I'm not sure any of that matters. When I look at my bottom line, it's about half of last year. Considering my royalty reduction was a wash with a price increase, that can only mean my sales have tanked. So neither me or IS are making more or benefited from the changes. I'm just one contributor though.

Nobody - let me repeat - NOBODY is complaining about $1-$10 prices.

I've actually been complaining about the $1-$10 price point.  I'd actually like to see micro move into the $10-$50 price range.

I'm not a fan of istock these days. It's especially hard to be as I close out my worst month there in nearly 3 years.

This is actually what I was thinking when I read those forum threads. I was surprised more by the fact that people were still doing well or hadn't noticed a change in their numbers. I had to go back to May 2009 to find a month this poor. Well, aside from February and the other poor months this year. It really seems like someone flipped a switch there at the beginning of the year.

It does seem a little crazy. I guess you are supposed to read everything you sign up for. I need some kind of "lawyer app" for the internet. 

So at some point they are going to actually announce real details for this? Like price. 

Seems nice but it's pretty hard to tell if it would meet my needs from a demo. And dropping $250 to find out I may not be able to use it doesn't sound like a good idea.

I thought you can rent it for $50 a month? It's not very economical, but I guess if you wanted to try it for a month.

Edit: Here's the link - http://www.ktools.net/photostore/renting.php

Thanks, Lisa. It does seem like with vectors there are a few more options with how you can sell them. I think packaging photos together like I'm doing with my vectors could work, though. Sort of like what Getty and some other companies do with image CDs. Put together 50 or so images in a group based on a theme and sell them that way. Not sure it would work, but it could be interesting.

What really drew me to packaging images like this was just that I didn't want to offer exactly the same thing I offer on agency websites. At least with these packs I am sort of rebranding the product and it looks different. It's also a better value for the buyer as opposed to buying single images at the agencies, and my intended price point will put more money in my pocket for each sale. I'm not at my intended pricing yet, and I'm launching with lower prices to try and generate some traffic.

Yeah, the new avatar feels a bit strange. I need to get used to it also. But it seemed like it was time. Launching the new website, getting back into stock after 6 months off, etc.

The site looks good. Yeah, I agree. Offering things that the other agencies don't is a good idea.

Don't feel bad. I never read that stuff either. 

How are all these stores going?

It seems that many started last January and with the coding and uploading and modifications, we are approaching a half year of "if you build it, they will come". (run your own site, make all the profit)

What always came to mind was this thread, where someone did build a site and supposedly markets it and the question is, anyone have sales?

http://www.microstockgroup.com/mostphotos-com/who-has-had-sales-at-mostphotos/250/

So that may bring up a survey question. Which makes more for you? After expenses? (not a real survey yet...) 1) K-tools, hosting your own site? or 2) Mostphotos? 3) Picking up dropped change from a fast food drive through?      

You can mark me down with Ktools, although I don't have an account at Mostphotos. So, that may be a gold mine waiting to be tapped. 

Then even more so to question the validity of some of the low earners 2 rankings, while one barely hear of anyone making $5 or more on any of them. If my maths do not fail me, if 10 people have 0, then 10 people must have 3 to get an average of 2; so where are these 3+ earners........? 

I guess it really depends on how your numbers match up to the poll numbers. You may find the poll results low or high in relation to your own numbers. You also may perform better or worse at certain agencies compared to the average. I always take them with a grain of salt because most of the people responding are photographers. Some of the agencies I'm at don't even get ranked, but I make money at them every month. The poll is more of a guideline for how you might do on an agency rather than a hard and fast rule.

I am glad you don't find it difficult, but I suspect you have certain type of customers, probably fellow graphic designers that understand the business and the work that goes into creating images. The use of your illustrations is also a bit limited. I don't want to go into gore details here but I had to deal with uses like printing images on bolts of fabric (how do you count number of impressions? or using images in medical advertising campaigns with "sensitive" subjects, or someone wanting to re-license the image or other things like that which take time to figure out and follow through. Some people wanting to buy images never heard of stock photography so they have a lot of questions. Some want to con you. Some don't know how to use a website. Of course, I can choose not to reply or say "no" to all special requests but then what's the point of running your own site..

Definitely not easy and I completely understand. I'm use to a lot of the emails from freelance clients. You do a dozen back and forth emails just to never hear from the person again or people just looking for freebies.  I had one guy even tell me that I wasn't Michelangelo after hearing my price quote. He did end up hiring me though. I'm actually really patient and polite in emails. I know, I know... it's hard to believe, right?   

You could adjust your prices to deal with the extra work. I've always questioned the micro logic of selling images based on size. I like the one size one price model better, although I did just add higher price point images (so maybe it's hypocritical to say that).  It's harder to get the volume of the micros, so it's nice to get more from each sale. I guess you'd have to look at your sales to see what works best. It's just a thought though.

I hope these personal agencies take off because I think it's a good thing. I looked through yours, Lisa's and others last time I bought an image. I wanted something specific, so I ended up buying at Canstock.

To be honest, this photo + thing is kind of what I thought they should have done instead of decreasing royalties last fall to increase revenue. Move the better selling files up to higher exclusive prices and maybe even bump up royalties for contributors. That would have put IS in a great position to dominate the micro market, but we all know that's not what happened. 

I only say this because i feel buyers are leaving istock and most probably coming to shutterstock and others. these are buyers who are used fine dining. They should take this opportunity to up their game and try to lure professional vector artists. If im feeling this way, im sure there are tons more.

Umm... Could you be more insulting to us long time Shutterstock contributors? What makes you think if Shutterstock had a premium collection that you would be allowed to participate in it? I'd think it would be reserved for those that have had a track record of sales at SS. Look, I'd love to make changes to many of the micro sites, but it's based on experience using those sites. I wouldn't knock Shutterstock before you've even used it.