pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Istock troubled waters my opinion  (Read 30062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2006, 16:35 »
0
Hee hee.... I see.  Indeed, there is a logo on the bottom.  OK.


« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2007, 05:33 »
0
 good post indigo.

 the main thing that drives me crazy on isp is not my rejections - i have to say that after re-reviewing of my images i agree with inspectors 98%  :(
 but when i see "latest uploads" - i see a lot of keyword violations and sometimes i really have my nerves breakdown.. i might be wrong, but i think that standards are less tight for exclusives (which i can understand), - but as i said - sometimes i got really nervous about that.
 otherwise, some tips from reviewers on my rejections are really helpful - on example difference between "over white" and "isolated". or crops with details that i missed (logo on zipper or button etc..).
  upload limits are also frustrating. but i know a few microstock reviewers personally, and it's really hard to believe what kind of (well...not so good) photos they receive every day for inspections.
 i personally got a site mail from one of isp inspectors - and he said that my photos were refreshing for that day for him.  (and few times on bigstockphoto too) - it made me feel good, i have to admit that.

« Reply #27 on: January 29, 2007, 04:44 »
0
After all my complaining I came to a conclusion that I am very happy with istock after all.  The upload limits are frustrating thats true... but they are there for a reason.  I now use the limit to resubmit rejection from previous months.  I also have to say that I have learned a lot from the reviewers... I've rarely paid attention to the comments, but now I always do.  Very often they tell you specifically where the problems are.  It's a great learning experience.  I also have to say that now I have much higher acceptance rate and almost all of my rejects can be resubmitted. 

« Reply #28 on: March 03, 2007, 00:25 »
0
My standards are quite high, and I only upload stuff that I think is good. I don't have a problem with a high rejection rate at any site I contribute to - they're all at least 85% acceptance rate. There are many images I see on stock sites - even on iStock - that I would have personally thrown out.

My main issue with iStock is with their undue pickiness towards images that are not technically "perfect" - I find that they often reject stuff that sells well at other sites. I cannot help but think that they are shooting themselves in the foot when they do this.

I also don't like the way their CV keywording works, and have found "hidden" keywords and categories that I would have normally lost out on. On the flipside, their keywording sometimes comes up with things I hadn't thought of. Overall, keywording at IS is a big pain - good thing that I only have to do it 3 times/day!
« Last Edit: March 04, 2007, 03:26 by sharply_done »

« Reply #29 on: March 03, 2007, 03:48 »
0
istock is one of my favourite sites.  It took a while to work out what they want and to realise my illustrations were not up to standard. 

The first few months were slow but now they are my second biggest earner and I have some photos doing quite well there that don't sell as many on other sites.

The upload procedure doesn't bother me.  I would rather spend more time uploading files that sell than spend less time uploading files that don't sell.

The upload limit is a bit restrictive and I am not looking forward to losing uploads when I go on holidays.

I like being able to make lightboxes for collections of photos.  Not many sites have anything like that.

« Reply #30 on: March 03, 2007, 10:59 »
0
I am  also a non-exclusive contributer to istock and I share most of  concerns mentioned here  like uploading limits. but I am still happy with istockphoto despite all.
yes sometimes I do get rejections which I don't agree with. for instance  once one of my image was rejected for including the word 'coke' among my keywords ???  and once I got my image rejected because the title included illegal character(I had accidentally hit the wrong button:(

but what I like about istock is that   they really push you through creating high quality images otherwise you know they'd be rejected.also I am often happy with the detailed feedbacks from the approval team,which you don't often get from others.
anyway to me it's one of the most prestigious microstok sites and a good place to sell images nonetheless  I still do wish commissions were higher:)
 

« Reply #31 on: March 04, 2007, 18:01 »
0
iStock's policy is to reward and support those who show a commitment.  Although I am a newbie, it is already apparent to me that the best price/volume benefits will come from iStock rather than elsewhere.  It is a question of building to gold/diamond status etc to reap the higher commissions.

One of iStocks successful contributors told me 'always upload the largest possible file, because you'll be surprised at how many large images are bought'.

In my first month at iStock half my sales have been at 'large'.  As a result my average commission is 74c.  I would need to sell three times as many images at SS to equal that.

A diamond exclusive would receive twice as much commssion as a newbie, making their take double at $1.44 per sale.  Their best photographers sell 50,000 - 100,000 images per annum at this level or higher.

I don't think that can be achieved elsewhere.

Remember also that at iStock exclusives get better upload limits (a diamond exclusive can upload 200 photos per week), exclusive distribution deals and a priority status.

« Reply #32 on: March 05, 2007, 05:55 »
0
A diamond exclusive would receive twice as much commssion as a newbie, making their take double at $1.44 per sale.  Their best photographers sell 50,000 - 100,000 images per annum at this level or higher.

I don't think that can be achieved elsewhere.

I was accepted at IS and at SS at the end of March last year. Since then, I've had more than seven times as many downloads at SS and nearly four times as much earnings. I don't think being exclusive at IS would beat that. The last three months, sales at DT has been better for me than IS as well, not by numbers but by amount.

Their exclusivity deal is much better for IS than it is for contributors, except those who don't want the extra work by uploading to multiple agencies.

« Reply #33 on: March 05, 2007, 17:18 »
0
Interesting statistics epixx.  Do you have the same portfolio at IS and SS?

Your numbers certainly make SS look appealing.

« Reply #34 on: March 05, 2007, 20:55 »
0
Their exclusivity deal is much better for IS than it is for contributors, except those who don't want the extra work by uploading to multiple agencies.
I've had the opposite experience as epixx. I have about the same number of downloads on both IS and SS and I signed up at the same time (Plus I have almost the exact same number of photos on each site). I've also had many, many extended licenses at IS versus none at SS. Even at the bronze level I'll be making more as an exclusive at IS then I would at SS and IS combined as a non-exclusive. While I don't like all the changes to the best search algorithm, I'll probably go exclusive when I hit the 500 downloads.

« Reply #35 on: March 05, 2007, 22:15 »
0
Interesting statistics epixx.  Do you have the same portfolio at IS and SS?

Your numbers certainly make SS look appealing.

No, due to the upload restrictions at IS, I have more than twice the number of photos at SS, even if I've had more rejections with the latter. The upload limits make a fair comparison almost impossible, and long term, IS may even be a better deal if I chose to go exclusive, but with DT being a strong competitor as well, I don't see myself doing that.

This obviously also has something to do with photographic style. Some of my top sellers at SS hardly moves at all at IS and vice versa. Even within one theme, the differences can be big sometimes. That's probably a result of a number of things, like customer base, how the search engine works etc.

But as opposed to common "knowledge", my old photos at SS sell rather well, at least as long as I keep uploading new ones.

« Reply #36 on: March 05, 2007, 22:37 »
0
I'm just starting and do the same on both IS and SS. I started uploading on IS and it was very slowly, with 71 images on line last month i made $30... i'm not very active, but i think is too slow...
I started with SS 02-19-2007 and 15 days after i made $29 with 50 images on line. Plus, on SS almost all my images sell and on IS i have one hit with 85 dls and the others hardly ever sell.
I owe IS the quality of my images, i learned a LOT there and still learning, they are relly helpfull on the forums... but SS wins when it comes to $$$, i get to shot what i want and it sells... so... learning to love SS  ;D

« Reply #37 on: March 06, 2007, 00:01 »
0
But as opposed to common "knowledge", my old photos at SS sell rather well, at least as long as I keep uploading new ones.
But as soon as you stop uploading, your downloads will take a dive (at least mine do every time I haven't uploaded in a while). At IS it is consistant.

« Reply #38 on: March 06, 2007, 00:48 »
0
I have only been uploading to microstock for exactly a month.  But I have learned much in that month.  I suspected all along that iStock would produce the goods better than elsewhere, but the upload limits are of course very restrictive for a newbie.

Nonetheless I now have 38 photos on line and have achieved 11 downloads in my first month.  That's an encouraging start given that I started the period without any photos on line.

I have also been contributing to Dreamstime, who take many more photos of course.

Although I have twice a s many photos with DT, I have achieved only 8 sales for slightly less commission per sale than IS.

In other words, IS is achieving twice as many sales per uploaded image.

Of course one month is too short a period to draw any firm conclusions.

Nonetheless, I am already aware that had I been a diamond exclusive with IS my earnings per upload would have been four times greater than with DT.

BigStock has achieved only minimal results.  One month is enough for me to decide not to continue with them (and I have already ditched 123RF and FT for other reasons).

I want to limit my uploading activity so that I can spend maximum time designing and shooting.

For me, at least, going exclusive with iStock is a definite plan.

« Reply #39 on: March 06, 2007, 01:13 »
0
I am not sure you should start making serious decisions about this business with only 38 images online at IS. You have a long long way to go...

I have 2800+ images at IS and my sales have been slowly declining now for a few months despite uploading what I can (I hate the upload limits and procedure!). My suspicion ever since the DA'ing fiasco and Best Match algorithm changes is that the search engine is favoring exclusives. I could be wrong but there is still much shuffling to be done in the industry and until things smoothen out, I would just go with the flow.

I suspect that this month IS will come in third overall for me, with the new prices at DT pushing it in to #2 spot, still with FT #1.

« Reply #40 on: March 06, 2007, 02:42 »
0
Phil - have you DA at istock??

YOur not at SS?  Is this because you dont want to sell for 25c.

« Reply #41 on: March 06, 2007, 07:25 »
0
Interesting statistics epixx.  Do you have the same portfolio at IS and SS?

Your numbers certainly make SS look appealing.



But as opposed to common "knowledge", my old photos at SS sell rather well, at least as long as I keep uploading new ones.

That's the whole problem with SS you have to keep uploading all the time, if you don't shoot a lot SS is probably the worst site out of all the stock sites I upload to. I'm not a pro I don't have tens of thousands of images, SS just doesn't work for a punter like me.

« Reply #42 on: March 06, 2007, 09:23 »
0
Phil - have you DA at istock??

YOur not at SS?  Is this because you dont want to sell for 25c.

Yup I have DA'ed my entire portfolio at IS. It cost me a lot of time and in the end, money to get it finished.

I am at SS but sales are not great for me there as of late. I upload when I can but these days you don't see the big spikes when you upload 20 or more files. SS was third last month for me behind FT and IS. This month will depend on sales at DT since I have a lot of higher level files there now.

« Reply #43 on: March 06, 2007, 13:07 »
0
Yes, it's early days for me Phil.

BTW, I got a large size download at DT overnight (I am in Australia) which paid a commission of $1.50.  That's a good rate and must reflect the new pricing structure.

I am of the opinion that microstock pricing is too low and over time prices and commissions will rise.

« Reply #44 on: March 13, 2007, 19:16 »
0
I must say that my experience with istock has been better and better since I upload on a weekly basis.  I see a real increase in sales and also in acceptance rate--now if an image is rejected by istock they give me a tip 99 percent of the time as to what needs to be corrected.  DT was a dead site for me until January, then it picked up and now it's doing great.  FT, on the other hand, has been a disappointment.  I've increased my collection there there every month; however,  I don't see an increase in sales at all.  It always stays on the same level.  The reason I still upload to FT is I had five extended licenses sales there since June.  I am even considering going exclusive with istock once I reach 500 downloads...  I don't have so much time to upload to all the sites and istock has been best for me anyways.

« Reply #45 on: March 13, 2007, 23:17 »
0
roman, if you want to be exclusive to istock, you have to know that at DT 'all Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (70%) percent of their portfolio online with Dreamstime.com for a period of at least six (6) months.'

« Reply #46 on: March 14, 2007, 17:21 »
0
I am not sure you should start making serious decisions about this business with only 38 images online at IS. You have a long long way to go...

I have 2800+ images at IS and my sales have been slowly declining now for a few months despite uploading what I can (I hate the upload limits and procedure!). My suspicion ever since the DA'ing fiasco and Best Match algorithm changes is that the search engine is favoring exclusives. I could be wrong but there is still much shuffling to be done in the industry and until things smoothen out, I would just go with the flow.

I suspect that this month IS will come in third overall for me, with the new prices at DT pushing it in to #2 spot, still with FT #1.

ARe you sure? It doesn't really make economic sense for IStock to be too biased against exclusives. You generate twice as much revenue for them then you would if you were exclusive there. I would think that IS would want to promote exclusives just enough to make it enticing for a certain percentage of people to go exclusive, but not be too biased because they actually get more revenue from non-exclusives.

« Reply #47 on: March 14, 2007, 23:17 »
0
Marco I couldn't diagree with your statement more.  Exclusives are THE profit centre for iStock, and for any other agency that chooses to run an exclusive contract.  In any business 80% of the profits are generated by 20% of the customers etc etc.  The exclusives give a constant supply of high quality unique images, highly saleable and commercial.  In stark contrast the non-exclusives are made up of thousands of weekend and holiday snappers many of whom bombard the agency with images that get examined and rejected.  Think of the cost of examining and rejecting all those hundreds of thousands of images.  That's money down the toilet.  That doesn't happen with exclusives.  Many of the exclusives run their stock as a business; they provide the best and only the best, generally speaking.

The thing that sets iStock apart from the rest is its exclusives.  THEY give it unique images to market and sell and do special deals NOT the non exclusives.

And another point: how many high quality exclusive type photographers are there in the world?  Fewer than some people think I reckon.  There will be a battle to get the exclusives and it wouldn't surprise me at all if in a year or two an agency like iStock closes its doors to anyone who is NOT exclusive.

No - its the exclusives (generally speaking) that drive the profits and the marketing.  Its the OTHERS that are not profitable.

Just my opinion.

« Reply #48 on: March 15, 2007, 00:19 »
0
so people like phildate, andresr, lisafx, rinderart, and many more who are not exclusive at iStock are just weekend shooters? ohkkkkay..whatever. I think the opposite is true about the serious business vs hobbyists. For anyone running this as a serious business who wants it to be a significant part of their income, it is not wise to put all your eggs in one basket. Just today iStock changed their search engine again, and my sales were off by 60% there today. Maybe it is a coincidence that my sales are off, maybe not. It sucks but at least I have my stuff at other sites as well.

« Reply #49 on: March 15, 2007, 01:48 »
0

In stark contrast the non-exclusives are made up of thousands of weekend and holiday snappers many of whom bombard the agency with images that get examined and rejected. 


Hey ... hang on a second! I'm a non-exclusive with iStock and I don't consider myself a "weekend and holiday snapper".

Whatever you may think of my portfolio, I do this full time - more than full time actually - have been taking photographs for over 40 years, have won awards for them, and am currently writing a book on photography for a UK publisher.

I don't go exclusive with iStock for two main reasons:

a)  I can (and do) make more money selling through a range of agencies.

b)  I consider iStock's exclusivity conditions unreasonably restrictive. And I believe, in the long run, their conditions are detrimental to the individual photographer - despite the fact that they trumpet them as being the best thing since sliced bread.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2007, 01:50 by Bateleur »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
8564 Views
Last post February 19, 2008, 15:52
by sensovision
3 Replies
6834 Views
Last post August 23, 2008, 18:55
by madelaide
0 Replies
4688 Views
Last post September 11, 2010, 03:00
by TylerCody
3 Replies
2830 Views
Last post August 06, 2013, 20:49
by Leo Blanchette
18 Replies
7955 Views
Last post March 21, 2019, 11:23
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors