelBitch

« Reply #18 on: November 25, 2009, 12:50 »

#link

The general rule I abide by with RM and Macro RF is that if it is the same model in the same location and wearing the same clothes then it is a similar, a slightly different angle on the head in the same situation is regarded as a similar, this is just plain common sense and also protecting your investment in the macro images.

Quote from: hqimages on November 25, 2009, 11:59

Quote from: PixelBitch on November 25, 2009, 11:15

Quote from: hqimages on November 25, 2009, 09:07