MicrostockGroup

1. You can, but it will look unprofessional.

2. Youc can't sell an MR image as RF. You would be cheating the MR buyers.

3. Once sold in RF, one image is always RF.

howardg,

I have sold images both as RM and RF (not the same images).  It's hard to say what sells more - my sales are too small for proper statistics. 

I have images in sites as RM and the same images in other sites as RF (sites in which RM is not available).  When I sell one of these images in one license, I delete it from the sites in the other license (that is, if I sell image as RM, I delete it where I have it as RF, and vice-versa).  You must be careful to know if sites will allow you to remove images.

I also keep a different portfolio for micro and macrostock.  I think it makes sense and personally I think it is very unprofessional to do otherwise.  Of course it may be a rare event to be "caught" doing that, but I don't want to risk, even if stock photography is not my main income.


Although prices in micros do vary, they are within a certain typical range.  I don't think a buyer would complain of buying an image for US$8 in one site and find it for US$6 in another.  But if he buys it for US$150, he might.  And for that price, he probably expected to be buying something more unique (even though with RF there is no guarantee at all), and will be quite upset to learn that the image has sold hundred of times in micros. 

I don't think the comparison of credits vs subs (DTxSS) is valid, as in theory the subs buyer puts a lot more money, so it's like he's getting a huge discount for volume.  Not that I agree with that discount, which is excessively high in something that is already too cheap.

I believe it would be of more concern a buyer in MP finding the same images in the micros - not the same shock as one buying in Alamy, but still a significant price difference.

Regards,
Adelaide

See these posts

http://www.thephotographybiz.com/comment/stock-photography-can-you-sell-an-image-as-rf-and-rm-at-the-same-time/

http://www.microstockdiaries.com/choose-microstock-or-macrostock-or-both.html

http://niagarashooter.blogspot.com/2008/05/perilous-line-in-stock-photography.html

Howard,

RF is RF, but when you have such huge price differences between microstock and macrostock, they are not actually the same.  We are talking about image costing US$150-250 (if I am not wrong) versus images costing US$6-10, so it's not the same as B&H vs competition. 

Indeed, there is nothing against the rules about placing the same images in both micro and macrostock. Many people here will tell you they do that. Many others however, like me, think it is just not a good policy, and it may harm your name. It simply doesn't make sense to me to sell the same thing at such different prices. 

As I said, although RF images do not guarantee any exclusivity, someone buying at Alamy may expect that an image costing US$250 won't be found being used everywhere.  Someone buying at microstock know this is much likely to happen (and they can easily see how many times that image was sold). 

In my point of view, you have to decide whether an image is worth selling 100 times at US$2.50 or a single time at US$250 (and I prefe the latter).  You may get the same in the end, you may even get more at the micros, but you have to decide how you want that image sold.  It is a lot about how you value your work, or a certain part of your work.  Again, just my opinion.

Regards,
Adelaide

Howard,

If you visited the links I supplied, you will see that PhotoShelter has already defined their position - no micro. From PhotoShelter:

"Cross-listing live PhotoShelter Collection images with microstock sites is now prohibited.
We will no longer allow photographers to sell images via The PhotoShelter Collection if the same image is currently listed for sale at a microstock site. We consider 'microstock' to be any image provider offering licenses for less than $50."

Always know the restrictions and limitations of Terms where you submit, whether it be micro or macro.

I think in a different way.

You can buy the same product from different stores for example a Canon camera. You can find a big difference in price from one shop to another.
How is guilty for that diference? Canon or the shop? How decides de price?

I dont chose the price of alamy or SS

They put the prices so Im not guilty or unprofesional if I have the same images in both sites

You are probably right but:


Exatly.
Alamy doesnt say you cant upload "micro-images", so its their problem I think.
Also, if Im not wrong they will include the new "micro license" at "micro price" so I dont see the reason why not to upload there the microportfolio.

Exactly

Trebuchet, amigo bueno, I am not questioning your liberal free market opinion, but why would you not prefer to sell an image for more money
when you can do that?
it may take a longer time to sell one image at 50 dollars, perharps,
but to sell it at 5 dollars, it will take you ten sales instead of one.
Would you not prefer to give your image a higher value, and earning more in the long run as well?

Can I sell one image as RM both at Alamy and Photoshelter ?

thanks.

It has always been my experience that buyers of intellectual property don't really understand the intricacies of the licenses until an issue comes up, but I only deal with buyers when things have gone wrong (ie they've been sued).

Are you talking about the higher end buyers, or all buyers in general? I've never heard this view point expressed so I'm very interested.