They seem to love food, my acceptance rate there has been 99 % for a long time now.  And the one percent they do reject is mostly due to similars (where I find them even worse than dreamstime).

I would imagine it's because your pictures of food are really good pictures.  I don't think it matters what the subject is if the photo is exceptional, it's going to get accepted.  If it's just OK or pretty good then you have a marginal shot at best any more.

Mat

I normally have a few sales every day but had a 4 day stretch, the first 4 days of October, with no sales. I would really like to know what is going on. No response so far from the email to support I sent yesterday.

I think that the search engine gets shuffled every now and again which changes the order in which images appear for certain keywords.  It seems to happen every few months or so.  The way I can tell is that my front page of images sorted by relevance will be different and I find a whole new type of photo starts selling consistently.  Around the end of September I noticed it so that could be what is going on with your 4 day dry spell.

Good luck,

Mat

Great thread, I'm glad it's been revisited.

Of course like most I use several different lenses for different things but if I were forced to give up all but one for microstock I would have to keep the Canon 16-35 f/2.8L

My style of photography is reasonably "in your face" so I can get a nice portrait when up close and personal or a nice shot that shows the environment really well.  It's a fast lens and super sharp.

That being said, if I didn't have my Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS I would be very sad as I use it about as much as the 16-35.

I have been playing with my Canon 100mm f/2.8 L Macro lens more recently as well and I've been using it in place of the 70-200 sometimes as it is faster and sharper. 

Have a good one!

Mat

That's the first interview I've read from him.  He is not what I would have expected.  35 years old and has attained that level of success!  Am I the only one here that has slapped myself in the forehead and wished I would have thought of it first?

I was thinking about uploading a few exclusive images to FT, but I was unsure about some things:

-Can the exclusivity of the images be removed any time? Or do I need to delete the image first and then upload it again as a non-exclusive image?

-Are exclusive images being sold on Fotolias partner sites and networks?

-How strict are they with the ecxlusivity: do they accept images from the same shoot to be both exclusive and non-exclusive?

-Is there any other sites that sell well and have options for exclusive images (not exclusive contributor) ? I know DT has, any experiences there?

Any experiences how your exclusive image sales have been on FT?

I am 100% exclusive on Fotolia and wouldn't change it.

You can change the exclusivity status of your image at any time but I believe you need to wait 3 months before you can offer it elsewhere if you switch it to non-exclusive.

Exclusive images are sold on Fotolia partner sites.  I know this because I find mine every now and again and as mentioned I'm totally exclusive.

As far as submitting some pictures from the same shoot as exclusive but uploading virtually identical shots to other sites I think is frowned upon.  I think ethically you would be pushing your luck and I would be pretty careful about doing so.  That would ultimately be a question for support but I doubt they would say "go for it!" 

Good luck!

Mat

I don't think you'll find anyone to dispute the fact that they've made mistakes and have turned people off in the past.  There have been communication issues, there have been changes that had me scratching my head from time to time.  As many of you know, I am intimately familiar with the frustrations photographers have felt there.  At the end of the day however, I feel that I am and have been consistently treated fairly and compensated fairly.  I've never been an I-Stock contributor (as mentioned..I tried...it didn't work out) so all I can really say is that their popularity had confused me greatly considering their nearly non-existent commissions.  They got out of the gate the fasted and the most visibly so from the start they've been essentially the "Brand Name" company in Microstock and have attracted many buyers.  It feels to me and has for some time that FT is gaining that "Brand Name" status amongst buyers and I've been feeling it in the increase in sales. 

If you are at FT cool.  If not and you have any questions, you are invited to shoot me an email.  If not and you don't...no worries. 

Have a good one y'all.

Mat

I do not believe you when you say you don't have any vested interest in Fotolia other the being a contributor.

Believe it Brother!  I'm a freak!  What can I say?

Mat

You're still on double secret probation.  

*!  I thought that was expired!

I have to throw in my .02 on the latest Microstock controversy here.  It's no secret that a lot of people have felt burned by FT on changes made in the past but in my opinion most, if not all the changes made had been done so with the sole intent of increasing business which ultimately had a benefit to us all.

So many people have asked me on many different occasions why I am exclusive to Fotolia.  I received a call from a guy just the other day trying to recruit me to upload to his company.  I told him I was exclusive and he said "Oh, I thought you were a Fotolia guy...not I-Stock."  That made me chuckle and realize how few people are exclusive to FT like myself.  Reading about the I-Stock Changes got me to thinking about why that is so I thought this seemed like as good a time as any to explain my choice.

Right now, as an Exclusive Emerald (equivalent to I-Stock Diamond right?) Photographer I earn a 54% commission on my sales.  54%!  Not only is the commission high, but I set my prices at $5 for XS and $40 for XL so I'm getting a higher commission on a higher dollar amount.  Every time I sell an XL file I get $21.60 added to my account.

As an Emerald Photographer I also have an Infinite Collection account to sell photos at even higher prices ($20 for XS, $200 for XL) with increased visibility and a 50% commission.

As far as I know, even non-exclusive commission rates have always been dramatically higher than those of I-Stock.  I always found it shocking that so many people were so defensive of IS and their 20% commissions...now? 

FT has an option for Image Exclusivity which lets contributors raise prices on individual photos.  Of course you get the higher commission if you are an exclusive photographer but you can still get the benefit of higher prices on exclusive images even if not.  This doesn't benefit me as I'm totally exclusive anyway but I thought I would mention it regardless.

I can upload as many images as I want as often as I want regardless of being exclusive or not.  I heard there is some sort of bulk upload option for new photographers as well but I'm not too sure about that.  When I dipped my toes in the I-stock water a few years ago I was puzzled and frustrated by the limits.  I would never get caught up...ever!  Not that I am now but being chronically behind is solely based on my procrastination through FT not on silly limitations they put on me.

FT pays commissions on promotional and free credits as though they were purchased.  I heard that I-Stock does not do this?  From what I understand they send out a lot of these promo credits to recruit buyers.

FT is the number one micro-stock site in Europe and is picking up speed around the world!  I have always believed that FT has had my best interest in mind as their successes equate to my success.  I would both love and hate it if all the top micro-stockers were at FT.  Love it because the quality of imagery would be so high that the lions share of the buyers would have to be there too.  Hate it because the competition would be so fierce I would really have to step up my game.  I'm willing to do it if you want to give it a shot come on over!

For what it's worth guys, I'm sorry that you are getting dumped on so rough at IS.  Especially those of you that are exclusive.  If any of you have any questions about FT I'm happy to answer them.  I'm not always a shameless cheerleader, I'll give straight answers to the best of my ability and if I don't know the answer I will try to find it for you.

Good luck all,

Mat Hayward 

In 2008 my sales dipped around 20% in August compared to July.

2009 was a 35% drop in August vs. July.

I don't know about the other sites but the August slow down has been consistent for me.  September 2009 picked up considerably for me though (08 September was nearly identical to August 08).

Have a good one,

Mat

Yep, it should be fine as long as it covers all the disclaimers the FT release does.

Quote from: dirkr on August 05, 2010, 06:54

Quote from: MatHayward on August 05, 2010, 05:50

  Some day I'll crunch the numbers to find out. 

Unfortunate for you that FT does not provide those figures, although that has often been asked for...

never thought in that.. it is true you cannot know how much a photo have earned there, really weird in fact!

You can, you just have to manually add it up which is very time consuming.

Mat