Quote from: DonLand on February 23, 2014, 23:07

Well after reading all of this I decided they are not worthy of supporting in any way

I wonder if anybody ever notice how you are loosing control over your images (your work)?

Where's the limit?

http://depositphotos.com/license.html
http://depositphotos.com/license-comparison.html

Welcome to the world of microstock... and enjoy your 0,27 or 0,30 $ 
or
Deposit Photos Extended Licence $2.64!

and here.


Microstock is great, first sales are great, until you realize there's something wrong with your business...

Did they also write this sentence in your email vilainecrevette:

If for some reason, you would like to opt out of our partnership programs, just let us know and we will comply with your request. However, please keep in mind, in that case you will be excluded from all our partnership programs and your images will be sold solely on depositphotos.com

?

Interesting idea if we talk in generalities. No one wants to give away their secrets but I suspect that no idea is �new� in the world of microstock these days. Yes, there are niches but even those are getting harder to define. My bestseller(s) are images I uploaded in 2006, as well as a few unique illustrations that are actually pretty simple. The photos were taken with a Fuji S602 at a US baseball game of the crowds in the stands. They still sell today (160+ downloads, is that a lot?) even with over 65 thousand other similar images in the database when searching for crowds. When I first sold them they were sold as RF, now they are Editorial as rules have tightened. Even though the people in my shots are the size of fly specks someone in charge was worried that there might a recognizable face in the crowd. Reality was that someone copied the shot and was told that it should be submitted as editorial so they complained about mine which were then changed from RF to Editorial. So much for touting best sellers. Yes, they do get copied.

Of my 126 images I have 25 with no downloads, but 13 were added in the past 2 months and the other 12 in the last 6 months so you can see I add when I�m bored, after I've taken a trip, when I run across an old image I think might sell or come up with a new illustration (I now work in Illustrator all day at my day job but mainly technical stuff). Yes, I delete my �stinkers� (defined by me) if they haven�t sold in 3 years even on the slight chance that one �might� sell. I guess that you could call me a hobbyist even though I�ve done this for a paycheck in the past (product photographer for catalogs, nothing artsy). There are tourist landscape photos in my port as well as flowers and objects and yes, some do sell. I don�t shoot people (other than crowds or editorial while traveling).

Yes, I�m exclusive to DT. My RPD is consistently around 3 dollars, my downloads per image is around 12. I make from 25 to 75 dollars a month for an average of 50, same for each year I�ve been doing this. With those numbers I don�t feel like I really belong on MSG because there are those here with more images and with more dedication. I now realize that many have done this for a living but in 2006 when I joined it was just for fun. I didn�t know it was an �industry� that could make one a good sum of money. Hell, I didn�t even really know what Royalty Free was although I had purchased Rights Managed for an ad agency I worked at (from slides or transparencies). Today I�m also a keymaster so that adds to my microstock income each month (I didn�t count that in my totals). I�ve always leaned towards the technical side of my profession (graphic design) so that has worked out well. Plus, I was always a good speller.

I�m anonymous because of the keymaster thing but if anyone wants to see my port send me a message. The admins at DT probably know I�m here but that being said I try and tell it as I see it so I�m not worried. But, after being online since Al Gore invented the internet I have no desire at fame or for strangers to know my every move. I�m not even on Facebook, or interested. I do know that anyone who wants to track me down can and will. No one is invisible these days.

BTW -- I am totally open to any critique  of my shots 

I got the 6D a month ago. I got it rather than the latest 5D because it had functions that were useful to me (notably GPS) that the 5D didn't have and the places where the 5D had the advantage weren't things I needed. I'm not doing video, though. My impression is that the 5D is targetting the video market and the 6D the stills market. For stills, the 6D is amazing, especially with the incredible high ISO performance it has.
I think it's about looking at the features on each and seeing which suits you best. If it is the more expensive one all you have to do then is work out if the extra functions are worth the price to you. For me, the 5D would probably have been less useful despite costing 50% more (or thereabouts). I used the money I saved to get the 100/2.8L macro lens.