MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: how to be non-exclusive...for dummies  (Read 20019 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

yecatsdoherty

« on: February 22, 2009, 22:56 »
0
this is a question about the basics of being non-exclusive...let's say I have ten images. if I am non-exclusive, can I upload these same ten files to every agency for sale? or do non-exclusives have different images on different sites? do sites frown upon uploading the same images across the board?

my assumption about workflow for a non-exclusive accepted on three or four sites is to upload every image to every site and see what happens. I assume each site has its strengths, weaknesses and preferences. are these general assumption correct? thank you.


« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2009, 23:04 »
0
this is a question about the basics of being non-exclusive...let's say I have ten images. if I am non-exclusive, can I upload these same ten files to every agency for sale? or do non-exclusives have different images on different sites? do sites frown upon uploading the same images across the board?

my assumption about workflow for a non-exclusive accepted on three or four sites is to upload every image to every site and see what happens. I assume each site has its strengths, weaknesses and preferences. are these general assumption correct? thank you.

 Yes, all images and all agencies.. Some accept different stuff so the ports will vary slightly but the general idea is spread your images out.. Are you starting to second guess your exclusivity?

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2009, 23:10 »
0
I'm like 'eighth' guessing it at this point. I started reconsidering exclusivity last year. and more and more I am drawn to non-exclusivity. but the decision will not be easy, I have to wrap my head around it. everything I have worked towards has been under the assumption of continued exclusivity with iStock. but things change. I used to feel being non-exclusive was shooting yourself in the foot. now I am starting to see that remaining exclusive is a questionable decision. not sure yet, but wanted to be sure I have my ducks in a row before jumping ship.

helix7

« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2009, 23:49 »
0

I don't envy your decision, as it's a tougher one to make from your perspective. It's easy for me to add up everything I earn in a month, compare the total to my istock earnings, and make a decision about whether I would be winning or losing if I were exclusive. You don't have that option, and opting to go non-exclusive would be more of a leap of faith than a by-the-numbers decision.

You certainly wouldn't be the only one questioning your exclusivity in these slow economic times. I had a brief email exchange with a Black Diamond exclusive a few weeks ago asking me about my website and some other things related to selling independently, because they were thinking about jumping ship as well. It's a lot to think about, and not an easy thing to do if you do take the plunge (think about the time you'll spend uploading your entire portfolio to all those other sites), but it sounds like for some people it is becoming a more likely possibility.


yecatsdoherty

« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2009, 00:18 »
0
well, I am not intimidated with the workload at least. if I were to go non-exclusive, I am one of those energizer bunny types....the work uploading my ports to various sites doesn't bother me at all. nor the work required to manage them.

the daunting task for me is spreading my interests and taking the short-term hit on iStock royalties. right now seems like a good time because I am totally scr*wed on iStock right now anyways. my sales are awful. I am waiting to see what happens with best match 2.0. if they ever get their act together and actually implement the d*mn thing.

« Last Edit: February 23, 2009, 00:21 by yecatsdoherty »

« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2009, 00:36 »
0
right now seems like a good time because I am totally scr*wed on iStock right now anyways. my sales are awful.

FYI: I upload all my shots (the same) to 8 sites. Istock makes 8% of my earnings. As a non-exclusive there, acceptance is much tougher though. They only have 1/4 of my port because of upload restrictions and stupid rejects for keywords etc. Workload is OK if you use FTP. That's a magic word not in the vocabulary of istock  :P

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2009, 00:43 »
0
I use DeepMeta for everything to do with managing my iStock port. it would be tough going back to 15 uploads per week, but it would also force me to be more selective. so not necessarily a bad thing. I need to be prepared for the month ro two that it will take me to establish myself elsewhere too.

as for keywords, I am already very clean with keywording. so I think I would be fine there. I use obvious, clean and applicable keywords only most of the time. sometimes after acceptance I add more after searching for my images and seeing keywords  I missed.

I have a good acceptance rate at IS, so I am hoping my work is good enough for other sites too.

« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2009, 00:52 »
0
I use DeepMeta for everything to do with managing my iStock port.

Fantastic program. I know the guy that made it.

it would be tough going back to 15 uploads per week, but it would also force me to be more selective. so not necessarily a bad thing. I need to be prepared for the month ro two that it will take me to establish myself elsewhere too.

Except for Shutterstock that emphasizes new contributors and images, you will have a lean couple of months. DT takes over a week to approve, and they only start to sell weeks later. SS takes long to approve, but you can use a "roommate" (other nick). I figure your IS port will stay as it is, so no worries there.

as for keywords, I am already very clean with keywording. so I think I would be fine there. I use obvious, clean and applicable keywords only most of the time. sometimes after acceptance I add more after searching for my images and seeing keywords  I missed.

Keywording is less pain at other sites but I hope you put them in the IPTC.

I have a good acceptance rate at IS, so I am hoping my work is good enough for other sites too.

For sure. Istock is the most demanding, at least for non-exclusives.

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2009, 01:41 »
0
does every site have its own model releases? or can I upload istock model releases to other sites?

which sites would you recommend I go to first?

« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2009, 02:02 »
0
You need to make yourself a generic model release that can be used across all websites (see mine for example http://www.meder.net/files/MODEL-RELEASE-CM-BLANK.pdf ) Also I would recommend starting on Shutterstock and Dreamtime and then do the rest ie, FT, BigStock, 123 and SX.

shank_ali

« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2009, 02:13 »
0
this is a question about the basics of being non-exclusive...let's say I have ten images. if I am non-exclusive, can I upload these same ten files to every agency for sale? or do non-exclusives have different images on different sites? do sites frown upon uploading the same images across the board?

my assumption about workflow for a non-exclusive accepted on three or four sites is to upload every image to every site and see what happens. I assume each site has its strengths, weaknesses and preferences. are these general assumption correct? thank you.
Listen Mrs your not going to have your work on other sites.
The whole industry has expanded in the last couple of years and as a result the rewards are spread more.
Sure buyers of our work visit various micro  sites but istock by far pays more to it's exclusives.
I would start being less productive and more selective on your work.Your current work will not attract sales IMO.
Have you ever applied to Getty.

« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2009, 03:15 »
0
Stacey, at least you have the luxury of getting advice by the smartest person on the planet whose decades of microstock experience on virtually all sites of the planet he is willing to share with you.

You wouldn't have that on the iStock Forums because he's not allowed to post his crap over there.

michealo

« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2009, 03:31 »
0
Stacey,

I think too that you will have to remove all your images that were accepted from IS during your exclusivity period. MichaelJay can correct me if I am wrong on that ...

« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2009, 03:47 »
0
Stacey, you have some nice images, but looking at your portfolio some of your images might have a hard time getting accepted, not because they are technically flawed, but because of the subject. My experience with iStock is, that they accept a lot as long as it passes the high technical standard. Rusty metal pipes have a harder time to be accepted at other agencies than at iStock. For example I am pretty sure Fotolia and Shutterstock would reject them. Dreamstime probably as well. Stockxpert I do not know.
I do not say your work is bad, its just that some of it is not what other agencies are looking for.

Altogether if you have the time, it is better to submit to several agencies, if you do not have a very good best match position. Thats my opinion and experience and probably of most non-exclusives. Thats why they are non-exclusive :)

If I were you and would do this bold step, I would try out Shutterstock, Fotolia and Stockxpert. If after 90 days it is not worth it or you see that it will become almost impossible to get to your former earnings, you can go back to be exclusive. For this reason I would not submit to Dreamstime, because you have to have your work there for at least 6 month.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2009, 04:03 by Freezingpictures »

« Reply #14 on: February 23, 2009, 03:59 »
0
Stacey,

I think too that you will have to remove all your images that were accepted from IS during your exclusivity period. MichaelJay can correct me if I am wrong on that ...

You should be aware that if you decide to drop your exclusivity with IS, all the images you uploaded as an exclusive will be removed. This is done so that people do not take advantage of the increased upload limits and then switch back to non-exclusive once their portfolio is 'large enough'. (Here's the contract - see Section 12.a.(i))


This interpretation is completely incorrect. Canceling exclusivity does not result in all your content being removed from the site. All that happens is that your content is "removed" from being considered exclusive after 30 days (i.e., removed from exclusive-only searches, promotions, royalties, etc). After 90 days you can apply again to become exclusive if you wish.

I would encourage anyone with questions/concerns about the Artist Supply Agreement to contact iStock Contributor Relations directly.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/best-match-2-0/135/

michealo

« Reply #15 on: February 23, 2009, 04:30 »
0
Thanks Jan, I stand corrected

e-person

« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2009, 04:44 »
0
this is a question about the basics of being non-exclusive...let's say I have ten images. if I am non-exclusive, can I upload these same ten files to every agency for sale? or do non-exclusives have different images on different sites? do sites frown upon uploading the same images across the board?

my assumption about workflow for a non-exclusive accepted on three or four sites is to upload every image to every site and see what happens. I assume each site has its strengths, weaknesses and preferences. are these general assumption correct? thank you.

The assumptions are correct, although each site tends to accept a certain type of work, more than others, plus there are inconsistent reviewers. One week they might accept all your photos, the next they might reject them all. This is particularly true with SS and DT (disclaimer: I hate DT, so anything I say regarding them, will reflect that).

Also, coming from IS exclusivity, I think you will suffer rejections shock. SS, for example, is much much much much, more practical than IS. They mainly accept what they think it sells.

For your own good: stay exclusive. Don't jump back. I think you would get a shock if you do otherwise. Forget it. You are a natural born IS exclusive.


« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2009, 05:17 »
0
Another thing, if you do go non-exclusive - you'll be able to upload all those images rejected by iStock (for whatever obscure reason) to other sites - you do still have them on disk don't you?

If you go for it, let us know how you get on, I'm sure many folk here will be interested...

« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2009, 05:27 »
0
I think too that you will have to remove all your images that were accepted from IS during your exclusivity period. MichaelJay can correct me if I am wrong on that ...

Totally wrong, distributed information by some people.

« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2009, 05:38 »
0
Stacey, I have been exclusive from the point I was eligible and I have been reconsidering it every few months since then. I have submitted to a mid-price agency before and I had applied to other micro agencies and uploaded to a few as well. Sometimes I really miss splitting my risks as well. I don't like the changes of my income just like you don't.

Though, I keep saying to myself: There are many other markets that don't conflict with my IS exclusivity that I still can explore. I am now invited to upload to Getty through IS. I have a local RM agency I won't to challenge myself to get into this year. I will explore to do contract work locally. As long as I haven't tried those things, I don't think I will be serious about dropping exclusivity.

My main reason for not going to split the same images across agencies: What I really love is photography. I think post processing is okay but I don't like it too much. And I definitely don't like uploading, keywording, optimizing meta data, that's the boring part. I don't want to imagine spending more time doing search checks and keyword optimization for each site (and nobody can tell me that the same keywords work best for all sites). That's why I prefer to look for additional income from other sources where I can focus on shooting more and different images rather than working on the same images again.

« Reply #20 on: February 23, 2009, 06:22 »
0
Hi Stacey -

You've probably already done this but its worth looking at a few blogs of non exclusives to see how their  royalties break down between agencies. Then you may be able to extrapolate some figures to see how well you could potentially do.
http://www.microstockdiaries.com/microstock-earnings-report-january-2009.html
http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/microstock-photography-earnings-january-2009/
http://www.niltomil.com/n2m/january-2009-earnings/

Like someone said... you can always go back to being exclusive later if it doesn't work out.

I'm fairly new at this microstock ballyhoo and still feeling my way but I think diversification is crucial as it smooths out your income, especially during these turbulent times.

« Reply #21 on: February 23, 2009, 06:39 »
0
Then you may be able to extrapolate some figures to see how well you could potentially do.

I don't think it's so easy because you can't assume to stay at current levels at iStock when dropping exclusivity. It might work or might not work.

« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2009, 06:49 »
0
... and I have been reconsidering it every few months since then.

For me this is the crux of the matter. Exclusives always seem to have this 'buyer's remorse' gnawing away inside themselves on whether they have made the right decision or not. Independents on the other hand, at least all the ones I know (and that's quite a few), are happy and confident that they are much better off remaining so. We only have to visit the IS forums and read the shrieks of indignation everytime there's a best match-change to confirm our thoughts.

Yes, it is a little more work ... but then you also have more fun, make more money and have a much more stable income. It never fails to surprise me how if one agency has a bad month or two the slack is invariably picked up by a couple of others. We all like getting EL's too and you have many more chances with your images available to different buyers.

As has been said before IS's upload system takes about the same amount of time and trouble as uploading to the next biggest 4 or 5 agencies together. I don't see any truth in the suggestion that you need different keywords for each agency (other than IS with all those phrases, etc).

Signing up for exclusivity is like assuming that the future is already cast and the natural order of each agency's market share is permanently written. This of course is nonsense as stock photography (all of it, not just the 'micro' bit) continues to change and develop on a monthly basis. I have no idea which will be the biggest and best agencies in 5, 10 or more years from now (and that's the timescale I'm thinking in terms of) and neither does anyone else. It might even be an agency that has yet to be launched.

As an independent contributor I am delighted everytime someone signs up for exclusivity but I simply don't understand why they do so. Everytime that they upload a new 'exclusive' image it makes it more difficult for them to break the habit though. Good.

« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2009, 06:58 »
0
I've been in your shoes. Last Oct I finally gave up that my sales would ever return to the levels that were before the site went belly up with DA and the subsequent other changes. My sales at IS have continued to steadily decline at IS but no more than they were declining when I was exclusive.

« Reply #24 on: February 23, 2009, 07:30 »
0
Then you may be able to extrapolate some figures to see how well you could potentially do.
I don't think it's so easy because you can't assume to stay at current levels at iStock when dropping exclusivity. It might work or might not work.

I've sure I've read in these forums somewhere (tried to find it again and couldn't) that ex-IS-exclusives have reported no significant drop in IS sales (revenue of course takes a 50% hit) when going independent. I don't disagree that this calculation wouldn't give you a wide margin of error but it's the best way to generate a educated guess at the impact of turning independent.

From what I've seen the Istock proportion of income varies between 10% and 50% for independents.

So for min and max estimates:
(Current iStock Sales/2)*10 = Max estimate
(Current iStock Sales/2)*2 = Min estimate

The worst case scenario is that there would be no financial benefit, but more work uploading. Best case you'll be making 5 times what you are now. Realistically you'll probably wind up getting somewhere in the middle.

But it's not just numbers. I'm not advocating exclusivity but it's a lot easier to track unauthorised usage of your images if they're only at one agency.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
6400 Views
Last post June 30, 2007, 17:51
by yingyang0
3 Replies
3509 Views
Last post October 02, 2007, 15:54
by Peter
4 Replies
4299 Views
Last post February 03, 2009, 12:26
by Anyka
4 Replies
4306 Views
Last post February 24, 2009, 11:17
by digiology
2 Replies
2906 Views
Last post May 09, 2014, 12:42
by Shelma1

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors