Which file is worth 10x the other file?
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-2493233-united-states-flag.php?st=c805381
or
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-2388290-beautiflul-huge-us-flag.php?st=f2a69da

The idea of self-curating the collection to a degree (self-promoting to P+ / E+) was one of the few things that IS had done right the last several years. So naturally they remove that and replace it with an idiotic algorithm that can't tell an ordinary but lucky high-selling file from a higher quality and/or more unique file.

What they should have done instead was to continue to allow contributors to promote files to a higher level, but also allow them to demote* files to a lower level. Contributors know better than any algorithm ever could what is best for their files. If the concern was that files were changing price suddenly (laughable considering what's been going on the last few weeks), then limit the ability to change. But don't take away the one thing that was actually working and smart about IS.

* I guess that applies to exclusives only, allowing them to demote down to the Main collection.

I have a small port at iStock but seemed to get a chance to move pix to P+ pretty often and every time I moved one of my photos to P+ it sold MORE often rather than less often. The number of sales as well as what I made each time the photo was licensed would increase significantly.  All my P+ photos turned into my best-sellers, even if they hadn't sold much (or even at all) on iS before becoming P+. Now they are dumped into the Main collection and while still selling, my share is about 1/3rd less ( "Large" files are selling for less than "Medium" size files were in May).

My guess is that most buyers work for companies that already have plans with iS and these employees don't care if a photo costs them $5 or $10 more, but my loss of $1 or more on every sale will add up well before their $5 savings per photo becomes noticeable. Meantime, their bosses will start to care if they're spending $10 for two photos one week and $400 for two photos the next week. Making the Main collection cost less only serves to highlight the highest prices. Wouldn't it make more sense to raise all prices? In business, rule #1 is that if you're selling fewer items, you need to charge more per item.

So frustrating.

Thanks Ron re Paypal - wasn't sure how it worked with Euros

Anyone know about the Scandinavian stock sites?

Hi:

Are you on FAA? On FB?

Writing to ask you all a big favor.  I'm in a contest on Fine Art America to get one of my photos into a TV commercial. I need to actively solicit 250 votes before the judges will even look at it. I've need about 100 by June 30, so still quite a way to go - and I need to get a cushion since apparently last year some contestants repealed their votes at the last minute to hurt the competition. Craziness! I've lost about 30 votes along the way so far   Anyway, it would be great to have my work in the commercial and featured prominently on the site. So, if you like my photo, please vote for it and share the link on FB and twitter too if you don't mind. I know some of you are viral marketing geniuses and I can certainly use the help. Thanks so much!

I really appreciate your support. And if you're on twitter (I'm @campyphotos) you can retweet. xxooxx Here's the voting link for my photo: http://t.co/Afxolk0d4A Thanks again!

If you have a photo in the contest you can add the link here or PM me if you prefer to remain anonymous - I used up the 100 votes they give you but on occasion as people drop out I'll get a vote back. Can't promise it'll happen but meanwhile I'll happily vote and comment on your regular images to say thanks.

THANKS!  Hope you are enjoying the true start of summer!

-Marianne

Joining groups that are active helps you get noticed  - but not sure what it does for sales. I had my first after I got active but from people searching from outside. Had been on the site 9 months at that point. I've been on there  about a year and a half - joined earlier but uploaded my first photos in the winter of 2012. Joining groups seems to increase rank, but like all social media it takes a lot of time. The returns probably don't justify the time I've spent on the contests, comments and such - but I still have bouts of activity. Keeps things interesting.

Four sales with 98 images. One was a mixed media image and the rest were from a news event (OpSail 2012) that I photographed. Hard to know what will sell, though I've had one photo that's sold as a large print twice now (Framed and on metal - all my sales have been ready to hang so the checks were worth cashing at least). I've made a few large sales this year through a gallery I'm with too but selling fine art is not the way to riches unless you have a big name. Still, it's a nice outlet for my creative endeavors. I felt like my work was getting so commercial just shooting stock and assignments - need to shoot just for the love of it sometimes.

I counted my views and stopped when I got to 10,000 - sure that several a day are from bots so that accounts for a few thousand in 18 months but buyers have found me through keywording.

Are any of you in the TV contest? I am and could use a vote if you can take a minute. You can vote when you're signed into FAA or sign in with FB. I need to get 250 by June 30 and have about 100 to go - would appreciate if you could take a minute and vote here:

http://fineartamerica.com/contests/national-tv-photo-contest-2.html?tab=vote&artworkid=7434283

Thanks and good luck!

-Marianne
 

A friend of a friend posted last night about being pilloried by a complete stranger on Facebook who had blocked her so she couldn't see what he was saying. She found out about it through friends who saw the posts. Trolls. The internet is a weird place. Although we can find out more than ever about people and their personal lives, ironically, it is also a very impersonal place, which seems to make some people feel they have carte blanche to lie and bully and attack people because the medium insulates them from suffering the consequences of their actions.

But to answer your question, for what it's worth, here's my experience: 

I've been shooting stock since late 2008, part-time.. Small ports: ~150 images on microstock ~ 650 on Alamy, so it contributes very little to my bottom line, however, though I have certainly grumbled about falling stock photo prices at Alamy, my first page photos at SS getting lost in the newest shuffle, and dismal months, when I look at year to year trends and particularly growth in the last two quarters, it has grown steadily and consistently every year.

Interestingly, my microstock $ grew noticeably even though I added very few new photos last year, Alamy grew less and I doubled my portfolio there last year, the opposite of Johnathan's experience.

And yet, at them moment, traditional stock is trumping micro for me.  I had my BME recently thanks to photos I licensed myself directly to various publishers. ("strong" is a relative term - I'm talking $500-$900/month in direct licensing for anywhere from 2 [my BME] to 4 photos in the last two months. Combined with what I earn from the agencies, it's encouraging but even if sales continue at this rate, stock will probably be a small percentage of total income. I have a couple thousand photos on my own website, initially built to advertise my portfolio for assignment work, so they're not all tagged to sell. Most people interested in licensing stock from me or buying prints call or email me to discuss specific terms of use anyway, whether the image they want to license is tagged for sale or not. Most sales there initially come from Google searches, some of those random hits have become regular clients. I license traditionally-priced photos on my site, so am considering setting up a Symbiostock site for microsales.

Realistically, I can't see shooting stock full time as a viable option until after I get through the 70,000 or so photos I've shot over the past six years (for assignments & more recently for stock ), editing them down to ~3,000-4,000 images while continuing to shoot new stuff, and most significantly, making a push to market my stock photos on my own.

I work as a freelance writer (corporate communications, SEO copy & magazine assignments) and an assignment photographer, and also sell some fine art through galleries. I started working as a freelancer a few years before I learned about stock, and have seen the market for assignment photography and print media change drastically too. I think the only thing all of us who want to make a living in a creative field can do is work on improving our craft, keep good records to see what's working and what isn't, and keep adapting to an ever-changing world.

The internet enabled me to quit my job and stay home with my daughter for several years, working part-time from home in a new profession. I took a huge cut in income (I used to be a trial attorney in NY) but it's been worth it to me to do work I love and have time with my family. As an empty-nester now, my goal is to build up my portfolio so it makes a good second income and something I can rely on to supplement our income when my husband and I retire. I mostly shoot lifestyle and products for assignments, and travel and concepts for stock, not the most lucrative for most people but travel images are my best stock sellers & it's work I love to do.

I was thinking about EmberMike's $100K. Despite the fact that averaged over seven years it is nowhere near enough to live on, personally, I think it's still something to brag about. I'm impressed. Some troll could sit there and say $100K/7 < $15K a year. Sometimes it is a matter of interpretation. Assuming, say, he made $100 year one, $1,000 year two ... $30Kyear six and $50K year seven, he could be on his way to making $100k a year and considering whether it's time to quit the day job. I never read his initial post, but assume he was either responding to a query about how have you done in stock so far? Or sharing his achievement of reaching the $100K goal. Either way, we should be encouraging each others successes here, whether we think it's large or small.

It's easy to criticize. I shoot for local publications who get freebies from people but still pay me for my work but I still get annoyed when someone is willing to give away their photos for a byline. Unfortunately, this is the reality of the world we are living in.  If a friend shows me something they got "published," I 'd be happy for them. If they gave away the photo for free I would encourage them to request payment in the future. But telling them nicely and giving them a clue how much they should ask for next time is far more likely to bring about that result than bashing them for hurting the photography business. The point is, are you on here for the sense of community, or for some other reason?

Not sure I really answered your question but I guess what you can take away from this is that as your income builds each year, you should look for trends. If the growth rate is consistent, even if SS is your best one month and DT the next and Alamy the next, over time you'll get a sense of what you need to do to get to the next level. For me, having a mix of micro and macro makes sense, because I realize I can use the same skills I use to pitch assignments to sell RM stock on my own, but I needed to have enough inventory before I could get to that point. And success on the macros requires a much larger portfolio, generating far fewer sales.  Being on the micros where I generally sell a few images a day, gave me a good sense of what sells. Until this year, micro always beat macro for me even though I put my better stuff on Alamy, and given the economy, I think I'd be crazy to only license traditional stock. Selling on my own is a lot more work, and somewhere down the line I won't want to spend so much time marketing, so keeping various agencies in the mix makes sense.

After voting for Phil's lovely Venetian portfolio, I'm hoping for a similar favor.

I'm in a contest on Fine Art America to get one of my photos into a TV commercial. I need to actively solicit 250 votes before the judges will even look at it. So it is social media followed by a jury. I've got 139 votes so far, so still quite a way to go - and I need to get a cushion since apparently last year some contestants repealed their votes at the last minute to hurt the competition. Craziness! I've lost about 30 votes along the way so far   Anyway, it would be great to have my work in the commercial and featured prominently on the site. So, if you like my photo, please vote for it and share the link on FB and twitter too if you don't mind. I know some of you are viral marketing geniuses and I can certainly use the help. Thanks so much!

I really appreciate your support. And if you're on twitter (I'm @campyphotos) please retweet.

You need to either be signed in to FAA or signed in to FB. Best to do that before you hit the link. (If you're not on either, you can also sign up as an art lover on FAA but that's a lot more work than I'd expect).

Here's the voting link for my photo:http://t.co/Afxolk0d4A  Thanks again!

Hope you are enjoying some sunshine this week - yay summer!

(My FAA prices are more than micro, but certainly far less what they'd go for in a gallery - but no, they are not microstock.  In fact, selling those prints is different than selling "stock" since they aren't licensed, you actually provide the buyer with a tangible product. But I think that FAA and other POD sites like it are a good outlet for our work and certainly the type of site and sales many of us are interested in. Anyway, if you like my photo and don't mind my asking for your help, please vote for it. Thanks! 

My RPD keeps going up there - up well over 100% from 2011 and up ~40% from 2012. QTR4 2012 and QTR1 2013 are significantly higher than anytime in the past, so it's not all doom and gloom.

Sure, I'm bummed that extended licenses only get me $15-16 (even $28 on SS is peanuts but that's the nature of the beast) but those $7-9+ regular sales of Level 4s & 5s are still happening & despite the 35-42 cent subs of those same images, my RPD continues to rise. It is disheartening to get $9.22 one day for an extralarge and then see that same level 5 net me 42 cents a day later at the same size (as happened this week). (But even more distressing to see Alamy license a photo for $260 (when I got 60%), then see Alamy license the same photo for <$2 dollars, and see SS license it for 33 cents. If Alamy licenses the same photo for $1.61 one day and $260 the next, I have no problem licensing RF files there and on the micros. Unfortunately, they don't have the volume for those piddly sales to add up.

Through April 2012 subs were earning 84 cents, now it's 42 cents - that's a drag - I guess I missed that memo - but even with 38 subs out of 52 licenses, the image I mentioned above has earned me over $95 on DT so far - and it was a simple experiment with my lensbaby that the other sites rejected & it would never have passed Alamy's IQ.

 It does seem to be feast or famine over there but I haven't added anything new in quite a while. If I upload a bunch of new stuff I usually see a jump in sales. My port is too small to be statistically significant. But what seemed like a slump early this year is really pretty steady and gaining with no effort on my part.

Dismal month all around so far. No direct stock photo sales yet to put me over the top like the past two months. DT is out in front at the moment but it is a very sorry little pack they are leading this month, thou there's still time for it to turn around (they need an icon for fingers crossed on here x?) 

The sites do have buyers with different tastes. I guess that's why a port with <150 photos can still find lots of buyers despite the millions of photos they have to look at.

2nd BME but again like last month (which was my very best month ever for stock photo sales), it was only because I licensed four RM images on my own, for decent but not stellar $, however, the publisher that licensed the images is also considering many more of my photos at the moment for current publications so hoping next month will be good as well.It looks like they could become a regular source of seasonal stock photo income. Otherwise it would not have been pretty since SS and Alamy, my usual best earners, were both down (from last month and from last May). -Alamy sales barely even worth a mention this month and SS way down. DT around the same as last month, starting to climb back toward the levels I was seeing in late 2012.  IS up despite my very tiny port there.  DT and IS both up significantly from last May.

Nice start on SS and DT this month considering June 1 is a Saturday so let's hope that's a good omen. June was my best month last year, thanks to sales from my site, and okay sales elsewhere, so we'll see how it goes. Off to the Scott Kelby On the Road Conference in Atlantic City this week & then planning to shoot some stock at the Jersey Shore, so hoping I learn some more ways to market my own stock. I think that's a lot more promising at the moment, though I was having a nice run with Alamy until a couple of very slow months, so I should upload more there too. Toying with applying to Stocksy, but not sure.

Very disappointed that SS has been falling lately. They'd been growing consistently for so long I didn't expect this big drop.

Falstaff, where are you averaging RM sales of $600 per sale? That sounds great!

BME thanks to netting $900 from two sales on my own site.

SS: Up a tad from last month & up 53% from April '12, but I'm concerned because ELs made the difference. My lowest number of dls in a long time (50 with 158 images) & though some of my best-sellers are still on pages 1 and 2 for important keywords, others have dropped to pages 3 or 4. Anxious to see how things go in May.

DT : Down 40% from March (BME) but still 15% above my average & up 20% from last April.

The rest (iS, Alamy, fotolia) were pretty average, and surprisingly, I had sales on Bigstock for the third month in a row.

I voted but missed seeing alamy in the list. Oh well ...

Same in NY - if it's electronic no sales tax is due. However, if I sell a print to someone in New York, my site is set up to collect sales tax. I have my site with Photoshelter and they have it set up so that you can go in and charge sales tax by location. I'm not required to collect sales tax for out of state sales.

I contacted the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance and they directed me about how to become a sales tax vendor, explained that I didn't need to collect tax on electronic downloads, and now I pay the sales tax that I've collected each year to them once a year, and get a partial refund for collecting the taxes. It takes less than half an hour to fill out the tax forms online. It also gives me a tax break (i.e. I don't have to pay sales tax on certain purchases used in connection with my photography business). You need to keep careful records (as you do with any income) but it's a pretty easy system.

I'd call your state taxing authority and ask them how it works. I found them very helpful which was rather unexpected. Like me, you might be pleasantly surprised. And once you know how it works you won't have to be concerned that you're doing something wrong. You'll have peace of mind & it's probably less complicated than you think. Good luck

All my sales today were new images uploaded last month - but though final sales $ in April were average, they would have been way below average if I deducted ELs from the final figure.  I hope whatever shuffling they've done doesn't mean more months like April to come where a reasonable return isn't possible without ELs - though more ELs are always welcome.

Happy May Day everyone!

I've lived in New York my entire life (other than college). If I took a photo of Times Square it would be a travel destination (IMHO) even though it's less than an hours' drive or train ride from my house. If I took a macro photo of a flower in a garden in Paris, I wouldn't see it as a travel destination photo. Now, if it was an exotic bloom in the tropics, maybe it would be travel. If I took a sweeping landscape photo of the English moors that would be a travel destination. I think it's more about whether it is something unique to the place or something that could be anywhere. But it can be a close call. Food shots are often used by travel magazines, but you can get Vietnamese food in London and Japanese food in Paris - if a travel magazine is writing about restaurants, these would be travel. But they could be used for other purposes too. It's so subjective.

I have an editorial photo I took when I started with SS through their On the Red Carpet program of someone doing ashiatsu massage at an acting expo that my daughter was attending in NYC. For the past two years it has appeared in Fodor's Guide to Walt Disney World as a thumbnail in their spa section. So you never know.

Here's a link with the photo - I blogged about this subject "Is this Travel Photography?" (June 2012).

http://travelstockphotos.blogspot.com/

No travel keywords - I doubt that travel editors search for "travel" anyway. It's so broad. But I could be wrong.