Quote from: Newsfocus1 on February 13, 2017, 13:26

Your portfolio remains where it always was on Istockphoto.com (which is now the site for buyers). Think of ESP as an upload and account management platform. To see your portfolio click on Account Management (top right) on ESP and scroll down to Portfolio where you will find a link to our port.

Thank you

Quote from: microstockinsider on February 12, 2017, 02:23
In the "My Content box" on the home page click "upload and review content", then click the green button "+new submission", it will generate and show you a new tab titled "Submission batch istock creative image" with "upload files" in it, drag them on there or click the + and you can upload away

Thank you for the explanation, but, been that I can't see my portfolio on ESP, if I upload new images, where do they go? This was my concern...

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on February 11, 2017, 14:42
Seriously why would you even bother 

The problem is that on Fotolia I only sell old stuff, the same on Dreamstime, on Envato I'm no more in, I can't be exclusive on Shutterstock so...maybe I could try to upload them to Istock, hoping for a better future...

I have 50 images ready to be uploaded and I can't understand where I have to upload them. If I can...

When they will realize how silly is they decision, it will be too late.
That said, I am Emerald level on Fotolia, Gold level on Istock, top level on Shutterstock, diamond level on Turbosquid, but not good enough for them...

I do not use to buy ither people's pictures, but some times ago I do. For that reason I still had 10 credits in my account. With 10 credits, previously, you did know that you could by "some images". Now I have 2 new credits and I know that I can buy only two images. In my opinion, the feeling of the buyers with many credits in their accounts, is that, with this conversion, thay have lost they money...

Quote from: cthoman on September 02, 2014, 18:23

Quote from: Vinne on September 02, 2014, 18:20
Evething for 1 Dollar?
This sounds familiar...

Doesn't it say one new credit is 5 old credits?

I was joking, but when for almost all the other agencies 1 credit means 1 dollar or so, they will make advertising saying: 1 credit for a full size image. New customers will say: wow, this is very cheap. Than, when they go to buy credits they discover that one credit costs 8/10$. They will be veeeery happy for this and they will go to DPC were 1 credit really is 1$. They share the same Marketing management with Microsoft...

Evething for 1 Dollar?
This sounds familiar...

Quote from: tickstock on October 12, 2013, 16:00
There is another thread where nonexclusives said that the average price a buyer paid for their images was around $5 while the average price paid for an exclusive image was between $20-25.  That would mean 4x the royalty from price increase plus 2x the royalty from your % increase for a total of 8x.  Sales may fall because of the higher prices but they may not because of the better best match placement.  If you do get a good amount of files into Getty that can account for another 50% of your iStock. exclusive income.  For me it's 25-40% but there are others who make more on Getty than iStock.  I would think 8x is likely outcome on the conservative side, for me just for losing the higher prices, Getty, and % I would probably be down around 93% .   If you can find reports on facebook or a few here you'll see that many exclusives that left had their iStock income drop by 90%.

This is the kind of answer I would like to have when I start this thread. Something inside me wants to give it a try. In any case, I will aspect some months to see if the situation settles.
Thank you for your point of view.

Yes, in the end I had some relevant experience based answers. Thank you for that.
The conclusion I have reached is that, in my opinion, doubling the inconme becoming exclusive is absolutely possible if you have a good quality portfolio, due to the major royalty rate and the Vetta/Getty collections.
The fact is that doubling the income, for my situation, is absolutely non enough for considering exclusivity.
So, thank you all for your replyes...

Quote from: gostwyck on October 11, 2013, 17:11

You asked a question and one of the most successful commercial photographer/illustrators has gone out of his way, several times now, to give you sound, reasoned advice. Yet, far from thanking him, you persist in telling him that he is wrong?

No, I'm not saying that he is wrong. I have absolute respect for Sean and his work. I'm only saying, by hanving years of experince about, that there is not so many people around that can make exactly the same image i make and sell them at a lower price (and if they make then copying exactly mine, they are thieves and should therefore be treated as such). Ralely had this kind of problem, never care about it and so, I don't think that becoming exclusive I will care about that. I have perfectly understand that Sean is saying that I should not become exclusive from is point of view. But if read my first post, you will see that my question is not that.

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on October 11, 2013, 16:30
Look, I don't care what you decide to do.  I'm just pointing out that you're competing with the entire world when you're creating content entirely within software, and the rest of that world is probably going to be lower priced then you if you turn exclusive.

No doubt about this point. The fact is that you are refearing to illustration in a way that lets presume the with photography it is different. If my four years child comes into your studio when you are shooting, and you give him your camera, you can be sure he can click the button. Furthermore there are at least 10 photographers for every illustrator. So, sorry, but I can't see the point...

If you search "smiling girl" on Istock, you will find 1,25 million results. So the question is, why do you continue to waste you time shooting this kind of subject?
People look for what fits better in they project, someone cares about the price, someone not. Somebody spends 300$ for a signle photo, somebody 3000$. For somebody 30$ is to much. I mean, you only have to care about how is your target.

As I said, there is not a matter of "same image at a lower price". I do not create tons of 3d objects on a white background. For sure this kind of things only can sell at low prices. My question only is: how much unicity, originality, quality, can make the difference in been an Istock exclusive seller? As a non-exclusive, most of the times, quantity mean more than quality (as can be seen in Sean example...)

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on October 11, 2013, 12:39

"High Quality 3d renders" are easily duplicated by people around the world, who sell non-exclusive, so you will be competing against the same content at cheaper prices.

Sorry, Sean, with all the respect, I don't want to sound suberb, but when I say "high quality 3d renders" I'm saying "high quality 3d renders" and in the microstock market less than 1% of the 3d renders can be called "high quality". At list for my standard. So they are not easily duplicated. I am in the top 200 at Fotolia and of that 200, i think that not more than 20 are 3d artists. So for sure, this kind of competition is not a problem for me. My problem, insted, is that everywere as a non-exclusive, quality can't compensate the fact that many images don't have the time to be seen that they goes under tons of others in the search engine. And they are lost forever. So if you upload hundreds pictures every month this may not be a problem, but if you spend hours or days on a single image you start to think that this images should, at least, be seen. If it have hundreds of views and don't sell ok, but I use to have, for many of my images, 1 sell every 4 views, so my priority is that much people possibly views them.

Regarding prices what I can say is that when Istock gave us the possibility to put some of out images in the Photo+, I decided to put all the best sellers I can in that collection. As a result, I have seen no sale reduction but only an higher income. The same thing appends with some exclusive images on Fotolia were I've set the price at 3x. That is the reason for what I am quite confident about higher prices.

Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.