MicrostockGroup

So I'm reading the recent posts about Flickr and obviously there are plenty of people who manage to get work or sales through Flickr (not referring to the Flickr collection from Getty!!!).

I hope some of you successful Flickranians or whatever you call yourselves over there wouldn't mind sharing your secrets of success in order to get endless streams of commissioned works and sales requests 

Do you actually upload your entire portfolio (reduced in size and with watermark) to Flickr and that's it?

I have some of my best sellers and subjectively my best work there and in 4 years nobody ever contacted me. I do make a living off of microstock so the images are not lousy.

Please advise.

That's not what I was asking.

I was wondering how photographers approach Flickr in terms what they upload and how much.

Like do you upload your entire Microstock portfolio as well or just a few images?

Are you actively participating in groups etc. contributing images or inviting endless numbers of people as friends...?

1. I did 2 years ago, full port, watermarked.

2. My paying account was suddenly terminated without any warning. My guess is (a) the watermarking annoyed the sharers and they reported me for 'commercial use' (not allowed); (b) I had links on every photo to the actual sales site (commercial use).

3. Flickr doesn't really like other (paying stock) sites, I have the impression. But maybe they changed now they decided to team up with Getty. Users hate the watermarks and I got scolded for that a few times.

4. Yes, I heavily participated in groups. It's a feelgood and wow site. It can be very rewarding and you get high exposure by that. On the downside, it eats time. If you don't do that, your photos will drown in the other 2-3 billion.

5. You can set the copyright as you wish: all rights reserved or one of the (worthless) creative common "licenses".

6. I never had anyone contacting me for a sale, but I regularly found blogs and even commercial sites carrying my pictures complete with watermark and all.

Hope this helps. Also check Dan Heller's site: he has some articles about Flickr.

Nevertheless, I started a new account again, but free this time. In that case, you are limited to 200 photos so your port won't fit there.

^^ Wow.  That's all I need to know.  Can't imagine why a stock seller would want that.  

There are advantages. Many occasional image users (like bloggers) don't know about microstock and how easy and cheap it is to buy an image nowadays. Even larger corporations don't. You can at least educate them. The ones that bluntly use your Flickr images do it mostly out of convenience and not with bad intentions. The ones that do wouldn't buy your images anyways and they are "punished" by a watermark that takes them a lot of time to clone out.

The main advantage of Flickr, as I experienced, is social networking in the photography arena. It was a great help to me to settle safely and get connected in Northern Mindanao (totally different culture, dangerous if you're ignorant) around a topic that interests all of you.

I found some amazing photographers the past 2 weeks on Flickr that didn't even hear of microstock. It's a particular situation in a very poor area in the Far East. I'm convinced it's full of talent but they just don't have the resources to develop that talent. If you can team up with those, it can (and it already has) been a win-win in real before. But that might not be an issue in the West.

A third advantage is that you get a tremendous exposure since Flickr is one of the most visited sites in the world, with very good SEO. Three years ago, I was all over Google with my images, by Flickr.
That might not be an issue for big shots like you, that get a lot of exposure by the agencies, but if you are a "regular" with a small port partly in a niche, you need to take every chance you can to push yourself in the limelight.

Everybody experiencing the glass ceiling in his sales by conventional microstock is looking for new business models. I'm eager to know what the "free" thing of Boughn-Arcurs-Avava will be. "Freemium" can be a part of it, I don't know.

That's why I nevertheless reopened an account on Flickr. You'll have to use it wisely. If the bubble of microstock is bursting (for the photogs, not the agencies) you need to be proactive and try... try...

I never worried so much about having images stolen at Flickr.  That concern came after seeing so many complaints being stolen from our very own Micro Stock sites.  I'm sure there must be some reason for concern but what are you supposed to do.  We all seek recognition.  Where do you get recognition without risk? 

I try really hard not to let this upset me.  It's sorta like the weather; "We all want to talk about it but who's gonna do anything about it?"

I stopped uploading to Flickr but it was because they pissed me off ... not because any member was abusing my copyright. 

As for exposure; I guess I was lucky.  I was contacted on several occasions "requesting" the right to use my images -- usually for FREE but at least they asked.  And, (big grin)  I was recognized.

Doesn't it fall into the derivative work rule? I think it is a very open concept when to consider the image has been altered enough.

You can make Flickr turn into $$$. Some will hate it, just like many hated micro.