Just wondered Do you find Editorial pics worthwhile on IS - what do buyers like in general how do they compare with RF sales?

Editorial files on IS are sold as RF. Unfortunately, iStock itself in some of their writing seems to not understand the difference between RF and editorial, so it isn't surprising that some contributors might get mixed up, too. I prefer to use the terms 'editorial' and 'non-editorial', or 'editorial' and 'creative'. RF is a licensing type, just like RM is, and editorial images can be sold under either license (not on IS, as they have only RF).

Except for some success with some of my earliest photos, I have not found editorials worthwhile on IS. But perhaps I just don't submit the right ones. I have had a few sales on some of my later images, but I don't have all that many files, so perhaps that's why. Then again, I haven't had a sale of anything since Thursday morning, so I'm not sure bothering with IS even makes sense anymore.

I've found that a huge percentage of art directors, graphic & web designers I talk to are totally clueless about the difference between commercial & editorial usage. They just know they need an image for their client and if it looks good they use it ... not the way it should be but that's reality.

Hell mend 'em if they get sued.

Disappointing. It feels like another "good thing to do" that IS trotted out with a fanfare but have since neglected....something other agencies are also guilty of. It seems at launch point everyone is "stoked" about this new "awesome" revenue "opportunity" until it looks like some major elbow grease and a chunk of change is required to get customers to open their wallets.

How many images of random neighborhood parades, airshows, etc., would one expect to sell?  Mostly it's just a thing for an agency to toss to micro shooters who want to submit things they don't have releases for.  It isn't breaking journalism or anything.

Even professional sporting events have a limited, very limited, news life and not much demand. The public events such as you cite have even less.

How many images of random neighborhood parades, airshows, etc., would one expect to sell?  Mostly it's just a thing for an agency to toss to micro shooters who want to submit things they don't have releases for.  It isn't breaking journalism or anything.

Prints? Sorry the media credentials for events do not allow a license for prints.

I do Ok with it. If it's low hanging fruit I pick it and a lot of the shots I also sell as prints. My best selling editorial images  have strong historic value and will always sell as they cannot be taken again. Some make good news stock, but then when a news event happens that applies,  no one is going to istock for a stock image. Newspapers, magazines and blogs use stock images that are not commercial everyday, but I have never seen an istock credit on one.

 I suppose some are being used outside the editorial license.

And maybe it's just me? The thread subject is EDITORIAL so I assumed you were talking about that. Credentials allow for distribution and news licensing, can be used for books and articles, but that does not include prints or resale of photos.

If that has nothing to do with what you were writing about. My apologies. 

Yes there are other kinds of Editorial. Sounds like you are writing about public events and I'm thinking in terms of credentialed events. Two different places and licensing restrictions.

And I doubt that Leaf will ban you for quoting anything... 

Quote from: Uncle Pete on October 14, 2014, 22:35

Prints? Sorry the media credentials for events do not allow a license for prints.

Quote from: landbysea on October 14, 2014, 15:17

I do Ok with it. If it's low hanging fruit I pick it and a lot of the shots I also sell as prints. My best selling editorial images  have strong historic value and will always sell as they cannot be taken again. Some make good news stock, but then when a news event happens that applies,  no one is going to istock for a stock image. Newspapers, magazines and blogs use stock images that are not commercial everyday, but I have never seen an istock credit on one.

 I suppose some are being used outside the editorial license.

Say what? What does media credentials have to do with my post? I don't need a license to sell my own prints. Low hanging fruit means I didn't go out of my way to get the shot. If I can monetize it by selling as editorial and also sell prints of the shot I do. I am not going to give specific examples.
But if i take a photo of something and 6 months later that something is suddenly newsworthy then there is a scramble for stock images. And I never seem to make a sale when that happens. I see media using other sources.  Yet I do sell them. I just don't find them in use.

Ok you thought I was responding to your previous post. I wasn't. If I was I would have quoted you. That;s how I got banned from istock. Cross post after an admin posted. lol