MicrostockGroup

I have tried to submit editorial work to them several times in the past and have yet to hear back from anyone.  The photos I've used to try to gain access can be seen here...  http://www.mathaywardphoto.com/MatHaywardPhotos/

I think it is tricky at best to get accepted there these days but good luck just the same!

Mat

Elenathewise is one of the top 30 or so microstockers in the business.  Here's her account of submitting to Getty.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-macrostock/accepted-at-getty/

Not sure.  I haven't bothered applying to Getty.  

I suspect if someone of Elena's experience and skill is getting relegated to Photographer's Choice then most people who apply are probably getting turned down flat.  

From what I hear Flikr is the fastest way for "the rest of us" to seek acceptance from Getty. 

Ive supplied them since 1993 and thats the main core RM section.  All these other avenues such as Photographers-Choice, their RM, etc, etc, are as far as I know pretty much a waste of time, further more I would never pay to get a pic into files, doesnt make sense.
The original RM, their main-core is the place where regular big buyers/spenders go, such as ad-agencies, large corps, pr-agencies, etc, you know, people who dont mind spending lots of money, rights, etc.

Once I had submitted my application to Getty (short mail, with a link to my website), it took them about 3 months to reply. I was offered a contract for their RF and RM 'house collections', i.e. not just 'Photographers Choice'. (In these times, I don't think I'd ever pay to place an image with any agency.)

So: yes – it is still possible to get a standard contract with Getty. But it takes some time to get there. And in my case, I redesigned my website so it only showed relevant RM type content and allowed for a good viewing experience (flash-based player or similar). And my front home page showed the best 10 shots from the past 2 years of professional work. ("If in doubt – take it out". That front page needs to have a real impact on whoever looks at it.)

Prior to being offered a contract, there was also a phone-interview during which we talked about my future plans in photography (lifestyle? illustration? travel?).

interesting thanks for sharing.. ..anyone else get into getty recently?

I have a modest number of files in various Getty collections, including PC. Despite attempts to get into other collections--I've received little to zero feedback from TPTB. At a certain point, the lack of response is a response in itself, but the greatest value in the exercise--it has forced me to do a good deal of research and re-evaluation of the future marketing and sale of my work. On one hand I feel there is always going to be serious resistance to change and a need to adapt or die. However, I also believe that photographers/artists in general must be a cohesive force that affects positive change within our industry and that involves more than anything else--valuing our work and the work of our peers. It's clear that as contributors, our value is being diminished. to what degree is anyone's guess. but the quote that continues to ring true and cause concern from my POV is the following:

"Getty Images' top priority is expanding its own market share by whatever means necessary, irrespective of the damage it causes to the rights and interests of contributing photographers and image partners." "

this sentiment continues to creep into the foreground...sigh. despite being optimistic by nature. the other great point raised in the article is the concept of self-marketing and--if necessary--finding alternative means of selling our photos without devaluing them.

Christian, FWIW, I only used my ten free PC slots. I'll never pay an agency an upfront fee for representing my work. I gotta agree, it does seem an invention to garner funds from contributors. Thus far I've worked on the presumption that it was better to belong in one place, with one agency and its affiliates....but I continue to find much more value/interest connected to my work through other avenues of sale and direct marketing of my work. I admit that it truly surprises me.

I've met many wonderful people connected with iStock and Getty too. but as much as I might truly value those individual connections and friendships, I won't devalue my work (either directly, or by allowing an agency to devalue it) anymore than those of who have long been saying that things were underway that would be detrimental to contributors. golden handcuffs. I can't imagine the sense of a loss of control on the part of contributors who make far more than I do. anyways. que cera cera....

I'm a contributor to PC and their house collections. I personally think their house collections does suck more than PC. With their house collections you only get cutting edge stuff accepted nowadays but this stuff sells even on Getty rarely. Also you have to do all the work upfront retouching logos, making their stuff up to their specific standards (black- and whitepoint etc.), attaching model- and property- releases, adding five conceptual keywords, title and description in their specific framework etc. just to get them all rejected or even worse they just accept one single picture from a pretty big series but this means that all other pictures of the session are blocked forever because of their heavy-handed exclusive-policy. I rather pay 50,- Dollars and then I least know the stuff will get accepted as long as it meets their technical requirements but the RPI is sinking very very quickly on Getty so I don't think that PC will work in the near future even if you exactly know what you are doing. If you are unexperienced you won't see your 50,- bucks again let alone any profit.

yes ofcourse! their house-collection, is supposed to be cutting-edge stuff, thats why its there! and nothing wrong with that!  only, that was yesterday.  Today their cutting edge stuff is no better then the best of Micro. They know that! and thats why they are gradually turning everything into micro.

Their cutting edge-stuff of today is no more then the everyday Lifestyle-images you can see on anyone of the big four micro sites. Just have a look at the Hot-shots from Getty/IS,  same old balha, blaha, every time.

Sounds like your submission procedure is different to mine then. I'm submitting to house collections as well: I send out UNRETOUCHED lo-res images to my editor. Last submission they accepted 40% of the initial submission (though I do a tight pre-edit myself already). Releases, keywords, titles, descriptions I add AFTER uploading the hi-res file to the portal. Acceptance rate on the portal: 100%.

I came into getty through the old istock program and luckily i was given a House contract. However I also got burned by the heavy editing, especially because i thought they had rejected the more commercial part. So for now I´ve decided I´ll submit very few images to House, preferably single images. With PC we now get a lot more free slots per quarter and I hope to max out on that.

For me Getty is a good additional outlet, I find that I can submit a different style of images, more subdued colours, more European in style with good results. The monthly income is a lot less predictable because they have a big variation in prices, the traditional stock photographers have written all over about it.

On the whole I think it is a good experience, I can certainly recommend Getty.

Even if you get a PC contract I wouldn´t be dissapointed but embrace it and give it a go.