Author Topic: GL New iStock? We Should (Read 12033 times)

fotografer · « **Reply #25 on:** January 15, 2013, 18:26 »

Quote from: Mantis on January 15, 2013, 18:15

Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 18:10
^^^Haven't they been accepting people photos for a few years now?

To be honest I didn't get past their application, which stated that as part of their upload terms DO NOT UPLOAD MODEL RELEASED PEOPLE IMAGES. So I just clicked "X" and took another swallow of beer.

I've been uploading model released images to them for some time now

klsbear · « **Reply #26 on:** January 15, 2013, 18:30 »

When they initially started accepting images with people I think it was by invitation only. I don't know if they lifted that restriction or if it is still a select group that can upload model-released images.

brmonico · « **Reply #27 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:06 »

What is the site of GL ?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #28 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:11 »

Quote from: brmonico on January 15, 2013, 19:06

What is the site of GL ?

http://graphicleftovers.com/

Kelly@GL · « **Reply #29 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:16 »

Hi All,

We do accept people images!

In the application process we ask that you not upload people images because there is no way to add releases until after you are accepted. To ensure that each applicant is legitimate, we do background checks to make sure the images presented belong to them. In this process, if we see that their portfolio contains MR images, then we activate the MR uploader in their dashboard.

Sorry if this was confusing and not very clear.

ShadySue · « **Reply #30 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:19 »

Seemed clear to me. I just looked at the Seller Agreement where it says:
"The Seller acknowledges that GL will not accept any Images that infringe on any copyright, trademark, property- or any other applicable rights. You are solely responsible for the legal status of your Images. You warrant that for each Image You own all the proprietary rights and that You obtained all the necessary releases which You must provide for each submission."
http://graphicleftovers.com/seller-agreement

Just checking: that wording seems to suggest you don't accepte editorial?

Kelly@GL · « **Reply #31 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:22 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 15, 2013, 19:19

Seemed clear to me. I just looked at the Seller Agreement where it says:
"The Seller acknowledges that GL will not accept any Images that infringe on any copyright, trademark, property- or any other applicable rights. You are solely responsible for the legal status of your Images. You warrant that for each Image You own all the proprietary rights and that You obtained all the necessary releases which You must provide for each submission."
http://graphicleftovers.com/seller-agreement

Just checking: that wording seems to suggest you don't accepte editorial?

Correct, we do not offer an editorial license at this time.

jjneff · « **Reply #32 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:26 »

Will you offer video in the future? Might be a good time to reach out to all exclusives at iStock Kelly. Great site and I will be submitting there in the future.

gillian vann · « **Reply #33 on:** January 15, 2013, 19:50 »

i'm sorry I also was under the impression of no people images.
if 123 hadn't pissed everyone off they may have been a better choice.

brmonico · « **Reply #34 on:** January 15, 2013, 20:34 »

Well, i just my first submission. After i do it i saw all images must be exif data....so...i think only half will have! Lets see...

Kelly@GL · « **Reply #35 on:** January 15, 2013, 23:00 »

Quote from: jjneff on January 15, 2013, 19:26

Will you offer video in the future? Might be a good time to reach out to all exclusives at iStock Kelly. Great site and I will be submitting there in the future.

Video is very popular and would be a great addition to our site. Yes, maybe in the future. We look forward to you joining us!

sdeva · « **Reply #36 on:** January 16, 2013, 01:03 »

Quote from: stockastic on January 15, 2013, 17:15

While it's frustrating to have good photos rejected, I think we'd be better off if some of these sites specialized a bit, instead of everyone trying to sell everything to everyone, and competing only on price. So maybe the answer is more agencies, not necessarily large, but having some degree of specialization - people, or objects, or travel, or something else... which could help buyers too, to some extent.

I couldn't agree more

. Over this Christmas period I uploaded 24 files (all photographs) to GL and they accepted SIX. That's an acceptance rate of 25%. Funnily enough pretty much all those other images got accepted at the other sites (I'm on 10+ stock sites) - and some of those rejected by GL have already started to sell well. So go figure their strategy! On other side GL sells VERY LITTLE despite all those high handed rejections (at least in my case). Someone on another thread suggested that they are pressing more into illustrations, vectors etc which sounds fine to me. That could be sound business strategy in these times of aggressive microstock competition as it focuses on a niche. However if this is the case they should state it clearly - and not waste contributor's time uploading photography works and getting next to everything rejected. That's what I think.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #37 on:** January 16, 2013, 01:29 »

Quote from: sdeva on January 16, 2013, 01:03

Quote from: stockastic on January 15, 2013, 17:15
While it's frustrating to have good photos rejected, I think we'd be better off if some of these sites specialized a bit, instead of everyone trying to sell everything to everyone, and competing only on price. So maybe the answer is more agencies, not necessarily large, but having some degree of specialization - people, or objects, or travel, or something else... which could help buyers too, to some extent.

I couldn't agree more . Over this Christmas period I uploaded 24 files (all photographs) to GL and they accepted SIX. That's an acceptance rate of 25%. Funnily enough pretty much all those other images got accepted at the other sites (I'm on 10+ stock sites) - and some of those rejected by GL have already started to sell well. So go figure their strategy! On other side GL sells VERY LITTLE despite all those high handed rejections (at least in my case). Someone on another thread suggested that they are pressing more into illustrations, vectors etc which sounds fine to me. That could be sound business strategy in these times of aggressive microstock competition as it focuses on a niche. However if this is the case they should state it clearly - and not waste contributor's time uploading photography works and getting next to everything rejected. That's what I think.

that is very weird, sure they are a little picky but I don't think they are unfair, looked into your iStock portfolio and I don't see a reason for rejections at GL, what were the rejections reasons? that said my GL portfolio is smaller than at SS

sdeva · « **Reply #38 on:** January 16, 2013, 02:57 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 16, 2013, 01:29

Quote from: sdeva on January 16, 2013, 01:03
Quote from: stockastic on January 15, 2013, 17:15
While it's frustrating to have good photos rejected, I think we'd be better off if some of these sites specialized a bit, instead of everyone trying to sell everything to everyone, and competing only on price. So maybe the answer is more agencies, not necessarily large, but having some degree of specialization - people, or objects, or travel, or something else... which could help buyers too, to some extent.

I couldn't agree more . Over this Christmas period I uploaded 24 files (all photographs) to GL and they accepted SIX. That's an acceptance rate of 25%. Funnily enough pretty much all those other images got accepted at the other sites (I'm on 10+ stock sites) - and some of those rejected by GL have already started to sell well. So go figure their strategy! On other side GL sells VERY LITTLE despite all those high handed rejections (at least in my case). Someone on another thread suggested that they are pressing more into illustrations, vectors etc which sounds fine to me. That could be sound business strategy in these times of aggressive microstock competition as it focuses on a niche. However if this is the case they should state it clearly - and not waste contributor's time uploading photography works and getting next to everything rejected. That's what I think.

that is very weird, sure they are a little picky but I don't think they are unfair, looked into your iStock portfolio and I don't see a reason for rejections at GL, what were the rejections reasons? that said my GL portfolio is smaller than at SS

many different ones such as- We are not interested in this image. Thank you - Isolation (including one or more images that had not even been isolated) - Tones - Poor use of focus - Lighting - Contains artifacts, noise or aberation. My issue is that at least over 90% of these same images have gotten accepted at other websites and some already started to sell well despite low January effect. So just dont get it!! $:-\$

Phil · « **Reply #39 on:** January 16, 2013, 03:32 »

they also have a daily upload limit, which is a pain for putting up whole ports

Microbius · « **Reply #40 on:** January 16, 2013, 03:45 »

Quote from: Kelly@GL on January 15, 2013, 19:16

.......To ensure that each applicant is legitimate, we do background checks to make sure the images presented belong to them......

Can I just say that GL is the only agency I have ever had contact me to say they had spotted something coming through the queue from another contributor that they think could have been stolen from me, and could I check and verify if that is the case.

Now contrast that with some of the other sites that currently house portfolios from people with blatantly infringing material several weeks after they have been reported here.

(I hope this doesn't give my ID away to GL staff but it had to be said!)

sharpshot · « **Reply #41 on:** January 16, 2013, 04:29 »

Quote from: Kelly@GL on January 15, 2013, 23:00

Quote from: jjneff on January 15, 2013, 19:26
Will you offer video in the future? Might be a good time to reach out to all exclusives at iStock Kelly. Great site and I will be submitting there in the future.

Video is very popular and would be a great addition to our site. Yes, maybe in the future. We look forward to you joining us!

Perhaps another option is a partnership with Pond5? They're another contributor friendly site that specialize in video clips and already have a lot of buyers. It might be a good option for former exclusives to upload stills to GL and video clips to Pond5, especially if the two sites could work together and cross promote the different portfolios. Starting a new video site from scratch is going to take a lot of time and Pond5 aren't ideal for stills buyers, I don't think they sell vectors yet.

BrianM · « **Reply #42 on:** January 16, 2013, 09:24 »

Kelly@GL,
Could you respond to some of the acceptance rate issues in this thread?

I've been a contributor with iStock for over 5 years. With a 90% approval rating and a portfolio of thousands of images. Many of us have been around long enough to know what sells (especially within our own areas of focus.)

One thing Getty and iStock have done well is get over the fetishistic quality focus and instead focus on sound quality images that are also authentic and serve buyers well. Heck, for the extreme, consider the current phone cam/mobile craze of buyers and ad campaigns (perhaps a fad, who knows) where lo-fi is actually sought after.

One thing I would place a high priority on if I move to another agency/distributor would be a reasonable acceptance process for experienced stock photographers that quickly checks for adequate quality but doesn't try to guess the market (which can change over time) nor toss out solid images, perhaps made under difficult circumstances, because of minor flaws that wouldn't concern buyers.

ShadySue · « **Reply #43 on:** January 16, 2013, 11:04 »

Quote from: Kelly@GL on January 15, 2013, 19:22

Quote from: ShadySue on January 15, 2013, 19:19
Just checking: that wording seems to suggest you don't accepte editorial?
Correct, we do not offer an editorial license at this time.

Thank you for confirming.
In best Duncan Bannatyne mode, "And for that reason, I'm out!"

Newsfocus1 · « **Reply #44 on:** January 16, 2013, 12:02 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 16, 2013, 11:04

Quote from: Kelly@GL on January 15, 2013, 19:22
Quote from: ShadySue on January 15, 2013, 19:19
Just checking: that wording seems to suggest you don't accepte editorial?
Correct, we do not offer an editorial license at this time.
Thank you for confirming.
In best Duncan Bannatyne mode, "And for that reason, I'm out!"

That would be me too as a large proportion of my port is editorial. Kelly, is that something you are considering or would consider in the near future? Regards, David.

heywoody · « **Reply #45 on:** January 16, 2013, 13:46 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 16, 2013, 11:04

Quote from: Kelly@GL on January 15, 2013, 19:22
Quote from: ShadySue on January 15, 2013, 19:19
Just checking: that wording seems to suggest you don't accepte editorial?
Correct, we do not offer an editorial license at this time.
Thank you for confirming.
In best Duncan Bannatyne mode, "And for that reason, I'm out!"

There are other forms of work that aren't accepted either which makes them unsuitable for some but, again, the key thing is that it would be a case of moving your product line from tesco or walmart and using the local corner shop to sell your product

ShadySue · « **Reply #46 on:** January 16, 2013, 14:03 »

Quote from: heywoody on January 16, 2013, 13:46

Quote from: ShadySue on January 16, 2013, 11:04
Quote from: Kelly@GL on January 15, 2013, 19:22
Quote from: ShadySue on January 15, 2013, 19:19
Just checking: that wording seems to suggest you don't accepte editorial?
Correct, we do not offer an editorial license at this time.
Thank you for confirming.
In best Duncan Bannatyne mode, "And for that reason, I'm out!"
There are other forms of work that aren't accepted either which makes them unsuitable for some but, again, the key thing is that it would be a case of moving your product line from tesco or walmart and using the local corner shop to sell your product

Of course, but if you can't sell your product at the corner shop, it can't work.

Tryingmybest · « **Reply #47 on:** January 16, 2013, 14:49 »

Quote from: jjneff on January 15, 2013, 10:59

O.K. I am a lone business like all of you, when my files are pulled from iStock I am looking for a place with a higher price point then SS. It makes no business sense for me to just deactivate files with no place to put them just because I am pissed. I am looking at GL and thinking lets start this New Site with one that is already up and running. I think Kelly will work with us and this will add a one two punch to iStock at the same time. We can launch a massive campaign for GL and feel great about where our images are. I think its a win win for us

GL is a good place. I think everyone should follow their heart. That said, we need to back the smaller folks to give them a chance to take the place of eyestuck. That's easy for me to say as an illustrator since I hardly ever need to use releases, pay models, etc.

m@m · « **Reply #48 on:** January 16, 2013, 14:58 »

GL! been there done that = No Sales, tons of nonsense rejections, up to now that I know of, No People photos unless your invited, and just read No Editorials...sorry dropped them around a year ago for all the above reasons...No thanks!

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #49 on:** January 16, 2013, 15:12 »

Pleasant place, pleasant people. Professionally run, etc. They want to lay a bit more emphacy on that they sell photography not just illutrations, vectors.
Im afraid its not much revenue at the moment.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: GL New iStock? We Should (Read 12033 times)

fotografer

klsbear

brmonico

luissantos84

Kelly@GL

ShadySue

Kelly@GL

jjneff

gillian vann

brmonico

Kelly@GL

sdeva

luissantos84

sdeva

Phil

Microbius

sharpshot

BrianM

ShadySue

Newsfocus1

heywoody

ShadySue

Tryingmybest

m@m

ClaridgeJ

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors