MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Newbie Discussion => Topic started by: Peruphotoart on April 07, 2018, 13:40
-
What do you think about the addictive and westend61 agencies? It's a bit difficult to enter but they say that they give good profits are connected with stocky and offset, someone who is in these agencies and can give me a little more idea of how they are doing?
greetings to all =)
-
What do you think about the addictive and westend61 agencies?
Greetings!
Last week I published on my blog a detailed review of Addictive:
https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2018/03/21/addictive-stock-brutally-honest-review/
Not so familiar with westend61 but have heard positive things.
Good luck
-
What do you think about the addictive and westend61 agencies?
Greetings!
Last week I published on my blog a detailed review of Addictive:
https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2018/03/21/addictive-stock-brutally-honest-review/
Not so familiar with westend61 but have heard positive things.
Good luck
Now I have a better vision about that agency for the moment as I am very small in microstock I hope that my portfolio grows to apply later in addictive, Thanks!
-
“It is strictly forbidden to upload ‘sisters’ photos (from the same session) to agencies other than those used by THE COMPANY. In other words, if the author decides to provide THE COMPANY with a specific session where, for example, a model appears, with a specific style and a specific location, it will not be able to divide this session between different media,"
Dividing between different media: like photos and video?
... since it would not comply with the exclusivity terms imposed by the agencies with which THE COMPANY works.”
[/i]
Do they only submit each series to one agency (an not have it on Addictive) to comply with their excusivity terms?
I'm not in this market as I don't do lifestyle, but I like to keep an eye on what's going on.
I'm a bit uneasy about the agencies which you can hardly get into, but suddenly if you supply Addictive (or several others) you can get in to these 'wishlist' agencies, but splitting your take (I've read on at least a couple of occasions about people who submitted directly to agencies and were rejected, but got THE SAME PHOTOS accepted via one of these distributing agencies). There must be 'stuff' going on in the background.
-
“It is strictly forbidden to upload ‘sisters’ photos (from the same session) to agencies other than those used by THE COMPANY. In other words, if the author decides to provide THE COMPANY with a specific session where, for example, a model appears, with a specific style and a specific location, it will not be able to divide this session between different media,"
Dividing between different media: like photos and video?
... since it would not comply with the exclusivity terms imposed by the agencies with which THE COMPANY works.”
[/i]
Do they only submit each series to one agency (an not have it on Addictive) to comply with their excusivity terms?
I'm not in this market as I don't do lifestyle, but I like to keep an eye on what's going on.
I'm a bit uneasy about the agencies which you can hardly get into, but suddenly if you supply Addictive (or several others) you can get in to these 'wishlist' agencies, but splitting your take (I've read on at least a couple of occasions about people who submitted directly to agencies and were rejected, but got THE SAME PHOTOS accepted via one of these distributing agencies). There must be 'stuff' going on in the background.
Of course there is 'stuff' going on in the background. Once upon a time before digital and internet it made sense to have a platform where you are with one agency and they had partner agencies elsewhere. Tony Stone Images was a great example of this, and it was very rewarding because it physically put your work into new territory. In todays market anyone anywhere can access imagery online and it really makes no sense to get into an agency just to get in the backdoor of another agency. In days of yore agencies were committed to you as a contributor which simply is no longer the case with any agency with the exception of maybe Stocksy. From what I can see apart from the co-op aspect Stocksy is what most if not all agencies used to be before the free for all introduction of microstock, which ironically was founded by the founder of Stocksy. In between days of yore we have gone from a 'Stocksy' style selection of photographers to my three legged cat with an eye patch qualifies and is today's new 'professional'. Overall the higher end agencies are selective and difficult to get into which brings on a whole new breed of agency... the middle man.
These agencies want to have you image exclusive all the while commiting nothing to the contributer all the while are making their slice of the pie by getting images in the backdoor of other agencies - almost like a parasite it needs a host to survive.
As these agencies are privately held companies, they don't have to do any explaining who actually owns the company.
My bet is many of these middle man agencies are owned by others with the sole purpose of being making more profit while paying the contributor even less.
Supplying middle man agencies makes no sense to me, but then I am already in Getty and also IS exclusive and all things said, I think that is a good spot to be in today's market, even if I don't like Getty and everything is has become.
-
“It is strictly forbidden to upload ‘sisters’ photos (from the same session) to agencies other than those used by THE COMPANY. In other words, if the author decides to provide THE COMPANY with a specific session where, for example, a model appears, with a specific style and a specific location, it will not be able to divide this session between different media,"
Dividing between different media: like photos and video?
... since it would not comply with the exclusivity terms imposed by the agencies with which THE COMPANY works.”
[/i]
Do they only submit each series to one agency (an not have it on Addictive) to comply with their excusivity terms?
I'm not in this market as I don't do lifestyle, but I like to keep an eye on what's going on.
I'm a bit uneasy about the agencies which you can hardly get into, but suddenly if you supply Addictive (or several others) you can get in to these 'wishlist' agencies, but splitting your take (I've read on at least a couple of occasions about people who submitted directly to agencies and were rejected, but got THE SAME PHOTOS accepted via one of these distributing agencies). There must be 'stuff' going on in the background.
Of course there is 'stuff' going on in the background. Once upon a time before digital and internet it made sense to have a platform where you are with one agency and they had partner agencies elsewhere. Tony Stone Images was a great example of this, and it was very rewarding because it physically put your work into new territory. In todays market anyone anywhere can access imagery online and it really makes no sense to get into an agency just to get in the backdoor of another agency. In days of yore agencies were committed to you as a contributor which simply is no longer the case with any agency with the exception of maybe Stocksy. From what I can see apart from the co-op aspect Stocksy is what most if not all agencies used to be before the free for all introduction of microstock, which ironically was founded by the founder of Stocksy. In between days of yore we have gone from a 'Stocksy' style selection of photographers to my three legged cat with an eye patch qualifies and is today's new 'professional'. Overall the higher end agencies are selective and difficult to get into which brings on a whole new breed of agency... the middle man.
These agencies want to have you image exclusive all the while commiting nothing to the contributer all the while are making their slice of the pie by getting images in the backdoor of other agencies - almost like a parasite it needs a host to survive.
As these agencies are privately held companies, they don't have to do any explaining who actually owns the company.
My bet is many of these middle man agencies are owned by others with the sole purpose of being making more profit while paying the contributor even less.
Supplying middle man agencies makes no sense to me, but then I am already in Getty and also IS exclusive and all things said, I think that is a good spot to be in today's market, even if I don't like Getty and everything is has become.
I sell in Istock, how did I sell in Getty? What kind of commissions does the artist receive there for a sale?
-
Bittersweet experience. I prefer dont lose control of my images. In macro only offset works well but falling. I returned to microstock this year. By w61 or blend you get only 7 .5% of price of getty sales for example. They rejects a lot of work and them agencies reject again a lot of work they send ( and you cant quit this.images during contract) for sone people work... but.i earn more in micro... sad to say...
-
Bittersweet experience. I prefer dont lose control of my images. In macro only offset works well but falling. I returned to microstock this year. By w61 or blend you get only 7 .5% of price of getty sales for example. They rejects a lot of work and them agencies reject again a lot of work they send ( and you cant quit this.images during contract) for sone people work... but.i earn more in micro... sad to say...
what you mean when you say them agencies?
personally i waned to try westend but i am with cavanmages and want give them a try...i send them first batch of 44 and they accepted 5 only, but for as they were travel i could sell to other agency, sure if i send a batch of 80 lifestyle, where i paid model location and they accept one or two i will refuse it and send to micro. i will apply to offset soon and that's, for editorial i work with a good agency in usa, even for me micro is still growing and the big chu.
-
I said that you haver a first rejection of distributor an then a second rejection of the selected images by the seller agencies.
Example: send 100 to w61 they take 40 and of this 40, they send to offset and offset only accept 7...or 0
This operation with the other agencies....40 to plain picture an plain accept 2... 40 to Getty, accept 37
And you can't remove the images. I know big guys that after try macro distributors, returned to micro or send less to macro. I send less images now
-
I said that you haver a first rejection of distributor an then a second rejection of the selected images by the seller agencies.
Example: send 100 to w61 they take 40 and of this 40, they send to offset and offset only accept 7...or 0
This operation with the other agencies....40 to plain picture an plain accept 2... 40 to Getty, accept 37
And you can't remove the images. I know big guys that after try macro distributors, returned to micro or send less to macro. I send less images now
ok. u are in adobe premium, is there selling?
-
At the.begining sells good but today big drop of sales. Every month less and less images are aded by direct contributors. Only sites like w61 or addictive upload regulary
-
At the.begining sells good but today big drop of sales. Every month less and less images are aded by direct contributors. Only sites like w61 or addictive upload regulary
i would have like to contribute to adobe premium but i cannot find a link, but anyway i just work with cavanimages and maybe direct to offset.
-
Good thing of direct offset is you are free to erase via e mail a submission that dont work. I have shots there with very good sales and others with 0. Macro is.double.or nothing