Author Topic: Fotolia (Read 13549 times)

hatman12 · « **on:** February 01, 2007, 20:18 »

Hi

I am a new 'observer' of the microstock market and have perused these forums quite a lot, just gathering views and information.

Fotolia have just started to accept my images.

However, the number of downloads shown for their top sellling images doesn't seem to square with their claims of 2 million images, biggest agency etc etc.

Perhaps I am missing something, but I go to Fotolia and see top downloads of say 300 for 'beach', then do the same search at SS or IS and find two or three thousand downloads for their top selling images.

It seems that there are so many agencies competing for a slice of this market that statistics they publish need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

At the end of the day, to make money a photographer must be with an agency that has the power to SELL, and to sell in quantity. My research of Fotolia suggests that sales there are very small.

Anyone have an opinion on this?

Hatman (Australia)

epixx · « **Reply #1 on:** February 01, 2007, 23:46 »

They are my fourth biggest seller. A friendly attitude and accepting 80% of what I submit helps also.

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** February 02, 2007, 02:27 »

they are a good site to submit to and worth your time, however their number of images need to be taken with a grain of salt. No one has figure out how they count their images, but it obviously is not the same way everyone else does.

nruboc · « **Reply #3 on:** February 02, 2007, 02:56 »

I LOVE Fotolia! They're my #2 behind ShutterStock. An awesome site!

CJPhoto · « **Reply #4 on:** February 02, 2007, 03:53 »

In relation to total sales numbers, you have to remember that Fotolia is only 1 year old compared to istock which is about 5?? and started as a photosharing site, then 5c, then 10c, now 20c per DL (so the sales numbers aren't comparitive) and SS is a high volumn site due to its download model.

having said that, there is something fishy about thier total photos number.

But still, they are definately a top 5 site and worth being at.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** February 02, 2007, 04:48 »

Check out

This Thread

to see how fotolia is doing for people compared to the other sites.
note: fotolia is also refered to as FT

PenelopeB · « **Reply #6 on:** February 02, 2007, 06:30 »

Hi everyone:

Can anyone tell me how to view my gallery in FT?

(Senior moment... I'm not seein it!)

Thanks

CJPhoto · « **Reply #7 on:** February 02, 2007, 09:39 »

"My photo" tab along the top

berryspun · « **Reply #8 on:** February 02, 2007, 10:24 »

Quote from: leaf on February 02, 2007, 04:48

note: fotolia is also refered to as FT

...FT or FL

Even though there is a question mark about their total number, it is a fast-growing stock site aiming the European market. The automated translation is available for most or their languages, although it is not perfect. Maybe if each translated site is considered as a different online picture presentation, that could justify the inflated numbers?

It is the only MS site where you can check who bought you pictures. I like this feature. Out of the dozen stock sites, FT ranks 4th for me.

kozmix · « **Reply #9 on:** February 02, 2007, 10:33 »

FT has been a deception for me, i've 85 images online and i've been there since 19 jan, and the best i've got is 16 views...on other stocks i have more than 16 on just a single image. As far as sales go just one at IS, where i just have 3 images so far.

Opla · « **Reply #10 on:** February 02, 2007, 11:23 »

For me FL is my 5th earner but today, one guy purchased 16 pics of one series @ 2 credits each, made my day!

ansontsui · « **Reply #11 on:** February 02, 2007, 11:42 »

I LOVE Fotolia !!!!

I use 1 month to reached my first 100 sales.. now, I am a Bronze level......

madelaide · « **Reply #12 on:** February 02, 2007, 15:47 »

Fotolia is very good, it's always been one my best three sites. It's the only where I had EL licenses (I've had about one a month). Uploads are reasonable simple and rejections are few (what may not be a good thing in fact...). It has sites in many languages what surely broadens the market.

Regards,
Adelaide

hatman12 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 02, 2007, 20:12 »

Yes, I've noticed a speedy response time from FT. They are accepting most of my images, but having said that I have learned a lot from rejections over the past two weeks since I first started submitting elsewhere, so they have received higher quality from me.

I have submitted exactly the same images to BigStock and DT and I will be very interested to compare acceptances/rejections etc. Interesting that none of my images have yet been reviewed at BS and DT, which only underlines how quick FT are. No guarantee that just because FT accepts something, it will automatically be accepted by the others.

But at the end of the day it is the ability to 'sell' and sell in quantity that counts.

All of my stuff is being shot 'new' specifically for stock photography.

My only aim to is build up a large enough portfolio with sufficient downloads to become 'exclusive' with one of the sites. The logic for this is explained in another thread.

hatman12 · « **Reply #14 on:** February 14, 2007, 14:03 »

Still hardly any views at FT. Lots of views of the same images at other agencies.

Traffic at FT seems to be very low.

I am suspicious, nd this coupled with their misleading claims for number of images etc makes me think I'll stop uploading there.

Yes, I know I've only been contributing to microstock sites for two weeks (!), but I believe it is important to whittle out the also-rans at an early stage and then focus on two or three agencies with an objective of becoming exclusive after about a year.

FT is no longer on my list, and has been relegated along with 123RF.

On a positive, I am very impressed with Dreamstime, who are getting lots of traffic, seem to be quick and efficient, and have already made two sales for me.

takestock · « **Reply #15 on:** February 14, 2007, 14:33 »

Fotolia is good for me.

Something to note. A lot of what I have sold has come off quite low number of views. So I would't be inclined to put a big emphasis on views.
It's what a buyer is looking for at the time, he will take it no matter how many views.

Pixart · « **Reply #16 on:** February 14, 2007, 16:43 »

Quote from: hatman12 on February 14, 2007, 14:03

Still hardly any views at FT. Lots of views of the same images at other agencies.

When you hover over a photo on Fotolia, you can see a quick view of the image. I don't think you would actually get credit for a "view" unless they click on the image for more detail. So - it's really impossible to compare views with another site - like Dreamstime where they have to click through to see a larger version of the photo.

But then again.. I may be wrong about this. But sales verses views on FT are very close.

Vally · « **Reply #17 on:** February 14, 2007, 17:57 »

I think that the only thing you can base your judgment on is sales not views. I'm also new to Stock having only started in December but find that Fotolia is one of the better sites for me personally. It ranks 3rd for me behind Shutterstock and Istock and I like the way you can see where your photos are going. By comparison Dreamstime is just behind Fotolia.

It still has had loads less views than most of the sites below it but as it is making more money that doesn't bother me

sbonk · « **Reply #18 on:** February 14, 2007, 18:14 »

Does everyone put thier most important keywords first on Fotolia? I have not been doing this and have just been leaving them as they are which ends up being in alphabetical order. I do not do as well on Fotolia as others seem to do. I am wondering if putting the important keywords first would make a difference.

madelaide · « **Reply #19 on:** February 14, 2007, 19:38 »

Quote from: sbonk on February 14, 2007, 18:14

Does everyone put thier most important keywords first on Fotolia?

I don't know if it makes a difference in the end. but I have the habit of putting most important keywords first even before I joined FT. When I started in stock sites at ShutterPoint, I learnt that their search tool uses the keyword positioning to rank images in a search, so I took it to the microstock.

Some sites reorder the keywords, others don't (StockXpert, for instance, in the edit window they are as entered but when you view it is shown in alphabetical order). I don't know if this means anything for the search in these sites.

Regards,
Adelaide

CJPhoto · « **Reply #20 on:** February 15, 2007, 04:43 »

Quote from: madelaide on February 14, 2007, 19:38

Quote from: sbonk on February 14, 2007, 18:14
Does everyone put thier most important keywords first on Fotolia?
I don't know if it makes a difference in the end.

They have said that it does make a difference. this is how their best match or pertance works. If a keyword is in your top 7 you will rank above a picture where it isn't.

I thin the other sites are doing this by description which is why they have a 5 or 7 word minimum.

michaeldb · « **Reply #21 on:** February 15, 2007, 23:22 »

This has been an informative thread to me!

I did not know that you could see who bought your images on FT. (I discovered that Fotolia itself bought one of mine recently, for 2 credits - I wonder what they are going to do with it). I also had no idea that the order of keywords made a difference. So thanks to you posters for the info!

As for me, I like FT except that the site itself seems slow, and everything is a little different the way it works, even the log-in is strange. But I like the way they pay, you don't have to make $100 or even $50 before getting paid.

scubabartek · « **Reply #22 on:** February 20, 2007, 12:29 »

Quote from: leaf on February 02, 2007, 02:27

they are a good site to submit to and worth your time, however their number of images need to be taken with a grain of salt. No one has figure out how they count their images, but it obviously is not the same way everyone else does.

That's not true Tyler. This has been figured out LONG ago. The number of photos advertised is the total number of photos submitted. This corresponds perfectly to the ID numbers of newest photos. This doesn't take into consideration all the photos rejected (about 50%) and deleted by users (who knows...). So Fotolia's much closer to a million images. Then again, they've always had problems with being honest (10% referral sales commission? Yeah... RIGHT. 10% of Fotolia's NET)

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Fotolia (Read 13549 times)

hatman12

epixx

leaf

nruboc

CJPhoto

leaf

PenelopeB

CJPhoto

berryspun

kozmix

Opla

ansontsui

madelaide

hatman12

hatman12

takestock

Pixart

Vally

sbonk

madelaide

CJPhoto

michaeldb

scubabartek

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors