MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Need some veteran opinions  (Read 4553 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 29, 2011, 12:02 »
0
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!



« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2011, 12:26 »
0
I don't think there is a good answer to that. I assume by RF/RM you mean Micros/Alamy (because you could always put it on Alamy as RF). It will probably sell reasonably well on the micros, whereas at Alamy you just never know. You might pick up a couple of really good sales or it might just die.

Is that Dubai? It's a nice handling of the mangroves.

« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2011, 12:33 »
0
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.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2012, 14:15 »
0
Matt why not submit to both RF and RM?

Also try Fine Art America.

You dont need anyone's help you have it all under control.

ShadySue

« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2012, 15:01 »
0
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?

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2012, 15:12 »
0
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?
There is nothing that says you cant!

If someone sees something of mine and wants to purchase it i will sell it to them, i am not going to send them to a Micro site where they pay pennies for it and they probably dont want to sign up to be able to purchase under some contract so why shouldn't i be able to sell it to them after all it belongs to me and i can do as i wish everyone does it.

Unless of course it stands out and can make you a fortune where in that case you dont put it on a Micro site.

There is stuff for rf sites and for rf and rm sites and then some that just plain dont belong to either. 

ShadySue

« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2012, 16:43 »
0
i can do as i wish everyone does it.
Oh well, fine then.

RacePhoto

« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2012, 05:29 »
0
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. "


 
« Last Edit: January 22, 2012, 05:35 by RacePhoto »

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2012, 09:29 »
0
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.

RacePhoto

« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2012, 12:33 »
0
This is true but you can still sell them on places like Fine Art America.

Honest, I don't think that was the question? Or anything to do with my answer?

There's nothing to stop anyone from selling their own work on FAA, no matter what license it is somewhere else? FAA sells PRINTS!  ???

And there's nothing wrong with selling the RF images as RF on Alamy.

The place where it gets complicated is selling things as RF on one site and RM on another and legally as long as you don't try to offer an exclusive, it's just a license variation. However Alamy doesn't allow it, and that was the specific contract reference.

The other part was whether to sell them RM or RF and personally, if you are selling RF on Alamy, the past indications are, that brings more money than RM on Alamy. On Average, historically, that may have changed with novel use and the newspaper discounts. Selling RF wouldn't be hurting income, it might actually help it?

Hey mtilghma? Sell them RF on Alamy.  ;D There's no conflict and everyone is happy.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2012, 13:03 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2012, 12:43 »
0
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!
« Last Edit: January 23, 2012, 12:51 by stockmarketer »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
4971 Views
Last post May 31, 2006, 17:08
by pixelbrat
13 Replies
4527 Views
Last post April 08, 2007, 17:53
by eendicott
5 Replies
3155 Views
Last post September 20, 2007, 17:44
by litifeta
1 Replies
1724 Views
Last post May 27, 2015, 12:32
by cobalt
23 Replies
3578 Views
Last post April 14, 2017, 11:49
by Anna.kupelian

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results