MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 95,000 photographers....  (Read 7604 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: March 28, 2008, 14:40 »
0
I think 95,000 contributors is a bit misleading....since I would guess that over half of those 95,000 have contributed less than 20 shots and then did not return when they realized it would take years to earn $100.

In response to an earlier comment about Fotolia, I find that Fotolia has recently been rejecting 80% of my shots that are approved at the other Big 6 sites.....and normally the rejection is that the "photo is not what we're looking for".

Is that a function of them getting bigger?  I don't think so.  I think it is because they are trying to mimic IS - but they don't have the buyers or the sales rate to compete.  And I think it is a poor move on their part since it will drive people away from them if they continue to reject photos that are routinely accepted elsewhere.  For example, a deserted island beach with white sand and a palm tree may be well represented in most photo libraries already, but for Fotolia to say that it doesn't have commercial application as a stock shot is just short sighted.

IS limits for us non-exclusives is actually good news for the smaller (and new) microstock sites - those of us who are constrained at IS end up sending a lot more of our stuff to sites that don't have such restrictive upload limits.

Interesting reading throughout...thanks for starting this thread.


lisafx

« Reply #26 on: March 28, 2008, 17:14 »
0
But more independent images at iStock means more competition for exclusives. I think the limits are here to stay at iStock, but they really benefit exclusives, not buyers.

I know the iStock wisdom is that all the stuff the other sites accept is just substandard junk they wouldn't take, but that's just not true. They have to walk some fine lines with the exclusive contributor idea, and although most of the gripes one hears from exclusives about too few benefits for them, I think the upload limits are probably the biggest one they get.

I agree that the UL limits at istock are more about restricting the amount of non-exclusive content than about image quality (forcing us to upload our "best" work)

The upload limits at istock have shrunk so much over the past couple of years that I really think they are shooting themselves in the foot.  35 Images/week for at diamond level is ridiculous.  And the fact that it is not a calendar week but some jerry-rigged 168 hour time period effectively means you lose even those few slots if you can't upload the same time every week. 

When top selling, highly in-demand artists (Yuri, Andres, Photoeuphoria, etc) are forced to concentrate the bulk of their portfolios on other sites it only adds fuel to istock's competition. 

fotoKmyst

« Reply #27 on: March 28, 2008, 19:19 »
0
  35 Images/week for at diamond level is ridiculous. 

lisafx and others...
 :-[don't mind if a curious newbie to stock but experienced working photographer ask a perharps silly question:

just how many images/week are you ppl averaging?
sounds like a lot , if you're all unanimously complaining about the limit shrinking.

that sounds like a lot of work, isn't it? :-\
it means you 're probably not doing anything BUT taking shots and submitting.
a working photographer like me would starve then *in terms of earning via stock photos), as i don't have the time to shoot to keep up to that weekly submission.  if i end up making nothing, i could make more just keeping to shooting assignment. (if you catch my drift). :-\

perharps, i could meet that max. on low period of my shooting assignments, but regularly, it sure sounds like it's not for me.. :P

your input is much appreciated as i do keep up with all you have been saying.  thanks again. :)
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 19:22 by fotoKmyst »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
20 Replies
10058 Views
Last post April 30, 2008, 01:20
by Seren
11 Replies
6671 Views
Last post January 27, 2008, 14:14
by KiwiRob
14 Replies
4849 Views
Last post April 20, 2018, 19:54
by Wishing well
4 Replies
1962 Views
Last post August 03, 2007, 05:32
by takestock
11 Replies
4867 Views
Last post November 04, 2008, 15:08
by yingyang0

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors