MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: steheap on January 05, 2010, 13:08
-
I recently (3 days ago) uploaded small versions of all my stock photos onto a Flikr pro account. I put a small copyright watermark along the bottom of each, but that would be easily removed if someone really wanted to - however, all they could download is an 800 pixel wide image. I put some generic words in my profile to say that I was a keen photographer and that my images were on Shutterstock, iStock etc. - no direct links to any portfolios.
I saw a lot of initial views of the photos, but today, a real sleeper file (http://www.flickr.com/photos/backyardimage/4235218883/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/backyardimage/4235218883/#)) was viewed on Flikr and then purchased on Shutterstock.
Does the group have any views on whether this sort of activity is beneficial to sales or just allows unscrupulous buyers to pick up small images for free?
Steve
-
No and it can harm you from going exclusive with a agency
-
No and it can harm you from going exclusive with a agency
No it wouldn't. If you post the file all rights reserved with a watermark you're certainly not offering a RF license on it.
As to whether it helps you in sales. If people see something they like and you can let them know where to find it, I imagine it would. Might help with referrals too.
-
I have found it to be beneficial. I post small watermarked versions of all my images to my flickr port, with a line to contact me for info on obtaining full size, non-watermarked versions. When people go to my site, they find links to my portfolios at the major agencies, and if they buy after clicking on those links, I get referral sales. I've received a number of SS referrals that way.
Now, keep in mind that Flickr has guidelines against commercial use, and it seems to be a big grey area so I'm trying to be cautious. But I'm certainly being less blatant about my activity than LumaxArt, a pretty high profile microstocker, who actually has direct links to his major agency ports in the description of each image. ( Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lumaxart/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lumaxart/) )
And if he has put a lot of effort into making Flickr work for him, you can bet there is serious upside to it.
-
This is one of those "your mileage may vary" kind of things...
As for my personal experience... Yes, I have direct sales attributed to stuff I have posted on my Flickr account. I even had a book author find one of my stills on Flickr and license it for his book cover. So, yes, there are a LOT of buyers using Flickr as a search engine.
But it's a crap shoot whether or not your images end up being legitimately purchased or stolen. For some, it's not a risk they're willing to take. For others, like myself, I find it more beneficial than harmful.
What I am finding *very* interesting is that I have been posting a lot of 3D renders on Flickr with links to my TurboSquid portfolio where I sell 3D models and I've seen my sales on TurboSquid jump as a direct result.
-
No and it can harm you from going exclusive with a agency
No it wouldn't. If you post the file all rights reserved with a watermark you're certainly not offering a RF license on it.
As to whether it helps you in sales. If people see something they like and you can let them know where to find it, I imagine it would. Might help with referrals too.
I don't see any designers going on Flickr as they have to deal with laws for not getting sued. The images there are not licenced (RF). Though you might be right, it can give you many referrals. I am curious at how much you can earn with this, I don't use referral links myself.