Quote from: bizair on December 28, 2010, 11:27
After seeing your stunning images Dan, I think I'll take my ball and go home.  What beautiful work.

Not at all.  Looks like you get to some interesting places yourself.  Keep it up.

Quote from: cclapper on December 24, 2010, 00:13
Just noticed your photos of Chumlee. Were they promo shots for the show, or personal? Just curious.

Hmm...of all the people I photographed you noticed Chumlee!!!  

Just kidding.  That shot was from a recent assignment for a group tattoo magazines that I have been working with for a couple of years Rebel Ink/Urban Ink.  Tattoos are not a core interest of mine, but the magazine was founded by an editor I had been working with for several years and it has become quite popular.  Because I have worked with this editor for a long time I have enjoyed freedom and flexibility to set the tone of some shoots.  For this project I suggested the backdrop of the vintage casino signs because it was a location that I had longed to shoot at--The Neon Museum in Las Vegas.  I am fortunate to have also been able to suggest several subjects for feature layouts.  

I am very appreciative of the response to my portfolio link here.  MSG has been a valuable source of information for me.  I am sure there are some other assignment shooters who at least read here. To answer a few questions, most of the work on my site is from client assignments.  Much of my recent work has been shooting for several bridal/evening dress manufacturers for their catalogs and advertising in NYC, FL and CA.  Some projects come with an established look that I have to carry forward, but most come as a somewhat blank slate where I work together with the company to develop the concept/lighting/set design which has been a challenge I savor.  Of course the work on my site is intended to represent the best of my work and does not indicate how many days (weeks?) I spend shooting against seamless paper backgrounds.

Another component of my work is in children's fashion which I show on a separate website (www.danhowellkids.com) and most of that work is derived from magazine editorial assignments and illustrating fashion and craft books for publishers.  Those magazine editorials were developed in conjunction with the staff art directors (some were ideas that I brought to the table) whereas the book projects generally have a more rigid look that has been developed and approved in advance (advertising is similar in that respect).  Working with kids and families is an area that I have only begun to scratch the surface with as far as microstock goes.  The few images I have put up have not yielded many downloads yet--but I have a lot to learn as far as SEO and keywording.

I found Leaf's response interesting as the other side of the coin.  I certainly haven't developed the revenue stream from microstock to compete with my assignment work, but I am encouraged to hear that you have.  My sum total of revenue from microstock (IS, SS, DT) wouldn't even equal the fee I got for the editorial assignment Cclapper commented on.  However, I do know that the more you put in the more you are likely to get out.  I also have to admit that I have had great success with spec. editorial sales which is an abstraction of stock since it is not created on assignment, though they are direct sales so I don't have to share the fees.  

Best holiday wishes.

After many years as an commercial and fashion photographer based in the NYC area, I decided approximately one year ago to investigate Microstock.  Don't know what took me so long.  I really wish I had started years ago.  I had dabbled in RM/traditional stock with the agency Retna who syndicates my celebrity portraits (not all that many) and a few hundred lifestyle images that never really amounted to much, so I wasn't that encouraged.

Honestly model releases were the biggest hurdle to get over.  Most of my assignment work is with models from agencies who are generally averse to signing any sort of model release that would allow for any stock usage.  That applies to the lion's share of my archive. I finally started collecting stock model release from some shoots and directing other shoots specifically for microstock. 

I hit two interesting (to me) milestones this week.  Just about one year to the date of first uploading, I had my 100th download from iStockphoto and my 1,000th download from Shutterstock.  Overall my impression of the two websites differ greatly. I have found iStockphoto to be frustrating with uploads and petty with rejections.  With effort I have maintained a 70% acceptance rate.  I could generally live with those two factors, but the biased search engine (towards exclusives) and the reduction of percentages to contributors leave me unenthusiastic to contribute to iStockphoto going forward.  On the plus side, the average value of each download has been about 4x that of Shutterstock.

On the other hand, I have found Shutterstock to be very easy to deal with.  The higher upload limits have allowed me to upload more than double the number of images in a slightly shorter amount of time.  Although I haven't specifically calculated it, I would guess my acceptance rate at SS is >90%. Of course the value of each download is significantly lower due to the subscription set up. 

I have seen both sites change their contributor's pages--generally for the better. However, trends in the overall photography marketplace do not leave me that optimistic for the future.  I don't imagine them to be any different in the microstock world.  Trends specifically at iStockphoto are not encouraging at all.

I can't say that the revenues from microstock for me have been disappointing, because I did not put any goals or expectations on them.  However comparing the results and revenue of my time and effort put into creating the images to that of my commercial work shows that microstock pays literally pennies on the dollar (maybe only a single penny??).  But that is, I know, not a fair comparison.  20 years in magazines and advertising vs. 1 year in microstock is never going to balance out, but my year in microstock has been rewarding from an information standpoint, if not a financial one.

I have learned an additional style of shooting and more about the lifestyle stock market.  I've also become more disciplined and efficient in retouching and image preparation.  I have valued the opportunities that having the goal of contributing to microstock has motivated me to do perhaps a dozen or more shoots that I would not have otherwise done as well as a use for numerous images I was creating anyway for other projects.

I had given myself a year to decide if microstock is worth the effort for my specific set-up.  At this point I would cautiously say that it is with the codicil that I would never take time away from my commercial assignments (or even my marketing efforts) to shoot or upload for microstock.  With the ebbs and flows of my schedule (somewhat determined by fashion seasons) I will find time that can be constructively applied to microstock and I believe that I will continue to find new ways of 'harvesting' images from assignment work that have value in microstock.

-Dan  (www.danhowellphotography.com if anyone is interested)

p.s. I have learned a lot from topics and messages on this board

is the web site stuck?  I don't seen my total downloads figure updating on the contributors page, but I see the images that were downloaded on the detail-by-day page.  Maybe that accounts for not seeing the BigStock option.

For me it's too little, too late.  I have mid-collapse World Trade Center photos from the morning of 9/11 that appeared on the front page of newspapers across the country.  When I submitted one to iStock last year when I joined it took them 4 months to decide it wasn't right for iStock.  Ironically, I am also with Getty and they didn't want to start and editorial account with me because I am primarily a fashion/commercial photographer and unlikely to be covering more breaking news in the near future.  Some of my WTC photos are with Alamy now. 

What further seems odd is that they don't want celebrity photos because that is what Getty 'does'.  It makes you wonder why Alamy/Corbis doesn't have a problem with the overlap.  My celebrity portraits are currently with Retna, but I would consider consolidating to one company for lifestyle and portraiture if one company proved to have a better RM/RF program.  Getty/iStock seems to be going in the other direction.

Quote from: SNP on December 13, 2010, 22:27
a bit off topic, but I'm amazed how many photographers consider natural light images to be more amateur...

They apparently haven't priced daily rental rates for daylight photo studios in NYC...

I agree with you.  The site has some issue with lag time in updating download statistics.  I see the dollar amount change, then the last upload appears and finally the total download number changes--usually hours apart, if not the next day.  The 'downloads today' under misc. stats is never correct, it appears.

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2010, 23:56
Dan, have you added other artists' images to your lightbox?  You won't see the option to make it public until you do.  

If you are only doing lightboxes of your own images, to link in your description field, they can't be, and don't need to be "public".  They will be viewable by anyone who clicks on your link.  

Public lightboxes and non-public ones are really completely different.  They used to call public lightboxes "galleries", and the private ones lightboxes.  It was less confusing.  

Thanks Lisa and Jsnover, I will try that. 

Quote from: jsnover on December 06, 2010, 22:44
But you don't need to make your lightbox public at all. Just linking to a private lightbox in the description field of an image is sufficient. Private doesn't mean access is controlled, only that it isn't searchable, so without the link no one would know it was there.

Thank you.  However I am still not seeing any control to make it public. 

Possibly public is not what I am looking for (yet they are called lightbox when you click on them).  I see images that display lightbox links on the left side of page that are exclusive to the creator of the image.  The image is not even contained in the lightboxes displayed.  They seem to be grouping set up by the individual contributor (neither 20 image minimum or from multiple contributors).

This is for reference to what I am seeking (no insult or complaint intended to the contributor):

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-6691673-senior-man-giving-woman-piggyback-ride.php

they are listed as: Clever Concepts, Health and Healing, Seniors, Teenagers, etc.

Sorry for reviving such an old thread, but the search didn't reveal the answer to my question.

I have made a lightbox of thematically related images in my portfolio.

How do you make an IS lightbox pubic. I read two conflicting instructions on the site. 

One says: "You must have images from more than one artist and over 20 images in the lightbox before it may be made public."

the other says: "Your lightboxes can be kept private or, after you've added 20 files, be made public and searchable by other iStockphoto members.

I see lightboxes that appear when an image is clicked on.  They contain grouped photos by a single artist/contributor.  How is that done?

In the FAQ, the following information is given:
"To edit lightboxes, click on the 'Manage' link at the bottom of the list of your lightboxes. Once there, you may make the lightbox public if it's eligible, edit the content or description and delete or email any lightbox."

I don't see any 'Manage' link at the bottom or the word 'Manage' anywhere on the page of my lightbox.

Within the U.S., does the map actually point to individual states/cities where images were downloaded? 

It's interesting to see where the images are going.  Not sure it will effect my shooting/uploading though.

Quote from: disorderly on September 12, 2010, 16:13

Quote from: danhowl on September 12, 2010, 16:01
Somewhat unrelated but partially motivated by these events, how do you selectively remove photos from IS?  I am going to winnow down my files that have not made sales and free them up for other options if they present themselves.  Thanks.

Bring up your portfolio display.  Click on one of the image thumbnails.  Toward the bottom of the page, click on Administration.  Type something in the text box (I use 'To quote Popeye, "I've had all I can stands and I can't stands no more!"') and click the Deactivate File button.  Repeat. 

I'm deactivating five images a day, starting with the Dollar Bin.  It'll take a while, but on the off chance something happens to change my mind, I won't have done too much damage to my port yet.

Thanks for the instructions.

Quote from: cclapper on September 12, 2010, 15:53

Not what the thread is about. Re-read the OP. The question is where can they find YOUR port if you leave IS.

I did.  It seems to me that you are applying overly rigorous parameters that are not found in the OP.  He offered an answer to the question and additional information.  Perfectly acceptable on a public forum.

Somewhat unrelated but partially motivated by these events, how do you selectively remove photos from IS?  I am going to winnow down my files that have not made sales and free them up for other options if they present themselves.  Thanks.

Just started at Alamy.  I am curious about what is popular at Alamy and also if contemporary personality/celebrity shots have a place on Alamy or if there is another on-line stock site micro- or macro- that would be good for that content.  I have also been approved for the reportage/archival path as well. I shoot many assignments each year for magazines or promotion with reality tv stars, musicians, business people and have freedom to release for editorial usage after publication.  Didn't see a category that seemed obvious or natural on Alamy site for this type of image.  I know that Corbis handles this type of stuff regularly, but I have regular stock agency already.  Not sure I'm ready to make wholesale switch. 

For those who are active in micros as well as Alamy, any thoughts about which type of imagery you submit to IS/SS/DT etc rather than on Alamy or vice versa?

Just went thru the QC process on Alamy.  Will be selectively moving things from SS, IS and DT if there is any indication that the type of images I have would do well there.  I will be moving my one big event shot there immediately.  Thanks for the suggestion.

Is there any way of limiting a particular image on Shutterstock to Enhanced License?  I have a newsworthy image that might prove to be in demand as the anniversary of the event approaches.  It sort of rankles to see the license royalties at $.25 for this particular image.

I don't know if it was the OP's specific question or not, but I am curious about the logic/strategy of uploading a specific body of work (not just uploading whatever image is available) in whole or in parts to keep images high in the search results.  I am talking about a group of images that are selected for upload--say, 40 images.  What is your strategy?

a. getting all 40 images up as quickly as possible
b. 10 images per day for 4 days.

Quote from: abimages on August 17, 2010, 16:39

Quote from: danhowl on August 17, 2010, 16:22
Is there no longer any upload success percentage available to view?  The page where I found it before is gone and I've poked around for it on the new version and haven't found it.

If you mean the Acceptance rate percentage, it's still on the 'upload' page where it always was. You just gotta scroll down to see it.

Thanks.  I found it.

Is there no longer any upload success percentage available to view?  The page where I found it before is gone and I've poked around for it on the new version and haven't found it.

Quote from: stokfoto on August 08, 2010, 13:15
Just uploaded a photo and realized uploading is even more time consuming now with to many options in  disambiguation  for insatance if you included the word hat among youe KW'd then you'll see soo many different type of hats in the list to choose from .that hurt my eyes:((((((((

agreed, check under 'human skin'   I don't seen how many more buyers will take advantage of those options than just looking thru the more general term.

Quote from: donding on July 30, 2010, 16:54

Wow those are some great photos. I love that one on your opening page. You have got great talent....but I guess I don't need to tell you that. Just wanted to let you know I was really impressed.

Thanks. That was awfully nice to say.  I'm still struggling with the differences in the micro-market, but so far it has been a positive experience.  FYI, I separate my work in the area of kids fashion and advertising onto a different site if you are interested:  http://www.danhowellkids.com

I'm a full-time fashion and commercial photographer in the New York City and national market. The bulk of my clients are dress companies who need photography for their ads, catalogs and/or web sites.  They tend to all get their sample dresses and gowns each season at the same time and need the images right away so I find myself tremendously busy Jan-Feb and June-July with clients shooting in New York and out of state.  During these times my micro stock activities take a backseat.

Outside those peak periods I shoot magazine assignments on a less regular basis.  Microstock is somewhat like my babysitter. It keeps me from getting in trouble or wasting my time in-between assignments. I wish there was better synergy between my assignments and micro stock, but my assignment work tends to be with agency models who are not allowed to sign stock releases. I'm hoping to integrate the two bodies of work more closely in the future.

Apart from that I speak at photography workshops that are organized by a friend. Away from photography I'm into road cycling and am currently building up a carbon road bike to replace a bike that was recently stolen. And My colorful circle of friends include actors, musicians and burlesque performers that always have shows to shows going on.

Samples of my fashion and commercial work:
www.danhowellphotography.com

...while I know that I'm still a newbie (when it comes to microstock), June has been the best month I have had this year (I only started submitting to any micro last Dec).  This month at SS has been nearly double the next highest month I have had to date.  My accepted contributions are still only tiny amounts compared to most around here--far to little to make any extrapolations about the general state of things.  Basically one recent shoot has been well received and accounts for a few dozen downloads in June itself.  

I hope the trend continues, but fortunately/unfortunately my commercial-fashion assignment work has kept me so busy that I haven't had a chance to create many new shots for micro.  Next month might yield some useful info (about SS at least), but it will be Aug. before I can do any significant micro shooting.

no, I got the point of your post.  The point I am making in this thread which you side-step is that other products with trade mark protection seem to pass inspection with microstock more easily than Apple products do.


from the Palm web site:
"Palm owns rights in the distinctive "look and feel" of its product configurations and packaging. This "trade dress" includes the unique style of Palm's phones, handhelds and other products, their packaging, and the layout of their web properties. Palm considers its trade dress to be among its most valuable assets and prohibits others from using it except under express license."

from trademarks.org:
"Trade Dress: Describes a product's distinctive design, packaging, color or other appearance which makes it unique from other products or goods. Trade dress of a particular product or good is protected under trademark law."