pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Best selling VECTOR sites?  (Read 36341 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 22, 2011, 22:52 »
0
Hello. I can find a TON of "top 10" and "bestseller" list for photography microstock, but not many for vectors. I've found that the best selling photo sites are NOT always the best for vectors.

I've been using PicWorkFlow for my vectors, and really like it. They offer a lot of sites, and I want to add new vector sites to sell my portfolio, but am not sure which new vector sites to add.

Here are my top 10 selling vector sites:
1. Shutterstock
2. iStock
3. ClipartOf
4. Vectorstock
5. Fotolia
6. Graphic Leftovers
7. iClipart
8. Veer
9. Canstock
10. Deposit Photos

For some reason, Dreamstime and BigStock have really declined for me over the past few months. They were in my top 10,  but have dropped out.

What are a few more sites I should be uploading vectors to?

THANKS!
~ Eli


« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2011, 08:55 »
0
I tried this question on "general stock discussions" but I had not answers so I try here. I have your same question but fot illustrations (no vectors).
Is ClipartOf good for illustration like this (to give you an example...):




and vectorstock is only for vectors?
I love Shutterstrock and I feel very well there but...only there. I'd like to find another good illustration's stock.

p.s. Like you can see I'm not english :(

« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2011, 09:25 »
0
I tried this question on "general stock discussions" but I had not answers so I try here. I have your same question but fot illustrations (no vectors).
Is ClipartOf good for illustration like this (to give you an example...):

and vectorstock is only for vectors?
I love Shutterstrock and I feel very well there but...only there. I'd like to find another good illustration's stock.

p.s. Like you can see I'm not english :(

Vectorstock is for vectors only. And I think that ClipartOf does not accept new contributors at the moment. Maybe you could try to sell prints at DeviantArt.

« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2011, 10:21 »
0
Nothing  better than deviantart? I know that there're good artists there but it's too dispersive...

« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2011, 12:24 »
0
You might check out Rodeo. It is a Finnish stock site, and they do sell vectors. They have had some problems lately because the owner suffered a broken back in an accident on a photography shoot, but it looks like they may be getting back to normal.

At Rodeo I have been earning per month about the same as Veer and about half as much as Vectorstock.

http://www.rodeo.fi

The site is in Finnish but you can write them or email them in English:
Rodeo Ltd
PL 45, 00661 Helsinki
Finland

[email protected]

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2011, 21:53 »
0
I tried applying to ClipArtOf, but they said they didn't need another vector artist (?) What's up with that?

My vector top 10

High earners
---------------
1. Shutterstock/iStockphoto (about 50-50 in terms of $$$)

Low earners
-----------------
2. Dreamstime
3. Fotolia
4. VectorStock
5. BigStock
6. 123RF
7. Graphic Leftovers
8. Crestock
10. Veer (ZERO downloads)

iStockPhoto and Shutterstock account for 90% of my earnings.
I stopped uploading to sites 4-10, because with 75 images in my port, I make only a few dollars a month. Totally not worth it.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2011, 22:00 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2011, 02:26 »
0
I tried applying to ClipArtOf, but they said they didn't need another vector artist (?) What's up with that?


I just talked with Jamie, the owner of ClipartOf, about accepting artists. Jamie is very passionate about taking care of her artists and only works with serious artists with a proven track record.

Here are the requirements at ClipartOf for accepting new artists:
1. The artist must offer completely unique style and content from what we already have so we dont dilute existing contributor sales. We do not frantically add contributors like other sites do because its unnecessary.
2. Must have at least 1,000 image available to us at time of signing. All files must be vector or high quality 3d renders.
3. Must be able to accept payments via paypal.

Jaime added, The difference between us and other sites is that we have very limited spots and will not always continuously add.

ClipartOf is not for all microstock and vector artists. I was lucky enough to get my portfolio accepted, and the results have been great. If you meet their requirements, I would recommend that you try and add your vector portfolio! If not, or if they turn you down, dont worry about it. I know that Jaime and her small staff are extremely busy, so they may not be able to answer each and every one one of your questions, or go into detail about why they turned you down. Dont take that personally. Instead, work on improving your portfolio and finding ideas and concepts that designers need.

I have worked with Jamie and ClipartOf a lot, and I know one of her primary goals is to help her artists be profitable and successful. Her guidelines are put in place to make that possible.

~ Eli
www.graphicgravy.com

« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2011, 09:39 »
0
I also work almost only with vector illustrations. I'm thinking of uploading my portfolio (about 400 works) to vectorstock.com. In shutterstock i sell average 28 images a day this month. In other agencies (fotolia, dreamstime, 123rf, etc) this number is much lower - only from 20 to 5 sales during whole month. What could i expect from vectorstock.com? Is it just another low earner, like depositphotos, cutcaster, or is it better for you? What kind (style, theme) of illustrations do You sell here best?

« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2011, 11:20 »
0
I also work almost only with vector illustrations. I'm thinking of uploading my portfolio (about 400 works) to vectorstock.com. In shutterstock i sell average 28 images a day this month. In other agencies (fotolia, dreamstime, 123rf, etc) this number is much lower - only from 20 to 5 sales during whole month. What could i expect from vectorstock.com? Is it just another low earner, like depositphotos, cutcaster, or is it better for you? What kind (style, theme) of illustrations do You sell here best?

It's entirely your decision whether to upload or not, but keep in mind they price 99% of their vectors at $1, severely undercutting the rest of the agencies.
My impression is they sell fairly well. Not surprising though, why wouldn't they with their prices. It's just a matter of time till all buyers know of the site and stop shopping at SS, DT, IS and the rest.

« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2011, 12:23 »
0
I didn't want to upload to Vectorstock because of low commissions and high payout. But then I wanted to try and I had few downloads with only eight images online. Now I have cca 100 images there and it looks that I will reach payout on Christmas. It's not that bad - with a few thousands of images it could be interesting.

« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2011, 09:54 »
0
For my part it looks like:

1. Shutterstock
2. Istock
3. CANSTOCK.. yes Canstock! :)
4. Dreamstime
5. Fotolia
6. Bigstock
7. 123rf
8. Veer
9. Crestock
10. Stockfresh

« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2011, 10:20 »
0
This month so far

1. Shutterstock
2. Fotolia
3. iStock (down from 2)
4. Dreamstime
5. Canstock (down from 4)
6. ClipartOf
7. Veer
8. Bigstock
9. 123RF
10. Graphic Leftovers
11. Crestock
12. FeaturePics
13. DepositPhotos
14. Cutcaster
15. Stockfresh

« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2011, 21:20 »
0
I have been playing around with selling stock vectors for a few months now. I have been active at Dreamstime, Fotolia, CanStock, & BigStock.

Dreamstime has been decent. I'm getting a decent number of sales, but most of them are subscription sales ($.35). I have my first "Level 3" file as of today, and still haven't broken the $4.00 mark on that image. Overall, I'm happy with Dreamstime, I just wish the commisions were better.

Fotolia has been a bit of a let down. They put a much lower value on the vector file, which doesn't make sense to me. At least with Dreamstime I get the occasional sale worth a few bucks. Every sale at Fotolia has been worth less than 1 credit.

CanStock has been a nice surprise, sales of vector files bring in up to $5 each. Although the volume isn't as high, the commisions are way better.  10 sales at CanStock has earned me more than the 40+ sales at Fotolia.

BigStock is flat, with two $1 commisions in the last 2 months.

Shutterstock is one I'd like to try, but their application process is a PITA, I have tried twice, with every single file being rejected both times. I uploaded proven sellers and still flat out rejected. Of course, then you have to wait a month to apply again.

« Reply #13 on: June 23, 2011, 00:11 »
0
Dave post in the Illustrators forum over there and let us know what they rejected them for.

For me Vector Stock has been a complete disapointment.  They rejected my top sellers across all my other sites and I can't even get to 100 in my port there so I quit uploading in April.  I get a sale here and there but nothing really to write home about.  This month has been really slow though across the board.

« Reply #14 on: June 23, 2011, 09:39 »
0
Shutterstock is one I'd like to try, but their application process is a PITA, I have tried twice, with every single file being rejected both times. I uploaded proven sellers and still flat out rejected. Of course, then you have to wait a month to apply again.

That surprises me. Shutter used to be easy to get in for vector artists. What exactly were the rejection reasons?

« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2011, 11:27 »
0
Shutterstock is one I'd like to try, but their application process is a PITA, I have tried twice, with every single file being rejected both times. I uploaded proven sellers and still flat out rejected. Of course, then you have to wait a month to apply again.

That surprises me. Shutter used to be easy to get in for vector artists. What exactly were the rejection reasons?

At least half of them had no reason listed, a few were "too many on site", a couple "overly simple vector", and a couple with "format issues" although they were all eps 8 or 10.

helix7

« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2011, 19:32 »
0

I just talked with Jamie, the owner of ClipartOf, about accepting artists. Jamie is very passionate about taking care of her artists and only works with serious artists with a proven track record.

Here are the requirements at ClipartOf for accepting new artists:
1. The artist must offer completely unique style and content from what we already have so we dont dilute existing contributor sales. We do not frantically add contributors like other sites do because its unnecessary.
2. Must have at least 1,000 image available to us at time of signing. All files must be vector or high quality 3d renders.
3. Must be able to accept payments via paypal...

I'm sorry but that's crap. Quantity of images doesn't say anything about someone qualifications. There are a couple of six-figure earners in this business with portfolios smaller than 500 images. And plenty of folks with huge portfolios of garbage. It's pretty lame to say that they don't think someone is serious unless they have 1,000 images.


...ClipartOf is not for all microstock and vector artists. I was lucky enough to get my portfolio accepted, and the results have been great. If you meet their requirements, I would recommend that you try and add your vector portfolio! If not, or if they turn you down, dont worry about it. I know that Jaime and her small staff are extremely busy, so they may not be able to answer each and every one one of your questions, or go into detail about why they turned you down. Dont take that personally. Instead, work on improving your portfolio and finding ideas and concepts that designers need..

You're right, it's not personal. It's worse. It's completely arbitrary that they throw out this minimum number of images they want to see before they'll actually judge your work on it's value, instead of simply how many decent images you can crank out quickly. It's got nothing to do with improving anyone's portfolio or figuring out what designers need. Many folks around here already have that figured out, and some of the real pros are doing well in this business without 1,000 image portfolios.

« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2011, 23:32 »
-1
I'm sorry but that's crap. Quantity of images doesn't say anything about someone qualifications. There are a couple of six-figure earners in this business with portfolios smaller than 500 images. And plenty of folks with huge portfolios of garbage. It's pretty lame to say that they don't think someone is serious unless they have 1,000 images.

You're right, it's not personal. It's worse. It's completely arbitrary that they throw out this minimum number of images they want to see before they'll actually judge your work on it's value, instead of simply how many decent images you can crank out quickly. It's got nothing to do with improving anyone's portfolio or figuring out what designers need. Many folks around here already have that figured out, and some of the real pros are doing well in this business without 1,000 image portfolios.


We judge by the quality and quantity. If you have 1,000 images but they are similar to what we already have, we're not interested. If you have 200 images and your details and concepts are out of this world, you're in.

If your portfolio doesn't make us go "WOW," we have no interest. We only need so many images of a waving American flag, shields, grunge elements, flowers or of cute puppies and we only want to add so many artists.

After being an image reviewer and library owner for over 8 years, I am rarely impressed and I'm disappointed in the lack of creativity and uniqueness these days.

I'm looking for diversity of images, quality, and the wow factor and for artists that contribute on a regular basis (weekly or even monthly) that are in this for the long haul so I don't have to add more artists later.

I looked up your portfolio and you are offering the same styles that others already have submitted to us.

Your green icons: http://www.emberstock.com/green_icons/

Our green icons: http://clipartof.com/-ecology_logos

Your sketches: http://www.emberstock.com/sketchy_notebook_elements/

Our sketches: http://clipartof.com/432394

Your grunge: http://www.emberstock.com/splatter_and_scratch/

Our grunge: http://clipartof.com/104474

Your shields: http://www.emberstock.com/shields_pack/

Our shield: http://clipartof.com/1065178

Your media icons: http://www.emberstock.com/social_icons/

Our media icons: http://clipartof.com/-media_icons

So after reviewing your portfolio, I don't see anything that we MUST have on ClipartOf.com This is why we would not accept you. You would not do well at ClipartOf.com because you don't have anything different to offer our clients.

The issue here is not lack of talent, but lack of imagination. Use both together and the outcome would be refreshing.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2011, 23:42 by jvoetsch »

« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2011, 00:32 »
+1
^^  :o
Real classy... calling out anothers work. But the jokes on you.
If you actually had any eye for talent, you would be able to clearly tell that helix7's stuff that you posted is far superior than the shown items in your library. 8 years as a reviewer and you still cant tell quality?

Its ok, some people are slow learners and dont know that they dont know. ;)

« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2011, 02:03 »
-1
^^  :o
Real classy... calling out anothers work. But the jokes on you.
If you actually had any eye for talent, you would be able to clearly tell that helix7's stuff that you posted is far superior than the shown items in your library. 8 years as a reviewer and you still cant tell quality?

Its ok, some people are slow learners and dont know that they dont know. ;)

Its not about who's is better in this case. Its about who came to us first. I'm not going to boot off existing artists and replace them with new, similar work, nor am I going to add more of what we already have. If you actually paid attention to what I wrote, its about duplicate content. We need fresh, new, exciting imagery, not the same stuff over and over by new artists.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2011, 02:06 by jvoetsch »

helix7

« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2011, 08:51 »
+1
Thank you, Jamie, for confirming exactly what I had guessed about you and your company and why I'd prefer to have nothing to do with Clipartof.

Also, thanks for judging my work on a very limited view of my portfolio. My website is new and has a very small percentage of my work available. I'd say you can see my complete stock portfolio here, but don't bother. I'm not interested in your opinion or your assessment of whether or not I'm good enough for Clipartof.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2011, 08:54 by helix7 »

« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2011, 11:40 »
+1
Quote
Its about who came to us first.

This seems a rather strange policy. You'd keep on an artist who's work is not as good as someone who comes to you later, purely on the grounds of the date they joined, rather than a judgement on quality. If I'm understanding that right, that seems rather an odd way of stocking a library.

« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2011, 12:05 »
+1
Quote
Its about who came to us first.

This seems a rather strange policy. You'd keep on an artist who's work is not as good as someone who comes to you later, purely on the grounds of the date they joined, rather than a judgement on quality. If I'm understanding that right, that seems rather an odd way of stocking a library.

i was going to respond because i clearly wasnt paying attention to what she wrote but you hit the nail right on the head. i just thought the name of the company itself was odd.

« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2011, 12:35 »
-1
Quote
Its about who came to us first.

This seems a rather strange policy. You'd keep on an artist who's work is not as good as someone who comes to you later, purely on the grounds of the date they joined, rather than a judgement on quality. If I'm understanding that right, that seems rather an odd way of stocking a library.

i was going to respond because i clearly wasnt paying attention to what she wrote but you hit the nail right on the head. i just thought the name of the company itself was odd.

We aren't interested in adding more than a couple hundred artists, and I dont kick off artists to add new artists that offer similar content. That's how we work. I guess artists do like being bullied and abused and apparently expect it. helix7, I did not say anyone was better than you I was clearly saying you dont have anything different to offer us from what our existing artists already contribute. That is all. Take it how you want to but I didn't say so and so was better than you.

« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2011, 13:11 »
0
This seems a rather strange policy. You'd keep on an artist who's work is not as good as someone who comes to you later, purely on the grounds of the date they joined, rather than a judgement on quality. If I'm understanding that right, that seems rather an odd way of stocking a library.

That's kind of how a real artist agent or rep works. They represent a smaller number of artists and try not to have as much overlap so their artists aren't competing for the same freelance jobs. I don't really see a problem with applying that strategy to a stock library. You can more easily cater to the needs of a smaller group than a larger one. It sucks that not everyone is included, but we've all seen how that works too.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
18 Replies
18491 Views
Last post May 31, 2008, 13:59
by steppysteph
14 Replies
6406 Views
Last post February 10, 2011, 14:54
by Morphart
2 Replies
4731 Views
Last post March 19, 2012, 01:55
by Metsafile
1 Replies
3621 Views
Last post December 29, 2015, 04:16
by Artist
0 Replies
3078 Views
Last post January 08, 2016, 01:10
by Artist

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle