pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What are the Best Macro Rights Managed Sites to Try?  (Read 24823 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« on: November 07, 2015, 12:23 »
+3
Hello microstockers,

Now that SS is giving our work away for free, I'm willing to try macro or rights managed websites. Are there any that are really good? I found Corbis and am ready to submit my application.
What are your personal thoughts? I really appreciate it. Thanks guys!


« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2015, 12:45 »
0
Getty Images, but only 20% of royalties.

« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2015, 13:06 »
+1
The best are the aggregates, Blend, Image Source etc.

« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2015, 13:12 »
+5
I can't offer suggestions, but would direct you to reports of Corbis' recent financial troubles and layoffs. I wouldn't expect much from becoming a contributor there

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-04/corbis-said-cutting-about-15-of-workers-amid-photo-price-war

And current & former employees' veiws

http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Corbis-Reviews-E4109.htm

« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2015, 13:37 »
+5
The best are the aggregates, Blend, Image Source etc.

I have around a thousand images through two of the biggest aggregates and my RPI is higher on the lower quality images I have in microstock. Pretty sad.

Hongover

« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2015, 14:16 »
0
There are a few, but Corbis and Getty is struggling.

It may seem like SS is giving away images for free, but we must understand that it's not SS that determines the market...it's the buyers. And the buyers are disagreeing with the macro stock business model.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2015, 15:03 »
+21
There are a few, but Corbis and Getty is struggling.

It may seem like SS is giving away images for free, but we must understand that it's not SS that determines the market...it's the buyers. And the buyers are disagreeing with the macro stock business model.

It's not just the buyers that determine the market. By submitting our images to the various distributors we are helping to set the market price. If nobody submitted to micro then the buyers would have no choice but to pay whatever the price is. If the price was too high there would be no buyers. Somewhere in between is the happy spot where buyers wont pay more and sellers wont take less. Our distributors keep dropping prices so why wouldn't buyers take advantage of that?

At one point we were happy to pay $5 to rent a movie from a local video store. We were then offered stuff like Redbox rentals for a dollar. We were then offered stuff like Netflix all you can watch for $8 a month. Who in their right mind would still pay $5 to a local video store? Nobody which is why they no longer exist.

Buyers are disagreeing with macro because they now have the Netflix of photography being offered to them. And the only reason the Netflix of photography exists is because we support them. So, you, me, and everyone else here in microstockland are responsible for the current market.


« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2015, 15:11 »
+7
It may seem like SS is giving away images for free, but we must understand that it's not SS that determines the market...it's the buyers. And the buyers are disagreeing with the macro stock business model.

Why wouldn't they disagree with the macro model? They're being offered a product for a few dollars that they were (at one time at least) willing to pay hundreds for.

The microstock model has a place in the market as there are a ton of graphic designers and small businesses that need images at a low price. In my opinion, however, they should get what they pay for. Micro buyers should be getting simple images and elements at these prices. Not ones taken with thousands of dollars of professional gear and worked on for hours in post processing. If they want high production value images and advertising concepts they should have to pay more. These are the images that shouldn't be found in micro. Unfortunately, we have all bent over backwards to create these images and sell them for a few bucks through micro.

« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2015, 15:37 »
+1
So, you, me, and everyone else here in microstockland are responsible for the current market.

That's a very good analysis, Paulie, and a correct conclusion quoted above.

The question is now that we're in this pickle, what do we do about it? Some of us tried hard with the Symbiostock model, and we know how that turned out. A few of us (like you) are successful selling directly through our own websites, but most of us (like me) don't make enough that way to cover the site-operation costs.

What other options do we have at this point?

« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2015, 15:54 »
+2
Who in their right mind would still pay $5 to a local video store? Nobody which is why they no longer exist.


Off topic: I still rent from the video guy down the street. He's the last shop of it's kind in my area and he will close his doors once the lease is up. But still, it's a much nicer experience to go to this guys store. You get out of the house, talk to some people and support an independent businessman. It's good for the world and for me.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #10 on: November 07, 2015, 18:54 »
+1
So, you, me, and everyone else here in microstockland are responsible for the current market.

That's a very good analysis, Paulie, and a correct conclusion quoted above.

The question is now that we're in this pickle, what do we do about it? Some of us tried hard with the Symbiostock model, and we know how that turned out. A few of us (like you) are successful selling directly through our own websites, but most of us (like me) don't make enough that way to cover the site-operation costs.

What other options do we have at this point?

Now what? Well you can wait for the crash where the majority of people abandon microstock and due to lack of supply prices rise. I think we're a long way off from that. Or you can wait for more sites like Stocksy or 500px to come along and pull prices upward. Also a long way off. Or you can figure out what you're not doing right with your own direct selling and fix it.

Regarding selling direct, Symbiostock isn't part of the problem. Neither are most of the other stock software or websites. I see a lot of people blaming the software. It's rarely the software. I also have a Photoshelter website which in my opinion isn't very user friendly and I just got a $250 RM license sale. It's the strategy behind the direct selling model that matters most.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #11 on: November 07, 2015, 19:00 »
+3
Who in their right mind would still pay $5 to a local video store? Nobody which is why they no longer exist.


Off topic: I still rent from the video guy down the street. He's the last shop of it's kind in my area and he will close his doors once the lease is up. But still, it's a much nicer experience to go to this guys store. You get out of the house, talk to some people and support an independent businessman. It's good for the world and for me.

I'd agree. I live in a small town. We still have independent small businesses. Unfortunately they're slowly being replaced by the same franchise businesses you see in every town across the United States. Uniqueness is going away and nobody seems to care. People flock to the new Whatever Bread Company and avoid the independent sandwich shop that has better food. It's just brand marketing and people flock to it like bugs to zapper lights.

« Reply #12 on: November 07, 2015, 20:39 »
0
I also have a Photoshelter website which in my opinion isn't very user friendly and I just got a $250 RM license sale. It's the strategy behind the direct selling model that matters most.


Was that sale a direct result of your own promotion or a sale that came through their "Lattice" site (http://www.photoshelter.com/lattice/search/)?

« Reply #13 on: November 07, 2015, 21:17 »
+3
Photoshelter could be more user friendly but I have buyers willing to contact me directly, pay me via PayPal and I email them a file or a download link.  I've made more this year selling stock direct than from all the sites I'm on combined. I've also earned much more from Alamy this year than in the past and a bit from other small traditionally-priced agencies. My microstock income has increased too, but I think that direct licensing and traditionally priced agencies are the way to go.

Small boutique agencies are probably best. I'm with Alamy but their RPI isn't great.

I'd work on getting into places like Stocksy, Trevallion, and places like that. I'd also suggest licensing traditionally-priced images on your own. I'm happy with Photoshelter, despite any shortcomings in their customer interface, they bring in high-end editorial clients, I've licensed images to Smithsonian Magazine, Coastal Living, and many other advertisers and magazines who were searching Photoshelter and found my work, my images there are also found through google searches. 

I'd also suggest getting Photographer's Market - a good way to find direct clients to license your work to - and of course for assignments which pay better than stock, if that interests you.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2015, 21:21 by wordplanet »

« Reply #14 on: November 07, 2015, 22:30 »
0
getty and corbis for sure
the aggregates that subit to them and others are great too

one way or another you need to be on getty imo for macro weather its direct or though an aggregrate

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2015, 22:59 »
0
Thank you all for the input! I appreciate it so much. I feel like I'm floating around since the SS watermark came out with no place to land...

It looks like Alamy provides a big file size as well when "right-clicking>View Image".

FYI, I really love the small town video stores but don't have any time to watch movies anymore ... I miss those Blockbuster days for sure!
« Last Edit: November 07, 2015, 23:13 by angelawaye »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2015, 23:54 »
+2
Moving back on topic a bit...

My only macro experience is with Alamy and Getty.

Alamy so far I'm on the fence about. I got four images accepted a couple months ago and just had a $100 sale. But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what I've seen most people say they earn $1 per image year with them. So if I had 5,000 images I'd expect $5,000 in a year. Not real good. And with this goofy one-bad-image-everything-gets-rejected model I'm leaning toward pass. I just did another smaller submission and if they fail it again I'm probably done.

Getty is kind of difficult to give an opinion on for me because I never really fully committed to them. I hear some people there make big bucks while others make micro money. My experience was a little of both. One thing to note is once you submit images there about the only way to deactivate any of them is to cancel your contract. So Getty still seems to be the macro leader and you'd probably need to try them to see if it's right for you.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2015, 23:58 by PaulieWalnuts »


PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #17 on: November 07, 2015, 23:56 »
0
I also have a Photoshelter website which in my opinion isn't very user friendly and I just got a $250 RM license sale. It's the strategy behind the direct selling model that matters most.


Was that sale a direct result of your own promotion or a sale that came through their "Lattice" site (http://www.photoshelter.com/lattice/search/)?


Hard to say because I don't know if Photoshelter shows the source of a sale. I'd say it was probably from my own promotional efforts.

Millionstock.com

  • Architecture; Arts; Historic buildings, Landscapes

« Reply #18 on: November 08, 2015, 04:03 »
0
I would try for sure Alamy!
Have a nice day :-)

« Reply #19 on: November 08, 2015, 04:48 »
0
Moving back on topic a bit...

My only macro experience is with Alamy and Getty.

Alamy so far I'm on the fence about. I got four images accepted a couple months ago and just had a $100 sale. But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what I've seen most people say they earn $1 per image year with them. So if I had 5,000 images I'd expect $5,000 in a year. Not real good. And with this goofy one-bad-image-everything-gets-rejected model I'm leaning toward pass. I just did another smaller submission and if they fail it again I'm probably done.

Getty is kind of difficult to give an opinion on for me because I never really fully committed to them. I hear some people there make big bucks while others make micro money. My experience was a little of both. One thing to note is once you submit images there about the only way to deactivate any of them is to cancel your contract. So Getty still seems to be the macro leader and you'd probably need to try them to see if it's right for you.
Alamy are very lenient with reviews.  I've had 1 rejection in around 2,500 images.  Maybe they check new contributors more thoroughly, I did small batches at first because getting them all rejected for 1 image not being accepted would be annoying.

« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2015, 11:39 »
+1
But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what
More than pretty lame. Alamy must have hired the photo curator from Pond5.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2015, 11:46 »
+1
But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what
More than pretty lame. Alamy must have hired the photo curator from Pond5.
Although it's daft, it is their officially-stated policy.
However, their managing images system is such a PITA that having any more than a dozen files waiting to be managed would be like a black cloud hanging over me, so now I drip up really small numbers at a time anyway.

« Reply #22 on: November 08, 2015, 12:19 »
0
What's the deal with Getty Images? Can anybody contribute? What are they looking for? Thanks!

« Reply #23 on: November 08, 2015, 12:35 »
+1
But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what
More than pretty lame. Alamy must have hired the photo curator from Pond5.
Although it's daft, it is their officially-stated policy.
However, their managing images system is such a PITA that having any more than a dozen files waiting to be managed would be like a black cloud hanging over me, so now I drip up really small numbers at a time anyway.
I've got something like 11,000 images on Alamy so understand their process. I just don't understand the "why" of the process. I've had the pleasure of looking at some of Paulie's work and I don't see someone who is at all careless. If he is getting rejections, then the process is broken and flawed.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2015, 13:10 »
0
Human/computer error are always possible.

Rinderart

« Reply #25 on: November 08, 2015, 13:21 »
+2
Heres a concept. How about Getting a Book together of your best commercial work, Having ZED cards made. 4 on the front and one on the back with your info/website and send it to Potential commercial Clients. Just Like Models and actors have to do. I still shoot for some clients I've had for 30+ years. This is what you have to do, stock in any form is residual Income. always has been except for the Ones who Made it a profession. If ya want it, Ya gotta go for it. No other way I know of.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #26 on: November 08, 2015, 13:32 »
0
But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what
More than pretty lame. Alamy must have hired the photo curator from Pond5.
Although it's daft, it is their officially-stated policy.
However, their managing images system is such a PITA that having any more than a dozen files waiting to be managed would be like a black cloud hanging over me, so now I drip up really small numbers at a time anyway.
I've got something like 11,000 images on Alamy so understand their process. I just don't understand the "why" of the process. I've had the pleasure of looking at some of Paulie's work and I don't see someone who is at all careless. If he is getting rejections, then the process is broken and flawed.

To clarify I separated my images into micro and macro collections.

Macro I sell as RM on my website and they are top quality.

Micro I still have some left on IS and submitted a portion to SS and Alamy as a test to see if any are macro worthy. SS accepted almost everything. The quality may not be perfection but they were good enough for Istock when they were at their pickiest and SS doesn't seem to have a problem with them.

If Alamy's standards are that high can anybody comment on if the returns are worth the effort?


« Reply #27 on: November 08, 2015, 13:36 »
0
I think Getty is still the Gorilla in this realm although not 800 pounds anymore. Just a pale shadow of what it was. With many thousand images you have a chance to make a decent income instead of the few hundred needed only 3 or 4 years ago. So the decline of the leader in macro has been ultra fast. Blend, Cultura, Image Source,.... might be a good option if you are into model shoots......Alamy you need to have tens of thousands to make any significant income and at the actual growth rate I would say that in a few years you will need to have more than 100.000 images to make a significant income with them......Corbis is facing difficulties and I wouldn't be surprised if any of the big players (Getty,Adobe or Shutter) will swallow them up no so far in the future. They have a great archive collection that might interest those agencies.

I might sound very negative but the time to enter a macro mid or micro agency is a tough goal nowadays......I think focusing in a unique style use social media to promote and attract direct clients will be a much better proposition financially than to waste efforts in any agency if you are starting now.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2015, 13:56 »
+2
@Paulie: Alamy standards are not very high. Much lower than iStock's used to be in the days when they had standards.
Can I just check: did they actually identify which file they failed with a reason? If they didn't both identify the failing file and indicate a reason, it is a system failure, and you can contact CR there. (Don't listen to the luvvas in the forums who claim that mistakes can't be made.)
If there was an indication of which file failed, with a reason given, but you don't agree with it, I'm not sure what recourse you have (anyone know if there is any?)

« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2015, 17:52 »
+1
Photoshelter could be more user friendly but I have buyers willing to contact me directly, pay me via PayPal and I email them a file or a download link.  I've made more this year selling stock direct than from all the sites I'm on combined. I've also earned much more from Alamy this year than in the past and a bit from other small traditionally-priced agencies. My microstock income has increased too, but I think that direct licensing and traditionally priced agencies are the way to go.

Small boutique agencies are probably best. I'm with Alamy but their RPI isn't great.

I'd work on getting into places like Stocksy, Trevallion, and places like that. I'd also suggest licensing traditionally-priced images on your own. I'm happy with Photoshelter, despite any shortcomings in their customer interface, they bring in high-end editorial clients, I've licensed images to Smithsonian Magazine, Coastal Living, and many other advertisers and magazines who were searching Photoshelter and found my work, my images there are also found through google searches. 

I'd also suggest getting Photographer's Market - a good way to find direct clients to license your work to - and of course for assignments which pay better than stock, if that interests you.

How much is Photo Shelter to join? I was looking at their site but couldn't find anything specific. I am really looking for a new home for my underwater stuff.

« Reply #30 on: November 08, 2015, 17:54 »
+2
Rinderart its 2015

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #31 on: November 08, 2015, 20:41 »
0
Photoshelter could be more user friendly but I have buyers willing to contact me directly, pay me via PayPal and I email them a file or a download link.  I've made more this year selling stock direct than from all the sites I'm on combined. I've also earned much more from Alamy this year than in the past and a bit from other small traditionally-priced agencies. My microstock income has increased too, but I think that direct licensing and traditionally priced agencies are the way to go.

Small boutique agencies are probably best. I'm with Alamy but their RPI isn't great.

I'd work on getting into places like Stocksy, Trevallion, and places like that. I'd also suggest licensing traditionally-priced images on your own. I'm happy with Photoshelter, despite any shortcomings in their customer interface, they bring in high-end editorial clients, I've licensed images to Smithsonian Magazine, Coastal Living, and many other advertisers and magazines who were searching Photoshelter and found my work, my images there are also found through google searches. 

I'd also suggest getting Photographer's Market - a good way to find direct clients to license your work to - and of course for assignments which pay better than stock, if that interests you.


How much is Photo Shelter to join? I was looking at their site but couldn't find anything specific. I am really looking for a new home for my underwater stuff.


It starts at $10 per month for the basic plan. http://www.photoshelter.com/tour/all-features/

I'd also suggest checking out Photodeck. I use both. They both offer trials. Neither do marketing. Photoshelter does have a buyer search but they don't promote it. I think it's leftover from back in the day when they tried to start a stock agency.

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2015, 10:34 »
0
Thank you for all the information. Maybe I'm too late in the game to enter into alamy but they also have a HUGE preview image so I'm going to stay away from that.

I'm looking into the other websites you mentioned...
(I can't self market - I'm just not good at self promotion)


« Reply #33 on: November 09, 2015, 13:56 »
0
How do you apply to Getty?
I applied once when they had a "contest" and they sent me a congratulatory email asking me to join iStock. Is there any other way than those contests?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
5071 Views
Last post August 10, 2010, 06:05
by ShadySue
41 Replies
15909 Views
Last post January 29, 2011, 04:05
by BaldricksTrousers
18 Replies
5728 Views
Last post April 20, 2012, 07:34
by sgoodwin4813
4 Replies
1370 Views
Last post January 01, 2020, 13:13
by HughStoneIan
1 Replies
2896 Views
Last post January 14, 2021, 19:35
by MatHayward

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle