Author Topic: About exclusivity... (Read 18770 times)

luissantos84 · « **Reply #50 on:** October 12, 2013, 15:54 »

http://www.michaeljayfoto.com/talking-numbers/detailed-microstock-report-for-september-and-the-third-quarter-of-2013/

almost reaching the income level before leaving iStock exclusivity (Jan 2013)

ShadySue · « **Reply #51 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:00 »

Anyone know what happened to aeonf?

tickstock · « **Reply #52 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:03 »

luissantos84 · « **Reply #53 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:06 »

Quote from: ShadySue on October 12, 2013, 16:00

Anyone know what happened to aeonf?

the other day we were talking about him, I will try and contact him, maybe he is around and we don't know

ShadySue · « **Reply #54 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:09 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 16:06

Quote from: ShadySue on October 12, 2013, 16:00
Anyone know what happened to aeonf?

the other day we were talking about him, I will try and contact him, maybe he is around and we don't know

Ooooh, another alias

Gannet77 · « **Reply #55 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:23 »

Quote from: tickstock on October 12, 2013, 16:03

Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 15:54
http://www.michaeljayfoto.com/talking-numbers/detailed-microstock-report-for-september-and-the-third-quarter-of-2013/

almost reaching the income level before leaving iStock exclusivity (Jan 2013)

That's good for him, I hope next year is better. For this year he still earned less than last year as an exclusive and he had to upload and deal with multiple sites. Those numbers don't look very encouraging if you are considering dropping exclusivity.

It's not discouraging either. As an Exclusive myself, I've earned less than I did last year too, with only four months of the nine showing an increase compared to 2012.

I'm sure anyone considering dropping Exclusivity would anticipate having reduced income for at least 6 - 12 months; I find it quite encouraging that it seems to be possible to get back to a similar level within only a year, though I'm not planning to jump ship just yet...

cobalt · « **Reply #56 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:37 »

The problem with my numbers is that I am uploading very slowly. It is my own philosophy and I don´t recommend it as a "best" strategy. But even with just 500 files on SS and Fotolia,600 on deposit and 280 on Dreamstime, I am very confident i will be earning more than if I was exclusive and had all files on istock once my full portfolio is online and I am back to producing and uploading in a regular workflow.

And then of course there is stocksy,video,westend61 etc...

It does take time to figure out what is best to upload where, but the simple fact that I have a correlation again between uploading and sales on the new site is excellent. this is what i wasn´t seeing on istock and what many people are still complaining about, that their new files don´t sell.

The most important thing is to attract regular customers and get your files lightboxed by as many people as possible. this is why I believe there is no real "short cut" to going indie. It takes two years to attract a following. It would also take two years to get regular clients if I was starting out new and going exclusive with istock today.

Many people have asked me about my results so that I decided to just blog about it in real time, the way I experience it including all frustrations but also suprises along the way.

But if you are looking for the "fastest possible way" to make a lot of money when going indie, then my path isn´t the one to follow. I have a longterm strategy that I feel very comfortable with.

Results so far are better than expected, but different than I thought they would be. For instance more and higher extended licenses than I expected, but lower volume of sales on the sub sites than I thought I would have. Also a lot more single image downloads,especially on Fotolia. And much better results on Fotolia when keywording in German etc...

I am still on a very low royalty level on most sites,so it will be interesting to see how the results change over time. But SS is getting stronger, this is easy to see.

ShadySue · « **Reply #57 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:38 »

I thought Michael's figures were encouraging. Not for me personally, as I know my main subject doesn't sell well at SS; but for most people I think that is a great result Michael has posted.

cobalt · « **Reply #58 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:42 »

I know people who are earning more than both Michael or me who dropped exclusivity at around the same time. However, I am not sure how many files they have already put on the new sites.

If you are well prepared it does not take long to upload files,most sites have fast inspections and extremly simple upload processes.

tickstock · « **Reply #59 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:42 »

luissantos84 · « **Reply #60 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:48 »

Quote from: cobalt on October 12, 2013, 16:42

If you are well prepared it does not take long to upload files,most sites have fast inspections and extremly simple upload processes.

iStock gets all the prizes there as well

ShadySue · « **Reply #61 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:50 »

Quote from: cobalt on October 12, 2013, 16:37

It does take time to figure out what is best to upload where, but the simple fact that I have a correlation again between uploading and sales on the new site is excellent. this is what i wasn´t seeing on istock and what many people are still complaining about, that their new files don´t sell.

That's the rub with iStock.
Uploading new/better/more diverse images, which used to be the mantra, does nothing now. I've looked in lots of ports, within my genre and in the more commercial genres, and I'm generally seeing the same thing. If they are still uploading, most excusive ports I've looked at are having virtually no sales of new files, e.g. from this year. A very few people are reporting * that trend, but I'm even talking about BDs and high Ds.
Some new indies are getting sales; one guy I looked at joined in May and has had ">100" sales, but he has uploaded over 5100 files in that time (many 'spot the difference' similars), was a long time professional with a trad macro agency (I don't know the story, but I'm really curious) and of course as an indie is undercutting the exclusives in the genre. But he already has a Big Name, and I'm really curious as to why he's joined iStock rather than step out on his own if he has left his macro (s?). I have a watching brief to see if he'll become exclusive. Oh, I see he's just put a huge number up recently on SS too, but under a totally different name. The name he's using on iS is the one I was familiar with.

pancaketom · « **Reply #62 on:** October 12, 2013, 16:51 »

Back before the RC mess I always thought that at some point I would have to make a hard decision about if or when to go exclusive at IS, but then they would "improve" search or something and sales would be cut in 1/2 and it would take a year of uploading to bring them back up. At least as an indie if one site (even SS) does that it isn't going to completely devastate your income.

Now I couldn't imagine putting all my eggs into that basket even if it looked like more income at the moment. I just have NO trust in them. Not that I trust the others much, but at least they probably won't screw me all at once.

Mantis · « **Reply #63 on:** October 12, 2013, 19:05 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 16:48

Quote from: cobalt on October 12, 2013, 16:42
If you are well prepared it does not take long to upload files,most sites have fast inspections and extremly simple upload processes.

iStock gets all the prizes there as well

Well, I think we should set up a wrestling match between Alamy and IS as both are prize winners in this arena

luissantos84 · « **Reply #64 on:** October 12, 2013, 19:10 »

Quote from: Mantis on October 12, 2013, 19:05

Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 16:48
Quote from: cobalt on October 12, 2013, 16:42
If you are well prepared it does not take long to upload files,most sites have fast inspections and extremly simple upload processes.

iStock gets all the prizes there as well

Well, I think we should set up a wrestling match between Alamy and IS as both are prize winners in this arena

YEP

ShadySue · « **Reply #65 on:** October 12, 2013, 19:21 »

Quote from: Mantis on October 12, 2013, 19:05

Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 16:48
Quote from: cobalt on October 12, 2013, 16:42
If you are well prepared it does not take long to upload files,most sites have fast inspections and extremly simple upload processes.

iStock gets all the prizes there as well

Well, I think we should set up a wrestling match between Alamy and IS as both are prize winners in this arena

Alamy's much worse IMO; but iStock will be a real pain when the five minute 'buffer' is implemented.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #66 on:** October 12, 2013, 19:35 »

Quote from: ShadySue on October 12, 2013, 19:21

Quote from: Mantis on October 12, 2013, 19:05
Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 16:48
Quote from: cobalt on October 12, 2013, 16:42
If you are well prepared it does not take long to upload files,most sites have fast inspections and extremly simple upload processes.

iStock gets all the prizes there as well

Well, I think we should set up a wrestling match between Alamy and IS as both are prize winners in this arena
Alamy's much worse IMO; but iStock will be a real pain when the five minute 'buffer' is implemented.

iStock will get there sooner or later, we can't say they aren't working hard, perhaps not on right way

anyway now it is time for my beauty sleep

KB · « **Reply #67 on:** October 12, 2013, 23:37 »

Quote from: ShadySue on October 12, 2013, 19:21

Alamy's much worse IMO; but iStock will be a real pain when the five minute 'buffer' is implemented.

I agree with the first clause, but the 5 minute buffer is meaningless ... if you UL with DM.

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #68 on:** October 13, 2013, 02:02 »

Quote from: tickstock on October 12, 2013, 16:42

Quote from: Gannet77 on October 12, 2013, 16:23
Quote from: tickstock on October 12, 2013, 16:03
Quote from: luissantos84 on October 12, 2013, 15:54
http://www.michaeljayfoto.com/talking-numbers/detailed-microstock-report-for-september-and-the-third-quarter-of-2013/

almost reaching the income level before leaving iStock exclusivity (Jan 2013)

That's good for him, I hope next year is better. For this year he still earned less than last year as an exclusive and he had to upload and deal with multiple sites. Those numbers don't look very encouraging if you are considering dropping exclusivity.

It's not discouraging either. As an Exclusive myself, I've earned less than I did last year too, with only four months of the nine showing an increase compared to 2012.

I'm sure anyone considering dropping Exclusivity would anticipate having reduced income for at least 6 - 12 months; I find it quite encouraging that it seems to be possible to get back to a similar level within only a year, though I'm not planning to jump ship just yet...

I agree, those numbers aren't very discouraging. It's hard to tell from the graph how much less he made than last year.

As of end of September, I have made 6% less in royalties than I did in the same period in 2012 as an iStock exclusive. And the amount I'm behind is mostly coming from the very early month when my iStock income dropped (by about 75%) but my images were not fully up at other agencies. On a monthly basis, I am earning more royalties in 2013 than the year before since June, so it took me five months into non-exclusivity to recover in earnings. Personally I find those numbers actually very encouraging.

Even more, after a steady decline in royalties from September 2011 until December 2012 (despite growing my portfolio by 50% in that period), I keep seeing a growing pattern month by month these days. This is the most encouraging part. Obviously I can't predict the future to see if this trend continues. But for comparison: While staying exclusive, my royalties dropped by about 8% from 2010 to 2011, and by 23% from 2011 to 2012. So even the drop in royalties this year compared to last year seems an improvement over the trend I have seen at iStock.

But for many iStock exclusives, I might not be a good example because I have never made lots of money from Vetta nor GI Sales, so I didn't lose much on the high end. Most of my portfolio is low-end stuff and was likely overpriced at iStock exclusive prices. And those of my images that I consider worth asking a higher price for, are not going to microstock but Stocksy or macrostock agencies.

I do have some insights on several iStock exclusives portfolios/earnings of friends and I doubt I would recommend going non-exclusive as they are making more significant amounts of money from Vetta/GI Sales. And I doubt you will ever be able to recover that part of your earnings from subscription sales at other sites. To me, it seems the key question where to place higher-value images. If you are successful getting them into Vetta (and putting them into your non-exclusive portfolios at other microstock agencies is the only other option you consider), iStock exclusivity is likely to pay off.

topol · « **Reply #69 on:** October 13, 2013, 04:35 »

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on October 11, 2013, 09:43

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on October 11, 2013, 09:21
Quote from: Beppe Grillo on October 11, 2013, 08:42
I don't understand how a 3d render (high or low quality) can be easily duplicated.
You must have the model, the material/textures… so?
What do you mean? Can you explain better?

You don't need a certain ethnicity of model or location to shoot an image. All you need is a computer and software. So, some teen in India can sit all day creating 3d work on his laptop.

This Russian guy was well known for duplicating the concepts that others did, pretty quickly. www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=614972

lol

Probably you have not an very precise idea of what means high quality 3d (modeling, texturing and) rendering?…
It means a lot of work, hours, days, sometime months for a single image.
Not only you have to create the model but you have to find/create the materials and the textures and then to apply them in the right way and in the right place.
Then you have to place the lights, and it is a lot more difficult than to move lamps in a photo studio. You have to make tests and tests and tests again, and a lot of adjustments before to reach a satisfying result.

Certainly nothing to do with the example that you gave…

I think that Vinne speaks about works of this level (or better):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbb3viz/7333048902/#in/photostream/

http :// vimeo. com/7809605

You ppl are really behing the curve here. There are thousands of people doing stuff like that the by dozens. I used to be heavily involved with a small but very advanced 3d anim studio, checking out these things daily to see the trends. Pics like the ones you linked might have been something special a decade ago, not now, when anyone can have i7+GPU power or better at home. Hey, even near realistic face renders for stills have become boring commonplace more than a decade ago, I remember a russian guy doing an almost perfect gladiator-russel-crowe right after the movie came out. 3D render for stills is a lot easier to get into and imitate than decent photography, you basically just need a room where you and your rig can fit.

heywoody · « **Reply #70 on:** October 13, 2013, 05:41 »

Almost at the point where models won't be needed...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/media/folder_248/file_2470808.jpg

ShadySue · « **Reply #71 on:** October 13, 2013, 05:47 »

Quote from: heywoody on October 13, 2013, 05:41

Almost at the point where models won't be needed...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/media/folder_248/file_2470808.jpg

Almost, but not quite.
At least she won't sue.

But you could get lookalike girls claiming it was them. The world is full of wannabe suers.

kobajagrande · « **Reply #72 on:** October 17, 2013, 03:03 »

Quote from: a1bercik on October 11, 2013, 13:59

Vinne, please read Sean's posts again. This will help you more than clicking and repeating the first question. Believe me, the answer is there.

Compact version, for lazier people is here:
<quote>
"High Quality 3d renders" are easily duplicated by people around the world, who sell non-exclusive, so you will be competing against the same content at cheaper prices.
</quote>

This quote is true but it is missing one crucial word... the word quality.

Yes, he might be competing against the whole world (as we all stockers do), yes they might copy his work (as some stockers around the world do)... but they can not copy the quality.
If you stand out from the crowd with quality, your content will be more popular, which will bring you more sales, no matter of the price (hint: Vizerskaya) (hint 2: go for exclusive, you will not regret it).
The people who copy other peoples work mostly don`t have that certain quality, if they have, they would not copy.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #73 on:** October 17, 2013, 06:04 »

Quote from: kobajagrande on October 17, 2013, 03:03

but they can not copy the quality.
If you stand out from the crowd with quality, your content will be more popular, which will bring you more sales, no matter of the price (hint: Vizerskaya) (hint 2: go for exclusive, you will not regret it).
The people who copy other peoples work mostly don`t have that certain quality, if they have, they would not copy.

Sure they can have the same quality. BTW, I was never talking about someone directly duplicating an image. Just that you have hundreds of guys who are really good at "home interiors", etc.

heywoody · « **Reply #74 on:** October 17, 2013, 16:13 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on October 17, 2013, 06:04

Quote from: kobajagrande on October 17, 2013, 03:03
but they can not copy the quality.
If you stand out from the crowd with quality, your content will be more popular, which will bring you more sales, no matter of the price (hint: Vizerskaya) (hint 2: go for exclusive, you will not regret it).
The people who copy other peoples work mostly don`t have that certain quality, if they have, they would not copy.

Sure they can have the same quality. BTW, I was never talking about someone directly duplicating an image. Just that you have hundreds of guys who are really good at "home interiors", etc.

I think it's clear what you meant. As far as I know ikea are now mostly using 3D interiors rather than photos in catalogues and the skills are widely used in non-microstock arenas.

SS stopped accepting this material sometime ago so exclusivity could be attractive on this basis but, if I were in the OP's shoes, I'd wait until it's clear what getty are up to.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: About exclusivity... (Read 18770 times)

luissantos84

ShadySue

tickstock

luissantos84

ShadySue

Gannet77

cobalt

ShadySue

cobalt

tickstock

luissantos84

ShadySue

pancaketom

Mantis

luissantos84

ShadySue

luissantos84

KB

MichaelJayFoto

topol

heywoody

ShadySue

kobajagrande

Sean Locke Photography

heywoody

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors