pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Dropping The Crown?  (Read 24738 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 06, 2014, 00:55 »
+1
Hi - I am new here, but not new to iStock. I have been an iStock contributor for nearly 8 years and have been an exclusive contributor for most of that time. I am quite seriously thinking about dropping my crown now for the first time. What I am curious about is how people who have dropped the crown in the last couple of years are fairing as independent contributors at this point.

I have read some conjecture on the iStock site in the exclusive contributor forum about how remaining exclusive is the best way to go and how you won't be able to replace the income so easily as an independent, but that is all opinions coming from exclusive contributors who only know what it is like from the perspective of being exclusive. On the other hand, I have not seen any actual stories from people who have dropped the crown and as to how they are really doing.

What I did find though is an interesting ongoing blog post from an independent contributor who has been shooting and uploading since about 2005. His blog post tracks his total monthly income for nearly the last 10 years and shows how it has steadily increased year by year. I looked at his portfolio on a number of stock sites and learned he has a bit over 10,000 images online on the other 3 of the Big 4 sites, and only a small portfolio on iStock with only about 1,300 images on iStock. So iStock isn't and never has been a major source of his stock income it would appear, yet he seems to have done fine without it.

So his story is quite positive. The question is are there other success stories like this from independents who dropped the crown on iStock? And are they at least doing as good as they were on iStock or perhaps better or worse?

I would appreciate any real life feedback people might be willing to share.

Cheers to all,

Craig
« Last Edit: May 06, 2014, 08:01 by CraigMiller »


« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2014, 02:22 »
+10
Hi Craig,

if you look around you will find many people reporting their story going indie. I think Michael was one of the fastest to have regained his full istock income, he did it in six months. But Michael was very well prepared and is in general an extremely well organized man and hard worker. You can find his blog here:

http://www.michaeljayfoto.com/talking-numbers/same-earnings-non-exclusive-from-istockphoto/

He was blogging his monthly income on a regular basis and just stopped doing that recently after proving he had reached his goals, so if you go back over that blog, youll get a good idea of what happened.

I went indie after the Getty Google deal last year and also terminated my Getty House contract at the same time. But this doesnt mean I am not interested in macro as well as micro. I have been blogging in short comments on my facebook page about my journey, but my info is not as complete or interesting as what Michael did.

I took a whole year to understand the market and didnt upload that much. So I only have betweenn 300 - 800 files on the new agencies. But I am glad that I took my time, because it helped me to understand what sells. I find that there are big differences in what kind of files become bestsellers, it is usually not the files that were bestsellers on istock.

Overall you have to remember the world out there is not waiting for you or your content. The indies have tremendously good artist who have been building large portfolios for years and have top search positions for their files. Your portfolio is coming in new so you have to fight your way in.

However, even with the small portfolio I have I am now overall at between 35% - 50% a month of my former exclusive earnings. This includes income from photos, videos and of course my indie income from 3600 files on istock.

So for such small portfolios, I think I am doing quite well and I am very glad I went indie. You have a lot more balance. There can be wild differences in monthly earnings, especially on sites like SS that offer a mix of very low subs income and very high extended license incomes (80 dollars, 28 dollars etc...) but the mix of different sites balances it all out.

I am also a member of stocksy and Westend61 and imagebrief, agencies that follow a higher price model. I also sell videos,mostly on pond5 and SS.

The most difficult thing to learn is what kind of content will sell where - high price or low price, high volume site or specialist niche etc...

The most important agencies for me are Shutterstock, stocksy, pond5,fotolia,dreamstime. On Westend I am too new to see results. And of course I still upload to istock.

I am also uploading to many of the smaller players, but the agencies mentioned are the most important for me. If anything, I would recommend to upload very regularly to SS and maybe to bundle the uploads into larger batches,instead of uploading 2 images a day.

And of course I would recommend applying to stocksy, if you are ready to work with an edited collection.

Good luck with your journey. You are not alone, there will be many more people going indie this year.

shudderstok

« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2014, 02:44 »
+3
and i am at polar opposites to cobalt. she has a lot of valid points for sure, however those points work for her. for me the logic of dropping the exclusivity of IS or dropping being a GI house contributor makes no sense at all, but that is what works for me.
for me the biggest reasons of remaining exclusive on IS and being a house contributor at GI are quite simple, i am very well established in GI, and also well established in IS. i can't think of one reason i would want break up what i have. i also have no interest whatsoever in uploading to several sites as it is very time consuming trying to sort out each sites quirks. i like that i can shoot what i do, and send what i deem to be the better work to GI and can either flag it as RF or RM or let them decide for me. i like the fact that i can also send what i deem to be second rate work and submit it to IS and let it settle where it does, and if for whatever reason IS or GI decide it is to be on both sites then i can double dip. for me it is more important to maintain my lifestyle and be free to shoot what i want to shoot and spend less time uploading to several sites.
i personally don't think there is a simple answer to your question. nobody shoots the same work, nobody has the same diligence in their work effort, nobody has the same strategy, and nobody has the same results.
i think as jasmine has pointed out above, what she does works best for her, i think she is nuts, but then what i am doing works best for me, and i bloody well know she thinks i am nuts :) so the solution is to do what works best for you, do what feels right for you and hope it works out for you. some people could drop the crown and fly, and others could drop the crown and flop.
whatever you choose - good luck with it.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2014, 03:25 »
+4
Be sure to pay special attention to the experience of people with similar ports to yours.
Certain subjects or geographical biases may not do as well as others on SS. It seems if you don't do well on SS, you might as well keep the crown. (However, things may well get much worse on iS with the new subs.)
You might also like to consider the acceptance whims of certain agencies, and the partner and other policies of certain agencies.
All of these can be found by reading around on here.
Good luck, whatever you decide.

Dook

« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2014, 03:37 »
0

for me the biggest reasons of remaining exclusive on IS and being a house contributor at GI are quite simple, i am very well established in GI, and also well established in IS. i can't think of one reason i would want break up what i have. i also have no interest whatsoever in uploading to several sites as it is very time consuming trying to sort out each sites quirks. i like that i can shoot what i do, and send what i deem to be the better work to GI and can either flag it as RF or RM or let them decide for me. i like the fact that i can also send what i deem to be second rate work and submit it to IS and let it settle where it does, and if for whatever reason IS or GI decide it is to be on both sites then i can double dip. for me it is more important to maintain my lifestyle and be free to shoot what i want to shoot and spend less time uploading to several sites.


Excuse me for a bit off topic question.
Shudderstok, what is GI house contributor and how do you become one? Are you just sending your files via Vetta slot or is there some other deal? If it's just Vetta deal (no Exclusive+ option anymore), how do you get whatever you decide through inspections since they are very picky these days, especially after this Signature, Signature + thing?
Thanks!

shudderstok

« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2014, 03:52 »
+1

for me the biggest reasons of remaining exclusive on IS and being a house contributor at GI are quite simple, i am very well established in GI, and also well established in IS. i can't think of one reason i would want break up what i have. i also have no interest whatsoever in uploading to several sites as it is very time consuming trying to sort out each sites quirks. i like that i can shoot what i do, and send what i deem to be the better work to GI and can either flag it as RF or RM or let them decide for me. i like the fact that i can also send what i deem to be second rate work and submit it to IS and let it settle where it does, and if for whatever reason IS or GI decide it is to be on both sites then i can double dip. for me it is more important to maintain my lifestyle and be free to shoot what i want to shoot and spend less time uploading to several sites.


Excuse me for a bit off topic question.
Shudderstok, what is GI house contributor and how do you become one? Are you just sending your files via Vetta slot or is there some other deal? If it's just Vetta deal (no Exclusive+ option anymore), how do you get whatever you decide through inspections since they are very picky these days, especially after this Signature, Signature + thing?
Thanks!

no worries. GI house contributor basically means you signed a contract with GI directly and abide by those terms. i have been with GI since pretty much day one and thus have become a GI house photographer. i think at one point they were offering a select few from IS the option to become a GI house photographer as well but am not 100% sure of this, they did offer me but i declined as i was already with them so i did not pay much attention to the details. i think the only way to become a GI house contributor these days is to simply apply to GI and if they are confident in your work they will offer you a contract though i am not sure if it is a house contributor one or not. perhaps there are others on this forum that can offer you more insight. hope this answers a few of your questions.

« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2014, 07:36 »
+2
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:30 by tickstock »

« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2014, 07:50 »
+4
However, even with the small portfolio I have I am now overall at between 35% - 50% a month of my former exclusive earnings. This includes income from photos, videos and of course my indie income from 3600 files on istock.

So for such small portfolios, I think I am doing quite well and I am very glad I went indie.
I know money isn't everything but making 35% of what you were, after a year of being independent, sounds really bad (not that 50% sounds much better).  I'm glad you feel good about your decision but those numbers are just to extreme for me to ignore.

Considering she is making that with 8% - 25% of her portfolio (300 - 800 out of 3600) uploaded to the other agencies that does not sound so bad...

« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2014, 07:56 »
+2
@Cobalt - Thank you for your very informative and well presented post. I am still a bit confused though why you haven't uploaded all 3,600 files to at least 3 or 4 of the other sites you are working with? I guess I am not sure I see the advantage of uploading what you have in small stages. Best wishes.

« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2014, 07:57 »
+3
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:29 by tickstock »

« Reply #10 on: May 06, 2014, 08:05 »
+1
However, even with the small portfolio I have I am now overall at between 35% - 50% a month of my former exclusive earnings. This includes income from photos, videos and of course my indie income from 3600 files on istock.

So for such small portfolios, I think I am doing quite well and I am very glad I went indie.
I know money isn't everything but making 35% of what you were, after a year of being independent, sounds really bad (not that 50% sounds much better).  I'm glad you feel good about your decision but those numbers are just to extreme for me to ignore.

Considering she is making that with 8% - 25% of her portfolio (300 - 800 out of 3600) uploaded to the other agencies that does not sound so bad...
It's been a year.  Losing 50-65% or more of your income for one or two or three years is a big deal for some of us.   If my income was down by 65% for just one year I would be forced to do something else.

I agree, that is a significant hit.

What I wanted to point out: assuming that the rest of her portfolio will perform somewhat similar once uploaded, it looks as if she might be able to get back to old levels of income (or even more).

So this could be an example that going non-exclusive does not necessarily result in long term lower income.

« Reply #11 on: May 06, 2014, 08:08 »
-1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:29 by tickstock »

« Reply #12 on: May 06, 2014, 08:17 »
+4
I guess we have to hear what she says but your theory is she could be making a lot more but has chosen not to, for a year.  I know I could get 3600 images up on all the sites in a week if I had to.

You seem very efficient. Can I hire you as an uploader? ;)

« Reply #13 on: May 06, 2014, 08:18 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:29 by tickstock »

shudderstok

« Reply #14 on: May 06, 2014, 08:22 »
+2
I guess we have to hear what she says but your theory is she could be making a lot more but has chosen not to, for a year.  I know I could get 3600 images up on all the sites in a week if I had to.

You seem very efficient. Can I hire you as an uploader? ;)
Not that efficient, I would just work 12+ hours a day until it was done.

i'd say it makes more sense to feed the machine once to stay where you are, not thrice to try and catch up.

« Reply #15 on: May 06, 2014, 08:39 »
+3
i'd say it makes more sense to feed the machine once to stay where you are, not thrice to try and catch up.

I am actually starting to think that I don't like having all my eggs in one basket in case something goes wrong with my one agency. I am not saying the agency will ever fall apart, but they could do things to reduce income for individual contributors as they have done in the past. Royalty rate drops, offering subscription sales, no upload limits, unfavorable search indexing, deactivating files, etc.

I would actually feel much more secure earning the same amount of money per month from 4 different sources than just 1. And this way, if one of the 4 sources goes bad, you don't lose your entire stock photo income in one shot. So perhaps what Cobalt is doing for example is taking a step backward to take a step forward. Makes sense to me.

It's the same strategy that is always recommended for stock market investing. You never put all your money into one stock. You diversify your portfolio to spread the risk over a number of different stocks. So being diversified at this point with a multiple of agencies selling your images, seeing how iStock is making the model less and less appealing to exclusives as time goes on, sounds like perhaps a more secure way to go for the future.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2014, 08:46 by CraigMiller »

Goofy

« Reply #16 on: May 06, 2014, 09:05 »
+9
"Dropping the crown"- more like the Crown of thorns being removed. Now you are free to join whatever agencies you desire. 

shudderstok

« Reply #17 on: May 06, 2014, 09:06 »
0
i'd say it makes more sense to feed the machine once to stay where you are, not thrice to try and catch up.

I am actually starting to think that I don't like having all my eggs in one basket in case something goes wrong with my one agency. I am not saying the agency will ever fall apart, but they could do things to reduce income for individual contributors as they have done in the past. Royalty rate drops, offering subscription sales, no upload limits, unfavorable search indexing, deactivating files, etc.

I would actually feel much more secure earning the same amount of money per month from 4 different sources than just 1. And this way, if one of the 4 sources goes bad, you don't lose your entire stock photo income in one shot. So perhaps what Cobalt is doing for example is taking a step backward to take a step forward. Makes sense to me.

It's the same strategy that is always recommended for stock market investing. You never put all your money into one stock. You diversify your portfolio to spread the risk over a number of different stocks. So being diversified at this point with a multiple of agencies selling your images, seeing how iStock is making the model less and less appealing to exclusives as time goes on, sounds like perhaps a more secure way to go for the future.

yup makes total sense if that is what you want to make of the stock photo game. if you have it figured let us know.
i am just one of those boring dividend stock investors, not exciting by any means or even remotely sexy, but it's consistent, and when it all went south i stayed above water, and now that it has bounced back i am way ahead. but that is the nyse, nasdaq, tse, dax, IS, GI, SS, game.

« Reply #18 on: May 06, 2014, 09:17 »
-4
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:29 by tickstock »

« Reply #19 on: May 06, 2014, 09:30 »
+3
For persepective:

From February to March Shutterstock saw an upswing of 94%. So if it dropped by 57% from April to March, I am on par with February and overall on a continuing upwards trend. In March I also earned more on SS with around 700 files than I did with 3600 files on istock.

This month again SS is leading before istock, but it is still early for May.

If you have a small portfolio you will have wild swings, even more so when the earnings have a huge variance. It is just like having a portfolio on getty. One month you make several hundred dollars, the next month less than 5. But overall it balances out.

Again, my portfolios are small and I am not in a hurry. If you want to do it the fast way, have a look at what Michael did.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2014, 09:33 by cobalt »

« Reply #20 on: May 06, 2014, 09:32 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:29 by tickstock »

« Reply #21 on: May 06, 2014, 09:34 »
+3
But then maybe you should focus on Michaels results. He did it in 6 months. So I suppose, so can others.

« Reply #22 on: May 06, 2014, 09:36 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:28 by tickstock »

« Reply #23 on: May 06, 2014, 09:41 »
+2
True, but how much of your new content is being moved to Getty? Is it still 20% of your new uploads that are getting into S+ and Vetta?

If it isnt, then what can you do? If your getty portfolio isnt being fed on a regular basis, then this income will drop over time,like on any other stock site.

If you really have good results with Getty and like working with them, then I think the artist that have a direct contract like shudderstock are at an advantage. At least they can keep feeding their macro portfolio whenever they want.

Anyway, everyone has to walk his or her path. And whatever you do, it is always hard work.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2014, 09:44 by cobalt »

« Reply #24 on: May 06, 2014, 09:47 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:28 by tickstock »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
67 Replies
27036 Views
Last post October 28, 2009, 07:33
by ichiro17
8 Replies
3961 Views
Last post December 16, 2011, 15:41
by RacePhoto
43 Replies
14491 Views
Last post May 18, 2012, 17:50
by djpadavona
40 Replies
10741 Views
Last post July 13, 2012, 11:24
by BaldricksTrousers
5 Replies
5117 Views
Last post July 12, 2016, 12:04
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors