Author Topic: Last chance to upload for credits. (Read 15836 times)

pelmof · « **Reply #25 on:** October 01, 2006, 15:14 »

Quote from: nruboc on October 01, 2006, 15:07

Quote from: leaf on October 01, 2006, 13:48
i think what will attract the photogs. is the sales. if they can spend a good chunk of change on advertising then they will get sales. take a look at fotolia, they started only recently and have a good market share i would say. they also have a ton of images (how many is another debate in itself)

Do you think Fotolia made it by spending a good chuck on advertising? I guess this is where we have a different line of thinking. All the advertising in the world won't make a difference if your product sucks (to be blunt). Which brings me back to my point. It's the photographers that make a site succeed. Fotolia's success in my book is that they recognized this. Although they don't have the best commission in the world, it does get progressively better with more downloads, and also they did that promotion where they paid real $ (not tokens) to photographers to upload. This is right about the time the site took off, coincidence, I think not.

Fotolia sucks for me. After 2 months, I have $.99 in sales.

P__

GeoPappas · « **Reply #26 on:** October 01, 2006, 15:29 »

IMO, the royalty % that microstock pays is not as important as two other numbers:

1. The total royalty amount over all images: This is the number that others have discussed in this thread. In other words, it is better to make 100 sales @ 0.20 (which is $20.00), then it is to make 10 sales at 0.50 (which is $5.00). This figure is what makes Shutterstock a great site. They have small royalties, but LOTS of sales.

2. The average royalty/image.

Here are my averages:

LuckyOliver	$1.043
Stockxpert	$0.856
DreamsTime	$0.813
Fotolia	$0.566
BigStockPhoto	$0.500
iStockphoto	$0.448
Shutterstock	$0.25
123RF	$0.270

As you can see, LuckyOliver has the highest average royalty/image (@ $1.04). But this figure is only based on a few sales, so I will need to give it some time to get a better reading, but I believe that it will be one of the higher paying sites (based on average royalty/image).

But if sales pick up and the average royalty/image is high, then this site could be very good for photographers.

nruboc · « **Reply #27 on:** October 01, 2006, 16:01 »

My reference to "sucks" was from a customer/designer point of view. Are you a designer? Do you buy images from stock agencies?

pelmof · « **Reply #28 on:** October 01, 2006, 17:17 »

Quote from: nruboc on October 01, 2006, 16:01

My reference to "sucks" was from a customer/designer point of view. Are you a designer? Do you buy images from stock agencies?

Yes, and yes.

nruboc · « **Reply #29 on:** October 01, 2006, 17:23 »

Quote from: pelmof on October 01, 2006, 17:17

Quote from: nruboc on October 01, 2006, 16:01
My reference to "sucks" was from a customer/designer point of view. Are you a designer? Do you buy images from stock agencies?

Yes, and yes.

Ok, curious to see your site, can I see a link?

dbvirago · « **Reply #30 on:** October 01, 2006, 18:02 »

Had a que waiting to get approved for at least 2 weeks. Used to be they would pile up for a few days, but like some agencies, when they got to you, they reviewed them all. Then I got a nice email saying which ones, if any, were decliend and why. Now, I get the email below, and some number of my images aren't in the que anymore, but most are. Without comparing one on one with my portfolio, I don't know which ones they reviewed and which ones were approved. I hope they are as busy marketing as they say they are.

"Nice work! We received your latest bunch and the ones we've approved so far are now in your
portfolio."

That doesn't cut it.

pelmof · « **Reply #31 on:** October 01, 2006, 18:20 »

Quote from: nruboc on October 01, 2006, 17:23

Quote from: pelmof on October 01, 2006, 17:17
Quote from: nruboc on October 01, 2006, 16:01
My reference to "sucks" was from a customer/designer point of view. Are you a designer? Do you buy images from stock agencies?

Yes, and yes.

Ok, curious to see your site, can I see a link?

I don't have a site. I work as a photo researcher for an online educational publishing company. As such, I research, edit, catalog, and design the placement of photos that illlustrate the text of the course. My expertise areas are literature, art and social sciences. I am a 30+ year semi-pro photographer who isn't shooting at the moment. All of my submissions to microstock agencies are designs--illustrations and fractals. Here's my link to the LO site:

http://www.luckyoliver.com/portfolio/pelmof

The first 19 images are the ones that sold.

P__

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Last chance to upload for credits. (Read 15836 times)

pelmof

GeoPappas

nruboc

pelmof

nruboc

dbvirago

pelmof

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors