pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Exclusive on one site, no-exclusive on every stock site which is more lucrative?  (Read 4155 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 15, 2015, 21:58 »
0
Exclusive on one site, no-exclusive on every stock site which is more lucrative?

By the way, I uploaded tens of photos to DT, but it's long time review is a big problem.
I uploaded some to FT for a long time, but it's seems no one visited them, on the contrary, photos on DT get visited everyday considerably.
Do you guys use the both at the same time?


« Reply #1 on: March 16, 2015, 07:01 »
+10
Exclusive on one site, no-exclusive on every stock site which is more lucrative?

By the way, I uploaded tens of photos to DT, but it's long time review is a big problem.
I uploaded some to FT for a long time, but it's seems no one visited them, on the contrary, photos on DT get visited everyday considerably.
Do you guys use the both at the same time?

#1 From my personal experience (six years exclusive with iStock, now two years non-exclusive), today non-exclusivity is more lucrative in microstock. It might only be different if you have high-value portfolio (lifestyle, business) which is also mirrored from iStock to Getty. However, with high-value images you could also sell through midstock or macrostock.

#2 If you think any review time is a "big problem", microstock isn't the right thing for you. It takes years to build portfolios and a standing in the market.  It doesn't make a difference if your images go online tomorrow or in two weeks or three months.

#3 Every agency counts "views" different but they are somewhat irrelevant. If you're interested in getting views, likes and +1s you should upload to Facebook, Google+, Flickr and 500px etc. Don't believe that views have any meaning in microstock.

« Reply #2 on: March 16, 2015, 07:06 »
0
Every agency seems to define views differently I get vast numbers on Dreamstime and very few on fotolia -  the opposite in sales (except a few more rather than vast!!) not that I give them any attention

« Reply #3 on: March 16, 2015, 10:34 »
+1
at the moment there are three very strong agencies in the micro market  - shutterstock, fotolia and IStock. A few years ago Istock was the dominant agency, they had over 80% of the market share. Being exclusive with istock meant,  having your files for sale in the dominant marketplace. And when Bruce was in charge istock was growing well.

But from what we hear shutterstock and IStock are around 300-400 Million each, Fotolia is probably half of that and growing well and then there are several other Players that together are probably also a few hundred Million Dollars. And then there is the Macro world and editorial if you are interested.

If you are Independent you can play all markets.

You can still send some content exclusive to a few agencies, including the Macro agencies.

it is more confusing to be indie and the market is changing all the time. but being Indie means that basically anything you produce can be sold somewhere. but you need time to learn what sells best where, there is no simple roadmap to follow.

most important is to have a low rejection rate, you should be able to have at least 80% accepted if you send content to a normal Micro agency that doesn't filter by style.

and you need to produce content every week and keep feeding the beast. of you sit back and watch your portfolio, nothing interesting will happen.

However, if you have very little time and see stock more as a little hobby and you just want to achieve 20-100 Dollars a month, then maybe try a few agencies and do go exclusive with the one you feel most comfortable with.

But if you want to maximise your income then being Indie and sending a mix of Indie and exclusive content to different agencies is the best way at the moment.

Dreamstime and fotolia allow exclusive images, so it is easy to test exclusive results as well. You just have to pay attention to any lock up periods for your files.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2015, 11:22 by cobalt »

« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2015, 02:02 »
0
Every agency seems to define views differently I get vast numbers on Dreamstime and very few on fotolia -  the opposite in sales (except a few more rather than vast!!) not that I give them any attention

Since iStock changed their system to only count views from logged in accounts, there is an odd chance to have images with 0 views but 1 sale. That happens when someone puts your image into their cart before logging in to make the payment.

If you want to increase your views, you just have to post in some agency's internal forums which of your images are your bestsellers. Hundreds of fellow contributors will happily view your images.  ::)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
4190 Views
Last post January 05, 2009, 13:32
by Read_My_Rights
3 Replies
5631 Views
Last post March 23, 2009, 02:04
by RaFaLe
1 Replies
9533 Views
Last post April 13, 2009, 11:53
by madelaide
17 Replies
8018 Views
Last post July 31, 2010, 05:58
by cathyslife
16 Replies
7098 Views
Last post September 18, 2010, 07:44
by gostwyck

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle