cool, i guess?

mtilghma

« on: January 16, 2012, 16:35 »

#link

I signed up for flickr for the first time ever a few months ago, mainly in an attempt to bring random internet views to my personal website, where I host my photos and point people to certain stock or print sites.

I guess I didn't uncheck the Getty bullet, so I got a sitemail that said something like "the getty curators have found your images and think that some of them would go great on getty, namely these pictures below:" then attached some of my photos from flickr they wanted me to upload to getty, and then they had a specialized link for me to create an account. I followed the link to create my getty submitter account, but I guess that's all I'll be doing for now.

Suffice to say that all the photos they cited have been for sale on the RF micros for years. My current workflow, which honestly is changing all the time, is:

Submit to SS.
If SS accepts, submit to all other RF micros.
If SS rejects, but I think it is definitely a micro-type photo, submit to all other micros.
If SS rejects, but I'm not sure exactly if the photo is geared to micro, submit to Alamy RM.

I do this because usually the Alamy RM stated number is to expect something like 1 dollar per image per year. I have a small (and I like to think high quality, but who doesn't) portfolio, and on SS alone, I see WAY more than 1 dollar per image per year. IS I also see way more than that, but its sliding. Others, the jury is still out, since I'm a newish independent, but I'm interested in giving RM a tentative try, so that influenced my workflow decision.

Not really sure how getty would fit into this, as it seems I'm a "flickr submitter" which means that I can only submit the photos theyve already tapped. So they cant replace the Alamy RM step, I don't think. And I don't think I want them to replace the micro steps, since who knows what they will and will not tap, or how long it will take.

Comments on my workflow decisions?


	Ignore \| Logged

helix7

« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2012, 22:04 »

#link

I think it's a little strange to base your workflow around SS entirely. Don't get me wrong, I create stuff with the intention of getting it accepted primarily at SS too. But I upload everything to pretty much every agency that I think will take it. I wouldn't base my decision to upload something elsewhere on whether SS accepts or rejects it.

One of the most beneficial perks of being independent is that a rejection isn't an across-the-board rejection. And I wouldn't wait for an SS rejection to upload something to other sites or to sway your decision on whether something is best suited for RF or RM.


	Logged

Karimala

« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2012, 22:16 »

#link

Quote from: helix7 on January 16, 2012, 22:04

Agreed. More times than I can count, SS rejected images that IS accepted, and visa versa. Just because one agency that's tough with reviews rejects an image doesn't mean another one with equally tough standards won't accept it.


	Ignore \| Logged

mtilghma

« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2012, 23:20 »

#link

Thanks for the comments. I meant mostly if you guys could see a way to fit this flickr thing in there, or if it is pointless, but I guess I was opening up myself for all comments, too.

I agree it's strange, and like I said, it changes pretty often so this is only likely temporary. But like I said, it is this way right now mainly because I want to give RM a try. Some people tend to say that location shots like mine are often more suited to RM, so I'm trying to slowly build an RM portfolio. Since if it is for sale on a SINGLE RF website it can't be RM, if I uploaded a photo to all micros and only put the ones rejected by all to RM, I'd have no RMs. Therefore it makes sense to send to one or two first, and SS makes the most sense since it both earns the most, and reviews the fastest. Does that make sense?


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: [1]

« previous next »

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Topic: cool, i guess?

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results