many websites don't seem to recognize the video metadata.

my main agencies are pond5 and ss.

Don't judge pond5 by their photo sales, video is their main media, they outsell ss nearly every month, unless there is an extended license on ss.

i submit a selection to fotolia and dreamstime, with dreamstime I still have hope, with fotolia I have nearly given up.

Haven't tried motionelements yet, but might try. Also want to try pixta.

But 90% of my video income is pond5 and ss. since uploading video takes a lot of time, I am glad I can make most of my money from two agencies.

ETA: I really like that I can set my own prices on pond5. I have many testshots, that I am happy to offer at low prices if somebody can find them useful. But I have other files where I paid models and invested in the production where the files can be priced much higher. Not all files are created equal. It is true for photography but even more for video.

Based on what i see with my own portfolio and from what I hear from ex exclusives you need a very, very large number of files if you want to have reliable 10 000 dollars a month. Especially the income from subs is much lower than I expected. I think I would need at least 20 000 files for regular 10k a month.

So unless the content is ultra, ultra generic, I wouldn�t send it to SS or a site that sells mostly subscriptions.

The extended licenses are a nice bonus, but so far I can�t really plan for them, neither in style that is preferred for the bonus nor can I make a realistic assumption "I will have X amount of extended licenses if I sell Y amount of sales". Maybe if I have 10 000 images online, but to get there is a very long road.

The other thing, I am now working with a 36 MP camera and processing large files takes much longer, then when I was shooting with 6-12 MP.

Another reason to send large files, with more niche content to agencies with higher prices. I really don�t see how I can ever get a decent return from subs sites.

I wish Shutterstock had a midstock price section, maybe even on a different agency. They have the ultracheap with SS, they have the super high end with Offset, but what about midstock? Because that is something that istock still does have, although they have lost many customers, they do have many business accounts who don�t mind paying around 60-120 dollars for a file.

The only other agency that is targeting midstock customers is stocksy. But they are doing it with a niche, while istock also sells objects on white to that segment.

Fotolia havs a system where you can gradually increase the price of your whole portfolio, on Dreamstime it is individual files that go up inprice.

But what would be interesting was if maybe there was an additional "artist shop" alongside my SS portfolio, where I can place files that I believe should get a higher price, because I know from experience it will rarely sell.

Or they need a new agency for that.

Obviously they can also just leave the whole midstock market to other agencies, nothing wrong with that. Their system works well, but it clearly favours artists or small teams that can produce very high volume of creative files.

As a single artist 50 files a week is a good output for me and that includes video or stock for high end.

I am really not a mass shooter. I would prefer to do 30 files well. But I can bring it up to 50 and just upload more variations.

But more than 200 files a month, would only be possible if I hire people. And then I need to have the money to feed them.

The only thing I could do is do more people/lifestyle shootings. I can get many more themes and files quickly when I work with people, than when I do still life. Good still life is very time consuming, you can spend a whole week and just have 6 really nice files.

So maybe that is something I could do, become a serial shooter for generic people stock.

We will see.

ETA: obviously the solution for me is not to focus only on SS, but look at the different options and different agencies. But 5000 dollars a month would be nice. It will still need 10k files, at least with what I am shooting.

It is a difficult decision. I hope you find the peace you seek in the mountains.

I just wanted to remind you, that if you are considering stocksy as one of the agencies you are interested in, their deadline for applications ends on October1st. You don�t lose anything by applying, they anyway seem to take quite a while to get back to people.

Otherwise, the next application date is some time next year, perhaps April, like this year.

It would be great if istock could turn things around, but their track record of the last years is just against them. And this time they managed to upset many customers as well.

I don�t know how much you can earn as an indie, but to work with several agencies and not be so dependent on whatever goes on at just istock has given me great peace of mind. The other agencies are all not perfect and they all have their own dramas and issues. But it is unlikely they will all upset you on the same day.

For peace of mind going indie was the best decision for me.

And you can still send exclusive images to Getty if you want. Or any of the other agencies that offer exclusive images.

Hi �ber...,

I have to admit from reading your posts, I didn�t think you had applied at all. I mean, it is obvious with any kind of application, wether you are applying for a job, a business partnership, a scholarship�that being polite is a normal part of human interaction. Why should anyone let you in, when you are already rude and aggressive while waiting outside?

Even if your images were better than those of the 4000 other applicants, a small agency lives through teamwork, a coop even more.

Many people are sad or frustrated because they are waiting for a reply or because their application was declined. But you don�t see them being rude about it, the way you are.

It is perfectly possible to express frustration and also critique in a respectful way.

There is some interesting details in there, nothing really new, but still fun.

But yes, how this can be thesis paper is hard to understand?

Maybe there is more somewhere else and this is just one very small chapter?

The next logic question will be how much of the market share are those buyers.

Just look at your download numbers. The majority of my downloads with my portfolio on istock are small to medium size files. So a huge number of people need simple, small sizes for daily use.

I also buy small sizes for presentations, I don�t need XXXL.

So for these uses, the customers are now forced to add a second agency for small sizes. And personally I don�t think they will go to SS. If you like working with credits, you will go to another credit site.

And if they like the new place, how often will they come back to istock to check their 3 credit offerings?

It is a great looking app, but I sincerly hope they bring back the keyword info.

And give us more useful data as well - Like total number of lightboxing for a file. Ideally with a graph, to see how the exposure of a file is growing over time.

Data on where a file has been sold (country info).

And most important: Please give us data for our galleries. Downloads and regional data. How many views does a gallery have?

Which countries are predomintanly downloading this style?

etc...

But kudos to a really beautifully designed app. When it comes to user interface SS rules the stock world.

I think we all agree that what is really necessary - sort the collection by quality - is what they are refusing to do.

Somehow they are running away from the most obvious thing to do and instead hope they can find some cosmetic design change or computer algorithm that will do it instead.

As an indie I am earning a little more money, not drastically more though. Looks like many customers have old credits with low value.

Quote from: Hobostocker on September 14, 2014, 20:40

they're the ones stealing potential customers from expensive design firms and keeping the prices unreasonably low.

Churches, schools, students, small businesses, scouts, ad circulars, etc., were the backbone of the explosive growth in micro.  IS is leaving them behind and going for the same customer base as Getty.

Not just those. Also corprorate power point presentations, internal memos,flyers, smaller print scales for smaller evnts and workshops. That is a huge world that needs 5-10 files for a 2 hour presentation, but is not going to pay 15 dollars a piece for them. And then all the businesses in the growth countries, millions of them.

Looks like Getty is simply limiting istock to a very small market. And how much can they grow there? Or is taking away customers from getty the only growth plan?

They are absolutely NOT claiming that what they are doing is new. But their combination of fluid hard and software has been a game changer many times. there were tablets long before apple, but it was the ipad that made them popular, there were mp3 players before the ipod,but the itunes store together with the ipod changed the way people bought music.

Now apple is hoping that together with with the apple payment system, the credit card will be replaced and it looks like the credit card companies hope that apple will bring more secure mobile payments etc...

Nobody has to buy apple, I think especially for geeks it is not always the right company. But for the normal user, that just wants to use technology without having to understand it in detail, they love apple very much.

And of course there already are many smartwatches. But how many have become mainstream and as popular as the ipod?

I love the design. Can't wait to get one.

But I would probably buy a dustbin if it was designed by Jony Ive and explained to me with his cool,smooth voice...

I�ll consider the irony in that as part of my missing payment for the 1.3 million downloads getty gave away for free via the Microsoft deal.

Those customers look really unhappy. And many people are still on holiday. I wonder what will happen when the system starts and people wake up to see what happened to their credits. I doubt many people pay attention to the newsletters. And Nobody is going to expect such drastic changes.

https://www.facebook.com/istock?brandloc=DISABLE

"Thanks for the heads up. I have been a customer over 8 years and typically buy 1- and 2-credit x-small images. Now under the new system I will need to pay 5 credits per image. You should have given customers more time to use their remaining credits or allow them to be applicable toward legacy pricing before the expiration date set at the time of the credit-pack purchase. Thankfully, I only have 15 credits in my account and I�m going to bleed it dry, grabbing 9 images prior to September 13th so I won�t be reduced to an account balance of a mere 3 images. I have to imagine most of your customer are web customers in the same situation as me who pay 1 or 2 credits per x-small, web resolution image. You claim the credits will be converted at the �current value or better�, but I will lose 2/3 of my value on this conversion based on how I use stock photography. This does not make it �easier for the customer� � it�s just a way to charge more per image. We know what resolution we need and liked having the flexible pricing to purchase the appropriate size. So while it may benefit you, most customers in the same boat as me will see this as poor business practice and downright thievery."

I am so glad, I can just sit back and watch the storm without getting wet this time.