Author Topic: istock exclusive - how many images for $10,000 per month? (Read 16246 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.

stock-will-eat-itself · « **Reply #25 on:** October 07, 2014, 15:30 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide 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.

$10k per month should be achievable from talented photographers and illustrators, its a good indication of the health of the business model. It allows a sustainable workflow, equipment upgrades, software, model and location hire etc. They are the ones who pull in the designers who shop around for the other low budget work that is floating around.

I make a good solid income from client work, they pay within 40 days, there's no risk. In todays market I have to wait years with no guarantee of a return for my time, it's becoming too risky.

If $10k per month is becoming impossible to reach then why choose stock over client work or even your day job? You just end up chasing your tail.

ShadySue · « **Reply #26 on:** October 07, 2014, 15:40 »

Have we established whether the monthly $10k is gross or net? IMO a gross figure is pretty useless, since a lot of new best-sellers are very expensive to make.

FWIW, the average UK salary in January was $2208pm gross, or US$3554, but with less buying power.

cobalt · « **Reply #27 on:** October 07, 2014, 16:52 »

I took it as gross revenue, not personal income. Personal income, before tax will be just a fraction of that, less than half, maybe 4000-5000 dollars. Apart from production costs and studio there is also costs for professional insurance, travel, accounting. i mean, you are running a business, wether it is a small plumbing business or a studio, you need to pay your bills.

Obviously if you have a day job and do stock as an add on, it will be different.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #28 on:** October 08, 2014, 10:31 »

What, gross income, adjusted income, net income

I was looking at Gross for a figure on the forum here but good point when asking one of these polls, is to define Gross or Net or we will get a mix of responses. I'd be hard pressed to figure out my Net for photography. And even harder to divide Micro from Contracts or magazines, or websites or direct sales.

Average Gross Salary Individuals: (2013 private survey)

89,040 CNY (14,000 USD) China
660,537 RUB (20,700 USD) Russia
£19,282 ($30,978 USD) Scotland
36,936 EUR (45,600 USD) France
46,085 CAD (46,550 USD) Canada
30,400 GBP ($47,500 USD) UK
$47,000 USA - average household income $69,821
59,940 EUR (74,000 USD) Germany
72,960 AUD (76,000 USD) Australia

Also yes, new images might or might not have the same value and returns as old content. But at least IS Exclusives have probably been the same for some time, which means they could extend out their Guestimates.

Past Performance is No Guarantee of Future Results

Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2014, 15:40

Have we established whether the monthly $10k is gross or net? IMO a gross figure is pretty useless, since a lot of new best-sellers are very expensive to make.

FWIW, the average UK salary in January was $2208pm gross, or US$3554, but with less buying power.

leaf · « **Reply #29 on:** October 08, 2014, 11:10 »

Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2014, 15:40

Have we established whether the monthly $10k is gross or net? IMO a gross figure is pretty useless, since a lot of new best-sellers are very expensive to make.

FWIW, the average UK salary in January was $2208pm gross, or US$3554, but with less buying power.

I am from Norway
I just picked $10,000 because it is a nice high lofty goal for people, a nice round number.
I was also thinking gross sales. Even though $10,000/month is a high amount I wouldn't consider it a crazy high amount. If you are producing quality stock you are also spending money. I'm happy to spend 50% of my income on stock production .. so if I want to pay myself $65,000/year (a rather modest Norwegian wage) I need to earn at least $130,000 from stock photos.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #30 on:** October 09, 2014, 14:36 »

Quote from: leaf on October 08, 2014, 11:10

Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2014, 15:40
Have we established whether the monthly $10k is gross or net? IMO a gross figure is pretty useless, since a lot of new best-sellers are very expensive to make.

FWIW, the average UK salary in January was $2208pm gross, or US$3554, but with less buying power.

I am from Norway
I just picked $10,000 because it is a nice high lofty goal for people, a nice round number.
I was also thinking gross sales. Even though $10,000/month is a high amount I wouldn't consider it a crazy high amount. If you are producing quality stock you are also spending money. I'm happy to spend 50% of my income on stock production .. so if I want to pay myself $65,000/year (a rather modest Norwegian wage) I need to earn at least $130,000 from stock photos.

but i was assuming u r already making 10K p.m, leaf. i don't know how many thousands of microstock became microstocker from clicking on your link to the right of this page. at least, i did.
so you r no doubt earning a lot from affliates

leaf · « **Reply #31 on:** October 10, 2014, 04:54 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on October 09, 2014, 14:36

Quote from: leaf on October 08, 2014, 11:10
Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2014, 15:40
Have we established whether the monthly $10k is gross or net? IMO a gross figure is pretty useless, since a lot of new best-sellers are very expensive to make.

FWIW, the average UK salary in January was $2208pm gross, or US$3554, but with less buying power.

I am from Norway
I just picked $10,000 because it is a nice high lofty goal for people, a nice round number.
I was also thinking gross sales. Even though $10,000/month is a high amount I wouldn't consider it a crazy high amount. If you are producing quality stock you are also spending money. I'm happy to spend 50% of my income on stock production .. so if I want to pay myself $65,000/year (a rather modest Norwegian wage) I need to earn at least $130,000 from stock photos.

but i was assuming u r already making 10K p.m, leaf. i don't know how many thousands of microstock became microstocker from clicking on your link to the right of this page. at least, i did.
so you r no doubt earning a lot from affliates

I haven't ever said how much I was or wasn't making.
I don't count affiliate income with regular microstock income.
Shutterstock cut their affiliate income to only 1 year, Fotolia scrapped theirs, iStock's was never good... that is to say, yes there is some affiliate income but if you want to try and finance working on a website with affiliate income, your going to be waiting a long time.

Difydave · « **Reply #32 on:** October 10, 2014, 08:15 »

I don't know if I've ever met many people who get this almost mythical "average salary".
Most seem to say "I wish" or "Bl**** H***, somebody must be making a lot!"

Suppose it depends where you are, what you do, where you live and whether you are public or private sector. (Public sector apparently gets on average around 14% more in the UK)

As far as $10,000 per month at iStock goes. I'm getting so very few sales at present that input by me is almost meaningless.

jsmithzz · « **Reply #33 on:** October 17, 2014, 00:00 »

There is no correct answer to this question because it all depends on the quality of the contributors portfolio. I know a lot of people who have 3-5 times as many files as I do but earn the same or less because their portfolio is just mediocre. I also know people with many fewer files who earn as much or more than me because their photos are simply better than mine.

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 16246 times)

Uncle Pete

Uncle Pete

Uncle Pete

stock-will-eat-itself

Uncle Pete

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors