Author Topic: iStock Illustrators (Read 20020 times)

consafos · « **on:** February 04, 2011, 14:22 »

Hello Fellow Illustrators

I'm an exclusive diamond level illustrator at iStock and have been a member there since 2005. However over the last few months at iStock I've seen my downloads take a DRAMATIC dive. And now with the lowering of commissions and site problems, I'm getting fewer downloads than ever.

Unfortunately for the first time since joining I am seriously considering dropping my exclusivity and moving on to other sites as well. This is going to be a huge and scary move for me because I depend on iStock for over half my income.

So I guess my question is this. Have any of you other Illustrators out there left iStock exclusivity behind and moved on to other sites? If so what sites did you go to and did selling your images at other sites make up for pay cut you experienced when leaving the iStock exclusivity program.

Thanks

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #1 on:** February 04, 2011, 15:50 »

I know someone in a similar position, she gave up exclusivity ( medium to high ranking seller), she's now back as an exclusive. 'Nuff said, although I'm sure you'll find different experiences as well, in fact I'd be interested to hear more positive experiences.

jamirae · « **Reply #2 on:** February 04, 2011, 17:01 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 04, 2011, 15:50

I know someone in a similar position, she gave up exclusivity ( medium to high ranking seller), she's now back as an exclusive. 'Nuff said, although I'm sure you'll find different experiences as well, in fact I'd be interested to hear more positive experiences.

yes, that would be interesting. Times are different now, though, with the new royalty structure. So she is now back but the circumstances are very different.

You may want to check out the iStock forum here or even this forum by a former iStock exclusive. Not sure how many are illustrators, though:
http://the-independence-day-forum.983074.n3.nabble.com/

helix7 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 04, 2011, 17:16 »

I'm not exclusive, never was, never will be. So take my opinion on this topic lightly.

I don't know how I'd do if I were ever an istock exclusive illustrator. Here's what I do know: istock currently is one of 14 agencies that I sell illustrations with, and they account for about 10% of my monthly earnings with pretty much identical portfolios across all of those agencies (except for a half dozen EPS10 files that istock would never accept). My earnings at istock are slipping every month, and within 6 months I expect istock to represent less than 10% of my monthly microstock earnings.

I highly doubt that I could have ever earned more in an exclusive capacity. I can't imagine that all of the perks of being exclusive (increased royalty, best match placement, etc) would result in 10x my current earnings at istock. Some people see double their earnings when they go exclusive, some see triple, I'd even venture a guess that 4 or 5-times your non-exclusive earnings is possible. But 10-times? No way.

So looking at this from a reverse point of view, if I had ever been exclusive at istock and dropped the crown to become independent, I'm extremely confident that I would have seen a significant jump in earnings and stayed independent. My personal experience tells me that exclusivity would be a losing proposition for me.

But that's just me. Experiences vary, and there are undoubtedly some people who would do worse as independent artists. So it is extremely tough to say how one person would do over another. I think independent illustrators may have an edge over independent photographers, having a few additional agencies to choose from that tend to do better for illustrators than photographers (GL, GR, VS). But in general, it all comes down to your personal portfolio and you can't really tell from someone else's experience how you'd do by comparison.

cthoman · « **Reply #4 on:** February 04, 2011, 17:49 »

Never been exclusive either. I would think it would be hard not to make more in the long run as an independent, but the transition will probably be painful. I guess you really don't know until you try though.

patricksuny · « **Reply #5 on:** February 07, 2011, 17:14 »

I'm a gold exclusive. Like the OP i feel the same. A few years ago I tried out being independent and 6 months later was exclusive again. It was alot of extra work I wasn't accustom to doing and my returns were about half (my situation at least). Returns have been diminishing, but I have been trying to focus on other freelance areas.

VB inc · « **Reply #6 on:** February 07, 2011, 17:29 »

I always wondered about the amount of buyers there were outside of istock. As an istock exclusive at 35% commsions rate, i just cant see myself losing my crown to test the waters outside. The price difference is too drastic with other agencies. I avg $7-9 a download on istock. I doubt i can make that up if i spread my work around other agencies.
That and i dont believe in the subscriptions model like SS where it favors quantity over quality. Just take a look at some of the vector packs that are really good sellers on SS. they have over 50 items on one file which is just bad for everyone.
Dont even get me started on vector stock... I wish i was a hacker... what i would do w that site!

jamirae · « **Reply #7 on:** February 07, 2011, 18:06 »

Quote from: patricksuny on February 07, 2011, 17:14

I'm a gold exclusive. Like the OP i feel the same. A few years ago I tried out being independent and 6 months later was exclusive again. It was alot of extra work I wasn't accustom to doing and my returns were about half (my situation at least). Returns have been diminishing, but I have been trying to focus on other freelance areas.

you are 'gold exclusive' but is your royalty still at the same level under the new system? Having a split portfolio I dropped from what would used to be considered "gold" (35%) to what used to be considered "bronze" level (25% - but now 16% since I went Independent).

bad to the bone · « **Reply #8 on:** February 07, 2011, 22:20 »

I experienced in the last 32 month as Vector illustrator, 3D-Illustrator and as Photographer, independent.
My Opinion is, just an opinion, if someone sells good as Illustrator at Istock, he should going on. It takes a lot more time and a lot more of afford and "time" to get the same earnings, anyway by the number of agencies you try. But!!! If your Illustrations are good enough for Istock and you sell well...why don't you grow up to Macro?
I've done some Illustrations for Microstock, but even if they sell good for a Vector Illustration, where's the joke?
Some rubbish done 3d pictures sell more, build in a tenth of the time.
My hint, as an illustrator at IS, don't go deeper to Micro...step up to Macro. They will welcome you, more than you expect.

Chris3fer · « **Reply #9 on:** February 07, 2011, 23:59 »

I'm a gold member since 07. My downloads have plummeted. Contemplating dropping exclusitivity as well.

helix7 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 08, 2011, 08:07 »

Quote from: VB inc on February 07, 2011, 17:29

...I avg $7-9 a download on istock. I doubt i can make that up if i spread my work around other agencies...

If your concern is your earnings per image sold more so than total earnings, then certainly istock exclusivity is probably going to be your best bet, especially with averages like that. I don't think any other site is going to be able to match that.

For me personally, I'm less concerned with earnings per download and more concerned with overall earnings each month, and with that in mind I'm inclined to remain independent.

Maui · « **Reply #11 on:** February 08, 2011, 10:21 »

Quote from: bad to the bone on February 07, 2011, 22:20

If your Illustrations are good enough for Istock and you sell well...why don't you grow up to Macro?

What macro agencies are there for illustrations? I know only very few, and it seems questionable whether they do better than iStock.

VB inc · « **Reply #12 on:** February 08, 2011, 10:29 »

Quote from: Maui on February 08, 2011, 10:21

Quote from: bad to the bone on February 07, 2011, 22:20
If your Illustrations are good enough for Istock and you sell well...why don't you grow up to Macro?

What macro agencies are there for illustrations? I know only very few, and it seems questionable whether they do better than iStock.

Thats what i was wondering... i honestly think the majority of the buyers migrated out of macro and into micro. Macros shooters follow the buyers and come into the micro agencies. Who needs to grow up anyways?

leremy · « **Reply #13 on:** February 08, 2011, 10:45 »

I hope my article can help you to decide.

http://sellingvector.blogspot.com/2010/12/istockphoto-exclusive-or-not.html

It all depends on your skills.

VB inc · « **Reply #14 on:** February 08, 2011, 12:15 »

^^ interesting blog... I didnt know about graphicriver. I wonder how long they have been around for. I still appreciate the higher prices at istock tho.

gbcimages · « **Reply #15 on:** February 08, 2011, 12:27 »

the problem with GR IS ONLY 25% commission on non exclusive .They want exclusive rights on photos to get 50 to 70% commission

helix7 · « **Reply #16 on:** February 08, 2011, 14:36 »

From your blog post:

Quote from: leremy on February 08, 2011, 10:45

That is why whether you should become an IStockPhoto Exclusive or not is highly depend on your skills. If you are super good, IStockPhoto Exclusive is your route to millionaire. If you are not that good, you may want to consider joining the other agencies...

The best illustrators should go exclusive and the mediocre ones should be independent? I'm sorry but that is total crap.

michaeldb · « **Reply #17 on:** February 08, 2011, 20:05 »

Quote from: helix7 on February 08, 2011, 14:36

From your blog post:
Quote from: leremy on February 08, 2011, 10:45
That is why whether you should become an IStockPhoto Exclusive or not is highly depend on your skills. If you are super good, IStockPhoto Exclusive is your route to millionaire. If you are not that good, you may want to consider joining the other agencies...

The best illustrators should go exclusive and the mediocre ones should be independent? I'm sorry but that is total crap.

+1

Morphart · « **Reply #18 on:** February 09, 2011, 21:17 »

Quote from: michaeldb on February 08, 2011, 20:05

Quote from: helix7 on February 08, 2011, 14:36
From your blog post:
Quote from: leremy on February 08, 2011, 10:45
That is why whether you should become an IStockPhoto Exclusive or not is highly depend on your skills. If you are super good, IStockPhoto Exclusive is your route to millionaire. If you are not that good, you may want to consider joining the other agencies...

The best illustrators should go exclusive and the mediocre ones should be independent? I'm sorry but that is total crap.
+1

+2

Define a good Illustrator?

I don't consider myself one as I don't spend much time on Illustration yet, but even my "ordinary" illustrations, around 300 of them still gives me a decent bonus income each month.

Morphart · « **Reply #19 on:** February 09, 2011, 21:23 »

About the Blog, it's an interesting articles. But I would add one to the one mentionned to selling vector:

Quote

They are Shutterstock, Dreamstime, Fotolia, and GraphicRiver. The rest are almost hopeless at the current state.

123rf and Bigstock gives me a small income each year, but last month I submitted my vectors (VERY easily and in 4-5 minutes to submit them after upload), I had some very nice sales in the 1 month that I have beend there. 5.00$, 2.50$, 19.80$ etc. is great sales when I am used to the 0.33 or 2.48 of Shutterstock (which is my main earner). I think Canstockphoto can be good. This is only 1 month, but if it sticks this way it might surpass Dreamstime in my yearly income.

      5426733    Feb 08, 2011 01:44PM    Regular
Vector
    $5.00    history
2       5293164    Feb 07, 2011 05:02PM    Regular
Vector
    $2.50    history
3       5293004    Feb 07, 2011 06:49AM    Distribution
Regular
X-Large
    $19.80    history
4       5292935    Feb 05, 2011 06:40AM    Regular
Vector
    $5.00    history
5       5292937    Feb 04, 2011 09:58PM    Regular
Vector
    $5.00    history
6       5293030    Feb 03, 2011 06:07PM    Subscription
Large
    $0.25    history
7       5293480    Jan 31, 2011 04:57PM    Regular
Medium
    $1.50    history
8       5292943    Jan 31, 2011 06:58AM    Subscription
Medium
    $0.25    history
9       5293376    Jan 27, 2011 08:00AM    Regular
Medium
    $1.50    history
10       5292940    Jan 25, 2011 07:40AM    Subscription
Large
    $0.25    history
11       5293022    Jan 24, 2011 10:36AM    Regular
Vector
    $5.00    history
12       5293004    Jan 11, 2011 07:38PM    Regular
Small
    $1.00    history
13       5293004    Jan 11, 2011 09:43AM    Regular
Vector
    $2.50    history
14       5293458    Jan 09, 2011 06:47PM    Subscription
Large
    $0.25    history

leremy · « **Reply #20 on:** February 10, 2011, 22:11 »

Quote from: Morphart on February 09, 2011, 21:17

Quote from: michaeldb on February 08, 2011, 20:05
Quote from: helix7 on February 08, 2011, 14:36
From your blog post:
Quote from: leremy on February 08, 2011, 10:45
That is why whether you should become an IStockPhoto Exclusive or not is highly depend on your skills. If you are super good, IStockPhoto Exclusive is your route to millionaire. If you are not that good, you may want to consider joining the other agencies...

The best illustrators should go exclusive and the mediocre ones should be independent? I'm sorry but that is total crap.

+1

+2

Define a good Illustrator? I don't consider myself one as I don't spend much time on Illustration yet, but even my "ordinary" illustrations, around 300 of them still gives me a decent bonus income each month.

Good illustrator are every where, but supers are rare.
I define supers for those who can use Gradient Mesh very well to create realistic objects.
Below are some examples of those that I think should stick with IStock.

cthoman · « **Reply #21 on:** February 10, 2011, 23:07 »

ooh, this should be good. Let me get my popcorn.

Morphart · « **Reply #22 on:** February 11, 2011, 09:11 »

Quote from: leremy on February 10, 2011, 22:11

Good illustrator are every where, but supers are rare.
I define supers for those who can use Gradient Mesh very well to create realistic objects.

Your examples are great photorealistic vectors. Does that make them better Illustrators? Is Rembrandt a better painter than Picasso or Dali or Michelangelo?
The images you showcase only has 100 to 400 downloads.

A cheap map vector has 11 000.

14000 on this one, and guess what, not Exclusive:

3000:

1100:

Super don't = Super money...

And the list goes on. My point is, every Illustrator has his style, and so every buyer are in need of a specific style to suit their project. Wouldn't it be boring if we all did photorealistic photos? Stock Illustration is about good and original ideas that sells. The style to me doesn't matter, every style can be Super... but in stock Illustration, I would prefer being Super Rich than just being a Super.

Cheers!

michaeldb · « **Reply #23 on:** February 11, 2011, 14:05 »

Quote from: Morphart on February 11, 2011, 09:11

Your examples are great photorealistic vectors. Does that make them better Illustrators?

Good question. I am always surprised at how many of us fail to understand what business we are in.

Microstock sites are not art galleries. Superior images are those which sell more.

Some sites (e.g. Vectorstock, Fotolia) pay more credits for vectors which are 'complex'. Why? Is there any evidence that 'complex' vectors earn more money?

DT on the other hand, pays more for images which have sold more. This makes sense.

Even in 'art' virtuosity is not the same thing as beauty, as Morphart points out. Microstock is a business. The products which succeed are those which sell more. Nothing else should matter. If you want to make photorealistic images, go buy a camera.

cthoman · « **Reply #24 on:** February 11, 2011, 15:50 »

Quote from: michaeldb on February 11, 2011, 14:05

If you want to make photorealistic images, go buy a camera.

That's the classic argument I was thinking of.

I think I've forgotten most of what I know about drawing realistically. I used to be better at it. Especially, my life drawing. I went to a figure drawing event a year or so ago and was surprised at how much I sucked at it. I just don't practice it enough to maintain the skills I used to have. That said, my process for producing finished illustrations now kicks the fanny off of anything I could do in college when I was a drawing machine. I wouldn't trade that in.

Morphart · « **Reply #25 on:** February 11, 2011, 17:59 »

Quote from: cthoman on February 11, 2011, 15:50

Quote from: michaeldb on February 11, 2011, 14:05
If you want to make photorealistic images, go buy a camera.

That's the classic argument I was thinking of.

I think I've forgotten most of what I know about drawing realistically. I used to be better at it. Especially, my life drawing. I went to a figure drawing event a year or so ago and was surprised at how much I sucked at it. I just don't practice it enough to maintain the skills I used to have. That said, my process for producing finished illustrations now kicks the fanny off of anything I could do in college when I was a drawing machine. I wouldn't trade that in.

Hey your green flying piggy is awesome!

Keep up doing what you are doing best ;p. Realistic stock vector has it's place say someone needs a huge print (ex: near a highway) and wants a top quality specific image there, else like you say, buying a camera is the way to go hehe :p

redwater · « **Reply #26 on:** February 11, 2011, 18:09 »

I agree with you. Microstock is all about commercial success. It's "design trumps art "in my opinion.

bad to the bone · « **Reply #27 on:** February 11, 2011, 18:43 »

Maybe, sometimes in future i will find out what these discussions are about.
Best Illustration is what sells best...at microstockbusiness, is it worth to mention or to discuss? Is this an artclub or something else?
Best agency for any Illustration is what gives the best return per Image, anyway if they reach it by more sales or by higher prices...RPI (Revenues per Image) is the Benchmark at this point.
This thread isn't about fotos...even if some someones would hope to get more attention in posting rubbish here as they get at microstockagencies for their rubbish fotos.
Fotorealistic Illustrations are not the matter of this thread. I can create an fotorealistic Vector Illustration of an perfect ball in seconds...some can do it better with more complex Objects....gratulations to them. Was this the question, NO!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: iStock Illustrators (Read 20020 times)

consafos

vlad_the_imp

jamirae

helix7

cthoman

patricksuny

VB inc

jamirae

bad to the bone

Chris3fer

helix7

Maui

VB inc

leremy

VB inc

gbcimages

helix7

michaeldb

Morphart

Morphart

leremy

cthoman

Morphart

michaeldb

cthoman

Morphart

redwater

bad to the bone

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors