pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: About exclusivity...  (Read 18555 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 11, 2013, 04:50 »
0
Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.


« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2013, 05:01 »
+1
You are earning the 1000 dollars because your files are a lot cheaper than the exclusive files. when you go exclusive you will have a higher royalty rate, but not necessarily the same number of downloads. Maybe the push in best match can balance that, but it is something to consider.

i am sure you will earn more than now, but I would be careful to assume that it will immediatly be double.

But maybe people who just went exclusive can share how their download rate changed.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2013, 05:03 »
+2
Very little is being made Vetta nowadays other than those photo factories which are on special deals.
The connector to Getty is intermittant. I don't know how you get onto the A list whereby the files go over quite quickly, but if you're on the Z list, it can take years.

FWIW, I'm exclusive; but if I wasn't, I certainly wouldn't think of becoming exclusive now.

Added: and Cobalt's right: when you go exclusive, you'll have a lot or rivals undercutting you, and even if your work is better, buyers might decide to satisfice with the much cheaper indie files. Your RPD will rise, but that's the only 'given'.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 05:05 by ShadySue »

« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2013, 05:29 »
+1
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?

This highly depends on how much of your is going to be moved to Signature+ and Vetta, and as a consequence will be mirrored to Getty. There are contributors who have a huge percentage (20 or more) of their images going into the top collections and they might receive huge amounts through the Getty transfer as well.

I am more on the cheap end of imagery, and while being an iStock exclusive very few (<1%) of my images made it into Vetta and even a few hundred images mirrored at Getty did never make a significant amount of money for me. I felt that my imagery is overpriced at iStock, so customers would rather choose a cheaper image from a non-exclusive contributor. When I made that assessment, I decided to leave exclusivity. Maybe the decision would have been different or harder with today's non-exclusive prices at iStock as the gap has widened. Then again, the partner program is making a huge part of my iStock income these days and you don't get to be part of that anymore as an exclusive.

I do understand the people who are staying exclusive because they are making a lot of money from the high-end imagery there. It would be much harder to compensate for at other places.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2013, 06:21 »
0
Becoming exclusive you will not have the possibility to continue to sell your images on other sites.
So you will probably earn more on iStock, but it is not sure that it will be twice more, and you will stop to earn money on any other sites.
I am not sure that leaving sites like Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Fotolia to become exclusive on iStock, your global income will grow. (I am almost sure of the contrary, but it is only my opinion, my feeling)

« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2013, 06:39 »
-3
Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.

"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.

« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2013, 08:40 »
0
Regarding prices what I can say is that when Istock gave us the possibility to put some of out images in the Photo+, I decided to put all the best sellers I can in that collection. As a result, I have seen no sale reduction but only an higher income. The same thing appends with some exclusive images on Fotolia were I've set the price at 3x. That is the reason for what I am quite confident about higher prices.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2013, 08:41 »
0
Regarding prices what I can say is that when Istock gave us the possibility to put some of out images in the Photo+, I decided to put all the best sellers I can in that collection. As a result, I have seen no sale reduction but only an higher income. The same thing appends with some exclusive images on Fotolia were I've set the price at 3x. That is the reason for what I am quite confident about higher prices.
I thought all indie images are now at one flat Main price?

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2013, 08:42 »
+2
Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.

"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.

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?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 08:44 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2013, 08:58 »
+3

"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.

Sorry, Sean, with all the respect, I don't want to sound suberb, but when I say "high quality 3d renders" I'm saying "high quality 3d renders" and in the microstock market less than 1% of the 3d renders can be called "high quality". At list for my standard. So they are not easily duplicated. I am in the top 200 at Fotolia and of that 200, i think that not more than 20 are 3d artists. So for sure, this kind of competition is not a problem for me. My problem, insted, is that everywere as a non-exclusive, quality can't compensate the fact that many images don't have the time to be seen that they goes under tons of others in the search engine. And they are lost forever. So if you upload hundreds pictures every month this may not be a problem, but if you spend hours or days on a single image you start to think that this images should, at least, be seen. If it have hundreds of views and don't sell ok, but I use to have, for many of my images, 1 sell every 4 views, so my priority is that much people possibly views them.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2013, 09:10 »
0
If you go exclusive and a buyer turns on the $ filter, they won't see your files at all, unless any get demoted to main.
I have no idea how many buyers do that.
But 'only at iStock' signals 'more expensive' - even when an exclusive file has been demoted to Main so is the same price as indies.

« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2013, 09:21 »
-6
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

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2013, 09:43 »
+1
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

« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 09:52 by Beppe Grillo »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2013, 09:49 »
0
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

Have you an idea of what is high quality 3d modeling, texturing and rendering?
Certainly nothing to do with the example that you gave

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

http :// vimeo. com/7809605

Do you think that it is so simple to duplicate?

I'm sure someone could do a photograph like that, but the chair and birds would likely be rejected for copyright.  ::)

« Reply #14 on: October 11, 2013, 09:50 »
+1
must be very low quality indeed, looking at over 600k downloads!

if it is that easy please teach us mere mortals ;D

« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2013, 09:53 »
-6
lol

Have you an idea of what is high quality 3d modeling, texturing and rendering?
Certainly nothing to do with the example that you gave

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

http :// vimeo. com/7809605

Do you think that it is so simple to duplicate?


Yep.   Once you've built up a library of models and textures to use, global lighting like that is pretty simple in programs like 3dsMax.  Like I said, people around the world have nothing better to do then sit around trying to make cool renders like that. Alex was just an example of a portfolio of quickly duplicated ideas.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2013, 09:59 »
-1

Yep.   Once you've built up a library of models and textures to use, global lighting like that is pretty simple in programs like 3dsMax.  Like I said, people around the world have nothing better to do then sit around trying to make cool renders like that. Alex was just an example of a portfolio of quickly duplicated ideas.

Now I understand better why it is "Sean Locke Photography" and not "Sean Locke 3D render"

EmberMike

« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2013, 09:59 »
+1
...I know that nobdy have the right answer to this question...

Oh, I'm pretty sure most folks around here do know the right answer to that question.

« Reply #18 on: October 11, 2013, 10:09 »
+1

Yep.   Once you've built up a library of models and textures to use, global lighting like that is pretty simple in programs like 3dsMax.  Like I said, people around the world have nothing better to do then sit around trying to make cool renders like that. Alex was just an example of a portfolio of quickly duplicated ideas.


Now I understand better why it is "Sean Locke Photography" and not "Sean Locke 3D render"


I worked for 9 years in the computer animation department at Disney.  I'm pretty sure I have a handle on some of the basics ;)

Here's a tutorial series that teaches you about using Mental Ray in Maya, for instance:
http://simplymaya.com/autodesk-maya-video-tutorial/lighting-and-rendering/the-dark-art-of-mental-ray/?tut_id=307

The point is not that it takes five minutes to create a more detailed render.  The point is that there are plenty of people around the world that have the time, inclination and equipment to do it.

« Reply #19 on: October 11, 2013, 10:11 »
0
As I said, there is not a matter of "same image at a lower price". I do not create tons of 3d objects on a white background. For sure this kind of things only can sell at low prices. My question only is: how much unicity, originality, quality, can make the difference in been an Istock exclusive seller? As a non-exclusive, most of the times, quantity mean more than quality (as can be seen in Sean example...)

« Reply #20 on: October 11, 2013, 10:21 »
+4
If you search "smiling girl" on Istock, you will find 1,25 million results. So the question is, why do you continue to waste you time shooting this kind of subject?
People look for what fits better in they project, someone cares about the price, someone not. Somebody spends 300$ for a signle photo, somebody 3000$. For somebody 30$ is to much. I mean, you only have to care about how is your target.

« Reply #21 on: October 11, 2013, 10:30 »
+1
If you search "smiling girl" on Istock, you will find 1,25 million results. So the question is, why do you continue to waste you time shooting this kind of subject?
People look for what fits better in they project, someone cares about the price, someone not. Somebody spends 300$ for a signle photo, somebody 3000$. For somebody 30$ is to much. I mean, you only have to care about how is your target.

Look, I don't care what you decide to do.  I'm just pointing out that you're competing with the entire world when you're creating content entirely within software, and the rest of that world is probably going to be lower priced then you if you turn exclusive.

« Reply #22 on: October 11, 2013, 10:51 »
0
Look, I don't care what you decide to do.  I'm just pointing out that you're competing with the entire world when you're creating content entirely within software, and the rest of that world is probably going to be lower priced then you if you turn exclusive.

No doubt about this point. The fact is that you are refearing to illustration in a way that lets presume the with photography it is different. If my four years child comes into your studio when you are shooting, and you give him your camera, you can be sure he can click the button. Furthermore there are at least 10 photographers for every illustrator. So, sorry, but I can't see the point...

« Reply #23 on: October 11, 2013, 11:11 »
-6
Look, I don't care what you decide to do.  I'm just pointing out that you're competing with the entire world when you're creating content entirely within software, and the rest of that world is probably going to be lower priced then you if you turn exclusive.

No doubt about this point. The fact is that you are refearing to illustration in a way that lets presume the with photography it is different. If my four years child comes into your studio when you are shooting, and you give him your camera, you can be sure he can click the button. Furthermore there are at least 10 photographers for every illustrator. So, sorry, but I can't see the point...

<sigh>

You asked a question and one of the most successful commercial photographer/illustrators has gone out of his way, several times now, to give you sound, reasoned advice. Yet, far from thanking him, you persist in telling him that he is wrong?

« Reply #24 on: October 11, 2013, 11:27 »
+4

You asked a question and one of the most successful commercial photographer/illustrators has gone out of his way, several times now, to give you sound, reasoned advice. Yet, far from thanking him, you persist in telling him that he is wrong?

No, I'm not saying that he is wrong. I have absolute respect for Sean and his work. I'm only saying, by hanving years of experince about, that there is not so many people around that can make exactly the same image i make and sell them at a lower price (and if they make then copying exactly mine, they are thieves and should therefore be treated as such). Ralely had this kind of problem, never care about it and so, I don't think that becoming exclusive I will care about that. I have perfectly understand that Sean is saying that I should not become exclusive from is point of view. But if read my first post, you will see that my question is not that.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #25 on: October 11, 2013, 11:38 »
+1
OK, think about the other thing.
You put your prices up to P+ and everything was good.
Then iS arbitrarily stopped that and put your prices really low.
Become exclusive, and there are no guarantees that they won't try to pull more new tricks. Their 'Collections' scheme seems to have benefitted some, hindered others, and there was no logic as to which side of the fence you came on.
They now have a history of changing the goalposts at will and at random, with no rhyme nor reason.
True, you only have to give 30 days notice to become independent again, but you'll have lost traction at your other sites in the meantime.
But if you want to give it a go, why not? (so long as you don't have innocent people depending on you to eat).

« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2013, 13:26 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:11 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2013, 13:59 »
0
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>

« Reply #28 on: October 11, 2013, 14:23 »
+8
Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.

Hey Vinnie,

I, too, asked for advice on this forum many months back when I was pondering on illustration exclusivity, and was very glad for some of the feedback received. I guess you could say that I'm now duty bound to help others. :D

From your described circumstances, you seem vastly more experienced than I am (I'm only a Bronze on iStock and I've been doing stock vectors seriously for just 10+ months now), so the only information I can provide are observations and data from my experiences:

1. I became exclusive on the 12th week of 2013. The income I received this week was roughly twice the amount I had received on the 11th week.

2. From the 12th week onwards, my earnings continued growing until the 24th week of this year with minor fluctuations in between. I'd been uploading somewhat regularly till this point.

3. On the 25th week of 2013, iStock introduced a major overhaul to their site interface and collections. As a result, the income I received on the 25th week was roughly 40% that of the 24th week.

4. From the 25th week till now, my earnings have yet to recover. And while they are still better than my earnings when I was a non-exclusive, I've yet to have a week as good as my 12th week (My first week as an exclusive.)

On the overall, I do think exclusivity will definitely kickstart one's earnings and exposure as long as the status quo remains the same. But now that iStock is in somewhat of a flux (a large number of changes seem to be slated for the near future), I think it might be wise to hold off making any long term commitments until the dust has settled.

I hope this helps. :) I plan to share more at the start of next year when I've hit my first year anniversary as a stock artist!

Cheers,
David
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 14:30 by davidgoh »

« Reply #29 on: October 11, 2013, 14:27 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:11 by Audi 5000 »

drd

« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2013, 15:02 »
+2
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?

Don't have any unrealistic expectations!


« Reply #31 on: October 11, 2013, 15:41 »
+1
I think that is better to wait for you, I don't like exclusivity but this isn't my point.
I think that you must pay attention to the present moment. You asked something that it's early impossible to answer at this time, and davidgoh answer is a good example of what I mean to say. Before to take your decision you need some reliable data and at this time there isn't. Istock this year continues to change the rules. It isn't something about if are good or bad everyone can think what he wants, the point is that the new rules can completely change the results and this happened whit the new search and new prices in example. Worst, more are coming, this was promised by iStock and no one can say how the impact for contributor will be. Whatever will be your decision to me this isn't the right time to take it, you can't get reliable data.

« Reply #32 on: October 11, 2013, 16:57 »
+2
I would contact support and asked if your portfolio will be reviewed if you become exclusive. I would also ask how long before your images are on Getty. If not you may be waiting a long time to get into S+ and Vetta and be on Getty. I make most of my sales from a handful of Vetta images and the top third of my images which are in S+. In addition I make half again my istock income from mirroring at Getty. My good sellers are not easily duplicated because of their remote location and in several cases it would require time travel, so results may vary for you.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2013, 09:02 by landbysea »

« Reply #33 on: October 11, 2013, 17:05 »
0
I think that is better to wait for you, I don't like exclusivity but this isn't my point.
I think that you must pay attention to the present moment. You asked something that it's early impossible to answer at this time, and davidgoh answer is a good example of what I mean to say. Before to take your decision you need some reliable data and at this time there isn't. Istock this year continues to change the rules. It isn't something about if are good or bad everyone can think what he wants, the point is that the new rules can completely change the results and this happened whit the new search and new prices in example. Worst, more are coming, this was promised by iStock and no one can say how the impact for contributor will be. Whatever will be your decision to me this isn't the right time to take it, you can't get reliable data.

One or two relevant answers, including this.  Where is the conversation on what a quality render is or photography vs 3D coming from?  He's doing x amount of business and wondering if exclusivity will produce 2x.  Who can say but looking at the sales threads over there I wouldn't be optimistic whatever type of content. 

« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2013, 03:49 »
+1
Yes, in the end I had some relevant experience based answers. Thank you for that.
The conclusion I have reached is that, in my opinion, doubling the inconme becoming exclusive is absolutely possible if you have a good quality portfolio, due to the major royalty rate and the Vetta/Getty collections.
The fact is that doubling the income, for my situation, is absolutely non enough for considering exclusivity.
So, thank you all for your replyes... ;)

« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2013, 05:36 »
+3
You know what they say - "past performance is no guarantee of future earnings".  Getty are up to something with IS and not clear what their end game is...

« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2013, 08:39 »
+3
I think it really is wise to just wait and see how things develop in the next few weeks or months. In principle being exclusive with a site that sells well and has a huge international network is very comfortable. I really enjoyed being exclusive. But the market is in big flux, Shutterstock has announced they want to reach a revenue of 1 billion, i.e. 5 times more than they have now and they obviously have the money to invest in the marketing.
Fotolia also has a private investor and is the largest agency in Europe.

And Getty has...2.4 Billion in debt. Maybe they still have a lot of money to invest to grow the site, I dont know. But if they invest money - will it go into marketing getty or marketing istock? or Thinkstock? Or Punchstock??

If you read the September earnings thread, it is very depressing.

On the plus side, they are actively doing something about istock,even if they start with changing logos and site layout,but it really looks like finally something is being done.

But just right now, I doubt they are the market leader in microstock. The report said their "midstock" business was 300 million. Shutterstock now has 230 million. Fotolia??? And all the others??

If you go exclusive, you would probably want to be with the agency that will be the market leader. But who will be the market leader in the coming years? I really wouldnt know at the moment.

I think the idea to ask them to tell you how many of your files will be placed into S+ or Vetta and when they will be transferred to Getty is a very good idea. If the quality of your work is really that good, they should be able to promote your work across their many agencies. Maybe they can even give you an earnings estimate based on how many files they push to a higher agency or collection.

Another alternative might be to talk to Fotolia. They pay up to 60% to their exclusive artists.

If you are good, there is nothing wrong in asking around and seeing what the agencies might offer you.

Whatever you do,best of luck!


« Last Edit: October 12, 2013, 08:56 by cobalt »

« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2013, 10:00 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:11 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #38 on: October 12, 2013, 10:18 »
+2
Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.

I'd think if you are doing $1000 a month at IS, then you are probably doing well at the other sites too. Especially if you've hit the point where you can adjust your prices at FT. I'd think that you'd be giving up more than you gain.

I'd say to look at your year over year and look at where you are growing, shrinking, etc. Then, plot out where you think you'll be in another couple years and compare that to how you think you'll do as an exclusive. If it is close, you may be able to squeeze out that same amount of money from adding a self-hosted site, finding new sites, or doing image exclusive deals.

In the end, you are really the only one that can decide what is going to be the most profitable.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #39 on: October 12, 2013, 10:24 »
0
If you can find reports on facebook or a few here you'll see that many exclusives that left had their iStock income drop by 90%.
True, but that was only to be expected short term; and many of those who became indie had experienced rapidly falling sales on iS, pushing them towards independence.
I wonder if iS would make a promise to port all your images over to Getty within a rapid time-frame, and actually deliver on the promise. (Depends whether the 'poor connector' is really bad technology, incompetence or malice).
The OP could always try to get all their images made Vetta and Editors' Pick as others have already done.
Of course, with iStock, what they do today may change tomorrow ...

« Reply #40 on: October 12, 2013, 10:29 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:11 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #41 on: October 12, 2013, 10:52 »
0
Personally my sales are on an upward trend in October although September was a big disappointment.

If I were you, I would not change my status until at least the end of December. You don't want to miss the peak sales in any agencies.

« Reply #42 on: October 12, 2013, 11:55 »
+1
There is another thread where nonexclusives said that the average price a buyer paid for their images was around $5 while the average price paid for an exclusive image was between $20-25.  That would mean 4x the royalty from price increase plus 2x the royalty from your % increase for a total of 8x.  Sales may fall because of the higher prices but they may not because of the better best match placement.  If you do get a good amount of files into Getty that can account for another 50% of your iStock. exclusive income.  For me it's 25-40% but there are others who make more on Getty than iStock.  I would think 8x is likely outcome on the conservative side, for me just for losing the higher prices, Getty, and % I would probably be down around 93% .   If you can find reports on facebook or a few here you'll see that many exclusives that left had their iStock income drop by 90%.

This is the kind of answer I would like to have when I start this thread. Something inside me wants to give it a try. In any case, I will aspect some months to see if the situation settles.
Thank you for your point of view.

« Reply #43 on: October 12, 2013, 12:06 »
+2
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:10 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #44 on: October 12, 2013, 13:01 »
+3
more changes? thank god we have iStock to cheer up the stock business, actually I prefer the boredness from SS ;D

« Reply #45 on: October 12, 2013, 14:24 »
-1
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:10 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #46 on: October 12, 2013, 14:39 »
+4
more changes? thank god we have iStock to cheer up the stock business, actually I prefer the boredness from SS ;D
Shutterstock has been kind of exciting recently getting rid of referral earnings and changing the TOS, launching Offset, etc... and I doubt they're done yet.

and I can't wait ;D

whatever SS decides to change in the future, don't forget iStock pulled us to 15% back in 2010, 3 * years, weren't they suppose to be sustainable now? ::)
« Last Edit: October 12, 2013, 15:26 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #47 on: October 12, 2013, 15:33 »
-2
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:10 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #48 on: October 12, 2013, 15:37 »
0
more changes? thank god we have iStock to cheer up the stock business, actually I prefer the boredness from SS ;D
Shutterstock has been kind of exciting recently getting rid of referral earnings and changing the TOS, launching Offset, etc... and I doubt they're done yet.

and I can't wait ;D

whatever SS decides to change in the future, don't forget iStock pulled us to 15% back in 2010, 3 * years, weren't they suppose to be sustainable now? ::)
Good reason not to be nonexclusive.

because exclusives are doing a lot better ;D

« Reply #49 on: October 12, 2013, 15:43 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:10 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #50 on: October 12, 2013, 15:54 »
+1

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #51 on: October 12, 2013, 16:00 »
0
Anyone know what happened to aeonf?

« Reply #52 on: October 12, 2013, 16:03 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:10 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #53 on: October 12, 2013, 16:06 »
0
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 ;D

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #54 on: October 12, 2013, 16:09 »
0
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 ;D
Ooooh, another alias   8)

« Reply #55 on: October 12, 2013, 16:23 »
+4
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...

« Reply #56 on: October 12, 2013, 16:37 »
+1
The problem with my numbers is that I am uploading very slowly. It is my own philosophy and I dont 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 wasnt seeing on istock and what many people are still complaining about, that their new files dont 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 isnt 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

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #57 on: October 12, 2013, 16:38 »
0
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.

« Reply #58 on: October 12, 2013, 16:42 »
0
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.

« Reply #59 on: October 12, 2013, 16:42 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 09:09 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #60 on: October 12, 2013, 16:48 »
+1
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 ;D


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #61 on: October 12, 2013, 16:50 »
+1
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 wasnt seeing on istock and what many people are still complaining about, that their new files dont 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.

« Reply #62 on: October 12, 2013, 16:51 »
+11
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.


« Reply #63 on: October 12, 2013, 19:05 »
+1
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 ;D

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

« Reply #64 on: October 12, 2013, 19:10 »
0
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 ;D

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

YEP ;D ;D ;D

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #65 on: October 12, 2013, 19:21 »
+2
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 ;D

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

« Reply #66 on: October 12, 2013, 19:35 »
0
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 ;D

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

KB

« Reply #67 on: October 12, 2013, 23:37 »
0
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.  ;D

« Reply #68 on: October 13, 2013, 02:02 »
+3
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.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2013, 02:08 by MichaelJayFoto »

« Reply #69 on: October 13, 2013, 04:35 »
-3
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. :)

« Reply #70 on: October 13, 2013, 05:41 »
-1
Almost at the point where models won't be needed...

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

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #71 on: October 13, 2013, 05:47 »
0
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.

« Reply #72 on: October 17, 2013, 03:03 »
+1
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. ;)

« Reply #73 on: October 17, 2013, 06:04 »
0
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.

« Reply #74 on: October 17, 2013, 16:13 »
0
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.

« Reply #75 on: November 29, 2013, 09:20 »
0

« Reply #76 on: November 30, 2013, 20:20 »
+1
Vinne,
to your original post.
I too am gold and have been exclusive since I qualified.  I also do a pretty good monthly business at IS and have no interest in working with other sites since i only do this for fun and the nice money that comes with it.  So many variables others have mentioned, so it is hard to tell if you would come out ahead.  I just sold a signature plus medium size photo, and my take was just under $16.  Sale number totals are down each year for the past 3-4 years, but $ earned is nicely on the rise again since they redid the collections.   Is it helped by being exclusive??? I don't know but am happy with it.

mlwinphoto

« Reply #77 on: November 30, 2013, 21:33 »
+1
  I just sold a signature plus medium size photo, and my take was just under $16. 

I just sold a medium from Main (the only collection I'm allowed to participate in) and my take was 60 cents....

Exclusivity makes sense if money is the only thing you are concerned about, and I'm sure it is for many, understandably.  Personally, I would never go back to the crown as the other sites I have joined are enjoyable to be with and I feel motivated to continue working for/with them. Nov was my best month on SS by far and is getting close to what I was doing at iS as an exclusive.  I am also with Macrografiks and Stockbo, two recent startups that make me feel as though they actually appreciate my being there.....and who knows, perhaps one day they will pay off....


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
69 Replies
26737 Views
Last post July 02, 2009, 18:49
by gostwyck
79 Replies
28297 Views
Last post July 11, 2009, 22:21
by bittersweet
3 Replies
2899 Views
Last post March 10, 2013, 17:45
by Jo Ann Snover
10 Replies
2994 Views
Last post January 17, 2014, 00:20
by Rinderart
1 Replies
1437 Views
Last post July 15, 2014, 04:33
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors