The problem with tripods.  The adequate ones are too heavy to lug around all the time and the light weight ones are not much steadier than hand held.

I compromised and got a monopod that converts to a rather poor tripod and is also a walking stick.  Shooting indoors - churches, castles, etc. - hand held without a flash (often prohibited) required high ISOs.  The monopod lets me shoot at ISO 200-400 which will usually work for me.  Also, in Italy - and probably elsewhere - tripods are often not allowed in churches but monopods are ok.

fred

I have been doing MS for about a month now and have about 280 pictures up on Shutterstock and about 225 on Fotolia. Both sets of pictures are nearly the same, but of course they vary a bit since some seem to get approved on some sites and not on others and vice versa.

What I found though is that my sales on Shutterstock are about 10 times what they are on Fotolia with the same pictures. I realize I have about 15% more pictrures on Shutterstock, but still it seems like a huge discrepancy. At first I was thinking it is because of the subscription issue and generally low pricing on Shutterstock, but I see Fotolia is offering cheap subscriptions now too. I am also starting to get more "On Demand" sales on Shutterstock, so it is not all just subscription sales on Shutterstock.

I would be interested to hear if other's experience and observations between these 2 sites has been the same and what the possible reasons are as to why sales on one is much greater than on the other since they both are about the same size in terms of market penetration. I also wonder if this issue might have something to do with key wording order on Fotolia in any way?

Thanks to all...

In my experience Shutterstock is hard to compare with any other site and even with itself over the last year.  I started in Nov 07 with 31 images and made over $54 with $0.25 sub sales only - it is my BME and I missed the first week of November.   Nov 08 - for the entire month - with 225 images online I made $22 and that includes 3 On Demands (Large size).  My sales on Shutterstock have steadily declined as my portfolio has grown over the year (Mar 09 was $15 with 280 images).  Over the same period Fotolia and IS (except for a drop in the October timeframe) revenues have grown as my portfolio has grown.

My ports are really too small to provide much statistical value but it still seems to be a strange business.

fred

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2009, 06:05

Sure they are.

Dear DT, please disable my contributor account and images as I do not wish to sell there anymore.  Thanks!  Love A. Con. Tributor

How hard is it not to be a jerk about doing that?

I'm certainly no apologist for DT, but as I don't know their back end system I wouldn't presume it to be a quick thing for them to do. If it is a simple matter of one click and you're history then indeed it would be a friendly extra thing for them to do. But if it took more than 5 minutes of staff time per contributor request, I personally wouldn't expect them to allocate resources to it.

A site would be foolish not to be able to disable an account very quickly.  Legal issues - especially copyright abuse and liability - could easily arise that would require it.  fred

Do you  think it's stupid to lock the editing rights of a user who tried to put dirty words there and even emailed us about it?

Do you also think it's stupid not to have a bulk deactivation option so photographers disable files in revenge because they just received their first refusals? Without any concern given to other photographers who had to wait more because the pending line got bigger or that the agency reviewed their files for free?

Seems to me you just need to review your policies.  Other sites get along just fine without holding images for 6 months.  They also have lower payout limits.  DT should be able to make up for any losses from doing away with the 6 month hold with what they make on cash flow lag from the high payout limit.  Or even better just lower the payout limit.

Lotsa options for DT but us poor contributors are just supposed to put up high payout limits and the 6 month hold nonsense.

BTW if I check out before I reach the $100 limit does DT keep it or do you cut me a check for my earnings?

fred

DT has been pretty much a dead loss for me.  Up a bit in dls this month but 99% subsales at $0.35.  Return per Image at lowest ever and half of my average.  Any change can only help me.

fred

Fred - your images are beautiful, I'm surprised you had problems at SS.

Thanks Stacey.  I think my appeal is to narrow for this economy.  My best work is travel industry oriented and the slump is being felt there very badly. (Doesn't really explain my success at iStock though.)

I need to work harder and do more images that are imaginative and more generally stock oriented.

Your portfolio is a good example - lots of variety and very well done.  Thats where I need to be.

c h e e r s
fred

    

Shutterstock started strong for me but as I have added to my portfolio earnings have steadily decreased over my 16 months there.  My BME was my first month there and I had only 40 images I now have over 260 and just had my WME.  Very difficult to figure this out.  

Over my 22 months with iStock is has been up and down for me seemingly fluctuating with changes in the best match.  This was my BME there with double what I made at Shutterstock with only 117 images.

I got in on my first try with IStock but it may have been easier then.  It took me 4 tries for Shutterstock so if you got in there you should be able to make it in iStock.

c h e e r s
fred

That�s extremely useful Fred.  How many versions do you have? 

Thanks. Only have the three at the moment.  Not big sellers though. Not accepted everywhere - could be done better.

c h e e r s
fred

That�s because noone dare to say anything and risking getting thrown out. That�could easily happens with sales also. We�ll never know. I wanna belive I can trust such big agency though.

Oh, I'm not questioning their honesty but I am beginning to wonder about their competence.  Maybe their database can't handle the load any longer.

fred

Yeah, I figure it is the old 80/20 power curve with 80% of the earnings going to 20% of the contributors.

c h e e r s
fred

Of the seven sites I have contributed to over the last 2 years - largest portfolio is only 262 on SS -  only on FT have my revenues increased faster than my portfolio size  (121).  Earnings have collapsed elsewhere (WME on SS in spite of the fact that I just got my raise to $0.33) or at best stayed even (IS).  FT must be doing something right.

fred

Quote from: an0nym0us on March 08, 2009, 06:37

'The cool thing about it is that I'm also willing to sign my real name to whatever it is I have to say.'; Mat, you are exclusive to Fotolia, and never said a bad thing against them, so it's not so cool to use your real name. I'm afraid I am forced to post as 'anonymous' instead - not a thing I usually do - after reading all that bad stories about accounts being closed, posts being deleted, threads being closed on the official Fotolia forum, and I don't wish to put at risk my hard work there.

Dan, I just went through the Micropayment group archive and could not find the message you are paraphrasing.  Could you provide the exact quote or a link or reference that I could use to read the actual message.  Thanks and

c h e e r s
fred


This is a fair point.  Chad Bridwell threatened contributors on the Yahoo Micropayment group last year that anyone critical of Fotolia on a private forum such as MSG and Micropayment could have their accounts deleted without warning.  I don't blame anyone for wanting to maintain anonymity so that they can speak freely on sensitive subjects. 

Sorry Mat, but the company you moderate for has thrown down the gauntlet.  "Criticize us, anywhere or anytime, and we will close you down immediately."  So now we have an increasing amount of anonymous posters.  Doesn't seem fair to blame someone for maintaining anonymity when he/she is just reacting to agency threats.

I made 2 files, sold them 4 times and earned $21,27. I think it's worth it.

It just seems to me that an awful lot more effort must go into creating a sound clip - like  yours - than an image and yet I'm not sure their prices would make that much more money.

Also, would hate to put something up there, get $20 for a dl and then here it as a big hit or movie or TV show theme. 

At this point I've got a lot more equipment and software than talent but it does sound like fun.

I have a track that is about ready but it includes another musician (a real one) any idea if iStockaudio will allow a joint piece/copyright?

Thanks
fred