Don't mean to be offensive by calling out for veterans -- newbs to the scene are more than welcome to chime in, but you will probably see why a veteran's opinion might be more useful.

Here is a shot I just edited and will soon be uploading.  I think this photo is a good one for me to ask this question about, because it is probably average for the photos I upload.  Certainly many are better, but some worse, too (all of this is opinion, of course, but my opinion).  Most are landscapes like this, many of identifiable places, like this, etc.

So my question is, would you submit shots like this as RF or RM.  Initially, I submitted all my shots as RF.  That's going back to about 2005.  Just recently, I've continued submitting most shots as RF, but now I will submit only the best of the best new shots to RM (my only option thus far is Alamy).  Under that recent method, this one would probably still go to RF.  Do you think shots like this type of scene, of this general caliber, would be better suited to RM?  Do you think I'm doing it right?  Or do you think shots of this type of scene, but top-notch, should still be RF (ie I should not submit anything at all to Alamy RM).

I hope that wasnt too confusing -- any input is greatly appreciated!

Thanks BT... I know I don't have the answer, but I was hoping someone might   Basically, I'm trying to piggy back off people who have already done this experiment, so I have less chance of just killing some images, haha.

Yes, by RM/RF I meant Alamy/Micros.

It's Miami.  Thanks for the compliment on the mangroves... I wanted them lighter, but merging the holes in the leaves was becoming nearly impossible for any bigger exposure difference.  Also, mangroves are pretty movable by the wind, so that also wasn't helping the blend.  But yea I'm moderately happy with the result.

Matt why not submit to both RF and RM?

Why do you think that would be a good idea?
Where would you advise doing this?

i can do as i wish everyone does it.

Oh well, fine then.

Quote from: mtilghma on December 29, 2011, 12:33

Thanks BT... I know I don't have the answer, but I was hoping someone might  Basically, I'm trying to piggy back off people who have already done this experiment, so I have less chance of just killing some images, haha.

Yes, by RM/RF I meant Alamy/Micros.

It's Miami.  Thanks for the compliment on the mangroves... I wanted them lighter, but merging the holes in the leaves was becoming nearly impossible for any bigger exposure difference.  Also, mangroves are pretty movable by the wind, so that also wasn't helping the blend.  But yea I'm moderately happy with the result.

Maybe I don't understand the question or my answer is not what you are asking, but why don't you just sell it RF on both sites? No conflict, everything is just fine without potential licensing conflicts.

You might also have noticed it's in the Alamy contract that you can not sell images as RF in one place and RM on Alamy. Spelled out, clearly. So I'd guess my second part of the answer is, you can't do that.

http://www.alamy.com/contributor/contract/default.asp

"2.2 You cannot submit identical or similar images to Alamy as both Royalty-Free and Rights Managed. The licence type on Alamy for an image must be the same as the licence type for that image and similar images which you have on other agency websites. "


 

This is true but you can still sell them on places like Fine Art America.

Frankly I don't know what RM agencies will think of this, but if I were a RF reviewer, here's what I'd say...

Limited Commercial Value.

As a contributor to the microstock agencies, here's the approach I take:

Anytime you are about to upload an image, ask yourself, "Who would buy this, and what would they use it for?"  Looking at your photo, I can't think of an answer.  Can you?

The images that sell are those that convey a concept.  And best-selling images are those that best convey their concepts immediately upon sight.  That means the image has to SCREAM a concept.   As the buyer peruses a page of hundreds of choices, all of them in tiny thumbnail form, what is going to make your image jump off the page and demand to be bought?  It has to work well in a very small size on the screen, and it has to slap the viewer across the face with its message.

I'm not commenting on the quality of your pic.  Frankly, the microstock game is not about quality anymore.  Many, many people will get accepted into the agencies based on their work being of sufficient quality.  But few will have great success generating actual sales because they don't understand how to get into a buyer's head, how to pick the right subject matter, how to develop a unique style, and how to make their images scream a message or concept.  

Still, I do wish you well.  The more contributors who embrace this philosophy, the better microstock will be for buyers and sellers.   Best of luck!