I just noticed first sales on few sites so I could start from something positive here. So far after 2 months I am expecting first payout on SS, got few DL on 123 and FT (ftp upload is broken) and finally first sales on DT and StockXpert.

All others seems to be dead.
IS - stack with their upload process so I cannot really build any portfolio there while I managed to have over 1000 photos on 123
BigStock - same as above, weeks of waiting for review of 10 photos
CS - they are very fast in reviewing I mean rejecting my photos
FP - everything works ok but no sales at all
SV - just patetic review times and upload process

Potentially useful.
YAY - smooth upload process. I can build portofolio almost as fast as 123 but I have no idea if this would take off in June

How long have you been on iStock? Your profile shows December 2005 but based on your posts it seems that you haven't started contributing till recently.

As a newbie you can upload 15/week so about 60 a month. If you upload VERY good images you should get 50 of those 60 approved. At this rate you can have 600 images there in a year. If these images are top notch then they would make a LOT of money. At this stage in the industry quality is lot more important than quantity.

The upload limits are problem only for two types of people:
Someone like you, who just started and has suddenly a lot of images to upload.
Someone like Yuri Arcus, who produces just enormous amounts of images (honestly I don't understand why they have upload limits for black diamonds)

Quote from: maco0708 on May 16, 2008, 22:50

(honestly I don't understand why they have upload limits for black diamonds)

Have to admit, I have wondered the same thing a lot lately regarding diamonds, as I have bumped up against my 35/week limit every week for months. 

But you make a good point about those photographers like Yuri and others who upload hundreds of images a week.  If the limits were not in place for such high producers then it would put a big strain on the reviewing system and result in searches packed disproportionately with images from a few non-exclusive mega producers.

Having exclusive images competing with such a huge increase in non-exclusive images might result in lower exclusive sales and disgruntled exclusive members.

Keeping non-exclusive limits low also ensures that the buyers see more unique content in the searches rather than the same content that pops to the front of every search on every other site.

I have come to the conclusion that the UL limits on higher levels are primarily to protect the exclusive collection.  Not a bad decision for istock ITLR (although damned inconvenient for me )

Good point Lisa! I wonder if that is precisely the logic behind it. But by protecting exclusives they are "hurting" customers because they have less images available.

While I have complained about the iStock upload limits, it is a good way of managing the volume and as people above have noted, culling out many duplicates, because the photographers will send the best photos first, not batches of different angles of the same shot. It also protects the exclusives to some extent.

Limited uploads also reduces the burden and stress on reviewers and can make a more consistent group of reviewers. Also good for content management.

Here's something else to consider. Lets say someone has 1,000 MS photos in their portfolio. A new site opens, they upload the same 1,000 photos that are on the other top sites, except iStock!

You look at the top 7-14 sites and all the same photos are pretty much on all of them. The number of redundant photos across the industry, makes almost all the sites, the same as each other. No advantage to paying for one site over another, except at iStock?

No advantage to photographers, because all we do is spread the same seeds across the same fields, and hope they will sprout in a different bare spot. 

The advantage to SS is that they have a lower cost subscription to "all the same photos" that are available at just about every other site, with the above exception of IS exclusives.

IMHO there are two major sites, and then all the rest. Best wishes to Yay or SV or NewMicroOfTheMonth, or anyone else, but it's going to be a nearly impossible task to grab a viable share of the market. I don't see anything compelling to buyers about offering the same photos, at higher prices, that SS probably has already online.

The third big site will be someone who comes up with something different, not someone who sells the same old re-cycled photos, in the same ways that SS and IS are already doing it.