MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Alamy.com => Topic started by: LSD72 on November 05, 2010, 16:14
-
I was reading back in the Forums and found this thread
http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com/sales-at-alamy-any-updates/ (http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com/sales-at-alamy-any-updates/)
I thought it might be fun to see who is still around from that time. Also to see how people are doing and if its impacted somehow by Istocks dealings and such.
For my input: I had 13 images up there since last year.. and forgot about them. Checking them about a month or so ago, I had a sale netting me $66. Its from a shot that would never had made the micros at all.. but yet.. someone wanted it for an education book of some sort. Yay Me..lol.
Now with Istocks changing of their game, I figured to change up my approach to Work Smarter Not Harder. I decided which Micros Agencies I am going to stop uploading to or cut out altogether when I reach payouts. I am going to start concentrating on Alamy with RF and RM and occasionally shoot a little for the MS Sites I am keeping. It will be different Photos. I do have some of my RF Photos Crossed over into Alamy but I am going to keep them separate now. This should cut down the time a little by only submitting to Alamy for the most part and about 3 sites (2 Micros and 1 Business cards cause I like making them).
Since 2 weeks ago I have upped that 13 images to 56 now (with about 6 or 7 of them being crossed from the Micros).
Your Turn. Any Updates or Stories?
-
I doubled my portfolio to around 500 and my sales have fallen this year. Sold 10 last year with around 250 images and only 3 so far this year. I would love to drop microstock and go with alamy but I would need at least 20,000 images and that will take a while.
-
Seems that most of the Forum Talkers at Alamy are UK based.. same with sales reported or images found. I wonder if thats the key..lol. Images that even the Brits can use or something. Just pure speculation as in I need to look at the images found sections more.
-
I doubled my portfolio to around 500 and my sales have fallen this year. Sold 10 last year with around 250 images and only 3 so far this year. I would love to drop microstock and go with alamy but I would need at least 20,000 images and that will take a while.
I submitted a couple dozen of mostly editorial images as a test and haven't sold anything.
I was just reading the latest sales results thread and was kinda surprised with the responses. Some of these people have 10,000 - 15,000 images and are getting $500 - $1,000 per month.
If Alamy could deliver at least comparable or better RPI than micro then it would be worth the time. But it doesn't look like that's happening.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
-
I doubled my portfolio to around 500 and my sales have fallen this year. Sold 10 last year with around 250 images and only 3 so far this year. I would love to drop microstock and go with alamy but I would need at least 20,000 images and that will take a while.
If Alamy could deliver at least comparable or better RPI than micro then it would be worth the time. But it doesn't look like that's happening.
It's just not the same animal and as such is difficult to draw a straight comparison to. What sells on Alamy wouldn't get past most Micro inspectors keen (place tongue in cheek here) eyes. And even if they did the sales volumes would be so low as to not be worth while.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Yep, same policy. All in or all out.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Yep, same policy. All in or all out.
At least you don't have to upsize now.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Yep, same policy. All in or all out.
At least you don't have to upsize now.
The upsize part is good to know but the reject one rejects all part I still don't like. I might start uploading there again. I do have tons of images that wouldn't make it on regular micro because of property release's/landmarks. Micorstock doesn't seem to understand the concept of flowing water from a waterfall and the silky look. They always say focus isn't where we feel it should be or poor focus. I'll upload those to Alamy.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Now they have something like "Partially past inspection", so if one of the images does have a problem the batch is accepted but the image has to be re-uploaded or ignored.
-
the last time (last week) i submit to Alamy, i guess it is still 1 failed and all batches failed.
when i checked out those sold images that post by alamy contributors in their forum thread, i found out that a lot of 'editorial' kind images can be like a 'snapshot', a sink with dirty dishes, a potholes on the road. It is quite different than what i thought a stock photo as. I had mentioned some links in my blog http://wp.me/pPDGb-2H (http://wp.me/pPDGb-2H) or u can just go alamy forum to check out what found alamy images that had been used.
It seems like alamy accept any kind of shots since their sales results showed that their customers bought all kind of images.
But dont get me wrong that i criticize those shots technically poor or suggesting we should submit that kind of photos to alamy. But they are shots that will reject in many agencies.
But those shots i refer are more 'editorial' and not using in advertising.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Now they have something like "Partially past inspection", so if one of the images does have a problem the batch is accepted but the image has to be re-uploaded or ignored.
That's for special cases, one I had was that somehow one image in a batch was slightly smaller than the minimum size. I got an auto message about this at upload, then the batch went throught and 'partially passed inspection'.
If one fails, all batches in your queue fail, and it takes a week to get notification. No change there.
Also if there's a technical problem with uploading one of your images, though then a week after submission someone goes in manually and sorts it and the others are QAd. Despite a lot of advice on the forums about what might be wrong with your image to make them fail at upload, all mine which have 'stuck' have gone through, without change, when resubmitted.
-
the last time (last week) i submit to Alamy, i guess it is still 1 failed and all batches failed.
when i checked out those sold images that post by alamy contributors in their forum thread, i found out that a lot of 'editorial' kind images can be like a 'snapshot', a sink with dirty dishes, a potholes on the road. It is quite different than what i thought a stock photo as. I had mentioned some links in my blog [url]http://wp.me/pPDGb-2H[/url] ([url]http://wp.me/pPDGb-2H[/url]) or u can just go alamy forum to check out what found alamy images that had been used.
It seems like alamy accept any kind of shots since their sales results showed that their customers bought all kind of images.
But dont get me wrong that i criticize those shots technically poor or suggesting we should submit that kind of photos to alamy. But they are shots that will reject in many agencies.
But those shots i refer are more 'editorial' and not using in advertising.
Also remember that iStock's images can't be 'real' because of possible copyright issues. e.g. if I took a photo of the pile of dishes I'll soon be washing up, even if I managed to get a tripod in front of the sink and control the lighting, reflections and hotspots, still iStock couldn't accept it because even my plain white dishes are probably recognisably M&S, not to mention all the other brands you'd find in there. For editorial use, that's not an issue.
-
I doubled my portfolio to around 500 and my sales have fallen this year. Sold 10 last year with around 250 images and only 3 so far this year. I would love to drop microstock and go with alamy but I would need at least 20,000 images and that will take a while.
If Alamy could deliver at least comparable or better RPI than micro then it would be worth the time. But it doesn't look like that's happening.
It's just not the same animal and as such is difficult to draw a straight comparison to. What sells on Alamy wouldn't get past most Micro inspectors keen (place tongue in cheek here) eyes. And even if they did the sales volumes would be so low as to not be worth while.
I agree. Some of those big portfolios have thousands of similars that would be rejected by the micros. It's a lot easier to build up a big portfolio on alamy, so comparing the RPI isn't worthwhile. I do think it would take more work to make a decent amount with alamy than the micros but alamy is just one site, so that's no surprise. I am going to build a portfolio with alamy to take away my dependence on sites like istock, so I don't have to put up with insulting commissions.
-
I doubled my portfolio to around 500 and my sales have fallen this year. Sold 10 last year with around 250 images and only 3 so far this year. I would love to drop microstock and go with alamy but I would need at least 20,000 images and that will take a while.
If Alamy could deliver at least comparable or better RPI than micro then it would be worth the time. But it doesn't look like that's happening.
It's just not the same animal and as such is difficult to draw a straight comparison to. What sells on Alamy wouldn't get past most Micro inspectors keen (place tongue in cheek here) eyes. And even if they did the sales volumes would be so low as to not be worth while.
I agree. Some of those big portfolios have thousands of similars that would be rejected by the micros. It's a lot easier to build up a big portfolio on alamy, so comparing the RPI isn't worthwhile. I do think it would take more work to make a decent amount with alamy than the micros but alamy is just one site, so that's no surprise. I am going to build a portfolio with alamy to take away my dependence on sites like istock, so I don't have to put up with insulting commissions.
Good point on the similars. Okay so what would happen if you cut out the similars? Or had the exact same images on your best earning micro site and also Alamy. What kind of results would Alamy get?
I really like Alamy but I haven't figured out what works there and haven't invested much time in it.
-
I don't think alamy will make as much for me as SS or istock but perhaps close to DT. They sell images that wont be accepted or aren't going to make much on the micros and there is always the chance of some big sales. I really don't like estimating how much I might make, I am going to build a bigger portfolio and find out.
-
I don't think alamy will make as much for me as SS or istock but perhaps close to DT. They sell images that wont be accepted or aren't going to make much on the micros and there is always the chance of some big sales. I really don't like estimating how much I might make, I am going to build a bigger portfolio and find out.
That's what I think I'm going to do. I mean what would happen? No sales? Well the way I look at it is your really not losing anything but your time because a lot of the photos that can be uploaded would be rejected by most micro's because of the copyright fears of microstock. That is pretty much the only place you can upload all those editorial like images that are sitting idle on your hard drive. I won't mix the micro with the macro though. I'm willing to spend the time it takes to upload those images I already have to see what will happen.
-
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Now they have something like "Partially past inspection", so if one of the images does have a problem the batch is accepted but the image has to be re-uploaded or ignored.
Kone: No They Don't!
Why does this erroneous claim keep making the rounds. Are you reading that self centered guru David K's claims? He's so full of himself he can't see past his own nose.
If you upload a file and the server fails, you can get a partial fail. If you upload and undersized image, you can get a partial fail.
If you have 1 photo or 7 batches of uploads, waiting for QC, and one photo fails, everything waiting will fail. It hasn't changed.
donding: One Fail all fail, and there's a reason.
Alamy is for adults and educated photographers. If you can't tell the difference between a good exposure, and a sharp image, they don't want to waste time, culling your uploads and holding your hand.
I think you are intelligent and observing enough to do self evaluation. They don't want to waste time with reviewers picking and choosing. They look at the batch, a general view, and then they examine selective images. If those look OK them the whole batch passes.
Why isn't anyone crying about that? You don't have long waits, generally 48 hours, because they don't look for tiny flaws at 200% like some micro sites that seem to get their rocks off rejecting images for the tiniest flaw, a reflection, a tidbit of some logo, or some other excuse to refuse an image.
Alamy does not QC for content! I'll repeat myself. If you have a well lighted shot of a brown rock on a brown sand beach, proper white balance... they will accept it! ;D What else can we ask for? A site that takes our images and shows them to customers and pays us 60%. Not a site that rejects most everything, and what they do take, they keep 80% and send us some spare change for being their slaves and donkeys.
-
Alamy does not QC for content! I'll repeat myself. If you have a well lighted shot of a brown rock on a brown sand beach, proper white balance... they will accept it! ;D What else can we ask for? A site that takes our images and shows them to customers and pays us 60%. Not a site that rejects most everything, and what they do take, they keep 80% and send us some spare change for being their slaves and donkeys.
You gotta good point there. I don't think I'd have problems with rejects like I did in the early days, I've learned a lot since then. My main rejects initially was with the upsizing. I always had trouble with that if there was any cropping done to my photos.
-
I doubled my portfolio to around 500 and my sales have fallen this year. Sold 10 last year with around 250 images and only 3 so far this year. I would love to drop microstock and go with alamy but I would need at least 20,000 images and that will take a while.
I submitted a couple dozen of mostly editorial images as a test and haven't sold anything.
I was just reading the latest sales results thread and was kinda surprised with the responses. Some of these people have 10,000 - 15,000 images and are getting $500 - $1,000 per month.
If Alamy could deliver at least comparable or better RPI than micro then it would be worth the time. But it doesn't look like that's happening.
Sorry to stick a pin in the bubble but the number you want is bottom line, how much do they send you in a check, per year. Statistics don't put food on table or pay the bills. RPI is a micro statistic and meaningless at Alamy.
The less photos you have, the more it will go up. PaulieWalnuts, you know how well you did with IS when you started. Very Well, and great shots to match that. Now you have doubled your portfolio and your RPI is dropping. It's just the way it goes. But you are still making a better Bottom Line income from IS than you did the first year.
Same for Alamy. It's not about how many images someone has, although that helps, it's about how many images that buyers want! :)
I just figured out that I'm working for about $100 - $150 an hour at the office. However I only work one hour a week. So it sucks. That's how RPI works too. It's am empty, fluffed up, pretty number, without any economic value or meaning. Bottom Line!
I keep selling things on Alamy that I toss up as extras. The ones I put up as the meat and potatoes, aren't selling. Says something about my business plan and target market? Or lack of foresight and understanding the demand! I guess I need to shoot more CrapStock and less interesting Editorial. I know what a major part of the problem is. I'm shooting things that the Alamy buyers don't want to need.
Alamy sells different content to a different market, so don't expect micro style or a micro type of shot, to bring in bigger money on Alamy than it does as volume sales on micro. Two different demands. Someone pointed out that the majority of Alamy sales appear to be in the UK. I believe that's still true and maybe 80% of their market? They have a US office, and have opened other sales efforts in other parts of the world, but I think it's still associated with the UK. Not much help for a guy from Chicago or Milwaukee, finding European content that's in demand. ;)
-
The demand for images from the UK worries me. I never did good with Fotolia and I think that was a lot of the problem...UK images. Maybe I'm wrong but as for US I think you gotta have something that is in demand that is of US origin. Is there a way to determine how many downloads a photo gets on Alamy? I know I have photos of things that are found on Alamy, but in short supply. I'd like to be able to look at the download demand for that type of image to see if it's really worth the effort to edit these images.
-
The demand for images from the UK worries me. I never did good with Fotolia and I think that was a lot of the problem...UK images. Maybe I'm wrong but as for US I think you gotta have something that is in demand that is of US origin. Is there a way to determine how many downloads a photo gets on Alamy? I know I have photos of things that are found on Alamy, but in short supply. I'd like to be able to look at the download demand for that type of image to see if it's really worth the effort to edit these images.
Nope, you've only got that 'All of Alamy' thing, FWIW, which only registers their selected 'big buyers' (almost certainly most/all from the UK), and generally doesn't indicate sales from searches. Also, if you want to know if someone searched on e.g. New York shopping, you'll get a different result (six searches in past year) than if you type shopping New York (16).
However, they cut contributers' percentages specifically to establish a US base, and made a request a few months back for US content, so I guess it depends how much marketing they do. Which is a question I've always wondered about.
-
Look in "My Alamy" and go to Alamy Measures and click "All of Alamy". There you will see what people are looking for. Click on the Sales Column and that will show you how many sales for a certain Search. Thats one way of checking out what sells.
You can also go into the forums and look for Threads about Found Images to get an idea of types of images that are being use.. and by who.
I see a lot of usage by UK Guardian.. I think an Online News outlet.
-
Race . . You are right, I had a "Partially Failed" but it had to do with an Error with the Upload.
-
Partially failed inspection:
But they do, it has happened to me . . . but only once.
Since the size of your partially failed jpg is 114Kb, it was clearly far too small for Alamy and auto-rejected at upload, as has been explained above at least twice.
-
Partially failed inspection:
But they do, it has happened to me . . . but only once.
Since the size of your partially failed jpg is 114Kb, it was clearly far too small for Alamy and auto-rejected at upload, as has been explained above at least twice.
Right, right . . . I stand corrected.
-
Look in "My Alamy" and go to Alamy Measures and click "All of Alamy". There you will see what people are looking for. Click on the Sales Column and that will show you how many sales for a certain Search. Thats one way of checking out what sells.
You can also go into the forums and look for Threads about Found Images to get an idea of types of images that are being use.. and by who.
I see a lot of usage by UK Guardian.. I think an Online News outlet.
That helps a lot. It gives an idea what the keywords they use to find what they are looking for. I'm going to study that more and try to see what the treads are. I can't help with the UK, but the US I can. We'll see if it works.
-
I submitted a couple dozen of mostly editorial images as a test and haven't sold anything. I was just reading the latest sales results thread and was kinda surprised with the responses. Some of these people have 10,000 - 15,000 images and are getting $500 - $1,000 per month. If Alamy could deliver at least comparable or better RPI than micro then it would be worth the time. But it doesn't look like that's happening.
Sorry to stick a pin in the bubble but the number you want is bottom line, how much do they send you in a check, per year. Statistics don't put food on table or pay the bills. RPI is a micro statistic and meaningless at Alamy.
The less photos you have, the more it will go up. PaulieWalnuts, you know how well you did with IS when you started. Very Well, and great shots to match that. Now you have doubled your portfolio and your RPI is dropping. It's just the way it goes. But you are still making a better Bottom Line income from IS than you did the first year. <snip...>
Bottom line obviously is important. But RPI does mean something - how much return am I getting for the time I invest. Having a bottom line of a few thousand dollars per month would be nice. But if it takes 50,000 images to get it (RPI), not worth the effort. A few thousand images in micro could give me the same bottom line. I'm planning to diversify but I haven't figured out where Alamy would fit in that plan.
My RPI has actually steadily been going up so that's not a concern today. Diversifying through other non-micro/RF channels is the goal.
-
Kone: No They Don't!
Why does this erroneous claim keep making the rounds. Are you reading that self centered guru David K's claims? He's so full of himself he can't see past his own nose.
If you upload a file and the server fails, you can get a partial fail. If you upload and undersized image, you can get a partial fail.
If you have 1 photo or 7 batches of uploads, waiting for QC, and one photo fails, everything waiting will fail. It hasn't changed.
donding: One Fail all fail, and there's a reason.
Okay, you might be right, but this is my experience (I had couple times "partially passed inspection"). I don't understand why would one upload a smaller size of image if know what size is required. My acceptance is almost 100% so maybe I am not right person to comment on this.
-
Race . . You are right, I had a "Partially Failed" but it had to do with an Error with the Upload.
Maybe it would be easier if I explained what I see there.
You can get a processing error, which would be something on the server or upload, where the file isn't transferred correctly. It's not really a rejection.
You can get an automatic, for file size, which also doesn't blow the whole batch or anything else.
OR
The dreaded QC rejection which still means one fail all fail. >:(
"Failed QC
The Image has been scrutinised by our QC team but has failed quality control. An asterisk (*) next to an image when viewing your submissions will indicate the reasons for the failure. Please note as we do not look at all images we will reject all images in a submission if we find recurring problems."
Although someone did claim that one bad scan was rejected and the rest went through. So maybe they have a policy for "processing screw-up" and people can get a pass for that? WHo knows...
But in general, I wouldn't expect a batch to pass with a failed image in it.
-
The dreaded QC rejection which still means one fail all fail. >:(
I guess the best way to handle that if you have a iffy one is to upload it like you do with iStock...15 a week. That is if their approval time is a week. I don't know because it's been a long time since I uploaded anything there. After looking at some of the shots in category I was looking at, those shots are much worse than I have so I doubt I'd have a problem.
-
The dreaded QC rejection which still means one fail all fail. >:(
I would think that if you have been submitting to micro for a while and have an idea of what QC errors get you rejected from micro then it should be a breeze getting through Alamy QC. Micro is by far and away the most nit picky of them all.
-
My review times are 24 to 36 hours. Unless you put something in on Friday... then you wait all weekend like I am doing now. ;D
I do consider the Micros more stringent on reviews than Alamy.
-
My review times are 24 to 36 hours. Unless you put something in on Friday... then you wait all weekend like I am doing now. ;D
I do consider the Micros more stringent on reviews than Alamy.
That's a better review time than most of the micro's!!
I agree the Micro's are picker. The old photos I uploaded there in 2007 are the worst I've seen.. :D
-
I have roughly around 2000 images with Alamy, 1700 or so RF, all the same RF images I submit to microstock. And before you bash me for sending Alamy the same stuff that's on the micros, Alamy has publicly said that they accept micro images, just as long as they are RF. My Alamy earnings: In 2009 I earned a total of $1600, in 2008 $1800, 2007 $2600. So that isn't as much as I earn from IS or SS or Fotolia, but for me it's on par with Dreamsime, and much better than Big, or Can , or 123. So I just think of Alamy like another micro, with the benefit of sending them the occasional RM, and not having to worry about any editing on their part. There is always the possibility of getting a real big payoff with Alamy, rare but it does happen, and it's no more time consuming than most micros. Now there is no upsizing so that even saves more time. Win win in my book.
-David
-
I have roughly around 2000 images with Alamy, 1700 or so RF, all the same RF images I submit to microstock. And before you bash me for sending Alamy the same stuff that's on the micros, Alamy has publicly said that they accept micro images, just as long as they are RF. My Alamy earnings: In 2009 I earned a total of $1600, in 2008 $1800, 2007 $2600. So that isn't as much as I earn from IS or SS or Fotolia, but for me it's on par with Dreamsime, and much better than Big, or Can , or 123. So I just think of Alamy like another micro, with the benefit of sending them the occasional RM, and not having to worry about any editing on their part. There is always the possibility of getting a real big payoff with Alamy, rare but it does happen, and it's no more time consuming than most micros. Now there is no upsizing so that even saves more time. Win win in my book.
-David
Agree 100% with all of the above.
I is notable, though, that the earnings are going down rather than up. Is that because you are getting fewer sales there, or because the average price per sale is dropping?
In my case, the price per sale has dropped significantly over the past year (even without counting Novel Use) and I'm just wondering if it's the same with others.
-
Since they did away with the upsizing policy and accept microstock as RF maybe next they will reduce the payout to $100 rather than $200..... ;D
I know it's probably wishful thinking. I've started uploaded to them again and we'll see how that goes. I can upload so much more with Alamy than I can with the microstock because of their copyright policies.
-
I is notable, though, that the earnings are going down rather than up. Is that because you are getting fewer sales there, or because the average price per sale is dropping?
Both
Also, a few years ago they changed their system of key wording and I never took the time to go through my images and fix them so I believe since then, my images have never ranked very high in Alamy searches. I just recently went through all 2000 of my images, and re-keworded them to fit their hierarchical system, and also removed duplicated keywords (i used to be very sloppy at keywording) so now hopefully my images will rank higher and I'll get more sales. Or maybe i just wasted a whole bunch of time. We'll see.
-David
-
Since they did away with the upsizing policy and accept microstock as RF maybe next they will reduce the payout to $100 rather than $200..... ;D
Isn't it $250?
-
Yes, payout threshold is $250 at Alamy.
-
Since they did away with the upsizing policy and accept microstock as RF maybe next they will reduce the payout to $100 rather than $200..... ;D
Isn't it $250?
SHOOT!!! Well then maybe they will reduce it to $200.00... ;)
I just hope I'm not wasting my time uploading all these pics.
-
I is notable, though, that the earnings are going down rather than up. Is that because you are getting fewer sales there, or because the average price per sale is dropping?
Both
Also, a few years ago they changed their system of key wording and I never took the time to go through my images and fix them so I believe since then, my images have never ranked very high in Alamy searches. I just recently went through all 2000 of my images, and re-keworded them to fit their hierarchical system, and also removed duplicated keywords (i used to be very sloppy at keywording) so now hopefully my images will rank higher and I'll get more sales. Or maybe i just wasted a whole bunch of time. We'll see.
-David
Perhaps some buyers have been put off by all the microstock images on the site? I'm not having a dig at people uploading them there, I have started doing it myself. They have clearly stated that they have no concern where else we sell our RF images. I just can't believe alamy haven't separated them from their main collection. Some buyers just don't like microstock, the same way some contributors don't. When they find out they have been buying microstock images on alamy, I wonder how they react?
-
When they find out they have been buying microstock images on alamy, I wonder how they react?
As it's the license they're buying and not the image it's their own fault if they react badly for buying something they don't need.
If I need turf for my lawn and buy 500 rolls from a bulk supplier only to find out that the shop down the road sells them in individual rolls and I could have just bought the 20 that I needed it's my own stupid fault, not that of the bulk supplier or the guy that grew the grass.
-
...In my case, the price per sale has dropped significantly over the past year (even without counting Novel Use) and I'm just wondering if it's the same with others.
On the last three RF sales I had I received a tenth of what the list price/commission was :o
Large resolution but micro pay. :-\
-
Got the latest upload through, but has anyone had a problem with the new "Manage Your Images" not showing the description? I also noticed they all come through as royalty free through this way and no way to change them to RM. I finally went to the Old version and the description showed up there and had the option to change to RM. Is this the way the new one is or am I doing it wrong?
-
Had a few pass last night. No problem with any part of Manager. These were RF shots anyways but I could change it if I wanted in Manager. Dont know what is happening with yours.
-
Had a few pass last night. No problem with any part of Manager. These were RF shots anyways but I could change it if I wanted in Manager. Dont know what is happening with yours.
I don't know either. I was a bit surprised when the description wasn't there. All the keywords were of course in the third keyword space as always but no description and royalty free as default. And you can't change that after it's saved. I'll just stick with the old manager. I just wish they would just put all the keywords in one place rather than having to move them all around.
-
Got the latest upload through, but has anyone had a problem with the new "Manage Your Images" not showing the description? I also noticed they all come through as royalty free through this way and no way to change them to RM. I finally went to the Old version and the description showed up there and had the option to change to RM. Is this the way the new one is or am I doing it wrong?
Not sure if this is at all relevant, in "Manage Your Images" you can set the Default Pseudonym and type of License. So I set mine to my main pseudonym and license type, and start from there when getting images ready.
-
Got the latest upload through, but has anyone had a problem with the new "Manage Your Images" not showing the description? I also noticed they all come through as royalty free through this way and no way to change them to RM. I finally went to the Old version and the description showed up there and had the option to change to RM. Is this the way the new one is or am I doing it wrong?
Not sure if this is at all relevant, in "Manage Your Images" you can set the Default Pseudonym and type of License. So I set mine to my main pseudonym and license type, and start from there when getting images ready.
Thanks Ann, but I noticed that when I went back to that area to assign releases so I changed it to no license type assigned. I'll see how that works out. I noticed also that there are more than one tab and the additional information you can put in like what is in the old "manage images" section is there. Call me stupid I guess..... ;D I still think I like the old way better because it's all right there in front of you.
-
sounds like that should work fine, dongding.
I don't remember the old version of managing images - partly because I didn't start submitting more than 1.5 images :D a month until a few months ago.
-
sounds like that should work fine, dongding.
I don't remember the old version of managing images - partly because I didn't start submitting more than 1.5 images :D a month until a few months ago.
There should be two choices on your "My Alamy" page. There's the Manage Images (old version) and Manage Images V2.4. Both of them still show up on my main page. It still won't show my descriptions, just the keywords. It takes me forever to redo everything. I have tons of stuff that wouldn't work with micro I'm uploading there. Hope it's worth all the trouble. Have you had any luck with them? I've only sold a few long ago but nothing recent.
-
sounds like that should work fine, dongding.
I don't remember the old version of managing images - partly because I didn't start submitting more than 1.5 images :D a month until a few months ago.
There should be two choices on your "My Alamy" page. There's the Manage Images (old version) and Manage Images V2.4. Both of them still show up on my main page. It still won't show my descriptions, just the keywords. It takes me forever to redo everything. I have tons of stuff that wouldn't work with micro I'm uploading there. Hope it's worth all the trouble. Have you had any luck with them? I've only sold a few long ago but nothing recent.
You mean you can't see the tab that says Description, right next to keywords, when you are in the editor? That's strange. Here's a screen snapshot. See the restrictions and attributes part for license type? Of course it's easy for me, I hit no model release for the Editorial images and zing, it's marked RM. :D
Description is not searched anymore.
(http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/4527/alamyedit.jpg)
ps Misguided attempt to accent the red background and add some flare to the food. It is distracting and ruins the shots. Oh well, live and learn! :D Rejected at IS and SS for "color balance". LOL
-
When they find out they have been buying microstock images on alamy, I wonder how they react?
As it's the license they're buying and not the image it's their own fault if they react badly for buying something they don't need.
If I need turf for my lawn and buy 500 rolls from a bulk supplier only to find out that the shop down the road sells them in individual rolls and I could have just bought the 20 that I needed it's my own stupid fault, not that of the bulk supplier or the guy that grew the grass.
Not quite the same.
You buy a battery for your camera from a local shop and it's $59. Then you find the identical battery, same maker, for $3 on eBay. Do you just say, "oh well, I'm stupid" or say, "I'll never go to that store that rips me off." ?
A tradesman says he'll paint your door for only $100. The next week you find out he painted you neighbors door for $5, do you hire him again?
Of course if you are one of the idle rich with millions in the bank and you live off the interest, you may not care. The rest of us look for a fair and consistent price and value.
-
When they find out they have been buying microstock images on alamy, I wonder how they react?
As it's the license they're buying and not the image it's their own fault if they react badly for buying something they don't need.
If I need turf for my lawn and buy 500 rolls from a bulk supplier only to find out that the shop down the road sells them in individual rolls and I could have just bought the 20 that I needed it's my own stupid fault, not that of the bulk supplier or the guy that grew the grass.
Not quite the same.
You buy a battery for your camera from a local shop and it's $59. Then you find the identical battery, same maker, for $3 on eBay. Do you just say, "oh well, I'm stupid" or say, "I'll never go to that store that rips me off." ?
A tradesman says he'll paint your door for only $100. The next week you find out he painted you neighbors door for $5, do you hire him again?
Of course if you are one of the idle rich with millions in the bank and you live off the interest, you may not care. The rest of us look for a fair and consistent price and value.
Your examples don't compare.
In your scenario the battery is the same identical battery with the exact same usage from both shops, whichever shop you purchase from you get the same thing. The tradesman is providing a service not a product so that's not even worth discussing.
The basic RF license you purchase from Alamy is not the same basic license that you purchase from microstock, it's the equivalent of a microstock extended license.
Maybe this scenario would help.
Two hire companies, exactly the same car. One company hires it out for a minimum of 7 day rental period at $500 and the other by the day at $100. A customer gets the car from the first company, he only needs the car for two days - he's paid $300 more for the purpose he required it for than if he went to the second company. His fault not the hire companies or the car manufacturer - Same product different contract (i.e. license)
To understand this you and others need to completely remove the fact that the product is an image, we do not sell images we sell licenses to use an image. And in answer to people who ask why Alamy allow microstock images and don't separate them it's because (obviously) they understand this.
Edit - This might help understand it more. On iStock you can get an XL image for 20 credits but you can also get the exact same image in the exact same size for 145 credits. The image that the buyer downloads is identical but in one instance they're paying 125 credits more. Why is that?
-
Description is not searched anymore.
I've since found the tab for description, call me stupid. I was just use to the old version where everything is right in front of you. I changed the default license type to none so I don't make the mistake of letting some through as RF when I want them as RM. I know the No model release ones and No property release ones automatically go to RM, but there are some I want as RM which I have a model release for.
As for the description are you saying I don't need to put in the description because it's not searched anymore? Why do they still have it?
-
When you zoom on an image, the description (at bottom) could be particularly important for editorial photos. When title tells the whole story, I've seen same info in description field.
-
To understand this you and others need to completely remove the fact that the product is an image, we do not sell images we sell licenses to use an image. And in answer to people who ask why Alamy allow microstock images and don't separate them it's because (obviously) they understand this.
Edit - This might help understand it more. On iStock you can get an XL image for 20 credits but you can also get the exact same image in the exact same size for 145 credits. The image that the buyer downloads is identical but in one instance they're paying 125 credits more. Why is that?
Excellent explanation Richard. This should lay the issue to rest. But it won't, unfortunately. This issue keeps cropping up and the misunderstandings persist in spite of every effort to explain.
Suffice it to say I will keep licensing my images - micro and otherwise - on Alamy until they tell me I can't. And that won't happen because they are making too much money on portfolios from micro producers.
-
To understand this you and others need to completely remove the fact that the product is an image, we do not sell images we sell licenses to use an image. And in answer to people who ask why Alamy allow microstock images and don't separate them it's because (obviously) they understand this.
Edit - This might help understand it more. On iStock you can get an XL image for 20 credits but you can also get the exact same image in the exact same size for 145 credits. The image that the buyer downloads is identical but in one instance they're paying 125 credits more. Why is that?
Excellent explanation Richard. This should lay the issue to rest. But it won't, unfortunately. This issue keeps cropping up and the misunderstandings persist in spite of every effort to explain.
Suffice it to say I will keep licensing my images - micro and otherwise - on Alamy until they tell me I can't. And that won't happen because they are making too much money on portfolios from micro producers.
People can license whatever they want, wherever they want. The original point is that the buyer is getting the same image for $200 at one place that they can download at another for $5. If someone wants to compete with themselves and waste time by uploading to Alamy, when the same product is for sale on 20 other sites for much less, that's their choice.
Considering all the smoke screen, that the license is slightly different. Lets not be so rude to assume that buyers live in a vacuum and are so stupid that they can't use a search or figure out that for $5 they can get the same image for most uses, for $195 less! If you go out to buy toilet paper, cookies, gas for your car or lunch meat (to just come up with some common consumables) You probably pay attention to prices. If you see the same package of meat from the same company at one grocery store for $3.98 and the next store for $5.98, you are going to tell me, you don't feel like store #2 is trying to stick it too you! ;D
I look at an image much like a bottle of Coke. It's the same no matter which store you get it from. It's identical, except for the price. Let me guess, people here who buy Coke products don't go to the Quick-Mart or a gas station that charges the highest prices for their regular supply, they watch for sales or buy at a store that has lower prices all the time. We SHOP.
The image that someone downloads and uses is identical from both sources. Throwing the the size is a red herring. The end use is the same or they wouldn't be looking in both places, one could be eliminated because of the license. But then we aren't comparing the identical image and license anymore, are we, if the use and size varies?
This might help understand it more. On iStock you can get an XL image for 20 credits but you can also get the exact same image in the exact same size for 145 credits. The image that the buyer downloads is identical but in one instance they're paying 125 credits more. Why is that?
No accounting for stupidity, but I wouldn't base my sales and income on a regular flow of the same. :D If it's the same image for the same use, that's the only explanation. If it's for a different use, it's in effect, not the same image anymore! Apples to apples, same size, same use, same license, and tell me again why licensing from Alamy for 40 times the Micro price isn't an insult to the buyer?
-
Edit - This might help understand it more. On iStock you can get an XL image for 20 credits but you can also get the exact same image in the exact same size for 145 credits. The image that the buyer downloads is identical but in one instance they're paying 125 credits more. Why is that?
I don't understand at all. Can you give some concrete examples where the "exact same image" on iStock is sold for 20 and 125 credits for the same size?
-
Edit - This might help understand it more. On iStock you can get an XL image for 20 credits but you can also get the exact same image in the exact same size for 145 credits. The image that the buyer downloads is identical but in one instance they're paying 125 credits more. Why is that?
I don't understand at all. Can you give some concrete examples where the "exact same image" on iStock is sold for 20 and 125 credits for the same size?
I would assume Richard is referring to the fact that you can buy the exact same picture (i.e. even the same size, so the picture is really the same) as standard RF license and extended license. You get the same image but different license for its usage. That clearly shows that you are in fact licensing an image, not buying an image.
-
The original point is that the buyer is getting the same image for $200 at one place that they can download at another for $5. If someone wants to compete with themselves and waste time by uploading to Alamy, when the same product is for sale on 20 other sites for much less, that's their choice.
They get the same image but they DO NOT get the same product, the product we sell is the license not the image.
As an independent you've got the exact same images on one microstock site as another but at different prices, and the buyers don't get anything extra, I don't see people making a song and dance about that.
I would assume Richard is referring to the fact that you can buy the exact same picture (i.e. even the same size, so the picture is really the same) as standard RF license and extended license. You get the same image but different license for its usage. That clearly shows that you are in fact licensing an image, not buying an image.
Exactly 'Danicek'
To add, I really don't care where anybody sells their images but I'm surprise at the amount of people who don't understand how stock agencies operate.
-
I don't understand at all. Can you give some concrete examples where the "exact same image" on iStock is sold for 20 and 125 credits for the same size?
I don't need to give concrete examples, every image in your portfolio is for sale like this.
-
I don't understand at all. Can you give some concrete examples where the "exact same image" on iStock is sold for 20 and 125 credits for the same size?
I don't need to give concrete examples, every image in your portfolio is for sale like this.
Oh, right; you're talking about regular license and extended license. You need to be more precise when talking to those of us who can't second-guess.
-
People can license whatever they want, wherever they want. The original point is that the buyer is getting the same image for $200 at one place that they can download at another for $5. If someone wants to compete with themselves and waste time by uploading to Alamy, when the same product is for sale on 20 other sites for much less, that's their choice.
Sorry Pete, but this is just complete BS. My gross (not net royalties) sales at alamy so far this month are:
27.08
27.08
130.00
130.00
38.74
29.00
0.83
As you can see, out of seven sales, all but two of them are at prices comparable to what you would pay on the micros. The argument that the prices at Alamy are so wildly different than the micros was legitimate five years ago, but these days it just doesn't hold water.
I don't know why we have to go over and over the same arguments ad nauseum on this forum. You don't think those of us who sell micro images on Alamy are doing the right thing. Fine. Duly noted.
I don't think it is right to sell images on Thinkstock, but I figure it's your business and so I don't continuously bring it up.
-
About licenses, I recently purchased images at DT and I didn't have to click on any "I agree" terms of usage (unless I did it so automatically that I didn't registered having done that in any of the three times). So do people really know what they're paying for in any site? I remember Elena from FP saying some people think they are purchasing a merchandise, not a digital file.
-
I don't understand at all. Can you give some concrete examples where the "exact same image" on iStock is sold for 20 and 125 credits for the same size?
I don't need to give concrete examples, every image in your portfolio is for sale like this.
Oh, right; you're talking about regular license and extended license. You need to be more precise when talking to those of us who can't second-guess.
Sorry I wouldn't want you to have to read anything through, but as I was discussing the fact that we sell licenses and not images I presumed it was blatently obvious what I was referring to.
-
I don't know why we have to go over and over the same arguments ad nauseum on this forum. You don't think those of us who sell micro images on Alamy are doing the right thing. Fine. Duly noted.
At times like this I think of the line in City Slickers where Mitch is trying to explain how to set the video so you can record one channel whilst watching another, "He doesn't get it, he'll never get it, even the cows know how to set the video now" :D
-
...I don't think it is right to sell images on Thinkstock, but I figure it's your business and so I don't continuously bring it up.
No, that's what I do :)
-
[....]
At times like this I think of the line in City Slickers where Mitch is trying to explain how to set the video so you can record one channel whilst watching another, "He doesn't get it, he'll never get it, even the cows know how to set the video now" :D
Video on VCR, right? Why, even my cats don't remember how to work that anymore. ;)
-
People can license whatever they want, wherever they want. The original point is that the buyer is getting the same image for $200 at one place that they can download at another for $5. If someone wants to compete with themselves and waste time by uploading to Alamy, when the same product is for sale on 20 other sites for much less, that's their choice.
Sorry Pete, but this is just complete BS. My gross (not net royalties) sales at alamy so far this month are:
27.08
27.08
130.00
130.00
38.74
29.00
0.83
As you can see, out of seven sales, all but two of them are at prices comparable to what you would pay on the micros. The argument that the prices at Alamy are so wildly different than the micros was legitimate five years ago, but these days it just doesn't hold water.
I don't know why we have to go over and over the same arguments ad nauseum on this forum. You don't think those of us who sell micro images on Alamy are doing the right thing. Fine. Duly noted.
I don't think it is right to sell images on Thinkstock, but I figure it's your business and so I don't continuously bring it up.
Sure, because you have the same images on Micro! (take a deep breath, that's 100% humor) :D
What I was trying to get to, is yes, licenses may vary and the price can vary according to license, but if someone is going to say something sells at X for one price and Y for another price, it's important that it's the same size, same license, identical in all respects. Otherwise, there's no way to compare. Diving off into, how images are licensed and sizes is true, but it evades the point of comparing identical sales and images.
The pictures on Thinkstock came from StockXpert. IS and SS were smart enough to refuse them. So what's happening is I'm getting 25c for a download instead of having the photos sitting on my hard drive earning nothing. Hey that sounds like the microstock pitch? ;) Some of the IS images were already on StockXpert so I've already shot myself with those being out in the wild on ThinkStock subscription. Too late. You want sad? I make more on ThinkStock with the junk and old cast-offs than I do on BigStock. BigStock earns four to six times more, when I get a sale, but last month I sold nothing! Which place put more into the account?
Easy enough for me, RM on Alamy, RF on IS and SS. Now and then a large RF might go on Alamy, but I'm beginning to think that was a bad decision as well. They should all be RM no matter if it's a flower, bug or Editorial. I'm getting kind of tired of RF and cheap prices. Wish I could change all my images on Alamy to RM, except the one RF that sold, because it's too late for that one.
I don't have as many good stock shots as the majority of people here, especially you or Lisa, or the other serious micro shooters. (no shots with models at all!) On SS we all know, it's 25c, ThinkStock 25c, IS I'm still averaging around $1.50 a download. Alamy less volume, but bottom line is more dollars, averaging commission of $80 per image. 2009 Alamy produced more income on a small number of sales, than all the micro sites that I was with, added together. So I'm going where the money is. Dropped all the micros except IS and Partner, SS and "partner", when BigStock reaches $50 I'm done. StockXpert has had their chance, time to pull the plug on that. I can't get excited about $3-4 a month selling CrapStock on ThinkStock that came from StockXpert.
We're still in the same place. Some do well with a shotgun, selling everything, on every site they can get it on, working for small change and often not even annual payouts. Others find that specific targets and smaller numbers of distributors works better. I'd rather sit for nothing than work for nothing. :)
If I was buying photos, I'd look for the cheapest place that offered what I needed, and if people want to put their hard work up on Micro fro 25 cents to $1.50 that's fine. I'd take anything that you got from Alamy (maybe not the 83 center?) over the usual cheap micro payments.
And even though I'm against this because the question needs to be "percentage of what" What's the percentage paid at Alamy vs the percentage paid from a Micro site? When IS goes down to 15-20% for me, it will still be earning more than the rest of the micro sites, per download and bottom line. Alamy can be 50% which is nice, and they aren't trying to lower commissions or wring out every cent they can take from us. What's the percentage on SS? And that hypothetical image that could sell for 25 credits or 125 credits, how much is a credit worth in real money? Credits, canisters, vetta, partners, lower commissions, and all the rest, it's starting to sound like some kind of flim flam.
-
And if the original question got lost in the endless debate. (I plead guilty)
Yes Alamy has lowered prices in many instances. They also lowered the commissions 5% last year to finance the USA office.
They are coming down to meet Micro and offering UK newspapers sweetheart deals.
It hasn't hit me, but probably people with more micro style images are getting more micro-like prices? I doubt if the PRI will ever be the same as Micro. I doubt if McDonalds makes as much on each $1 McDouble sale as a sit down restaurant selling a $9 burger. But the profit can be the same, after costs are deducted, or figuring on volume.
I don't think RPI is a valid way to measure income. People should ideally have the same number of photos/images and see how much they make bottom line. That's what counts. Unfortunately having identical numbers of the same images on all sites, just doesn't happen.
You can't buy dinner with RPI! :D (or percentages) Just earnings
Want a really much better looking RPI? Delete all the non-selling images from a micro site. Hey that's odd, now the RPI just went up like a rocket, but the earnings remain unchanged. RPI only works comparing Micro to micro!
-
...On SS we all know, it's 25c...
No, it's $0.38, if you put in a small amount of work. And they charge about the same as thinkstock and have to pay more reviewers. I still think that if it wasn't for thinkstock, SS and others would of raised commissions by now, so we are probably losing more money because of them. All people are doing by using them is showing that they don't mind how low a site sets commissions. Don't you think the other sites will see that as an excuse to give us a worse deal in the future?
-
...On SS we all know, it's 25c...
No, it's $0.38, if you put in a small amount of work. And they charge about the same as thinkstock and have to pay more reviewers. I still think that if it wasn't for thinkstock, SS and others would of raised commissions by now, so we are probably losing more money because of them. All people are doing by using them is showing that they don't mind how low a site sets commissions. Don't you think the other sites will see that as an excuse to give us a worse deal in the future?
I agree 100%. I also think that Thinkstock sells a lot of bad stuff too, hopefully they keep doing that....
On the subject of Alamy. I'm having a good month at Alamy sold 4 so far all $100 +.
-
Does anyone know where Alamy advertise or market?
-
...On SS we all know, it's 25c...
No, it's $0.38, if you put in a small amount of work. And they charge about the same as thinkstock and have to pay more reviewers. I still think that if it wasn't for thinkstock, SS and others would of raised commissions by now, so we are probably losing more money because of them. All people are doing by using them is showing that they don't mind how low a site sets commissions. Don't you think the other sites will see that as an excuse to give us a worse deal in the future?
Sorry but it's 25c because that's what it is. Not everyone has $500 worth of sales. I think there was a poll last year and many people haven't reached the 38 level yet. So stop basing your "facts" on creative opinion. Just because you are doing well and have good returns, don't assume that everyone else does.
The company pays photographers 25 cents for each image that a customer downloads. Beginning May 1, (2007) founder and Chief Executive Jon Oringer announced Monday, anyone who sells more than $500 worth of images will get 20 percent more per image--30 cents.
And this: The base commission for a subscription is 25 cents. Once you make 500 dollars, your commission will be raised to 33 cents per download. The next raise is obtained when you reach 3000 dollars, bringing your commission to 36 cents. The last raise brings earnings to 38 cents per download, once your lifetime earnings reach 10 000 dollars.
Do you know how many people have $10,000 in downloads on SS? Because that's what it takes to make your claimed 38c "if you put in a small amount of work"
Want a number? 2000 downloads to get to 33 cents. 7575 more downloads to get to 36 cents. And another 19,444 downloads after that to make 38 cents. Come on, how many people have 30,000 downloads on SS? You really believe it's "if you put in a small amount of work"?
March 2010 here:
Question: What Level of pay do you get for a 25-A-Day As of March 1st 2010 (Voting closed: April 01, 2010, 18:28)
25 cents (under $500 Level) - 34 (22.8%)
33 cents (up to $3000 level) - 43 (28.9%)
36 cents (3-10,000 level) - 32 (21.5%)
38 cents (over $10,000 in sales) - 34 (22.8%)
I don't submit on ShutterStock - 6 (4%)
Total Voters: 149
73% do not make 38c a download = "if you put in a small amount of work"
If it wasn't for all the price cutting new sites, offering the lowest subscription rates possible, and people who upload everything they have, every time a new place comes around promising sales, maybe we'd be getting a raise from the stable outlets. Keep supporting dilution and low prices, but you rail on ThinkStock for selling at the same rates, to customers, as SS, DP and the rest? Not that I'm a fan of ThinkStock, but when they are selling at the same price, they aren't causing a market drop. They may be screwing us with low commissions, but they are pricing at comparable levels as the rest. Not like some other new place that is undercutting the market, giving away free photos to make it look like they have buyers, and offering people 25c an upload to get suckers to join them.
So it's OK to be a whore for a quarter on one site, and give them your portfolio for an extended period, but it's not OK to sell out for 25c a download at some other site, that's hosting old, stale, small files? Someone still needs to explain that to me?
I wish I knew what this has to do with Alamy earnings?
Aw, never mind I found you... Nice collection: very cool, over 4000 images.
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-68500p1.html (http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-68500p1.html)
Darn nice, IS is even better!
http://tinyurl.com/37a5nhc (http://tinyurl.com/37a5nhc)
-
^^^Perhaps $0.38 takes a bit of work but I think anyone should be able to get $500 of sales if they want to. It might take a bit of time for those that can't spend many hours a week doing this but at least it's there for anyone that wants it. And they do sell more than $0.25 subs, there's PPD and EL's, so your numbers are all wrong.
-
^^^Perhaps $0.38 takes a bit of work but I think anyone should be able to get $500 of sales if they want to. It might take a bit of time for those that can't spend many hours a week doing this but at least it's there for anyone that wants it. And they do sell more than $0.25 subs, there's PPD and EL's, so your numbers are all wrong.
lol I agree with the characterization that someone who works at it can make more images, and thus more money. My efforts are towards Editorial RM on Alamy, that's where this thread started. My first full year at Alamy I decided to have 1000 images on sale. Got them in for review by the deadline. This year I decided that I would go for quality over quantity, limiting myself to best shots instead of a collection of redundant OK shots.
When I have something small or I'm playing with some technique, or have an idea, then it's likely to go to micro. That doesn't mean it's suitable for micro or a good seller. I could have a thousand CrapStock" shots on Micro and why? I don't shoot models, I don't shoot marketable concepts or pictures that tell a story, and that's what goo micro does. ELs have dried up this year. Maybe the buyers are wise to my game?
You have 4000 on SS and 10 on Alamy. I have 1400 on Alamy and 200 something on SS or IS. Of course we'll have different results. We are going in different directions.
Ever go fishing? Use a small bait, you'll catch many small fish. Use a large bait, and you might not catch anything at all for days or weeks... but if you do, it's going to be a big one! :D
One sale at Alamy equals one year on SS for me. I hope that explains why I work harder at Alamy than plugging away for quarters like a donkey with a carrot dangling in front of my nose. 30,000 sales to earn the 38 cents a download level? It seems a little far out to me. And some days I don't think that working for hours to get 38c a download is a good use of my time. But that's just me. The successful micro shooters have worked long and hard to build up their income levels into a steady flow of sales.
I have a day job. Six months out of the year I work weekends too. Some other weekends I'm shooting events editorial, some I'm shooting on contract for an agent or club. Micro is fifth on the list for me. For some people it's first. :D You are correct, I don't have a great amount of time for Micro and I don't put a great amount of effort into it. Ten micro shots in a good month is about the limit.
10-11 hour days, on a race weekend, is about average and it takes a heck of a lot of time to cull and edit those. Then when I'm done I might have 20-30 keepers... maybe. That's an entire weekend. One magazine editor says "send us your ten best from the event".
Honestly I don't think that you should assume that others can shoot 20 acceptable micro images a week for four years, like you have. That's a bit of time and dedication. Not like someone can snap their fingers and have 4000 images on SS! Likewise dropping 1000 images onto Alamy was much easier for me (with the old 48MB file size, manually adding keywords to each image as well) than it is for some other people. It all has to do with motivation and chosen direction.
I really like getting an Alamy $80 commission, much more than turning on the computer in the morning and seeing that someone in the UK just bought one of my shots for a quarter or I just got another $1.40 on IS! Sure it doesn't happen as often, but at least I feel like I'm getting a fair value for my efforts.
-
^^^ I have over 500 on alamy and about 1,000 that I haven't found the time to upload because I am too busy with microstock :) Someone here told me it's wise to separate my macro identity from my microstock one, so I use a different pseudonym for my alamy RM portfolio. Please don't post a link here if you find it.
I remember someone posting here that they upload 50 a week to the micros while doing a full time job. I really don't see the problem with reaching the higher levels with SS, anyone that wants to do it just has to have some talent and a few hours a week. 5 quality images a week would probably do better than my 20, there's a lot of junk in my portfolio. I had a $200 sale with alamy this month but I will still make more with SS, so while it's nice to see the big sales, microstock seems to work well for me and I have a much better idea of how much I will make each month. If alamy had more consistent sales, I would use them more and hopefully that will happen when my portfolio grows.