I had a desire to do nature photography for a long time. I got some books and learned the basics and specifics without actaully owning or using a camera. I applied my degree in biology to do some volunteer wildlife field work. I was given an SLR in 2004 and we used slide film.  I bought my own camera a week later.

I kept using slides and by word of mouth i was contacted by some people looking for slides because they were preferred by publishers. I met a photo researcher from NY in 1996 and she encouraged me to shoot stock and to think beyond just nature. I bought Ron Engh'ss book " How to Sell and Resell your photos". In the 90s most of what i sold was by word of mouth. I sold some shots for a birding field guide and also I was the guy local businesses went to. I also had some graphic designers asking for photos.  I made more money selling prints from slides. I started scanning and posting on the net in 96 and i had a strong online presence in photo galleries.

In 2007 I finally went digital. That was about the time that DSLRS were affordable and had enough quality to make a decent print. I applied to some stock photo companies and they ignored me. Since microstock is open source I decided to give that a try. I did well the first year but still made more money selling direct. A sale to a winery of one photo for a wine label made more than 100 microstock sales. As prices rose my royalties also did. The iStock Vetta program was very good for me and I had a top selling photo in that collection in 2010. My royalties per sale  are still increasing but sales are dwindling. New files don't get enough attention to catch on. I cannot afford to invest in microstock photography now. I concentrate my energy on marketing prints. My work is niched and does not have the broad appeal of some business stock

All the jobs I ever took since I bought my first camera allowed me to do at least some personal photography on the job. Getting on the inside of things was key to having whatever I  success have. These days my income is all online stock or print sales and a photography related online job. I own my own home but live I live on a poverty level income.

I just don't get it. My work is not in the search. I put up about 6 bird images after i was initially accepted way back when i got an invitation to join and applied and was accepted. i got 2 emails n June that refer to me as a crated artists. Yet nothing shows up in the searches. My work is as good or better than what is there. I sell regular on FAA. I have gorgeous photos of Roseate Spoonbills but the search turns up only one other. One of the brown pelican photos they have up is overexposed. Mine are perfect.  I would start uploading in earnest but if i will not be in the search i wont bother. And why do they refer to me as an early crated artist? Glad I found this thread.

I am still mystified or more so now.

Don't worry about the DPI. The image size is the only thing that matters. The 25MB is talking about the saved file. In fact just ignore the whole dialogue box about size. Save your photo at the highest JPEG size. Check the file size of the saved file not the open one. You are surely not over 25MB.

Quote from: ShadySue on June 29, 2014, 10:18
I have no real problem with the look of the artist website, though of course it's not as 'customisable' as they suggested.
Personally, I wish they had fulfilled their promise to have a UK/European partner in place early this year. Probably they realised that their key market is the US, so not worth the investment, and for many European artists (togs in particular) that may be the bottom line. Or maybe they were having 'discussions' with a European printer, but they fell through (shouldn't have announced it until they were ready).

You make it sound so simple. They would have to match all the frames and mediums. And still keep the profit margins close, so there are not 2 sets of prices, which would defeat the purpose.  And you really don't know what contracts the existing printer has with FAA. There was not a formal announcement I know of. What were they supposed to do lie everytime someone asks, and say they had no plans?

As regards watermarks, once you upload you can't always change your mind and just go do an edit and check the watermark box. You have to change out the image, because it is in that process that the watermark is added. As for the smaller thumbnails, they might not get the watermark even if you re-upload. Tech support will add the watermarks for you if you have uploaded without checking the watermark box.

ShadySue, the search is very literal. a search for praying mantis will not show a Joe mantis. There has to be an exact match. Although it will pull off the 'mantis" and match it up with "praying" if there are no other results to return. Putting in insect does not help. There are no categories. It a straight word for word match.
Stockastic is correct in saying that sales by a particular artist count in the algorithm. I figure there are other parameters in the algorithm related to sales.
There is a relevancy function to the algorithm. The search is not static and will eventually push back irrelevant files.

It seems that using the word art as a first word confuses the search unless the phrase is in quotes. The search will however return results for a search for deco with all the files with the tag "art deco". New files do not go to the end. They are ranked by an unknown algorithm. If the artist who uploaded it is a big seller and has recently sold works with that keyword the piece will go right to the front of the search. There are also various ways to change the sort. You can sort by age so Mr. stocktastic's new file is right at the top. ;-). You can also do a random sort. I doubt many use these options except experienced buyers. The sort options buttons are a bit glitchy also and will lock if any of the search terms is also a term for medium as in "art'

Whats "MGS".? And what is this outrage that our refer to?

Almost non-existent now. No sub sales. Days go by with out a regular dl. I cash out 2x a month now instead of weekly. If not for GI sales it would be monthly or not at all. Worse thing is that I haven't had a file added to S+ or Vetta since the big change over a year ago.  So GI sales can  only decline over time.  They didn't even move anything to main either although I sent the Pieman a link to the lightbox. I am getting paranoid that it is personal now. Just have to find a better place to park the world's greatest collection of deep water oil exploration, drilling and production images not taken from the air.

I did have to resubmit an image of the new visitor center at Port Canaveral as editorial. It is a rather distinctive building but a public one built by the Port authority and I took the image from the street. I did not even submit the great images I took from a later night shoot.

Now I am panicking. No dls in a week. Not only that but I am falling in the best match even from yesterday. Even my red flame Vetta is lost. Yet an ancient non exclusive image in the main collection is in the top row on a page I should dominate with my Vettas, flamers and hot new files. Instead I have nothing.  It is the exclusive promotion in reverse.

Worst week in 7 years for dls and money. A sudden end to sales.  I got one dl for $3.71 on Monday. So I guess the buyers have taken subscription plans. If I am going to only make a buck or so on an image I may as well hang up exclusivity. The Getty pay out was nice, but they have added no new work there in a year. If they cut my royalty rate next year  I will have to drop exclusivity, which seems to be what they want.

I would like to get some clarity on the commission. Lobo said 20% but he didn't say what we are getting 20% of. It would be nice if it was 20% of each sale including material cost. If they are just going to sell a license to print that is something else.

GI payout was substantial for me. It will easily beat my other  IS earnings for April. But it carries no RC points. Neither does the subscription plan. And nothing new has been added to E+ or Vetta for a year.  I own some pretty tight market niches. Not like they can go somewhere else for what I have been putting up. I am in a tough spot because I can only make money at mid stock prices where most of my work belongs, but I am being shoved into micro.

Slowest month I have had in years. And April is usually my best or second best for the past 6 years or so. I am very disturbed by my RC total. I usually make the 30% with ease. I don't see how I am going to make it this year. Shooting new stuff seems like a poor investment but I may have to lose money on new travel and shooting to protect what I have. The past few days seem to be a bit better. Selling from all 4 collection levels.

Before you name and shame people in here realize that the easiest way to add pricing to a large amount of images is to opt in the whole portfolio and then remove the ones that don't fit. I am sure a lot of people did this just like they did it when the iphone cases were introduced. They might not have even realized that it was open for business as some were beta testing. That would account for most of the trademark stuff you see.

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 23, 2014, 07:11
......... I'm not really sure he understands print selling, either, or he might not be so cavalier in his attitude towards copyright and trademarks (basically that this things don't matter  .... well, officially the site says it has zero tolerance to copyright infringement, but it takes no action when breaches are pointed out by a third party).

I am not sure you really understand print sales. Art is not like commercial stock. There is a lot more leeway on trademarks. And if the trademark holder does not object or may even encourage it, why should they pay attention to all the ignorant third party police trying to eliminate competition? Cellphone cases on Pixels, aside it is an art site with all the freedom (and responsibilities) that go with it. Maybe you have been brainwashed by the stock sites into surrendering your freedom of speech or forgetting you have it.

I thought they just somehow knew I have an iphone. Well they need some fishing photos so I will be happy to accommodate. I am down on the fishing pier three times a week anyway. I can handle "walking the dog" and "couch potato" also. "Gym bunny" not so much.

Quote from: ShadySue on February 01, 2014, 14:30

Quote from: landbysea on February 01, 2014, 12:38
How did I get $60 for a single PP download? Would that be Getty 360?

It certainly could have been; but Getty360 arrives in your balance at the GI update, not the PP update, though it shows green not purple on your bars.
Don't ask me why.

Thanks that must be it. I didn't really check the stat page when Getty came in. I still don't really get it but I guess I shouldn't ask too many questions.

How did I get $60 for a single PP download? Would that be Getty 360?

When you plan all your shoots for new Zazzle products.

At this rate will be on par for dls with my first months at iStock in 2007 when I had less than 10 files uploaded. This despite a good effort at uploading in 2013. My return per Dl. is at it's highest ever, with some of my files selling at $196 for a Vetta Xl. Actually I haven't sold a Vetta XL this year. I am in quite a quandry. I will hang in there this year and see if my royalty rate gets grandfathered next year. Also A lot depends on if some of my 2013 files ever get moved to S+. So far nothing has since May 2013 despite good sales on some including one that compares very well to my existing Vetta images. I will be talking to some boutique niche image sites this year and seeing if they will let me join. If I can get them on a site at mid or macro prices I can move the rest into micro sites. In the meantime I am concentrating on fine art photography and marketing of those images. The new uploads don't bother me as much as the lack of buyers for exclusive images.

Quote from: ShadySue on December 23, 2013, 18:36
I think nowadays I'm probably 'too conservative'. Last week I was mulling over why one of my files wasn't selling compared to some other images of the same structure, and a friend pointed out mine was the only one which was editorial. Why it wouldn't be editorial, when it's a very distinctive city structure, by an internationally known still-living architect and competed in 2010, I haven't a clue.

New buildings and famous architects do not make an exception to the law. There has never been a restriction on buildings for commercial use if shot from a public place.
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2013/02/12/is-it-legal-to-take-pictures-of-buildings-photography-law-questions-answered-by-experts/

Quote from: Ron on November 20, 2013, 20:22

Quote from: landbysea on November 20, 2013, 20:18

Quote from: Mantis on November 20, 2013, 15:11
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahh. Incompetent hacks.

Really. An Incompetent hack? Ha Ha. A tired inspector hits the wrong rejection button. OK I get a laugh out of that. So what's the difference, the file is being rejected anyway. To call an inspector an incompetent hack kind of makes you look like a heartless idiot. I  do 100s of inspections a day. Not for istock. Sometimes I click a wrong button. Well I guess when you are not using you professional name you can get away with being as ugly as you want. I love hitting the reject button.

OK, are you saying you reject images based on who the photographer is, and what he/she says in forums??

I am saying you don't know who is in the forum and to laugh and ridicule people that inspect your images is probably not very wise.

Quote from: Mantis on November 20, 2013, 15:11
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahh. Incompetent hacks.

Really. An Incompetent hack? Ha Ha. A tired inspector hits the wrong rejection button. OK I get a laugh out of that. So what's the difference, the file is being rejected anyway. To call an inspector an incompetent hack kind of makes you look like a heartless idiot. I  do 100s of inspections a day. Not for istock. Sometimes I click a wrong button. Well I guess when you are not using you professional name you can get away with being as ugly as you want. I love hitting the reject button.