Getty's keywords are awful. I have 17 on there from Cape Cod and only two have the keyword "Cape Cod" which means I'm unlikely to get many sales. Crazy! There's a fall image that has sold recently on Alamy with pumpkins in front of a church on the Cape that has "church" "Spirituality" and "Architecture" as keywords, but not "fall" "pumpkins" "Halloween" "Cape Cod" or "Chatham" - all necessary and much more relevant. Even lighthouses on the Cape don't have the lighthouse name or Cape Cod - and they certainly had those keywords on 500px.

Something to look into. Very disappointing. I'm glad to do my own keywords even if it's more work. What a waste for them to have made my photos unsaleable since there isn't a single keyword that would help people find them. Pumpkins on the lawn of a church don't scream "spirituality."

The Alamy team has always been gracious and accommodating when I've contacted them - even when it's been my fault in terms of messing things up. I sent them an email the other day (via Stockimo) that I'd made a mistake in captioning a pending image and they fixed it. I can't imagine doing that with the others - and there really isn't a way to have that same personal back and forth, which is why I like working with them. I've dealt with them since 2008 and they always go out of their way to help.

To be honest, I've had good customer service from shutterstock too - even last year when I got a frustrating and unhelpful email from someone there (re: a request to download one of my own images that was lost from my backup hard drive and a failed computer). When I complained about the initial response I'd received, I got a gracious new response explaining that the person on their end was new and sending me the photo I'd requested.

And of course Mat over at Adobe is great. I even got a nice email response years back from the owner of dreamstime.

It's easy to criticize all these places (and yes, there are things to be critical of), but at the end of the day, they are service businesses and whether they are dealing with clients or contributors, those who stay in business and have good reputations listen.

I get that sometimes we feel the need to call a place out in public if they don't seem to be listening or we want to help others with a warning when we have a bad experience, so I'm not criticizing the OP - glad he's satisfied with the response now too. I think it speaks volumes that both Alamy and Adobe monitor these forums and pop in. I'm surprised the others don't do it.

Corresponded with him via email and via Linked In - a really nice guy and so young. So sorry to hear.

I haven't uploaded anywhere in months....busy with other things, but in March SS really took off and April it was still quite solid -Adobe and Alamy also looked to be really gaining momentum to the point that I was hoping to find time to feed the beast once again...sadly, I didn't and SS and Adobe both slid in May...but Alamy continues to grow for me with 4 decent to excellently priced sales netting me a tidy sum. My own site also picked up and with two solid fine art sales - one in person and one via FAA - (which I wish we would add to the poll) and some little POD stuff as well, the month ended up being above average.

I'm hoping once some large projects are behind me that I can start uploading again. I bought a new Sony A7Rii a few month ago and I really want to put it thorough its paces.

Quote from: wordplanet on April 02, 2018, 18:21

I've had around 70 sales since I joined in 2012, some were cards and pillows and the like, but most are still prints. Even with piddly amounts such as $7.00 return on a shower curtain, my return per sale this year is above $100 per, as print sales usually bring in somewhere between $100-300 per sale, so a handful of sales every month or so makes the $30/year worthwhile.

$100-300 per sale is fantastic! Your art is obviously beautiful!

Thanks so much.

I�ve had an aluminum print & a regular framed print on Somerset fine art paper - both very high quality.  As good as any of the labs I normally use when I�ve had work printed for gallery shows. I don�t use them for fulfillment.
I Sent a couple of people there who contacted me for prints but some who were willing to spend hundreds for a print ballked at their shipping costs so now I use my regular lab if I can deliver the work myself.
I used to promote my work regularly on Twitter & sometimes on FB and while I can trace some sales to thos promos I�m not sure the time was worth it but I guess having those links out there might help. My mark ups on prints are higher than most I�ve seen - Ive seen some of my framed prints go for several hundred dollars. I find those who don�t want to spend that buy smaller prints.
Given the time I�ve put in I should be making more - I�d love be to be in that $5-10K group. I think FAA is one of the biggest and best known sellers of prints online and in any case I�ve always made back more than the $30 yearly cost with my first print sale of the year. But I�m making hundreds not thousands.

Quote from: wordplanet on February 15, 2018, 12:59

I license images from my own website

The trouble with that is the marketing. How do you get places like the Smithsonian to search for stuff on your website when the agencies have vastly larger collections at lower prices? OK, so you could negotiate to provide a feature on a topical subject - though the chances of them biting on that are poor. But for if they are looking for an illustration for a travel article, why would they go to you first instead of getting an image from an agency?

My website is hosted by Photoshelter. Even though they haven't been a stock agency since 2008, many magazines still search their entire database directly. Any photographer whose site is hosted by them can make batches of their images discoverable. Those images show up whenever someone searches the entire database. With over 80,000 mostly pro photographers on there, competition is stiff but that's how they attract top magazines as well as web designers and other buyers. A few licenses a year cover the cost of my Pro account there (over 1TB file backup, client lightboxes, site hosting, print sales, etc.) and the rest is profit.

I mostly license travel and editorial photos but I've also licensed backgrounds and other concept stuff I have on the micros to web designers and individuals. And sometimes people find my images there via google rather than by searching the database. When they dropped the agency in 2008, I was just starting out as a part-time editorial photographer, so I really intended it just to set up a web site. Being able to license stock and sell prints has been an added bonus.

You can try it for 14 days via this link: https://www.photoshelter.com/referral/MA2CA7TC7J though that's really not long enough to see if you'll be able to license images.

I have not ordered from them, but the company that used to run Crated has gone back to just selling canvases and framed art - I know photographers who have been very happy with their work and their shipping is reasonable - however I think they need a two-week lead time - they did when you could order directly from Crated. The site is Canvas Pop:
www.canvaspop.com

Here are their shipping charges as per customer service:
With standard shipping applied it takes 8 to 14 business days from when you place the order, or from when you approve your digital proof, if this is applicable, until the print is delivered to you. With Rush shipping applied, this process takes 5-7 business days from when the proof is approved. Standard shipping is a flat rate of $14 USD for the first print on the order, and $5 USD for each additional print on the order, while Rush shipping is $39 USD for each item on the order

They can do huge prints.

Again, I haven't ordered from them but I had some nice sales on Crated and have a friend who used both their framed prints and canvases for shows and continues to use them.

I think I'm the one that reported that I couldn't find any evidence of an Alamy buyer searching elsewhere (which is not the same thing as proving it!). Here is my latest set of analysis on the topic:

https://www.backyardsilver.com/2018/01/selling-image-alamy-agencies/

Alex also did some analysis and had a discussion with Alamy's content manager here:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2018/02/06/do-alamy-buyers-search-elsewhere-answers-from-alamy/

The end result - I submit all my images to all sites now, but editorial and commercial and use RF on Alamy.

Steve

Interesting article. His take is different than what we were told at the Alamy Brooklyn offices by a client some years ago - and I think that both points are valid. That client said the Alamy search experience was better and they searched there first and then checked to see if what they liked on Alamy was on fotolia, suggesting, against their own best interests, that if we wanted to protect our sales, the files should just be on Alamy.

His recommendation has been borne out by my experience. I started out with Alamy.

I then applied to shutterstock using my "less than best" images - it was easier to get in back then. I had lots of micro sales, no Alamy sales early on, so I experimented putting a handful of my better images on SS and sales improved dramatically.

I joined some of the other micros, uploading many of the same images. Some of those images I uploaded back in 2009 are still selling regularly on the micros.

These images sometimes get zoomed on Alamy and purchased on SS or fotolia (the site one Alamy client said they checked to see if there were duplicates they could license more cheaply). These images have also sold occasionally on Alamy, but my experience shows that I have lost more sales with those photos than I gained on Alamy. However, since they sell very frequently on the micros, some earning me hundreds to close to and over $1,000 on the micros, micro sales may have made up for the losses - hard to know since I don't know if I lost $30 sales, $50 sales, $250 sales, or $400 sales on Alamy.

A few years ago one of the microstock agencies licensed one of my illustrations for exclusive use for 2 years for $750 and I got half. It was one that was rejected by other agencies but has been a good seller for me on that agency after the exclusive period ended. So less than 300 Euros even for a few years is not a great price, though it could be worthwhile if they are more flexible.

First, see if they really need "forever" - that's what you want to avoid IMHO. If they only really need exclusive for a few years, it might be worth it.

I'm assuming you're relatively new to this, so just to help you assess what is possible, although I have a very small microstock portfolio (350 images on SS and fewer on the others), like many here I have a handful of images/shoots that make me hundreds each year.  Your image could well be a top seller - and there are people here who make thousands from a single image or shoot each year - so you don't want to give up that possibility by selling all your rights - "exclusive forever" is pretty much the same as selling your copyright (though perhaps "exclusive" would still let you sell the image as fine art, if that's appropriate). With rights-managed images, sometimes a client wants exclusive rights but only in a certain field - like exclusive book covers - and the time is still limited. I'd try to get more information first and also assess how much you think you would make from that image and any that are similar enough that you would have to refrain from licensing them too if you made an exclusive deal.

If you agree to "forever," you might want to add a couple of zeros on, at least.

Good luck!

Denovan - glad at least it gave you something to think about.

Paul - your photo is awesome.

D & P - If I was going back to shooting film I'd certainly consider medium format, but large format would be amazing. I used a 4 x5 view camera once - in my first photography class in college. Each week two of us would get to take one out apiece with three sheets of film each. A friend and I borrowed a car and headed out to the Massachusetts countryside where we found a beautiful old barn. Asked the owners for permission to shoot. They gave us lemonade and then lunch as well.

The contact prints were amazing, as were the enlargements. Sadly, my film holder had a serious light leak so I cropped it - I'd concentrated on making abstract images from the old wood grain - today I might want to print it in full, light leaks and all. It makes me want to scour my attic and see if I can find those ancient negatives.

Denovan, I totally get your desire to slow down your shooting. It's something I've thought about a lot lately too. I think that in this age of instant everything and falling stock photo prices there is so much pressure to shoot as much as you can, but for me at least, it backfires. With so many images from a shoot, I'm overwhelmed by my choices, especially since I license macro and micro images, so I feel the need to shoot for both when I can. Am heading on vacation soon for a week to one of my favorite photo spots. I want to limit myself to 108 photos, the equivalent of three rolls of 35mm film. Not sure I can pull it off. A fast 1 GB card would help LOL.

Spent 10 days in Edinburgh when my daughter performed in the Festival Fringe 10 years ago - loved the city - so did she. I just wish I'd had time to get out to the countryside. A tour of the British Isles is on my bucket list. Maybe when my husband and I retire, though I'd love to head out before. I watched the tv show "Shetland" recently on Netflix and also started freelancing for an editor from Dublin, and I have a photographer friend from the UK who keeps posting amazing photos from Cumbria, and then there's Poldark, so all this has rekindled my interest. May just have to break it up into several trips.

If you're looking for a small discreet camera, why not check out a mirrorless option?

I live an hour from Manhattan and find my Olympus OM-D E-1 (current model is the Mark II) a great choice for street photography.

Granted, the E-1 costs more than most second hand film cameras, but there are several excellent and far less expensive options by Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, etc. and you don't have the cost and/or the time-consuming need to scan all those photos.

If you're looking to show your street photography as fine art, don't worry that you're limited to film. That certainly hasn't been my experience. I use it for my fine art photography (both black and white and color) and have had several photos in juried gallery shows in NY and Connecticut over the past three years since I got my Oly. 

Here's a short article I wrote last week about the benefits of mirrorless cameras that you might find helpful. The assignment primarily focused on stock but I discuss other benefits too: https://www.greatescapepublishing.com/light-and-quiet-mirrorless-cameras-are-perfect-for-shooting-stock/

Feel free to ask questions here or send me a PM.

You can see some of the black and white photos here: http://travelstockblog.com/travel/my-world-in-black-and-white/

Hope this is helpful.

Out of curiosity, I just checked out the site.

It loaded within 6 seconds - kind of slow but not terrible.

But when I tried some very basic searches, such as "travel " and "people" after trying some locations such as "Italy" that I assumed I could find on a Swiss site, I still ended up with zero images and I made sure I was searching the entire database.

Is the search engine broken?

You seem to have a lot of editorial images. Who is your primary market?