Author Topic: Do you have your own stock site (or sites)? (Read 13163 times)

Jeffrey · « **on:** December 05, 2012, 12:07 »

Please post them here.

cthoman · « **Reply #1 on:** December 05, 2012, 12:44 »

I was thinking about starting a thread like this to set up a link exchange for artist run sites, but I never got around to it. Anyway... my site, MyStockVectors, is in my signature.

jareso · « **Reply #2 on:** December 05, 2012, 16:32 »

Sure I have some personal portfolio website(s)!

My main English personal portfolio website:
http://www.jareso.com

And than version(s) in respective languages:
(Of course human translated.)
1.) (jareso.sk) Slovenská republika
2.) (jareso.cz) Česká republika
3.) (jareso.pl) Polska
4.) (jareso.it) Italia
5.) (jareso.se) Sverige
6.) (jareso.ro) România
7.) (jareso.dk) Danmark
8.) (jareso.de) Deutschland
9.) (jareso.gr) Ελλάδα
10.) (jareso.be) België
11.) (jareso.fr) France
12.) (jareso.es) España
13.) (jareso.hu) Magyarország
14.) (jareso.ru) Россия
15.) (jareso.bg) Република България
+ More are in development.

I wrote some info about my portfolio websites here at MSG in various threads in past, so I will not repeat it here.
Instead I will give link here to last thread I wrote about this topic.
In case you want to read about why I have so many language versions of my website(s).

http://www.microstockgroup.com/selling-direct/keywording-on-your-website/msg277460/#msg277460

Btw. If anyone wants to do link exchange with my jareso(.com, .sk, .cz, etc.) websites please let me know!

Plus I am also developing/working on this one as my newest personal portfolio promotion website:
http://www.jareso.net
It is absolutely unfinished project, there is almost nothing for now, but I decided to put it online just for fun.
(Still better than empty/parked domain.)

+ I am also developing and preparing even more personal portfolio websites for myself.
I mean different projects that will be run on different domains than those I already mentioned.
But still will be promoting my stock portfolios.
Those are also far from finished and in various stages. I am not sure when those will be online.

lisafx · « **Reply #3 on:** December 05, 2012, 18:32 »

Mine's in my signature

Jeffrey · « **Reply #4 on:** December 05, 2012, 19:02 »

Nice sites you have there.

cybernesco · « **Reply #5 on:** December 05, 2012, 19:09 »

Here is mine

http://www.denispepin.com

Denis

PixelsAway · « **Reply #6 on:** December 06, 2012, 00:34 »

http://pixelsawaystock.com

Reef · « **Reply #7 on:** December 06, 2012, 01:13 »

Not yet but it sounds like a good idea.

If you are IS Exclusive are there any restrictions to setting up your own site and selling material as RM? I'm a little vague about the whole procedure but given the current state of affairs it might be something I would consider.

Jeffrey · « **Reply #8 on:** December 06, 2012, 04:08 »

^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

jjneff · « **Reply #9 on:** December 06, 2012, 06:22 »

Since when dose iStock allow that??

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #10 on:** December 06, 2012, 07:58 »

Quote from: Jeffrey on December 06, 2012, 04:08

^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

Lol, no they don't.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 06, 2012, 11:16 »

Quote from: sjlocke on December 06, 2012, 07:58

Quote from: Jeffrey on December 06, 2012, 04:08
^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

Lol, no they don't.

and how about on your own? (direct payments)

BImages · « **Reply #12 on:** December 06, 2012, 11:28 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 06, 2012, 11:16

Quote from: sjlocke on December 06, 2012, 07:58
Quote from: Jeffrey on December 06, 2012, 04:08
^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

Lol, no they don't.

and how about on your own? (direct payments)

You can't, unless it's Rm only...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #13 on:** December 06, 2012, 11:34 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 06, 2012, 11:28

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 06, 2012, 11:16
Quote from: sjlocke on December 06, 2012, 07:58
Quote from: Jeffrey on December 06, 2012, 04:08
^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

Lol, no they don't.

and how about on your own? (direct payments)

You can't, unless it's Rm only...

thanks! how do you as an exclusive feel about that? its your own work, you can´t do lets say an exhibition and sell some pictures?

BImages · « **Reply #14 on:** December 06, 2012, 11:55 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 06, 2012, 11:34

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 06, 2012, 11:28
Quote from: luissantos84 on December 06, 2012, 11:16
Quote from: sjlocke on December 06, 2012, 07:58
Quote from: Jeffrey on December 06, 2012, 04:08
^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

Lol, no they don't.

and how about on your own? (direct payments)

You can't, unless it's Rm only...

thanks! how do you as an exclusive feel about that? its your own work, you can´t do lets say an exhibition and sell some pictures?

The main difference between RM (or work for hire) and RF is the the number of buyers per image.
RF is multiple simultaneous buyers per image
RM is one simultanous buyer per image.

If you do an exhibition and sell multiple time the same picture to different clients, that's still considered RF, and is a breach of exclusivity contract. You can still shoot people and sell them their own portrait, that's basically RM and is allowed.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #15 on:** December 06, 2012, 11:55 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 06, 2012, 11:34

thanks! how do you as an exclusive feel about that? its your own work, you can´t do lets say an exhibition and sell some pictures?

Of course you can. Exclusive means IS is your sole distributor for RF sales. You should know that...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #16 on:** December 06, 2012, 12:19 »

I do know that you can sell as RM Sean but I was wondering about offline sales, thanks for the explanation Tony

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #17 on:** December 06, 2012, 13:59 »

Not my site, but I sell through WarmPicture, which is an artist-run agency - link in my signature

tab62 · « **Reply #18 on:** December 06, 2012, 14:17 »

I am still a newbie compared you folks thus don't blast me too hard on my questions about this topic-

If you sell your own images can this leave you open to a potential direct lawsuit as compared to having a microstock company sell them for you- at least you have a buffer with the MS company where with your own company there is no buffer.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #19 on:** December 06, 2012, 14:22 »

Quote from: tab62 on December 06, 2012, 14:17

I am still a newbie compared you folks thus don't blast me too hard on my questions about this topic-

If you sell your own images can this leave you open to a potential direct lawsuit as compared to having a microstock company sell them for you- at least you have a buffer with the MS company where with your own company there is no buffer.

The MS terms tend to pass any disagreements onto the contributor, iirc.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #20 on:** December 06, 2012, 14:27 »

You're always on the hook if you submit work that violates copyright, doesn't have a valid model release or anything else that could get you sued. Having an agency doesn't change that - see this lawsuit here and here as but one example. Google will get you lots more

Reef · « **Reply #21 on:** December 06, 2012, 17:20 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 06, 2012, 11:55

The main difference between RM (or work for hire) and RF is the the number of buyers per image.
RF is multiple simultaneous buyers per image
RM is one simultanous buyer per image.

If you do an exhibition and sell multiple time the same picture to different clients, that's still considered RF, and is a breach of exclusivity contract. You can still shoot people and sell them their own portrait, that's basically RM and is allowed.

I've heard that some IS Exclusive people sell RM on Alamy. Can not an RM image be sold multiple times as long as the history is recorded?

From IS Exclusive Agreement 2.1
but shall not include ...... Content that is "Rights Managed", which is defined as Content produced by the Supplier and licensed for a fee that is based on one or more limited uses and for which usage history is tracked;

luissantos84 · « **Reply #22 on:** December 06, 2012, 17:34 »

Quote from: Reef on December 06, 2012, 17:20

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 06, 2012, 11:55
The main difference between RM (or work for hire) and RF is the the number of buyers per image.
RF is multiple simultaneous buyers per image
RM is one simultanous buyer per image.

If you do an exhibition and sell multiple time the same picture to different clients, that's still considered RF, and is a breach of exclusivity contract. You can still shoot people and sell them their own portrait, that's basically RM and is allowed.

I've heard that some IS Exclusive people sell RM on Alamy. Can not an RM image be sold multiple times as long as the history is recorded?

From IS Exclusive Agreement 2.1
but shall not include ...... Content that is "Rights Managed", which is defined as Content produced by the Supplier and licensed for a fee that is based on one or more limited uses and for which usage history is tracked;

I have not only heard but seen with my own eyes exclusives selling on all other agencies but I will let other find them, don't wanna ruin other life but actually they are screwing indies, yesterday send a DT message to him, will see his reply

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #23 on:** December 06, 2012, 17:38 »

Quote from: Reef on December 06, 2012, 17:20

I've heard that some IS Exclusive people sell RM on Alamy. Can not an RM image be sold multiple times as long as the history is recorded?

Yes.

Reef · « **Reply #24 on:** December 06, 2012, 17:48 »

Quote from: sjlocke on December 06, 2012, 17:38

Quote from: Reef on December 06, 2012, 17:20
I've heard that some IS Exclusive people sell RM on Alamy. Can not an RM image be sold multiple times as long as the history is recorded?

Yes.

Thank you

ShadySue · « **Reply #25 on:** December 06, 2012, 18:31 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 06, 2012, 11:55

If you do an exhibition and sell multiple time the same picture to different clients, that's still considered RF, and is a breach of exclusivity contract.

No, it's not. It's selling a print, no matter how many prints you sell.
Even if you sold them a digital image that they could print off, it would still be RM so long as you made it clear that there were limits as to what they could do with the digital file - effectively, you'd be selling a Rights Managed license for them to print the file.

Exclusive ASA 2b:
"nothing shall restrict the Supplier from (i) establishing or maintaining a personal portfolio on the Internet where Exclusive Content is posted for the purposes of art display so long as you are not licensing or giving away rights to the Exclusive Content for anything other than such display; or (ii) using Exclusive Content in connection with the sale by Supplier of prints, t-shirts and other merchandise so long as you are not licensing or giving away rights to the Exclusive Content for anything other than such merchandising. "

ShadySue · « **Reply #26 on:** December 06, 2012, 18:32 »

Quote from: Jeffrey on December 06, 2012, 04:08

^^ iS now allows exclusive artist to sell from other sites, as long as the files are completely different.

Nope, only if they're Rights Managed.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #27 on:** December 06, 2012, 19:11 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 06, 2012, 11:55

The main difference between RM (or work for hire) and RF is the the number of buyers per image.
RF is multiple simultaneous buyers per image
RM is one simultanous buyer per image.

If you do an exhibition and sell multiple time the same picture to different clients, that's still considered RF, and is a breach of exclusivity contract. You can still shoot people and sell them their own portrait, that's basically RM and is allowed.

Dude, you really need to do some research. You're completely incorrect.

Reef · « **Reply #28 on:** December 06, 2012, 20:25 »

Thanks for clarifying this guys.

I've gone ahead and used the Alamy RM EULA (Worldwide) as the basis for my own RM EULA. The only major change I made was to remove the refund policy (defects excluded) but still allow the license to be cancelled. Well, what the heck

qwerty · « **Reply #29 on:** December 07, 2012, 03:48 »

Just sell RM photos off your own site with a 1 hour exclusivity clause in the contract.

^^ note I could not find sarcasm font ^^

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #30 on:** December 07, 2012, 07:34 »

Quote from: qwerty on December 07, 2012, 03:48

Just sell RM photos off your own site with a 1 hour exclusivity clause in the contract.

^^ note I could not find sarcasm font ^^

RM does not require exclusivity.

Jeffrey · « **Reply #31 on:** December 07, 2012, 09:58 »

I temporarily removed my vectors in my site.

I thought I misread the rule at iStock.

I went to the forum at iS to confirm.

Let's go back to the topic to talk about our site in this thread.

cybernesco · « **Reply #32 on:** December 07, 2012, 11:03 »

This is amazing to see the worldwide interest in microstock and in this site. Thank you Leaf for maintaining this site and letting us put up our site links in our signature.

With statcounter analytics help, I have put up a list of locations of some of the visitors that came from microstockgroup.com to visit my site since I replied to this thread on Dec 05. This is interesting to see how wide spread it is. As per following some of you reading this may recognized yourself:

Belgrade,Serbia
Vancouver, Canada
Puyallup, Washington, US
Birmingham, UK
Vouneuil-Sous-Biard, France
Szczepanow, Poland,
Dungannow, UK
Huntersville, NC, US
Istanbul, Turkey
Shanghai, China
Bucharest, Romania
Birkerod, Denmark
Sacramento, CA, US
Moscow, Russia
Katowice, Poland,
Anjou, QC, Canada
Hong Kong
London, UK
Castleford, UK

Denis

BImages · « **Reply #33 on:** December 07, 2012, 12:06 »

Quote from: sjlocke on December 07, 2012, 07:34

Quote from: qwerty on December 07, 2012, 03:48
Just sell RM photos off your own site with a 1 hour exclusivity clause in the contract.

^^ note I could not find sarcasm font ^^

RM does not require exclusivity.

http://www.gettyimages.ca/creativeimages/rightsmanaged?Language=en-US

I like where it's written: "exclusivity and control"...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #34 on:** December 07, 2012, 12:10 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 12:06

I like where it's written: "exclusivity and control"...

"‘Own’ the image for the duration of your project and control who else can use it."

... or don't. Exclusivity costs extra. It isn't a requirement.

ShadySue · « **Reply #35 on:** December 07, 2012, 12:11 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 12:06

http://www.gettyimages.ca/creativeimages/rightsmanaged?Language=en-US

H*ll. Why on earth, on a page dedicated to Rights Managed on Getty - "Excellence, exclusivity and control", is there a highly visible link to Thinkstock?

cthoman · « **Reply #36 on:** December 07, 2012, 12:14 »

This topic really veered off the cliff.

BImages · « **Reply #37 on:** December 07, 2012, 13:05 »

Quote from: sjlocke on December 07, 2012, 12:10

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 12:06
I like where it's written: "exclusivity and control"...

"‘Own’ the image for the duration of your project and control who else can use it."

... or don't. Exclusivity costs extra. It isn't a requirement.

Why in hell would you buy RM instead of RF, if it's not for the exclusivity? Think of it as a buyer point of view...
Why pay more ...for nothing?

ShadySue · « **Reply #38 on:** December 07, 2012, 13:08 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 13:05

Quote from: sjlocke on December 07, 2012, 12:10
Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 12:06
I like where it's written: "exclusivity and control"...

"‘Own’ the image for the duration of your project and control who else can use it."

... or don't. Exclusivity costs extra. It isn't a requirement.

Why in hell would you buy RM instead of RF, if it's not for the exclusivity? Think of it as a buyer point of view...
Why pay more ...for nothing?

RM without exclusivity can be cheaper, e.g. on Alamy. But as with most things, 'it depends'.

Anyway, the question is moot. If an image is set as RM, it's RM.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #39 on:** December 07, 2012, 13:09 »

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 13:05

Why in hell would you buy RM instead of RF, if it's not for the exclusivity? Think of it as a buyer point of view...
Why pay more ...for nothing?

Because the image you want isn't offered as RF. And you don't want to pay $500 for an RF image when your usage needs are small.

Getty's RM images don't even include exclusivity or offer it online.

"For help with licensing an image for multiple uses, exclusivity, bulk pricing, or other products and services, contact us by email, online or phone."

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #40 on:** December 07, 2012, 13:33 »

I have my own Trad RM agency since 1996. Its offline and very specialized, hence only RM. Its quite small only with around 45K images but it pays handsomely, especially from a heap of old and existing assignment clients, constantly buying for annuals, profiles, catalogues, advertising, etc. Its operated in the traditional way with direct client contact.

Having your own micro-site have never interested me at all. Too much hassle for too little in return. Besides, time is running out for that sort of thingy.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #41 on:** December 07, 2012, 14:12 »

you are always talking so well about RM, I wonder why you end up selling microstock, not attacking you just a question

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #42 on:** December 07, 2012, 17:08 »

Quote from: sjlocke on December 07, 2012, 13:09

Quote from: Buzbuzzer on December 07, 2012, 13:05
Why in hell would you buy RM instead of RF, if it's not for the exclusivity? Think of it as a buyer point of view...
Why pay more ...for nothing?

Because the image you want isn't offered as RF. And you don't want to pay $500 for an RF image when your usage needs are small.

Getty's RM images don't even include exclusivity or offer it online.

"For help with licensing an image for multiple uses, exclusivity, bulk pricing, or other products and services, contact us by email, online or phone."

My understanding or Rights Managed is just that ... the buyer and the seller decide on which or how much right is being purchased (licensed). It can be exclusive for a period of time for a certain region or ... it can be exclusive use ... Period.

It is just a matter of which Rights are being Managed.

Jeffrey · « **Reply #43 on:** December 07, 2012, 19:23 »

Please PUT YOUR DEBATE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

This is a thread about OUR OWN STOCK SITES!

luissantos84 · « **Reply #44 on:** December 07, 2012, 19:28 »

Quote from: Jeffrey on December 07, 2012, 19:23

Please PUT YOUR DEBATE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

This is a thread about OUR OWN STOCK SITES!

why don't you try to learn instead? or are you collecting links or getting ideas for your own website?

ShadySue · « **Reply #45 on:** December 07, 2012, 20:24 »

Quote from: tab62 on December 06, 2012, 14:17

If you sell your own images can this leave you open to a potential direct lawsuit as compared to having a microstock company sell them for you- at least you have a buffer with the MS company where with your own company there is no buffer.

We might like to imagine so, but you'd have to read the small print in each agency's terms and conditions. For example, iStock's exclusive ASA says
The Supplier agrees that neither iStockphoto nor any of its directors, officers, employees, partners, affiliates or agents shall be liable for any damages, whether direct, indirect, consequential or incidental, arising out of the use of, or the inability to use any Exclusive Content ...
... You acknowledge and accept and therefore waive any right to object to the fact that it is common business practice for commercial uses that the creator of Content is not credited, that Content may be modified, used in connection with sensitive topics and may be used or modified in ways that may be controversial or unflattering.
...
Notwithstanding the foregoing, given the exigencies of the stock photography business and the prevalence of royalty-free content, iStockphoto cannot take responsibility for the compliance by purchasers and licensees of the terms of such agreements. Accordingly, you acknowledge and agree to the possibility of Exclusive Content being used in a manner that is not contemplated in this Agreement, and you agree that notwithstanding any rights you may have to pursue the licensees of such Exclusive Content at law, iStockphoto shall have no liability to you or any person claiming through you for any breach by a licensee of the terms of any agreement respecting Accepted Exclusive Content.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #46 on:** December 08, 2012, 02:02 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 07, 2012, 14:12

you are always talking so well about RM, I wonder why you end up selling microstock, not attacking you just a question

Yeah thats fair enough. Well when I opend it 1996, there wasnt anything else, The term RF had just started but nobody really believed it would take off. There wasnt much else to do but thinking in terms of RM. Also the fact I started stock back in 88, then there was only RM, nothing else.
Back in those days most photographers made deals with their day-rate clients, i.e. I do the job for say 3K instead of 4K and in return you let me shoot some stock for myself inclusive MRs, PRs and all, not clashing with the commissioned pictures. SURE! they went for it all the way. Hence you could build up a massive port of very hard to come by images, etc.

In short RM is stable because of the people running it. They are very often creatives themselves working on long term plans and ideas as opposed to micro where any agency here today could be gone tomorrow, short term profits, etc. Ofcourse there are some loop-holes in RM but on the whole its quite stable.

If youre ever thinking in terms of RM? might be for some special material youve got or something? you can always PM me and Ill be glad to answer, got some great contacts after all these years.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #47 on:** December 08, 2012, 04:29 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on December 08, 2012, 02:02

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 07, 2012, 14:12
you are always talking so well about RM, I wonder why you end up selling microstock, not attacking you just a question

Yeah thats fair enough. Well when I opend it 1996, there wasnt anything else, The term RF had just started but nobody really believed it would take off. There wasnt much else to do but thinking in terms of RM. Also the fact I started stock back in 88, then there was only RM, nothing else.
Back in those days most photographers made deals with their day-rate clients, i.e. I do the job for say 3K instead of 4K and in return you let me shoot some stock for myself inclusive MRs, PRs and all, not clashing with the commissioned pictures. SURE! they went for it all the way. Hence you could build up a massive port of very hard to come by images, etc.

In short RM is stable because of the people running it. They are very often creatives themselves working on long term plans and ideas as opposed to micro where any agency here today could be gone tomorrow, short term profits, etc. Ofcourse there are some loop-holes in RM but on the whole its quite stable.

If youre ever thinking in terms of RM? might be for some special material youve got or something? you can always PM me and Ill be glad to answer, got some great contacts after all these years.

thats a nice answer, thanks for sharing

(was born in 84)

qwerty · « **Reply #48 on:** December 14, 2012, 03:13 »

Quote from: Jeffrey on December 07, 2012, 19:23

Please PUT YOUR DEBATE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

This is a thread about OUR OWN STOCK SITES!

?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #49 on:** December 14, 2012, 03:41 »

Quote from: Reef on December 06, 2012, 17:48

Quote from: sjlocke on December 06, 2012, 17:38
Quote from: Reef on December 06, 2012, 17:20
I've heard that some IS Exclusive people sell RM on Alamy. Can not an RM image be sold multiple times as long as the history is recorded?

Yes.

Thank you

What's more, you can sell a picture of a banana on a white background as RM if you feel like it. RM does not mean editorial.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Do you have your own stock site (or sites)? (Read 13163 times)

lisafx

tab62

WarrenPrice

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors