I am really grateful for all the responses here. Again, this wouldn't be for anyone that doesn't like letting go any part of their process. That would be torture for both parties. Also, as noted by some of you, Editorial pix are a different animal. We have experience with those too. However, as mentioned, the metadata must be entered by the photographer (at least the Description and Title fields). It's just too hard to get that right. However, having someone with 5+ years in microstock submissions would be helpful as a second pair of eyes for keywords.

Here's a question for you video artists: What are your average file sizes? We also have experience in the video metadata and submission realm, but with an illustrator that does 30 second animations.

Glad to hear you got re-hired. The models—and releases—are a pain. We got it down to a nice system for our customer when we do submissions. Even made a catalog. Anyway, good luck and welcome to stability. 

Quote from: akaWinning on December 31, 2015, 18:46
If you'd have asked me that back when I first started you might have had something.  Now that I am experienced I agree with Sean in that I'd rather do it myself and have it exactly the way I want it.  In addition, PP no longer takes me very long to accomplish, which makes it easy to do it all myself.  That being said, I haven't uploaded anything new because I just don't see hiring models to get the kind of group shots that will sell being a good investment these days.  Luckily my old job called me back to work 2 years ago, and I make enough there that I don't really need any extra income, so I've started shooting films and video as a hobby, which may eventually lead to me uploading some video clips at some point.  Finally got the Magic Lantern installed on my Canon dslr (and it's sweet!!!!) and I'm looking at the Panasonic GH4 for 4k.

Yeah, those are quite obvious mistakes. Indeed, it takes time to tweak things to the customer's preferences. But when it becomes a hassle and you have a big company handling it, I can see why you'd quit. Duly noted. Thanks Paulie for the insight.

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on December 31, 2015, 18:09
I've tried several similar services and gave up. They all had the same problems. The time it took me to do QA and show them all the stuff they missed and had to redo wasn't worth the time or money. I'm talking obvious stuff. Giant company logo on a building, big dust spots, and on and on. And they sometimes even missed them on the redo. Then there's the gray-area stuff like my idea of the right keywords and white balance may be different from yours. The bottom line is it takes too much time of back-and-forth to get an acceptable result. If I could find a service I could trust to get it right I may be willing to try it again.

From what I remember these companies were charging around $1-$5 per image. How much I'd be willing to pay would depend on how much of my workflow you could take over and how much I could depend on you to get the right end result based on my needs.

Thanks for the responses. Actually, my wife and I have been doing this for 5 years, but for one studio with great success for us and the customer's studio. So the process exists. No automation or applications were used—outside of the FTP droplets I made. We helped them get from a portfolio on all the sites at 3,000 to 15,000. So we've developed a nice skill-set handling post-production, upload and submission (most services offer everything but submission). And I'd rather not let it go to rust. We just use Photoshop, LR, Bridge and FTP software.

Of course, such a service would only be financially feasible if the photographer wants to expand their portfolio on a large scale. Also, because we're a mom-and-pop operation, we wouldn't be able to work with more than a couple photographers at a time.

I am sure there are some out here that would rather not do the processing, uploading and submission. So I'm just curious what they would be willing to pay. I'll keep lurking. Thanks again for taking time to write.

What would it be worth to you if small a company would provide you all the retouching, keywording, uploading and submission for flat per image rate across all the Top and Middle Tier sites? You send the Raw selections, signed releases and this service would handle it from there. We'll assume they are reachable by phone and email at central time and based in the United States and English is their primary language.

What kind of questions might you have and what price(s) would you be willing to pay?

Please break the link to the scam site. That will make it harder for them to track our traffic to them. Just put a word like BREAK or some symbol in the link. 

Quote from: FreeTransform on November 12, 2012, 16:04
So apparently they're aware of this, but I'm wondering how it was done. Looks like the entire iStock library for sale at a discount:

http://www.istockreseller.com/

Kelvin has a post telling people not to link to it:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=348941&page=1

That's a great idea. I would like to add that they should open reviewing positions to anyone who wants it. Anyone that gets too many complaints, gets booted from the list of reviewers.

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on June 25, 2011, 18:35
I'd only check for legal issues, and obvious technical problems (purple fringe, out of focus) leaving decisions about what sells to the buyers and artistic choices (selective focus, lighting, level of noise) to the photographers.

This way - no matter who the reviewers are - there's nothing unfair they can do with a clear set of rules.

Maybe this would be a good advocate for Microstock: http://searchapa.us/wordpress/wordpress/?page_id=16

Yes, flat fee. But make it less for illustrators. They don't submit high volume or giant files very often.

Quote from: dnavarrojr on September 28, 2010, 00:38
I am primarily interested in it for footage as well.  And I'll be honest, you need to seriously consider a flat fee.  $20 a month, $30 a month, something like that.

Find yourself a data center in the U.S. (there are many) that does not charge for bandwidth.  That was iSyndica's problem... The "price per upload" model for footage does not work.  If you can put together a package with unlimited transfers for a workable fee, the footage people will flock.

This stinks. Does Photoshelter support EPS (vector) illustrations? I can't seem to find anything about it on their site. 

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on September 27, 2010, 11:22
the idea was good but credits were too expensive, compared to current cost of bandwidth
so I never actually used it - besides registering for free.


Now, the only similar alternative is Photoshelter *


They offer an FTP export option, priced by bandwidth usage instead of credits. It is possible to upload to every site which accepts FTP - basically, all sites except IS. It's working pretty well, I am using it when I have to upload too many files at a time, otherwise I countinue to use plain old FTP.

*for those using my link to photoshelter above, yes it's a referral but there's also a discount for you!

Quote from: somethingpretentious on September 27, 2010, 19:10
I voted yes, but I will not be using your service, if it will be with the pricing structure suggested here. Isyndica was great not only for easy uploading, but also for keeping track of uploads. There need to be a way to keep track of the uploads for me to be interested. Also, I would not be willing to pay 1-2 cent per day per file in storage. If my math is not off, that would cost 3650-7300 USD pr year for a portfolio of 1000 images!  2 cent pr file tranfer is a bit high (isyndica was less than 1 cent as they always had rebates) and 4 is definately too much.

Good luck with the project!

I agree. If you can get the iSyndica pricing (and include all their features, especially for vector illustrators), then I think you can fill the void.

I happen to run a humble studio that works with a microstock photographer since late 2008. It all depends on how many images you want to submit. If it's 60-100 or more per week, it's probably a good idea. If you don't plan to be doing that for the next few years, you might stick to doing it yourself. You'll need to negotiate a fair rate. You might also consider the location of the retoucher. The trend for retouching is going offshore (to India, eastern Europe, etc.). Getting personal attention from someone overseas can be difficult.

You'll need about 3-6 months of "calibration time" with the retoucher to nail down your style and volume. You'll still probably be tempted to work on some as they come back from the retoucher. So don't worry about giving up working in Photoshop

Regarding confidentiality, you'll need to get a "Non-Disclosure Agreement" (NDA) signed. Preferably, you should have a lawyer draft it. If not, do something. Anything is better than nothing It is in the retoucher's best interest to keep your work confidential (especially if they are located in the United States or western Europe). We usually are quite poor and cannot market ourselves with anything but word-of-mouth. More folks will steal your images from the stock sites and "clone out" the watermarks. I've been doing this for 10 years and I am constantly getting proposals to remove watermarks (I refuse them).

Good luck!

Quote from: Imabase on May 26, 2009, 18:06
Hi Guys,

I was wondering how many of you employ or pays someone to retouch your images for you? Have you ever made use of these photo retouching services?
I have a large bulk of images that need to be retouched, and I have been working on them for a long time, and speed up I want to speed up this process by employing a photo retoucher.

What can I do to ensure my images wouldn't be stolen or used by the retoucher?