Justin:

This sounds very interesting. I read through all the posts here and the FAQs on your site and just have a couple very specific questions that I think others might have as well, so I'm asking them here. I'm pretty convinced that it's worth signing up during your beta period but want to be sure I understand exactly how this will work.

My site is with Photoshelter. I have portfolio images on there that are not available for licensing as well as stock images available  for licensing - some RM and some RF. I also license photos through various traditional and microstock agencies. If I sign up for the $10/month plan, am I correct that the only photos from my site that you will index are those available as RM, and obviously priced for licensing? Do I need to switch to the $40 plan if I want to offer my RF images from my site directly rather than from the agencies even though I have my own sales platform? 

You said you've been doing a lot of testing/polling. Are most of those you've polled traditional RM buyers or are they primarily microstock buyers - or, better yet, what's the percentage of each? I know many buyers purchase both trad and micro - but I'm just wondering which side of the business you'll be pulling most of your buyers from. 

Sounds like this could be a great way to get more traffic on my site, so looking forward to your response. Thanks.

-Marianne

I'd like to see an editorial RF option on Alamy too. I put my best editorial there but I license many more editorial images through the micros than I do through Alamy.
And I make way more from my RF images on Alamy than I do from my RM images.
So, for many reasons, the RF editorial route would be the way to go. They're practically doing it anyway with 15 year licenses for a lot of their editorial content. And that would let you keep the stuff you want to license as RM truly RM.
You have to be glad at least they are thinking and trying to come to grips with the current reality. Not sure anyone has the answer. You can't turn back the clock. Maybe they should just open an office in Japan?
Oh well, at least midstock pricing is better than NU.

Congrats! Nice image! Cool-looking building and the symmetry of your photo really works - good to know when to break the rule of thirds
Nice one !   

I like using Live View to manual focus when I've got my camera on a tripod. Really get consistent excellent results. (I have good reading glasses - got a reading prescription in the bottom of my sunglasses - highly recommend it to those over 50).
I considered getting a split screen - miss it from the days of film when I only had manual focus - but it would void the warranty. My D700 is out of warranty now though so I may look into it. Any suggestions on where to get one for a Nikon - and if the lens does the focusing rather than the camera as in the good old days, how does it work?

I had 6 images rejected for the recent assignment because they were "looking for something more elaborate."

When they weren't reconsidered before the contest ended - pretty annoying - I uploaded them elsewhere with good results. Haven't heard on any of them yet but they were all shot specifically for stock and 4 specifically for the competition with well-thought out concepts - 2 were portraits, one was nature/landscape, and the rest still life. Not a clue what wasn't elaborate enough - though in the past when I've resubmitted photos rejected for that reason they've been accepted on reconsideration. I uploaded a bunch of similar concept photos in April figuring they'd take some and reject others but they took them all - so this blanket rejection of varied photos that were on the money for the assignment was discouraging.

This was also my worst month ever on DT (aside from my first few months when I had only a handful of images) - I made less than 1/4 of what I normally do and have already made more over this past weekend than I did for the entire month of May - meantime sales were above average on SS and Alamy and average on iStock & fotolia. My sales on DT had been steadily climbing for a while so this drop off a cliff was out of the blue. I have 1/3 as many images on iStock and still made more there than on DT. And they accept my new stuff - I'll probably have as many images there as I do on DT shortly.

I get challenges to my keywords that make no sense from time to time. It's annoying but I reply politely and it never ends up being a problem.

Sorry - uploaded the wrong photo to the last one - (I tried to modify it but couldn't get it to delete) - the link is correct - but here's the message with the correct photo attached

And here's one from October with lots of images from Alamy and iStock:
http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/worlds-best-islands/23

I've licensed this one several times and found it a few times, including here with others that some of you may have taken:
http://www.budgettravel.com/slideshow/photos-charming-fall-islands,7673/#pic=13
It's from last September but I haven't posted on the tear sheets forum before and figured the other pix might be of interest.

It really is so varied. I have a lot of images that earn about $5-15 a year, a decent number that earn me $40-50/year and then some that have earned me over $200/year and are still selling well a year or two after I uploaded them. (These are all microstock - in traditional stock some never sell and others get licensed for several hundred$ a year, no way to estimate at all).

At this point I think that just about all of my MS images have been licensed at least 1-5x, with a growing percentage (about 10%) being licensed several times a week. Some of my images have been licensed over 70 times in a year but only earn me about $35-40/year because they are all small DLs or subscriptions, while others will be downloaded about half as much but will have a number of ELs and single image sales add up to far more.

I've only been at this for a couple of years part time with a small portfolio, but it's a question I've been trying to answer by tracking my sales and trying to concentrate on the types of images that earn me the most. My understanding is that images have a 5 year average shelf life, but like some people here I find that my nature and nature/travel images sell consistently and after 2-3 years they keep selling at the same pace. So, those kinds of images I'd expect to earn me around $1,000 average (some probably a lot more than that, and some less) in their lifetime on the micros, and possibly more for those that are 16 MP and will be large enough to use for most applications even as megapixels keep growing. The web will never need very large photos and most of these end up in online travel magazines or in the magazines themselves, not on billboards. If they keep selling for 20 years, they can earn me even more, but who know how technology will change. If people want interactive photos 10 years from now, they'll  not be worth much as stock, but they'll still make nice prints, which earn me a lot more than stock per sale, but are far less frequent.

My top 5 or so grunge and blur backgrounds are making me about $75-100+/year each - though my top seller may end up earning me more this year - too early to tell; the less frequent sellers maybe earn me $20/year.  I assume a year or two from now that trend will be out and they will have few if any sales, so I'd expect that in their lifetime, averaging the good sellers and the rest together, assuming a lifespan of 3 years with diminishing sales over time, I'll maybe average $100 per image over its lifespan. They'll be useless when the trend dies, but they were fun experiments and the light blur sales have paid for my lensbaby already.

Looking at these trends helps me decide which types of images it's worthwhile to shoot, and looking at sales across all venues helps me determine whether things such as a trip will pay for itself and how long before I actually turn a profit on the trip. I also like shutterstock's catalog idea. That's a great way to see what I average for a particular type of shoot which is probably more instructive than what I average per image. 8-10 sales a year at $28 dollars is better than 70 sales @ 33 cents, so the photo in the number two slot for # of DLs may earn more than the # 1 slot, and may keep earning for longer.

I like Photoshelter. I've sold some stock and use it all the time to get clients and share photos with them. I just used one of their templates and it's been working well for me.
I have two web addresses that point there and they were inexpensive to buy through godaddy.com. And I haven't done any marketing or advertising yet.
You have many templates to choose from and can customize them as much or as little as you want. As long as you have a paid account (not just the most expensive one), I believe that it's completely customizable, and even without the pro account you can have your own web address, sell prints, RM and RF licenses and other items directly.
I haven't done any advertising and was getting a lot of traffic until the latest Google change, (still getting traffic from all over the world, just not as much). I believe PS is working on figuring out how to overcome the latest issues. They also have free webinars on SEO, customization, what buyers want, etc. - very helpful. And you can talk to a real person there too.
And you can use it to back up files - even RAW files. You can have private and public galleries, and you can put your best photos in your gallery and set it up so people can search those galleries and everything else you want to license from your site (even photos that aren't featured in a gallery). They have the architecture set up for print, RM and RF sales - all the back end you'd have to build if you had your own site.
You can see my site here www.campyphotos.com
And if you sign up, please consider using this link: http://www.photoshelter.com/referral/MA2CA7TC7J Thanks!
Check it out and I think you might find it's a good solution.
Feel free to ask other questions via the board or PM
-Marianne

I just had my first EL at fotolia and noticed the license was much broader than at shutterstock, where you get $28 vs. $4. I thought I'd read through it before but realize I must have been confusing it with shutterstock. I joined fotolia after I had a few ELs @ $28 a pop on SS and figured it was worth opting in (as a newbie I must have thought I'd get $20 for an EL)- and now I believe that was a mistake. IMHO, if someone is going to use my photos for more than the limited scope permitted with the regular microstock download, then I'd rather have them license it from shutterstock where, although it's still a small commission, it's much more than the paltry $4.

In order to disable it, I went into edit and unchecked EL. I had a few, however, that would not allow me to edit them. I've been on fotolia for a little over a year and had a few old photos which sold back in March-April 2010. I guess they cut off all editing options after a file hasn't had a sale in a year. I just have a few files on fotolia and find their upload/keyword process cumbersome, but I get a few sales and assume it's not worth closing the account. Anyway, I wrote to them asking them to remove the others from the EL option last week but still haven't heard from them.

Did any of you have any luck contacting them and having them change your licensing options? If not, I'll probably delete the files altogether. Although the last couple of months have been slow, even slow sales at alamy, DT and SS are much better than my BME at fotolia.

I also found five photos of mine that from fotolia on fotkyfoto. I saw one post here that assumed the two sites are related, but does anyone know for certain? I wrote to fotolia about this too in a separate communication last week, but have yet to hear from them. Does anyone know for certain that the sites are related? I don't want to send a takedown notice if they're a legitimate partner.

BTW, DT does let you opt out of their EL and "sell the rights" options - they're different. You opt in to both and can change it by editing your image. Web-EL and Print-EL  grant more extensive rights than the regular license-but you keep your copyright and can continue to license the photo. Sell the rights EL, EL-1 and EL-3 let you choose your price. You sell your copyright in the first instance - not usually a good idea unless you get a lot of money and in the others you grant an exclusive license for 1 or 3 years. It's confusing because the web & print "EL" means "Extended License" while the "Sell the rights" EL's mean "Exclusive License".  The last two - exclusive for a year or for 3 years - are really an exclusive RM license (the license is not only limited in time like a regular RM license, but it is also exclusive during that time). I wouldn't mind setting a high price for the EL-1 or 3 but haven't opted in since I don't want to give up my rights altogether, and you have to opt in to all 3 exclusive options together, while the web and print extended licenses are each separate. 

Hi Ann:
What a small world!
Wish I had shot those with my D700 rather than my old D70 too!
Thanks for taking a look at my site. Couldn't find a link to yours. Send me a PM with the link if you'd like. I'd love to take a look at your work.

I have my site set up with Photoshelter mostly for my commercial and editorial clients, but I also keyworded some photos and made them available as stock under full-priced RM licenses. I haven't tried marketing my site, but have used Photoshelter's SEO guidelines and I just licensed a photo to a major magazine publisher who found a photo she needed on my site.
This sale out of the blue has made me start considering how I can really market my site once I have a larger collection of stock images. Any suggestions other than SEO?
Here's my site: www.campyphotos.com
Many of my images also come up very high in a google search, so I think SEO is an important factor but I can't imagine that alone will generate enough traffic. I'd love to be able to license a lot from my site but for now I license most of my images through the various online agencies. I hope that as my stock library grows, I'll be able to generate more direct sales rather than paying 40-85% to an agency, but I'm not in a position to get my photos seen by thousands of viewers a month- yet.
Cooperatives seem like a good idea but I imagine it would be tough to vet everyone and make sure that they were all equally committed to the business.
Does anyone have work on a virtual agency at Photoshelter? I'd be curious to see how well that works out.  I'd also be curious to see how well others are doing selling direct from Photoshelter.
I haven't tried seeling microstock via Photoshelter. Has that worked well for anyone? My thought would be that you can't get the kind of volume you need on your own to make that worthwhile.
Glad to see this thread started. Direct sales have been touted as the way to go and it will be interesting to see where this all leads.