first post in donkey years 
---------------------------
been in and out of microstock since IS SS dt ft and some good ones that died with IS acquisition, and also editorials with dt, alamy. was there with Alamy since day 1 and had 100% approval where i had my editorials. but deleted my account after 4 years i noticed zero views. i wrote Alamy why certain portfolio get listed while others even with 100% approval are having zero views, got no answer so i closed my portfolio.

i know, from my own sales, that fotolia (before dpc) and dreamstime had the best sales with editorials.
ironically, they were RT commercial images that were used in editorials, which i googled and found..
used by named newspapers (NYTimes,Washington Post,etc)

today, my shift as i said is Events Photography. i have PhotoJournalism and was a stringer on spec in my 35mm days across the country. i only touched with micro because i travel alot and a painter told me i have nothing to lose to try SS,IS, and i got in and was pretty much happy with it, what little time i spent giving them images.

but i am thinking , by consensus, lifestyle micro is more or less saturated, and from what i hear,
my own peers are losing money with clones of their work. luckily for me, i did not depend on micro nor lifestyle.

still, we all profit with diversity and passive income. i like to hear from all their views of where editorials sell. i do not want to hear where xxx pays 90% or better % . 99% of zero is zero, and to me and you will all agree no doubt a waste of time when i can just go to say IS , SS, where sales are regular and leave my stuff there.

but there is really no site that excels in editorials. not the paporazzi stuff of movie stars, but editorials.. events, sports,celebrities making surprise appearances,etc..
bread and butter stuff that we used to make during the 35mm days.

i know, from my own experience here, newsmedia no longer pays anyone , ie. we get it all free from wire (Reuters,etc), and whatever left, we take smartphones from readers. actual quote from several editors i had while traveling across country.

but i firmly believe other papers still take stock photos, as i said, i have several stock photos that are still being used every year for the same contents (taxation, sporting event, awards,etc).

but ft, dt,is, ss, do not really sell editorials . Alamy say they do, but you don't sell NFA is they don't get your images viewed.  i know it was not seen, because the history said ZERO VIEWS.
i cannot see how that is even possible with any site. unless my port was not visible,
which could be possible too. who knows.

anyway, this is not an Alamy thread. so please don't tell me about Alamy.
please do tell me about where i won't be wasting my time uploading editorials.

SS take editorials too, but lately they have been wacko with credentials. not every sporting event concert festival etc requires credentials. what is held in public open to public do not require credentials, and i got this from many organizers across the country. you only require credentials when it is a paid entrance event or an event closed to only the press .

outdoors festivals,etc  do not require credentials because you are giving them free advertising if your editorials sell as stock photos and are used worldwide.

then again, this is not about Shutterstock. so please do not waste Tyler's webspace talking about Shutterstock credentials on MY THREAD HERE, CHEERS !!!  I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR INSIGHTS.

In my day job I deal strictly with editorial photos. From what I see the only place a shooter can really make money on editorial is with Getty. Getting in is another story....

cheers for coming here to give me your opinion. jrwasserman
yes, i observed for years that the only images on www are mostly Getty. no harm to try when i do have time to gather a portfolio or i suppose they will only invite you, so i will need to build a site with my work.

while we are on Getty, how do you feel about the rumours of them displeasing contributors with their new promotional idea? the one which many are claiming to not being paid for the usage of their images.
as great as the lure for any site like Getty,etc.. i like to know what are the changes in their treatment of their suppliers, as already we see many sites going the displeasurable route to cut your earnings in the interest of short term gains.
i suppose it is inevitable to discuss a site in particular. i said i would not welcome that here, but
if it is on topic, i guess we will need to be more open in discussion .

my editorials do well on dt, ss and 123

ss has tightened its credential rules, but eased up on the type of editorial I do -- not breaking news or events, but 'reallife' images - ferries, markets, tourists, etc.  I no longer get many 'not newsworthy' rejections

yes, at the beginning i was doing such editorials... ferries, markets,etc.. but they are not as global as the other editorials that are international. i know Getty is where editorials are mostly, but they are again more like celebrities and red-carpet premieres, papparazzi stuff.

i was referring to more global editorials like sports, music, arts, theatre,etc..
of course, most would require credentials, which is not that difficult to get in my position locally,
as i am already in that circle . but i am thinking more of an extra income source
with a stock site which specialize in editorials.. which could well be useful as passive income during the months where such editorial images.. are not available. ie. it makes money for you while i am away on winter vacation  or when i am too old to stay up till past midnight for the shows,etc..
 

judging from the lack of response, i would take it that editorials aren't the breadwinners in microstock.
untapped resouces perharps??? another niche agency or coops???

it sure beats uploading to 20 sites that are non-productive and not getting any payout
in months, years, ... or ever !!!

cheers both .
cascoly, i just realised you are Symbiostock.
jrwasserman, so, would Symbiostock be the way to go...
to set up your own editorial personal site? instead of as your friends are facing
getting their works farmed out to pennypinchers. they are not under contract to
supply future sports,etc.. to these sites, right?
so, why don't they started their own Symbiostock site or own editorial coop?
being experienced photographers, there cannot be a shortage of business acumen and
cumulation amongst your circle of friends, surely.  sort of an editorial Stocksy,
for lack of a better word

i have lots of homework to do, reading about Symbiostock, ...
and how you get paid for the buyers who download your stuff on Symbiostock,
and what sort of network are we talking about.

do, cascoly, your network who has already got their own sites up on Symbiostock,
get enough traffic to make it worth their while paying for the site ?
this is i suppose a lot of work too, as opposed to just relying on Shutterstock ,etc..
but it would not hurt to investigate the possibilities,
,,. adding it to my own local project.

but surely it beat uploading to 25 sites which produces nada,
a total waste of time, which could be conserved into getting your own coop or Symbio site.
.. tribal stock , as i call it. (ie. little tribes of stock photographers bearing the same
market niche, so the buyers know there is one that exists with strictly editorials
by experienced photo journalists and editorialists .)

i will take it, that editorials is not a microstock love-child. but i still see potentials locally,
and globally if the images have a global usage (travels, is definitely one that is).

cheers both .
cascoly, i just realised you are Symbiostock.
jrwasserman, so, would Symbiostock be the way to go...
to set up your own editorial personal site? instead of as your friends are facing
getting their works farmed out to pennypinchers. they are not under contract to
supply future sports,etc.. to these sites, right?
so, why don't they started their own Symbiostock site or own editorial coop?
being experienced photographers, there cannot be a shortage of business acumen and
cumulation amongst your circle of friends, surely.  sort of an editorial Stocksy,
for lack of a better word

i have lots of homework to do, reading about Symbiostock, ...
and how you get paid for the buyers who download your stuff on Symbiostock,
and what sort of network are we talking about.

do, cascoly, your network who has already got their own sites up on Symbiostock,
get enough traffic to make it worth their while paying for the site ?
this is i suppose a lot of work too, as opposed to just relying on Shutterstock ,etc..
but it would not hurt to investigate the possibilities,
,,. adding it to my own local project.

.....

I'm not 'symbiostock' but I do have several sites and run a global search and a co-op which sets you up for a nominal fee. it's a one time fee, and my hosting fees are small, so I can absorb it for now   if you have your own domain it's easy to set up your own site and join the network.

http://cascoly-images.com/pix/symbiostock-installation-service/
http://cascoly.com/symbio/symbio-co-op-faq.asp

as far as getting paid, if you host your own site, people pay you directly thru paypal - if you use my co-op, I handle the paypal & customer service, and send payments to the co-op members after sales.

 there's no editorial co-op as yet, but if there's interest I'd help out.  sales from symbiostock are slow, but you set your own prices -- I had 2 sales, so total $25 yesterday, which beats all but 2 sites this month.  the main difficulty is getting noticed by buyers, and that will probably take more focused ad campaigns thru google

for some reason alexa likes the co-op and the network co-op sites rate in the top 20 of 180 symbiostock sites.
http://cascoly.com/symbio/list.asp?list=66

the symbiostock forums that were symbiostock.org are now at http://symbiostock.pix-now.com