MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 300-500 Images - looking for the best selling option  (Read 1934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 12, 2017, 10:50 »
0
Hi All... i have about 3-500 images sitting on my hard drive doing next to nothing. Im slowly uploading them to Fine Art America with the hope to make the occasional sale there but there.

Ive also uploaded a 20 or so images to Istock, and Im also registered with Alamy (2 images uploaded).

Obviously early days so no sales.

My question I think is a pretty simple one.

Given my image amount who should I sign up too / Is there a recommended limit / whose good, whose bad?

And is it problematic to sell the same image on one macrostock site while also selling it on a microstock site?


BTW - Most of my work is landscape, I dont expect to to be a big seller, its probably not that commercial.


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2017, 11:26 »
+1
Just check the poll results on the right. Higher up the list, the more sales people get on average. Pond5 might be an exception for you, as most of their sales are from footage... but Shutterstock and Adobe would make sense to try. Maybe 123RF and Dreamstime as well.

« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2017, 12:24 »
0
I would upload to SS if you don't get reasonable sales there tbh you'd probably be wasting your time anywhere else. You need to check the conditions of sale of the Macrostock site you are looking to sell on.

Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2017, 17:22 »
0
Quote
And is it problematic to sell the same image on one macrostock site while also selling it on a microstock site?

It depends on the licensing conditions...midstock/macrostock agencies may want exclusivity. If not exclusive you cannot legally license RM at midstock/macro and RF at micros.

Quote
BTW - Most of my work is landscape, I dont expect to to be a big seller, its probably not that commercial.

It depends on how unique they are, if you can provide a link with a sample that would be helpful for me/us to judge better on their marketability.

Quote
whose good, whose bad?

Some images are better suited to some agencies so difficult to say exactly. I have lists of microstock/midstock agencies on my blog but won't dare say who's good or bad, just how much they give in commission and types of images that they specialise in (more relevant to Midstock 'boutiques'). It appears that Adobe Stock is up and coming so i'd probably focus your energies on them, along with Shutterstock and Alamy (editorial) - that's what I'm doing.

Good luck, it's tough out there and applaud you for your enthusiasm, remember it's a marathon not a sprint!

« Last Edit: July 12, 2017, 17:24 by Brasilnut »

« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2017, 02:16 »
0
"It depends on how unique they are, if you can provide a link with a sample that would be helpful for me/us to judge better on their marketability. " I don't really think this only the market can judge marketability in my view.  The best option is just to put them out there and see what happens.

« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2017, 04:08 »
0

Quote
It depends on how unique they are, if you can provide a link with a sample that would be helpful for me/us to judge better on their marketability.

Here you go

newbielink:https://www.flickr.com/photos/mushroomgod/ [nonactive]

I would say though - this is the work I personally like doing. I have a backlog of sunny days/sunset/more general shots that have never seen the light of day.





Quote
Good luck, it's tough out there and applaud you for your enthusiasm, remember it's a marathon not a sprint!


Im pretty pessimistic about the whole thing. I don't expect to make much of anything, and Ill be happy with some beer money! but at the same time, seems like a potential missed opportunity not to upload them to a few places just to see what happens :)
« Last Edit: July 13, 2017, 04:10 by mushmatt »

« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2017, 04:16 »
0
They are very good pics. They don't have an obvious market for MS to me...but as I said before put em up for sale and find out ...if they don't all you've lost is a bit of time. Some might sell as wall art on the likes of FAA.

« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2017, 04:32 »
0
They are very good pics. They don't have an obvious market for MS to me...but as I said before put em up for sale and find out ...if they don't all you've lost is a bit of time. Some might sell as wall art on the likes of FAA.

Yeah, totally agree. I think the stuff that I dont post probably has much more potential, but at the same time is quite generic (is that good/bad, I dunno).

The more "arty" stuff has more potential in places like FAA...Well, thats what I suspect anyway.

I have another avenue that I think does give me some good potential to earn money though stock and thats CGI. Most of the CG work I see on stock sites I could do better in my sleep. But thats a hard sell currently as work in that area (its my day job) keeps me busy enough already. And not sure I could find the time to do stuff outside of it.


Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2017, 07:11 »
0
Quote
newbielink:https://www.flickr.com/photos/mushroomgod/

Good stuff. Most of it isn't Micro quality (in a good way), with the exception of some of the tulip fields/windmills, and London skyline. The rest would be best as fine art prints, in my opinion. Look into Arcangel images as some of your images could be covers of books, also Trevillion seems interesting.

Have you ever entered into photography competitions...I think some of these are worthy.

Nice style, I can see you put in a lot of time into these shots in the middle of winter with long exposure, which takes patience and discipline.

« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2017, 07:52 »
+2
These are very nice. If I were you I'd head more down the art/print and RM route. And establish yourself as a brand. You have a unique style.

I wouldn't put them in micro. I don't think they would sell in quantity so find a good macro site to work with where the higher price will make up for the low sales volume. A buyer who connects with your style will be willing to pay more money. As in hundreds of dollars. I just licensed a cityscape image for $400 and the business had no problem paying it.

Plus, if you're offering these images in micro and as prints, you'll be competing against yourself. Buyers price shop. If you have an 8x10 print listed somewhere for $50 and the buyer finds the image on micro for $5 and can print it at Walgreens for $2, why would they buy your print for $50? Answer is they won't and you'll get 50 cents instead of $25.

I was surprised at how many print buyers price shop. I was also surprised at how many interior designers use micro. They buy an image for a couple dollars, mark it up a few hundred dollars, and use it to sell a print to their client. And you get a few cents. When I pulled my landscape/cityscape stuff from micro I had quite a few buyers contact me directly asking me what happened to the image on the micro site and that they urgently needed it for a client project. When I started asking questions about what they planned to use the image for I was disgusted with the answers. Big money being made of which I had been getting peanuts.

My landscape/cityscape stuff I now only sell as RM and prints. Stuff like food, tech, and snapshots I leave in micro.

You have talent. Best of fortune to you.

« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2017, 07:58 »
0
"They buy an image for a couple dollars, mark it up a few hundred dollars, and use it to sell a print to their client."

Obviously against the license agreement though, yes?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2017, 08:15 »
0
"They buy an image for a couple dollars, mark it up a few hundred dollars, and use it to sell a print to their client."

Obviously against the license agreement though, yes?

But pretty much unpoliceable - unfindoutable unless in Paulie's exact circumstances.

« Reply #12 on: July 13, 2017, 08:15 »
+4
"They buy an image for a couple dollars, mark it up a few hundred dollars, and use it to sell a print to their client."

Obviously against the license agreement though, yes?

Yep. There are less experienced buyers who don't understand RF or extended licensing. All they think is they can buy a license and use it for whatever they want. And then there are those buyers who know what the licensing terms are and don't care. Because they know nobody will find the misuse and even if they did nobody is going to go after them legally. What micro site is going to chase license abuse? None.

Not trying to speak badly of buyers but the RF model has been marketed as unlimited usage, with confusing terms, and a big bright Download button with the "Extended" part kind of mentioned in passing. There's nothing policing it.

How often does anyone here get extended license sales?

« Reply #13 on: July 13, 2017, 08:48 »
0


Hi all, cheers again for all the good feedback - with regards to MS, I think im sold on the idea of uploading some of my more commercial work - Most of which is pretty generic and would fall into editorial.



With regards to my personal work (as per my link) I think you're righ - MS is probably a non starter. this quote though....

Quote
Look into Arcangel images as some of your images could be covers of books, also Trevillion seems interesting.

....has me thinking. Both of those examples are right up my street I think, and personally (assuming I can get in with them) I think my arty/landscape work would sit well on their sites. If anyone knows any other agencies who are similar Id love to hear them!.

And again, cheers for the help!

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #14 on: July 13, 2017, 10:07 »
0
Very nice work! Definitely try ArcAngel. I believe you can still sell your work as art prints and sell on ArcAngel too.

« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2017, 12:25 »
+1
Great pictures. Looks like they belong on somewhere like Stocksy or the higher priced RF agencies - keep an eye out for when they're recruiting.

« Reply #16 on: July 13, 2017, 13:02 »
+1
You have some lovely work.

As far as which items to select to sell as stock (versus prints), try to select those items that are of an identifiable place or thing (like the windmills, a popular city or tourist destination), or which could be used for a popular concept or theme - lost in the wilderness, spring growth, autumn leaves/woods, white winter chill, solitude and so on.

My experience has been that it's the strong demand for a place/subject/image type that really makes a difference (assuming you have great images from each). You should spend some time understanding how to keyword your images (do some searches on sites for subjects you shoot to get an idea) as you'll never be found if you don't ensure to add all relevant keywords (and stay away from spam; it won't help)

Shutterstock and Adobe/Fotolia will tell you all you need to know about microstock demand for your work. Unless you venture into video, I wouldn't spend time on the rest of the sites, many of which are struggling these days.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
5335 Views
Last post October 05, 2006, 10:27
by CJPhoto
4 Replies
1330 Views
Last post March 13, 2013, 20:27
by dbvirago
12 Replies
3453 Views
Last post November 26, 2015, 18:31
by Mackie
55 Replies
9972 Views
Last post March 31, 2017, 08:11
by dragonblade
3 Replies
712 Views
Last post August 25, 2017, 02:38
by Mayank

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors