Author Topic: Should I go exclusive with IS? (Read 21174 times)

winther · « **on:** August 27, 2008, 03:46 »

With over 500 downloads and 70% approval rate I'm qualified to become exclusive on IS.
I’m currently registered on all big 6 sites, but most of my income comes from SS – 6700 downloads since February (from only 300 images)
510 downloads from IS in 5 months, but only 70 images.
In the long term I’m wondering if I can be more successful on IS as an exclusive contributor – eventually becoming a gold contributor with the option of entering Gettys portfolio.
For those of you who went exclusive with IS – did you notice an immediate sale increase, and how long did it take before you earned more than on the big 6?
Any advice appreciated

/Henrik

michealo · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2008, 04:39 »

Henrik, you can apply to submit to Getty once you hit silver 2500 DLs.

I suspect that going IS is the best option and this is the path I will be choosing very shortly but its worth bearing in mind that the worlds most successful micro stock photographer is non exclusive.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2008, 06:28 »

Quote from: michealo on August 27, 2008, 04:39

its worth bearing in mind that the worlds most successful micro stock photographer is non exclusive.

Why?

Most successful in what sense?

Xalanx · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2008, 06:57 »

Quote from: sjlocke on August 27, 2008, 06:28

Quote from: michealo on August 27, 2008, 04:39
its worth bearing in mind that the worlds most successful micro stock photographer is non exclusive.

Why?

Most successful in what sense?

For example ... money...? Among a lot others.

Pesonally i find upload method of IS very obstructive. I haven't uploaded anything there in ages, because of this. It's extremely difficult to grow my portfolio. By the time I reach 1000 photos on IS even with 100% acceptance rate, I already sold a few thousand dollars on SS. Maybe more.
So you can add this one too - the worlds most successful agency doesn't offer exclusivity.

leaf · « **Reply #4 on:** August 27, 2008, 06:58 »

well since you got 2 replies from 2 exclusives I guess i should promote the other side

I think should come down to some sort of calculation where you figure out how much you are making total and how much you would loose by dropping the other sites. The amount that people gain in earnings by going exclusive varies. I have heard anywhere from 0x to 4x earnings.... which is right who knows.

Other things to consider is putting all your eggs in one basket - is it worth it? How hard / or easy would it be to change your mind later. Sites change how they work, perhaps istock won't be the #1 site in a year or two, or perhaps a change in the search engine will affect you negativly.
How much time will shooting and uploading only for one site save you?
What will you do with the images that istock rejects, since you can't upload them anywhere else - are they now worthless?

I don't think there is any right answer, but i am pretty happy submitting to all the sites... and obviously there are happy istock exclusives.

And for your reading enjoyment - here are a few 'exclusive debating' threads.
Exclusive Emails
Istock Exclusivity for a Vector artist
Exclusive or not?
Makes me want to be exclusive
Reason for going exclusive
Exclusivity Vs. Multiplicity
Istock poll about Exclusivity

edit for accuracy - thanks grp_photo

grp_photo · « **Reply #5 on:** August 27, 2008, 07:17 »

Quote from: leaf on August 27, 2008, 06:58

What will you do with the images that istock rejects, since you can't upload them anywhere else as RF. You could upload them as RM somewhere but they can't be from the same series obviously.

As far i remember it's even not allowed to upload rejected files as RM because iStock reserved its right that they maybe accept or use them anytime later.
I know this sound very strange but this was the rule about two years ago and an admin confirmed this at the forums at this time. It's possible they changed that as i don't care much about istock anymore.

leaf · « **Reply #6 on:** August 27, 2008, 07:20 »

Quote from: grp_photo on August 27, 2008, 07:17

Quote from: leaf on August 27, 2008, 06:58

What will you do with the images that istock rejects, since you can't upload them anywhere else as RF. You could upload them as RM somewhere but they can't be from the same series obviously.

As far i remember it's even not allowed to upload rejected files as RM because iStock reserved its right that they maybe accept or use them anytime later.
I know this sound very strange but this was the rule about two years ago and an admin confirmed this at the forums at this time. It's possible they changed that as i don't care much about istock anymore.

now that you mention it, i think your right.

michealo · « **Reply #7 on:** August 27, 2008, 07:27 »

One major consideration is that once you have shot, postprocessed and keyworded an image then uploading it to a new site or sites is only an incremental cost in terms of time/money so any earnings are essentially pure profit

If you are on one site then your margin is likely to be lower.

Say it takes $40 to create a sale-able image, if you are exclusively on IS you only make a profit when you sell more than this. If you submit to 6 sites your cost is spread over those. Admittedly higher commissions will help on IS.

I think many stock photographers fail to evaluate what they do in business terms.

Though many of the people here do, see RPI, etc threads and stats

yingyang0 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 27, 2008, 08:21 »

Quote from: winther on August 27, 2008, 03:46

With over 500 downloads and 70% approval rate I'm qualified to become exclusive on IS.
I’m currently registered on all big 6 sites, but most of my income comes from SS – 6700 downloads since February (from only 300 images)
510 downloads from IS in 5 months, but only 70 images.

I'm exclusive and if I was in your shoes I wouldn't go exclusive yet. With those numbers it wouldn't make since until you're gold or at least silver. I'd be working on building up your portfolio at IS so you can better compare them with the others.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #9 on:** August 27, 2008, 08:59 »

Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 06:57

For example ... money...? Among a lot others.

Are you sure? Sales, maybe. Net, maybe not.

What others? Downloads? Pretty easy to get a lot when you're spread across subscription sites where the cost per image is almost nothing.

I'm just saying, don't judge your situation by comparing yourself to anyone else.

helix7 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 27, 2008, 09:20 »

Quote from: sjlocke on August 27, 2008, 08:59

I'm just saying, don't judge your situation by comparing yourself to anyone else.

Solid advice. Everyone here is different, has different images, different sales figures, etc. For some, istock represents the vast majority of their microstock income and so exclusivity makes sense. For others, istock accounts for less than half of their micro income, and so going exclusive could potentially result in a loss of earnings. But again, it all depends on personal factors.

I haven't exactly made it a secret that I find many flaws with the exclusivity program, and that istock could make a few fairly minor changes that would make it more appealing to many people who are on the fence about it. At this point I couldn't possibly even consider exclusivity until I hit Diamond, and even then I would really need to take a good hard look at my numbers to make a decision. But that's just me. Some people report istock earnings representing 70% or more of their total monthly microstock earnings, and for them it's pretty much a no-brainer. It all comes down to your own personal stats regarding whether you go exclusive or not.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2008, 09:30 »

Quote from: sjlocke on August 27, 2008, 08:59

Are you sure? Sales, maybe. Net, maybe not.

What others? Downloads? Pretty easy to get a lot when you're spread across subscription sites where the cost per image is almost nothing.

I'm just saying, don't judge your situation by comparing yourself to anyone else.

Ah, superman and his arch enemy lex lutharcurs. Personally I'd rather have more profits than more sales and considering the production costs of the "most successful photographer" I'm guessing that Lisa (exclusive at iStock) has made more of a profit over the years.

jsnover · « **Reply #12 on:** August 27, 2008, 09:38 »

I can't tell you anything about the swtich to exclusive after nearly 4 years as an independent as it only happened on Monday

I'm also surprised that sjlocke didn't give his usual answer to the "should I become exclusive question" - No.

What I would say is that for a substantial portion of the time I was independent, IS earnings were more each month than SS earnings with only a slightly larger portfolio at SS. Unless I were exclusively selling vectors (and fairly complex ones, not the simple stuff that dominates at SS) I don't think I'd consider exclusivity at bronze. Look again when you're silver and in the meantime fill up your IS upload slots as much as possible to build your portfolio there - some people have a big honeymoon at SS but find it hard to sustain the level of income over time.

louoates · « **Reply #13 on:** August 27, 2008, 09:53 »

All the talk about being able to maximize profits with any given number of images needs to be weighed with the risk of tying yourself to one outlet. You've got the risk (actually certainty) of rejected images returning 0 income.

And suppose some disgruntled employee turns the image servers into toast. Stranger things have happened in business besides fire, data theft, data damage, etc.

Suppose someone offers you a hundred thousand dollars to buy out your best-selling category? Suppose you get a great idea to market your images in an exciting new way? How many hundreds of manufacturers have gone out of business after the goods they sold exclusively to Walmart were dropped from their shelves?

End of ranting. Sorry to re-cover the same ground as other threads. Just the way I see it. Too old (experienced) to change my views on this one.

bittersweet · « **Reply #14 on:** August 27, 2008, 10:46 »

Quote from: jsnover on August 27, 2008, 09:38

I can't tell you anything about the swtich to exclusive after nearly 4 years as an independent as it only happened on Monday

Just in time for 100% royalty day! Lucky girl!

cdwheatley · « **Reply #15 on:** August 27, 2008, 11:35 »

Being nonexclusive gives you a better chance to see what type of images sell. You might have one image that is doing well on Istock because it has good best match placement. If its not selling fairly well elsewhere across 6-7 sites, than you know you just got lucky.

Basically, you will have a better chance to learn what works for you by submitting at multiple sites. I'm sure most of us have had good images slip through the grill on istock that sell really well elsewhere and vise/versa. If you already have some experience and you know what works and what doesn't, than I guess it doesn't matter.

Another thing is: not everyone sells well at istock, its probably a good idea to figure out where your portfolio works best.

You can always choose to go exclusive at a later date, just watch the 3-6 month lock-in clause at some of the sites.

lisafx · « **Reply #16 on:** August 27, 2008, 11:55 »

Quote from: jsnover on August 27, 2008, 09:38

I can't tell you anything about the swtich to exclusive after nearly 4 years as an independent as it only happened on Monday

Congrats on your crown JoAnn! I knew you were working on it but didn't know it had come through already

It's still pretty rare for someone who has been at this so long to become exclusive (can only think of one other - Jim Jurica). I would be very interested in hearing your experiences regarding increased sales and/or search placement after you have some time to see how that is affected. If you don't mind sharing such info with us folks who remain curious about exclusivity...

jsnover · « **Reply #17 on:** August 27, 2008, 12:05 »

Quote from: lisafx on August 27, 2008, 11:55

I would be very interested in hearing your experiences regarding increased sales and/or search placement after you have some time to see how that is affected. If you don't mind sharing such info with us folks who remain curious about exclusivity...

Not a chance. You should all remain independent!!

I think the busy fall season will be a decent test of the financial consequences of the switch. I'm not one of those stats freaks though so I don't track the details image by image and hour by hour. Anyone who's curious can ask me again early next year

And as far as the luck on making 100% royalties day, that was good timing. Although if the gods really loved me they'd have had the two ELs from Friday and Sunday wait until Monday so I could really celebrate!

rene · « **Reply #18 on:** August 27, 2008, 12:11 »

Quote from: louoates on August 27, 2008, 09:53

All the talk about being able to maximize profits with any given number of images needs to be weighed with the risk of tying yourself to one outlet. You've got the risk (actually certainty) of rejected images returning 0 income.

And suppose some disgruntled employee turns the image servers into toast. Stranger things have happened in business besides fire, data theft, data damage, etc.

Suppose someone offers you a hundred thousand dollars to buy out your best-selling category? Suppose you get a great idea to market your images in an exciting new way? How many hundreds of manufacturers have gone out of business after the goods they sold exclusively to Walmart were dropped from their shelves?

End of ranting. Sorry to re-cover the same ground as other threads. Just the way I see it. Too old (experienced) to change my views on this one.

My thoughts too. I love IS, it's my best earner (2-4 times more than second one - SS). I hope one day IS will give us possibility to upload exclusives images and 80% of my portfolio will go there.

Xalanx · « **Reply #19 on:** August 27, 2008, 13:49 »

Quote from: sjlocke on August 27, 2008, 08:59

Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 06:57
For example ... money...? Among a lot others.

Are you sure? Sales, maybe. Net, maybe not.

What others? Downloads? Pretty easy to get a lot when you're spread across subscription sites where the cost per image is almost nothing.

I'm just saying, don't judge your situation by comparing yourself to anyone else.

Indeed, the cost of sub sales is less than pay per download. However, for a lot of photographers (myself included) the huge amount of sales adds up so that at the end of the day the sub sales win. In SS case, of course. It illustrates perfectly the concept of microstock. Huge sales for cheap money.
There are the other options there too. Dreamstime, Stockxpert, Fotolia, etc. The big 6. I had the curiosity of counting how many sales would Yuri have in a few days, at DT. Because DT shows the number of sales in the user profile. So I checked Yuri, Andres and Iofoto. Well... more than 1.000, each one of them. In a few days. That's only from DT. Imagine adding the sales from the other sites and tell me how would be possible to make the same amount of money in IS only, net.

It's a shame that IS doesn't have an easier way of uploading images, i would have beared with the 1-week time for review since I got quite a good acceptance rate (about 70%). But that uploading... it's killing me.

You're one of the top sellers at IS I think, judging after your stats - I just checked. Really impressive. So yea, for you it's really worthy, the exclusivity that is.

Cheers.

digiology · « **Reply #20 on:** August 27, 2008, 14:12 »

Quote from: jsnover on August 27, 2008, 09:38

I can't tell you anything about the swtich to exclusive after nearly 4 years as an independent as it only happened on Monday

I'm also surprised that sjlocke didn't give his usual answer to the "should I become exclusive question" - No.

What I would say is that for a substantial portion of the time I was independent, IS earnings were more each month than SS earnings with only a slightly larger portfolio at SS. Unless I were exclusively selling vectors (and fairly complex ones, not the simple stuff that dominates at SS) I don't think I'd consider exclusivity at bronze. Look again when you're silver and in the meantime fill up your IS upload slots as much as possible to build your portfolio there - some people have a big honeymoon at SS but find it hard to sustain the level of income over time.

Congrats on going exclusive at IS. I noticed Hatman went exclusive recently as well. I will miss the advice you both provided about other agencies. Your insight is always very helpful and much appreciated. Good luck to both of you!

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #21 on:** August 27, 2008, 15:16 »

Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 13:49

Quote from: sjlocke on August 27, 2008, 08:59
Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 06:57
For example ... money...? Among a lot others.

Are you sure? Sales, maybe. Net, maybe not.

What others? Downloads? Pretty easy to get a lot when you're spread across subscription sites where the cost per image is almost nothing.

I'm just saying, don't judge your situation by comparing yourself to anyone else.

As far as I remember Yuri ones post his stats in here. I do not know where the thread is. But he earned like 40% at iStockphoto as far as I remember. I could be wrong though. If he goes exclusive he should earn 80% right away and is much faster in uploading the 5000+ files at iStock which in turn will increase his earnings faster. And do not forget the best match which seem to favour exclusive. So I think it very well can increase Yuris income. However thats all speculation.
In fact for me my earnings have to increase like 120% until it makes financial sense to consider exclusivity. Honestly I sometimes wish I could go exclusive.

Indeed, the cost of sub sales is less than pay per download. However, for a lot of photographers (myself included) the huge amount of sales adds up so that at the end of the day the sub sales win. In SS case, of course. It illustrates perfectly the concept of microstock. Huge sales for cheap money.
There are the other options there too. Dreamstime, Stockxpert, Fotolia, etc. The big 6. I had the curiosity of counting how many sales would Yuri have in a few days, at DT. Because DT shows the number of sales in the user profile. So I checked Yuri, Andres and Iofoto. Well... more than 1.000, each one of them. In a few days. That's only from DT. Imagine adding the sales from the other sites and tell me how would be possible to make the same amount of money in IS only, net.

It's a shame that IS doesn't have an easier way of uploading images, i would have beared with the 1-week time for review since I got quite a good acceptance rate (about 70%). But that uploading... it's killing me.

You're one of the top sellers at IS I think, judging after your stats - I just checked. Really impressive. So yea, for you it's really worthy, the exclusivity that is.

Cheers.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 27, 2008, 15:18 »

Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 13:49

So I checked Yuri, Andres and Iofoto. Well... more than 1.000, each one of them. In a few days. That's only from DT. Imagine adding the sales from the other sites and tell me how would be possible to make the same amount of money in IS only, net.

I think sjlocke was also making the point about how much it cost to produce those 1,000 downloads. From what I've seen the top selling IS exclusives don't have huge payroll costs and tend to be more frugal so that their net profits are most likely higher than some of the top microstock photographers that have $25,000 large format cameras and $100,000+ payrolls.

grp_photo · « **Reply #23 on:** August 27, 2008, 15:22 »

Quote from: Freezingpictures on August 27, 2008, 15:16

Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 13:49
Quote from: sjlocke on August 27, 2008, 08:59
Quote from: Xalanx on August 27, 2008, 06:57
For example ... money...? Among a lot others.

Are you sure? Sales, maybe. Net, maybe not.

What others? Downloads? Pretty easy to get a lot when you're spread across subscription sites where the cost per image is almost nothing.

I'm just saying, don't judge your situation by comparing yourself to anyone else.

As far as I remember Yuri ones post his stats in here. I do not know where the thread is. But he earned like 40% at iStockphoto as far as I remember. I could be wrong though. If he goes exclusive he should earn 80% right away and is much faster in uploading the 5000+ files at iStock which in turn will increase his earnings faster. And do not forget the best match which seem to favour exclusive. So I think it very well can increase Yuris income. However thats all speculation.
In fact for me my earnings have to increase like 120% until it makes financial sense to consider exclusivity. Honestly I sometimes wish I could go exclusive.

Indeed, the cost of sub sales is less than pay per download. However, for a lot of photographers (myself included) the huge amount of sales adds up so that at the end of the day the sub sales win. In SS case, of course. It illustrates perfectly the concept of microstock. Huge sales for cheap money.
There are the other options there too. Dreamstime, Stockxpert, Fotolia, etc. The big 6. I had the curiosity of counting how many sales would Yuri have in a few days, at DT. Because DT shows the number of sales in the user profile. So I checked Yuri, Andres and Iofoto. Well... more than 1.000, each one of them. In a few days. That's only from DT. Imagine adding the sales from the other sites and tell me how would be possible to make the same amount of money in IS only, net.

It's a shame that IS doesn't have an easier way of uploading images, i would have beared with the 1-week time for review since I got quite a good acceptance rate (about 70%). But that uploading... it's killing me.

You're one of the top sellers at IS I think, judging after your stats - I just checked. Really impressive. So yea, for you it's really worthy, the exclusivity that is.

Cheers.

helix7 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 27, 2008, 15:46 »

Quote from: yingyang0 on August 27, 2008, 15:18

...I think sjlocke was also making the point about how much it cost to produce those 1,000 downloads. From what I've seen the top selling IS exclusives don't have huge payroll costs and tend to be more frugal so that their net profits are most likely higher than some of the top microstock photographers that have $25,000 large format cameras and $100,000+ payrolls.

Let's not make this out to be a "top non-exclusives need a staff of workers to compete with top istock exclusives" sort of thing. I know that's not exactly what you said, but I can see the conversation quickly going there. Obviously non-exclusives spend more time uploading, but time spent keywording is the same, and uploading to other sites is so much faster and easier than at at istock, so it's hardly an issue.

Guys like Yuri and Ron are quite the exception to the rule, and it is pretty silly to compare anyone to them. Same for Lise and other top istockers. Not exactly good comparisons. Keep in mind that microstock is just part of Yuri's and Ron's businesses, so the staff is necessary for a variety of reasons. But aside from them, how many people employ a staff? I don't recall hearing of any others, and if there are others I bet that there are very few of them. So the idea that being a top non-exclusive requires so much extra time and cost is a bit silly.

Comparing any of the top most successful microstock people to each other or anyone else really says very little about the business. To get any sense of which path is more likely to lead to the highest profit margin, you would need to sample contributors at some other levels of income and profit. Let's say those who earn around $100,000 from microstock annually. In that category, I doubt you'd see much difference in production costs between exclusives and non-exclusives, and percentage of profit would likely be similar. Just a guess, of course, but I think it makes more sense than the notion that exclusives are more profitable.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Should I go exclusive with IS? (Read 21174 times)

winther

michealo

Sean Locke Photography

Xalanx

leaf

grp_photo

leaf

michealo

yingyang0

Sean Locke Photography

helix7

yingyang0

jsnover

louoates

bittersweet

cdwheatley

lisafx

jsnover

rene

Xalanx

digiology

Freezingpictures

yingyang0

grp_photo

helix7

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors