Author Topic: Microstock Royalties? (Read 8222 times)

imagedeeva · « **on:** November 22, 2006, 10:48 »

I am new to micropayment and surprised at the range of royalties paid to photographers on different sites. Some sites pay 50% and others 20%. I guess it doesn't really matter in the beginning but what else do you get from a lower paying micropayment like Istockphoto that you would not get from the others to make it worth your while?

Also, has anyone been on the shoots with Istockphoto to one of their community events? Are they useful?

CJPhoto · « **Reply #1 on:** November 22, 2006, 11:08 »

In theory what iStock provides for their higher commision is higher marketing. Considering they are 1 or 2 on peoles lists, this is probably try.

imagedeeva · « **Reply #2 on:** November 22, 2006, 11:10 »

thanks that is a really good point that they do market more aggressively than others...I see them everywhere! it would justify them taking a bigger piece of the pie and seems to be paying off for photographers by the sounds of it.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #3 on:** November 22, 2006, 13:54 »

Yes it definitely pays off

leaf · « **Reply #4 on:** November 22, 2006, 15:36 »

agreed

I would rather get 20% and have 100 sales than get 99% and get 1 sale.

Bateleur · « **Reply #5 on:** November 22, 2006, 17:27 »

Quote from: leaf on November 22, 2006, 15:36

agreed

I would rather get 20% and have 100 sales than get 99% and get 1 sale.

Yup. And that's what iSstock offers. High volume sales. For all I complain about their high-handed ways, I still sell more images through them than any other agency.

Peiling · « **Reply #6 on:** November 23, 2006, 00:50 »

Big Stock is not so bad, had the same no of sales there as Fotolia but the commission I get is double at Big Stock vs Fotolia bcos most sales were 50cent to $1 verses Fotolia of 33cents or 66cents

fintastique · « **Reply #7 on:** November 23, 2006, 15:51 »

Sounds like this thread needs a link to one of tables

different sizes different prices

an 8mp photo will earn you $2.50 at StockXpert and you can set your own price at FP

CanStockPhoto now pay 25c for a subscription download

SS are my biggest earner and they only pay 25c regardless of size (thats why i only ever send them 4 mp)

CJPhoto · « **Reply #8 on:** November 24, 2006, 04:19 »

Quote from: fintastique on November 23, 2006, 15:51

SS are my biggest earner and they only pay 25c regardless of size (thats why i only ever send them 4 mp)

Do you think you limit your chance of a sale (and future sales) by only havnig 4mp pics. A designer might like it but not buy as it is small.

leaf · « **Reply #9 on:** November 24, 2006, 09:42 »

yeah that is what i have thought about too.

Or perhaps in the future they will establish a system where you get paid more for more MP. A few sites have started that. If that is the case, and you have downsized all your images, then you have to upload all the high res images again. Way too much work. I just upload the highest res possible to start with.

fintastique · « **Reply #10 on:** November 24, 2006, 12:57 »

I think in future i may start uploading the 8mp pics everywhere as
an 8mp will earn me
StockXpert $2.50
123 $1.50
FT $1.05
CanStockPhoto $1
istock $1
BigStock $1
DT $1

I actually upload 8mp to iStock to clear their 5mp hurdle

StockXpert are actually the only ones giving a decent price for a newbie the photographers cut will actually be more at DT and BigStock than FT.

The reason I started was I was uploading during the day and it saved a bit of time (and the principle of 25c for an 8mp at SS) whereas now I can queue multiple site uploads with Filezilla so that isn't really an issue.

Though I find most of my downloads are small photos though you are right someone will buy an 8mp+ rather than a 4mp at BS or DT if they are similar shots and BigStock price increase came out of nowhere so other price increases may happen.

imagedeeva · « **Reply #11 on:** November 24, 2006, 13:40 »

thanks fintastique, your site is really helpful and it is great to see the comparison all in one place...I did not realize there were so many variables between the sites.

seems like stockxpert has the best royalty but not the sales volume but worth a shot as it seems like they are growing... I am also going to try dreamstime, shutterstock and istockphoto. fotolia's rejection seems a bit negative to start

thanks everyone!

yingyang0 · « **Reply #12 on:** November 24, 2006, 22:19 »

Quote from: CJPhoto on November 24, 2006, 04:19

Quote from: fintastique on November 23, 2006, 15:51
SS are my biggest earner and they only pay 25c regardless of size (thats why i only ever send them 4 mp)
Do you think you limit your chance of a sale (and future sales) by only havnig 4mp pics. A designer might like it but not buy as it is small.

SS upsizes everything so it doesn't matter how big of a photo you sent them as long as it is over their 4 mp minimum.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #13 on:** November 25, 2006, 16:02 »

yingyang - for old members inst the limit 2mp and it is only 4mp for new people (since about 2 months ago). imagine buying an upsized 2mp image.

IRCrockett · « **Reply #14 on:** November 25, 2006, 16:07 »

The old member minimum size requirement is 2.5 MP.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 26, 2006, 01:54 »

Quote from: CJPhoto on November 25, 2006, 16:02

yingyang - for old members inst the limit 2mp and it is only 4mp for new people (since about 2 months ago). imagine buying an upsized 2mp image.

Ok, but that doesn't effect my point. For SS size doesn't matter.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Microstock Royalties? (Read 8222 times)

imagedeeva

CJPhoto

imagedeeva

Freezingpictures

leaf

Bateleur

Peiling

fintastique

CJPhoto

leaf

fintastique

imagedeeva

yingyang0

CJPhoto

IRCrockett

yingyang0

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors