Author Topic: Exclusive... (Read 5910 times)

hatman12 · « **on:** June 07, 2007, 16:26 »

The new best match at iStock brings back the old question of exclusivity. It has always been my thought that the agencies must place a greater emphasis on getting exclusive photographers; after all if they've all got the same pictures their businesses aren't worth much; the value is in having a larger selection of unique images.

Originally I planned all along to be an exclusive at iStock; but I've gradually changed my mind and fallen into the 'don't have all your eggs in one basket' camp. In any case as a newbie to microstock it's great to have the immediacy of SS and to see sales from a number of agencies.

But if, as time goes by, agencies place a greater emphasis on exclusives (such as iStock is doing with this new best match), eventually a decision will have to be made.

At the moment there is only one agency even worth considering being exclusive with, and that's iStock; but I suppose that will also change as the other agencies become more established.

Decisions, decisions.

kosmikkreeper · « **Reply #1 on:** June 07, 2007, 16:43 »

what do you mean by best match?

GeoPappas · « **Reply #2 on:** June 07, 2007, 17:12 »

Quote from: kosmikkreeper on June 07, 2007, 16:43

what do you mean by best match?

Best Match...

GeoPappas · « **Reply #3 on:** June 07, 2007, 17:17 »

I'm not sure that exclusivity is what an agency wants to focus on, since an agency receives a higher cut for non-exclusives. For example, IS receives 80% for non-exclusives, but 60% - 75% for exclusives.

sharply_done · « **Reply #4 on:** June 07, 2007, 19:17 »

I can see myself strongly considering the exclusivity decision with IS once I hit the diamond level (about a year from now). My plans calls for me to be making $65k at that time, and I'll have to take an immediate pay cut of $15k if I go with IS alone. I'll be able to build my portfolio faster and get increased visibility, though, so sales should increase. And I won't have the hassle of uploading to sites with low returns on investment. It won't be an easy or light decision to make.

best match: Heh ... the only thing I could think of when I saw this was "Bowel Movement".

hatman12 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 07, 2007, 19:41 »

Sharply you've probably seen the comments from 'new exclusives' that they see an immediate and often dramatic uplift in sales.

sharply_done · « **Reply #6 on:** June 07, 2007, 20:35 »

No, I haven't seen anything like that.
I've never even been to the IS forums.
Perhaps I should start.

sharpshot · « **Reply #7 on:** June 08, 2007, 03:59 »

If you think about it, new exclusives are going to have an increase in sales. I am sure those who buy photos from cheaper sites will buy them from there. When you are only with istock, they can't do that.

I can't go exclusive with istock because they have rejected photos that have made lots of money on other sites. They rejected my first vector application and I have seen some vector artists who sell very well on other sites rejected. I also think they should limit uploads more to those that have lower quality images and let those that sell more upload more.

How many of us have photos that could be selling waiting to be uploaded on our hard drives? This doesn't make sense to me and I think as time goes by, more people will look for photos on other sites, where the images are cheaper to download and the photographers have more of their portfolios online.

snem · « **Reply #8 on:** June 08, 2007, 05:03 »

Consider this... I go exclusive to Istockphoto, then I submit only those images they reject to other sites non-exclusively. Can I do this? What do you think about?

CJPhoto · « **Reply #9 on:** June 08, 2007, 05:13 »

Quote from: snem on June 08, 2007, 05:03

Consider this... I go exclusive to Istockphoto, then I submit only those images they reject to other sites non-exclusively. Can I do this? What do you think about?

No can do. You agree to supply exclusive to iStock for RF purposes. Can can supply elsewhere but only for RM.

snem · « **Reply #10 on:** June 08, 2007, 05:31 »

Quote from: CJPhoto on June 08, 2007, 05:13

Quote from: snem on June 08, 2007, 05:03
Consider this... I go exclusive to Istockphoto, then I submit only those images they reject to other sites non-exclusively. Can I do this? What do you think about?
No can do. You agree to supply exclusive to iStock for RF purposes. Can can supply elsewhere but only for RM.

This is valid also with those images that Istockphoto have rejected?

fotografer · « **Reply #11 on:** June 08, 2007, 05:53 »

If you are exclusive with one agency you can't sell any photos even rejected ones anywhere else with an RF license.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #12 on:** June 08, 2007, 08:10 »

How about if you "sell" (a penny?) the rights to the photo to a family member and they decide to put them up on other sites under their name?

Technically they are not your photos anymore, so its a possible avenue to explore

CJPhoto · « **Reply #13 on:** June 08, 2007, 09:27 »

Quote from: ichiro17 on June 08, 2007, 08:10

Technically they are not your photos anymore, so its a possible avenue to explore

Technically they might not be able to close your account and freeze any earnings. But they could.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 08, 2007, 09:56 »

possibly

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Exclusive... (Read 5910 times)

hatman12

kosmikkreeper

GeoPappas

GeoPappas

sharply_done

hatman12

sharply_done

sharpshot

snem

CJPhoto

snem

fotografer

ichiro17

CJPhoto

ichiro17

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors