Author Topic: istock exclusive - how many images for $10,000 per month? (Read 16243 times)

charged · « **on:** October 05, 2014, 12:42 »

The other thread on Shutterstock was quite interesting, so I wondered what people who are exclusive on iStock thinks the magic number is.

I used to make $0.50 per image per month. But these days it is more like $0.30 per image per month. So my personal experience is that it would take about 33,000 image to earn $10,000 per month.

I guess the one variable is that different people make different percentages on istock exclusive. I earn the 40% split with iStock.

cobalt · « **Reply #1 on:** October 05, 2014, 13:05 »

That´s very interesting. Would be great to have a poll like that also for Fotolia, because here in Europe many artists earn more with them, than with SS. Or Gettyimages or Corbis. Those who supply Macro agencies directly, how many images do they think they need to get a regular 10k revenue.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #2 on:** October 05, 2014, 13:31 »

Quote from: cobalt on October 05, 2014, 13:05

That´s very interesting. Would be great to have a poll like that also for Fotolia, because here in Europe many artists earn more with them, than with SS. Or Gettyimages or Corbis. Those who supply Macro agencies directly, how many images do they think they need to get a regular 10k revenue.

If we do such a poll for FT I would like to see infinity as an option.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #3 on:** October 05, 2014, 13:54 »

if u say the old Istock,
i would say a lot less than one would with ss today

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #4 on:** October 05, 2014, 15:55 »

A year ago I noted that the Yuri account on iStock, with 78,000 images had only 25,000 sales. Twelve months later the portfolio size is unchanged but the sales are up to 65k, so that is an average of half a sale per file per year for a top-quality, highly commercial portfolio. It will still be a huge sum of money, of course.

cascoly · « **Reply #5 on:** October 05, 2014, 21:11 »

Quote from: cobalt on October 05, 2014, 13:05

That´s very interesting. Would be great to have a poll like that also for Fotolia, because here in Europe many artists earn more with them, than with SS. Or Gettyimages or Corbis. Those who supply Macro agencies directly, how many images do they think they need to get a regular 10k revenue.

the scale doesn't go high enough to consider $10K per month with fotolia or the other bottom feeders! be happy if you can buy a few cappuccinos

pancaketom · « **Reply #6 on:** October 06, 2014, 00:05 »

I think it would be hard to make 10K per month and not get into the 40% bracket.

tickstock · « **Reply #7 on:** October 06, 2014, 07:37 »

Interesting that most people think an iStock exclusive will make the same or more as a nonexclusive contributor just at SS alone.

There is strong evidence that this is not true. The poll to the right shows exclusives make 50% more than at SS. Sean said that last month he was at 1/2 of what he would probably be making at iStock and that is for SS, GL, Stocksy, +. Cobalt said she was at 30-40% of what she thought she would be making as an exclusive and that includes many more sites than just SS.

The other interesting thing is that 43% of people here think that exclusives make less than the average RPI of a SS contributor and 31% think that exclusives have an RPI of nearly 1/3 the average SS contributor.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #8 on:** October 06, 2014, 07:51 »

^^^ One reason for the discrepancy in the poll might be that iStock exclusives are more "serious" about microstock...serious enough to pay attention to things like exclusivity (something I never noticed when I was a newbie, because I had a day job). So they may be earning more overall because they have larger than average/better quality than average ports. After all, they have to achieve a certain number of downloads to go exclusive.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #9 on:** October 06, 2014, 08:16 »

One obvious advantage of exclusivity was that you had a lot less uploading/keywording to do, so could spend that extra time creating more content.

Right now, with the changes to pricing, is not really the time to ask the $10,000 question, because what was true two months ago probably isn't true now.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #10 on:** October 06, 2014, 08:36 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on October 06, 2014, 08:16

One obvious advantage of exclusivity was that you had a lot less uploading/keywording to do, so could spend that extra time creating more content.

Right now, with the changes to pricing, is not really the time to ask the $10,000 question, because what was true two months ago probably isn't true now.

Totally agree. In the past month my sales have taken about 40% nosedive and seem to be staying there.

tickstock · « **Reply #11 on:** October 06, 2014, 08:51 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on October 06, 2014, 08:16

One obvious advantage of exclusivity was that you had a lot less uploading/keywording to do, so could spend that extra time creating more content.

This is a thread and poll about RPI so that shouldn't matter should it? Also nothing has changed with respect to that so again why does that matter?

PixelBytes · « **Reply #12 on:** October 06, 2014, 11:52 »

Quote from: tickstock on October 06, 2014, 07:37

Interesting that most people think an iStock exclusive will make the same or more as a nonexclusive contributor just at SS alone.

There is strong evidence that this is not true. The poll to the right shows exclusives make 50% more than at SS. Sean said that last month he was at 1/2 of what he would probably be making at iStock and that is for SS, GL, Stocksy, +. Cobalt said she was at 30-40% of what she thought she would be making as an exclusive and that includes many more sites than just SS.

The other interesting thing is that 43% of people here think that exclusives make less than the average RPI of a SS contributor and 31% think that exclusives have an RPI of nearly 1/3 the average SS contributor.

I dont know about today with all the shenanigans at istock, but historically it was much easier for is exclusive to make 10k than for indie with 10 or more sites together. The poll results are skew by people with small or noncommercial ports guessing. If the polls was limited to just the people who make or made 10k per month results would be different

ShadySue · « **Reply #13 on:** October 06, 2014, 12:15 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on October 06, 2014, 11:52

I dont know about today with all the shenanigans at istock, but historically it was much easier for is exclusive to make 10k than for indie with 10 or more sites together. The poll results are skew by people with small or noncommercial ports guessing. If the polls was limited to just the people who make or made 10k per month results would be different

These polls are always pointless, because as always, "it depends", mostly on the content of your port, but also on search algorithms.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #14 on:** October 06, 2014, 12:22 »

Please add a vote for "I'm not an exclusive" so we can view the results?

"If the polls was limited to just the people who make or made 10k per month results would be different" True and also the poll on the right is only people who choose to enter numbers here. So it's a small sample of ALL the exclusives. While the people who are on SS are a larger number and will have a greater variety of ages, sizes and content.

In other words, drawing some conclusion that IS exclusives, on average, make 50% more than SS people is a flawed and irrelevant conclusion. Apples and Oranges and rotten bananas.

Ask yourself, how many IS Exclusives answer the poll here, monthly? How many SS people. It's not balanced at all and doesn't lend itself to a logical or sound mathematical conclusion.

Quote from: charged on October 05, 2014, 12:42

The other thread on Shutterstock was quite interesting, so I wondered what people who are exclusive on iStock thinks the magic number is.

I used to make $0.50 per image per month. But these days it is more like $0.30 per image per month. So my personal experience is that it would take about 33,000 image to earn $10,000 per month.

I guess the one variable is that different people make different percentages on istock exclusive. I earn the 40% split with iStock.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #15 on:** October 06, 2014, 12:43 »

Quote from: tickstock on October 06, 2014, 07:37

Interesting that most people think an iStock exclusive will make the same or more as a nonexclusive contributor just at SS alone.

There is strong evidence that this is not true. The poll to the right shows exclusives make 50% more than at SS. Sean said that last month he was at 1/2 of what he would probably be making at iStock and that is for SS, GL, Stocksy, +. Cobalt said she was at 30-40% of what she thought she would be making as an exclusive and that includes many more sites than just SS.

The other interesting thing is that 43% of people here think that exclusives make less than the average RPI of a SS contributor and 31% think that exclusives have an RPI of nearly 1/3 the average SS contributor.

that's so true. as i said earlier, if OP said "the old IStock", it would be much lower number of images to make 10K than being indie with ss and all the single digit sites combined.

the other point i made (even stocksy cannot compare to ss because there is no history yet),
leaf took it to mean earnings today. but what i mean is it's too early to cheer for stocksy because there is no history stats yet. ie too soon to say stocksy big earning would last.
much in the same way as the exclusives of Old Istock used to make alot more than they do today.

point 1... only Istock EXCLUSIVES of pre-Getty ownership can match ss in earnings, or better.
point 2... ss is more successful in the way that it is not just top-heavy. meaning, most contributors , little or big, are making money with them.
that is not so with stocksy today, i am sure.

as pixelbytes and uncle pete said correctly. Apples and Oranges and rotten bananas. flawed and irrelevant.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #16 on:** October 06, 2014, 13:03 »

Quote from: tickstock on October 06, 2014, 08:51

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on October 06, 2014, 08:16
One obvious advantage of exclusivity was that you had a lot less uploading/keywording to do, so could spend that extra time creating more content.
This is a thread and poll about RPI so that shouldn't matter should it? Also nothing has changed with respect to that so again why does that matter?

Then I'm not sure why you were talking about the total earnings of Sean now compared with what his total earnings might have been on iS - that's not RPI either. But, yes, like you I had gone off topic so your rebuke is accepted.

charged · « **Reply #17 on:** October 06, 2014, 18:59 »

*** Please add a vote for "I'm not an exclusive" so we can view the results? ***

Added.
(I thought I had set it up so people could view without voting, guess not)

cobalt · « **Reply #18 on:** October 06, 2014, 19:42 »

Quote from: tickstock on October 06, 2014, 07:37

. Cobalt said she was at 30-40% of what she thought she would be making as an exclusive and that includes many more sites than just SS.

I only have 900 files on SS, 730 on fotolia,530 on dreamstime and pond5. less than 100 on stocksy and westend.

So for such a low number of files to get 30-40% (including income from 3800 files on istock) is actually a very good number. I am also still at bronze/silver levels, so my income will still increase in the next two years as I move up the ranks.

I am uploading slowly because I want to be lightboxed by as many customers as possible and I am mixing older files with new production. I believe taking the slow and painful route will yield much better returns longterm. But I am not suggesting to follow my example.

Michaeljay is the one who regained his istock income in 6 months and just recently earned more on SS alone than he did as an istock exclusive.

http://www.michaeljayfoto.com/talking-numbers/making-more-money-from-shutterstock-than-istock/

So if you work very hard then it seems to be possible to regain the income (and more) faster.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #19 on:** October 06, 2014, 19:48 »

Thanks, makes it more interesting. And yes, it says view results, so I'd assume we could also.

I've always said that IS has a good thing with exclusive and the people who can make it only working for them, should be rewarded for their loyalty. More than just a better commission.

I would ask this question for Leaf and you. Why $10,000 a month? That's $120,000 a year. Kind of a high income, or has the world changed that much?

I mean why not $2,000 a month or something more the level of microstcok earnings? Or the level of the median income in the USA? Which would be around $4200 a month.

Why $10,000 a month? 5% of individuals in the United States make more than $100,000. 16% of households if you want all people earning included in one number.

Quote from: charged on October 06, 2014, 18:59

*** Please add a vote for "I'm not an exclusive" so we can view the results? ***

Added.
(I thought I had set it up so people could view without voting, guess not)

cobalt · « **Reply #20 on:** October 06, 2014, 22:39 »

Well 10 000 is for full time working stock production. models, studio, gear, assistant...it is revenue not end profit. maybe 8000 would also work or 6000 depending on where you live, but I think for people doing stock full time this is not an unreasonable number.

charged · « **Reply #21 on:** October 07, 2014, 08:47 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on October 06, 2014, 19:48

I would ask this question for Leaf and you. Why $10,000 a month? That's $120,000 a year. Kind of a high income, or has the world changed that much?

I mean why not $2,000 a month or something more the level of microstcok earnings? Or the level of the median income in the USA? Which would be around $4200 a month.

Why $10,000 a month? 5% of individuals in the United States make more than $100,000. 16% of households if you want all people earning included in one number.

I was the one who started this post, but leaf is the one who started the other original post. Isn't Leaf from Australia? If so, Australia is extremely expensive. The median income there is $80,000AUD per year in Sydney. Which is comparable to $40,000USD for an American when you take into account of cost of living. This is today's exchange rate. 1AUD = 0.88 USD. Anyway, $120,000 isn't as much money to an Australian vs an American.

ShadySue · « **Reply #22 on:** October 07, 2014, 08:51 »

Quote from: charged on October 07, 2014, 08:47

Isn't Leaf from Australia?

No.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #23 on:** October 07, 2014, 08:59 »

No he's not, but that's a good point and so is:

Quote from: cobalt on October 06, 2014, 22:39

Well 10 000 is for full time working stock production. models, studio, gear, assistant...it is revenue not end profit. maybe 8000 would also work or 6000 depending on where you live, but I think for people doing stock full time this is not an unreasonable number.

I looked at USA and NY or San Francisco would need to make that number to be "below average". Of course if someone lived in a less expensive region or location, it would be more valuable income. I do understand that a dollar in Wisconsin will go much further than the same dollar in a major metropolitan city, anywhere in the world.

I was just wondering why $10,000 for you and Leaf. And not to keep people hanging on the "no he's not" part.

Oslo, Norway

Quote from: charged on October 07, 2014, 08:47

I was the one who started this post, but leaf is the one who started the other original post. Isn't Leaf from Australia? If so, Australia is extremely expensive. The median income there is $80,000AUD per year in Sydney. Which is comparable to $40,000USD for an American when you take into account of cost of living. This is today's exchange rate. 1AUD = 0.88 USD. Anyway, $120,000 isn't as much money to an Australian vs an American.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #24 on:** October 07, 2014, 14:26 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on October 06, 2014, 19:48

I would ask this question for Leaf and you. Why $10,000 a month? That's $120,000 a year. Kind of a high income, or has the world changed that much?
Why $10,000 a month? 5% of individuals in the United States make more than $100,000. 16% of households if you want all people earning included in one number.

yes, very very very good point +10 Uncle Pete.
i think the sum should be more to the question (to replace my current occupation), as i am sure none of us are in the NBA or in the Forbes 100

i remember one of the old msg-ers here who once say, "i am earning as much as i used to earn working in a boring office".
that should be the amount , i think. as each of us will have a different amount.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Poll

For istock exclusive - how many images do you need to earn $10,000 month

Author Topic: istock exclusive - how many images for $10,000 per month? (Read 16243 times)

charged

cobalt

PixelBytes

etudiante_rapide

BaldricksTrousers

cascoly

pancaketom

tickstock

Shelma1

BaldricksTrousers

PaulieWalnuts

tickstock

PixelBytes

ShadySue

Uncle Pete

etudiante_rapide

BaldricksTrousers

charged

cobalt

Uncle Pete

cobalt

charged

ShadySue

Uncle Pete

etudiante_rapide

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors