Yeah, there's a "View results" button at the bottom of the poll.  It's faint, but it's there.

I don't know, I feel if you aren't make more on iStock than the other sites you are doing something wrong. My iStock income is more than double Shutterstock. IO guess what I said isn't completely fair as iStock proved to be a top earner early on so it does gain more of my focus than the others. I'm sure you could do just as well on Shutterstock if focus was there...not so much Fotolia and Dreamstime..I just don't think they pull in the numbers...well Fotolia does, but I think their low subscription pricing depleats their potential.

Or u can  leave open the possibility  that maybe,just maybe, they did something right once with that focus ur mentioning...

I don't know, I feel if you aren't make more on iStock than the other sites you are doing something wrong.

So you feel I am (was - I left Istock after the RC introduction) doing something wrong, when Istock did not sell more of my images than Shutterstock?
I uploaded the same portfolio to different agents, who's job it is to make me money out of it. So if one of these agents does worse than the other, that's my fault?

Strange logic your are applying here...

When you put it that way than no. I'm saying that if you focus on an agency you get a feel for the type of content they accept as well as what sells. I am looking to make money and the place that I adapted to is iStock as they showed the best return early on. If it was Shutterstock then I'd probably be praising then and adapted to them.  Yes, I adapted my work to fit the agency and buyers...your approach is different by finding an Agency that fits your work already. Not a thing wrong with that, but I feel adapting can produce more income. In the end, it is your job to make the most out of any agency.

That does make more sense to me. But as I never had the experience that IStock showed better returns, so it would not have made sense to adapt to their needs.

It just shows (again) that different portfolios perform differently on the various agencies.
And for me that is one reason why I never wanted to be exclusive anywhere - I might be betting on the wrong horse...

When you put it that way than no. I'm saying that if you focus on an agency you get a feel for the type of content they accept as well as what sells. I am looking to make money and the place that I adapted to is iStock as they showed the best return early on. If it was Shutterstock then I'd probably be praising then and adapted to them.  Yes, I adapted my work to fit the agency and buyers...your approach is different by finding an Agency that fits your work already. Not a thing wrong with that, but I feel adapting can produce more income. In the end, it is your job to make the most out of any agency.

I adapted to istock years ago. I even considered exclusivity at one time. But despite my efforts to create work that I felt would fit the istock collection and buyer demand, my earnings there have steadily slipped. Today, istock represents just 5% of my total microstock income. They ranked 8th overall in earnings for me last month.

That's after doing exactly as you suggested for a few years, focusing on work that I felt would do well at istock. Because in 2007 and 2008, istock was, in fact, my best-selling agency.

That changed through no doing of mine, and there was nothing I could do to stop that downhill slide over the last few years.

Quote from: EmberMike on March 28, 2013, 14:22

Quote from: dingles on March 28, 2013, 09:18

When you put it that way than no. I'm saying that if you focus on an agency you get a feel for the type of content they accept as well as what sells. I am looking to make money and the place that I adapted to is iStock as they showed the best return early on. If it was Shutterstock then I'd probably be praising then and adapted to them.  Yes, I adapted my work to fit the agency and buyers...your approach is different by finding an Agency that fits your work already. Not a thing wrong with that, but I feel adapting can produce more income. In the end, it is your job to make the most out of any agency.

I adapted to istock years ago. I even considered exclusivity at one time. But despite my efforts to create work that I felt would fit the istock collection and buyer demand, my earnings there have steadily slipped. Today, istock represents just 5% of my total microstock income. They ranked 8th overall in earnings for me last month.

That's after doing exactly as you suggested for a few years, focusing on work that I felt would do well at istock. Because in 2007 and 2008, istock was, in fact, my best-selling agency.

That changed through no doing of mine, and there was nothing I could do to stop that downhill slide over the last few years.

I guess your work doesn't fit in well with iStock. Too many variables to consider how well you adapted the content.  Glad you found other places it does.

doesn't fit anymore you should have added

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 28, 2013, 14:43

doesn't fit anymore you should have added

LOL. Yeah, that was my experience too. Things changed really quickly there. It went from my top agency to expendable in less than a year. I don't think many people adapted.

or they have "disadapted" contributors with so many bright decisions

Not be supporting in what way?

Not promoting them to potential clients?
Not uploading there anymore?
Pulling your port?

Even though most of us get screwed in some fashion by most of the agencies, not uploading to them or pulling ports is a big step for many who have a reliance on the income.  Now, I dont support Istock, for example, when I recommend agencies to potential buyers, but I wouldn't pull my port (yet) because of a personal situation I am facing.

Theoretically, if money wasn't an issue, I would pull from ........in priority

1. Istock
2. FT
3. BS

Let Me Help! 


See it now?

Quote from: Silken Photography on March 27, 2013, 20:39

Yeah, there's a "View results" button at the bottom of the poll.  It's faint, but it's there.

ah, ala Pond5's styling?
i'll look out for it next time, but this "let's play where's wally" on each website gets tiresome.

I guess your work doesn't fit in well with iStock. Too many variables to consider how well you adapted the content.  Glad you found other places it does.

My work did fit in well with istock. I had a similar experience as you, in the early years I did very well there. istock was the first place I ever made $2k in a single month from one company.

I didn't change much. I just kept doing the type of work that was already selling well. New stuff, but in categories that I've always had success in.

I adapted to istock, and yet nothing I did could stop the decline that came in the more recent years. Whatever changed, it wasn't on my end. If my work fell out of favor with istock and their buyers, it was the result of something that was going on over there that I had no control over. I just don't think it's as simple as maximizing income by adapting to an agency. Especially when that agency is istock, one of the most volatile in the business.

iStock is gettin' a whoopin'! 

However, I did like the payout I got from them this month.