You won't ever meet them.  They're all together in one city and it's statistically unlikely that it's your city.  It's not NYC. 
If you did meet one, they probably wouldn't know they work for Shutterstock.  Technically they work for a third party and they're not told too many details that don't directly improve their performance. 
And if you did meet one who knew their work ultimately went to Shutterstock, they certainly wouldn't divulge details about their systems or processes. 

It hasn't always been this way, but that's how I understand it to be now. 

Many agencies rate images at review.  The better agencies don't rely on it much, if at all.  Instead, they use data.  Lots of it.  In case you were wondering, Shutterstock is one of the better agencies. 

If you want to get your images higher up the search results, there's one guaranteed way: create better images. 

This sort of thing happens a lot more than you think.  A company I work with counts among its contributors exclusive contributors from various agencies, mostly DT.

Quote from: MB2B on November 10, 2013, 11:24
On the other serious side, for about U$ 638 plus costs of travel and accommodation for those who do not live in Berlin, I'd better do it (meeting people and networking) right here in MG, for free.  Here is the best place to "meeting" people and network. Thank you Leaf for that.


May not be right but from the point of view of the contributor, what's the point in paying so much? The vast majority of microstock contributors even ever got the value of the registration fee.

Lee, might be better if you had planned to charge a small fee for watching the live event. Even if not actually live but with delay that allowed us to follow the event. This would be great and would be an option for many of us. And the event would have far greater impact.

Microstock Expo is aimed at professional-level microstockers for whom the ticket price is not an issue.  We considered making a more beginner-level event, but we didn't think it would work.  If anyone thinks otherwise and thinks they can make a go of it, they will have our support. 

We're filming the event again, and the price will be similar to last time.  The price is high because it's REALLY expensive to create the videos - we will not profit from them this time either.  We have no interest in live streaming - the information isn't so time sensitive and the extra cost is prohibitive.  We're also not trying to "have an impact".  We're just putting on the best show we can for a particular segment of the industry.

I hope you can understand.  Microstock Expo isn't for everyone.  If it seems too expensive, then with all love and respect, it's not for you. 

Quote from: rene on July 18, 2012, 05:24
I hope that Lee takes look to partner's program too, which is completely opaque. Why contributors should pay for it?

I'm opted out, but yes, it's on the list.

shutterstockmail.com is owned by Shutterstock.  They use it for all links in their email campaigns.  Based on the information presented in this thread so far, this is not a phishing attempt.

Whenever in doubt, manually type the website address into your browser rather than clicking any links in the email. 

Quote from: lisafx on July 14, 2012, 01:24
Thanks for clarifying Lee. The way it was presented in this thread made me think that my referred photographers were having the referral fees I get for referring them deducted directly from their earnings.

You had it right the first time.  They are.  Just not 100% - that's what I was correcting.  So, a portion of your affiliate earnings is deducted from the contributors you referred to Dreamstime.  That's why I removed my affiliate links - I don't want my referred contributors to be penalized.

Quote from: lisafx on July 14, 2012, 01:24
I was aware of this policy regarding affiliates.  The way they justify it is that those are not buyers directly on the site and we might not get those sales without the affiliates.  Not crazy about it.  I would certainly like to get the whole royalty,  but at least it isn't a new surprise.   

I think you're confusing affiliates with partners here.  Affiliate just refer buyers and contributors, having them become direct customers and contributors with their own Dreamstime accounts.  Partners connect to Dreamstime via the API to sell to *their* customers, so the transaction is not handled by Dreamstime on the Dreamstime website and the customers don't have a Dreamstime account.  Partner sales are, as far as I can tell, completely unaffected by this policy, given a customer buying through a partner doesn't involve any Dreamstime member account. 

And this policy is new as of April this year, when they updated the levels. 

Quote from: fotorob on July 13, 2012, 19:12
Long story short: The commissions for the affiliate spreader will be taken from the photographers share, not from the agency share now.

Just to clarify, Dreamstime still pays 'part' of the referral costs.  The referral costs are subtracted from the transaction value before our royalties are calculated, so the costs are shared. 

This is the relevant text from the Dreamstime site:  "For each transaction, the photographer receives a 25-50 percent Revenue Share, which is calculated based on the net sales amount for the transaction, after referral fees have been paid."

It's on this page:  http://www.dreamstime.com/sellimages

Note that "25-50" refers to previous rates. That needs to be updated to 20 - 60, or 20-50 if it's meant to refer to non-exclusive contributors only.

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 13, 2012, 19:45
Lee Torrens is removing his personal referral links to DT is what I understand.  Or, is there a way to remove links to Partners selling our images and causing us to receive a reduction in commission?  IE; is he suggesting we can opt out of subscription sales through DT partners???

This has nothing to do with the partner program or subscriptions specifically.  This is about 'affiliates' (or 'referrers') who refer buyers and contributors to Dreamstime. They're a different group of people, in this context, to 'partners', who sell image licenses on behalf of Dreamstime. 

Thanks Tyler and everyone else.  It's great to get that feedback, and what we said in the opening wasn't BS - it really wouldn't have happened without all the support that we received from everybody, not least our moderators, Tyler! Thanks for that.

It was definitely a lot of fun given how quickly it grew. I too would have liked more, but there were limits to how much we could grow given the compromises we made to ensure the first event created a strong foundation. So next year you can expect tracks for illustration and video as well as photography. We've also received a lot of very constructive feedback which will help us improve and grow the next event too.

And in addition to coming, moderating and shooting so much of the event, Tyler, thanks so much for sharing so much of it here at MSG for us.

We've just posted a quick blog post over on the Microstock Expo website with some of the official photos and info about the video footage. We're also putting more and more of the photos on the MEXPO Facebook page.

Quote from: Elnur on October 29, 2011, 23:07
I will have my 10 minutes on the topic "Lifestyle Design for Professional Microstockers". My main point is how one can have a full-time job, and be one of the most productive microstock  photographers, how to manage and organise the team, and how to streamline the production.

Anything specific, you want to hear? Let me know.

Looks like this one will be the best microstock conference ever !! 
See you there !!

I'm very much looking forward to hearing more about how you produce such an amazing quantity of photos while maintaining (successfully, long term) a demanding full time job.  Specifics I'd like to hear included in your presentation:
- your space: do you keep a dedicated space for shooting your still life?  how much?
- do you shoot tethered?
- how much of your post process is automated? (photoshop actions, metadata presets, etc)
- do you use any of the distribution and submitting services available for microstockers?
- analysis: how did you determine that still life is a wise subject to be your specialty?  would it be different if you didn't have a full time job?

Thanks Elnur!

Quote from: cobalt on October 29, 2011, 23:17
I am really, really looking forward to this, the speaker lineup is spectatacular!

Thank you so much Lee and Amos and a big thank you to all the sponsors as well.

You're very welcome.  It's been fun to put it together and it's humbling that all the people we invited agreed to come!  Thanks also for coming Jasmin!

Two new speakers to add:

Steve Gibson of MicrostockInsider
Josh Hodge - Pixdeluxe

We've sold more exhibition tables than we anticipated, so we've moved up to a bigger space in the hotel, which will make everyone much more comfortable.

Envato, makers of PhotoDune, have kindly sponsored the coffee and pastries, and Fuad Ta'eed from Envato will be there too, all the way from Australia.

There's still a couple of spots left to shoot at the Fashion shooting workshop with Luis Alvarez (watching is open to all attendees) if anyone wants to do that.  We couldn't find anyone to present the lifestyle workshop this year, so it's just the Fashion one.

Registrations continue to come in at a steady pace, passing 100 this week.  Those who opted-in to the networking option during registration have already received the list of other attendees who opted in to facilitate the networking. 

If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask them here or contact us directly via the website.

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on August 18, 2011, 08:13
Btw, I've been at that hotel once and it's fantastic from an architectural point of view: a minimalist, modern design (by british architects Jestico+Whiles) and nothing of that disgusting kitsch which seems to prevail in large hotels worldwide

That's good to hear.  The team doing the Audio-Visual stuff had great things to say about it too. 

Are the chairs in the foyer comfortable? 

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on August 17, 2011, 15:50
Indeed, I was almost thinking about coming - mainly because I've been a few times in Berlin and really like that town, and to meet some fellow photographers - but the idea of having to pay to hear such people speak is putting me off.

Yeah, I get that Claudio. There's always someone like that at each conference you go to.  I guess you either let that decide for you, or try to rationalise it somehow, like looking at the long list of speakers who you do want to pay to hear.  Or you could just hang out in the foyer; that way you get to see the town and meet some fellow photographers, without having to pay to hear anyone you don't like.

Tyler, a few more speakers have confirmed:

Mark Butler and Cathy Yeulet from Monkey Business Images, Pavel Orekhov and Dmitriy Shironosov from Pressfoto.ru/Pressmaster, and Andres Rodriguez.

Attendance is now at 70.

Hey Tyler, you can add these attendees to the list now:

Luis Alvarez
Elnur Amikishiyev
Tom Bennett, Pond5
Dittmar Frohmann, iStock
Offir Gutelzon, PicScout
Jean-Marie Guyon, CandyBox Photography
Peter Hamza, StockFresh
Jazz Mandair, Jaincotech
Pavel Orekhov, Pressfoto
Dmitriy Shironosov, Pressfoto
Robert Walters, PantherMedia
Rahul Pathak, LookStat
Lanny Ziering, SuperStock

We'll also have representatives of these companies:

BlendImages
Photocase
Fotolia
DepositPhotos
Envato / PhotoDune
Mauritius Images

...and we expect to also see these companies attending:
Cultura Creative
ImageSource

Including speakers and sponsors there's now over 60 registered attendees. 

Thanks for the blog mention Melanie.

Jasmin, thanks for signing up.  See you there!

I'm going again this year, though not speaking.  It was awesome last year - learned a heap and met a lot of very interesting people. And everyone was so friendly.

I'm looking forward to hearing Andres Rodriguez, Robert Davies and Simon Krzic speak this year.  Great lineup!

Hey Tyler, thanks for listing this. It's definitely shaping up to be quite the festival.

Quote from: sjlocke on May 17, 2011, 20:29

Quote from: Microbius on May 17, 2011, 08:13
Looking at the table of contents I would totally be prepared to buy this if I was starting an agency.
Just in terms of time saved doing the research it's got to be worth it.
It would cost a lot more to get an independent report commissioned or even to pay for an intern's time to bring all the info together.
Plus you get the updates to keep the info. current.

I can't imagine why you would think you should start an agency unless you knew 90% of this kind of thing to start.

That makes a lot of sense, but which microstock founders were intimately familiar with the industry when they started?

Bruce was a designer and started iStock because he was 'bitter' that his photos were rejected by traditional agencies, not to mention that it was not started with the intention of creating the microstock business model nor even making money (as far as the PR story goes, anyway). Jon was an entrepreneur with an education in mathematics among other technology sciences.  Serban also a designer.  Oleg had a background in telecoms and web hosting.  Tim & Dawn were also designers.  None of the top five agencies were started by people with industry experience, so they had to educate themselves about the market first (or as they went).

There's far more failed and non-starter agencies started by industry outsiders, but look at those started by people with industry experience: SnapVillage; Vivozoom.

123RF is an exception, relatively, and YAYmicro is probably borderline depending on what metric you measure.  Still, industry experience isn't what makes the different in microstock.

I totally agree that they have to know at least 90% of the information in my report before they start a new microstock agency, but that's the point:  judging by who is successful and who isn't, someone who buys a report like mine with little prior knowledge and then starts an agency is just as likely (if not more likely - statistically) to be successful as someone who knows all the information already.

Quote from: Microbius on May 17, 2011, 08:13
Looking at the table of contents I would totally be prepared to buy this if I was starting an agency.
Just in terms of time saved doing the research it's got to be worth it.
It would cost a lot more to get an independent report commissioned or even to pay for an intern's time to bring all the info together.
Plus you get the updates to keep the info. current.

In 2008 I did a custom research job bringing together information about microstock and how it related to a specific business model that the customer had in mind. It was 20 pages and they paid $1,000.  The little consulting I do these days is usually verbal or answering questions by email, but it's even more expensive. And what I charge is well below the rates of formal industry consultants.

I guess if you have an intern do the collation it could end up costing less, but you'd have to spend time telling the intern what to collate (although the table of contents from my report might do that for you).  However, I think there's more value in the understanding of the information than just collecting it together.  There's a lot of explanation as to 'why' agencies do what they do, with cross references and citations to supporting evidence.  An intern wouldn't get that without spending massive amounts of time on it, which would then become expensive.

Quote from: lisafx on May 17, 2011, 02:04
Lee, I have rarely in my life seen anyone handle criticism with such tact, openness and class.  Bravo! 

Thanks, but much of it is valid so I benefit from taking it on. Even if it's just to understand how people view things. 

Quote from: lisafx on May 17, 2011, 02:04
It sounds like you are uniquely positioned to offer a wealth of useful information beyond what most of us could provide, even if we wanted to go to the trouble to compile it. 

If I was a better photographer I wouldn't have gone to the trouble either. But I have been lucky to have the experiences I've had, and people in the industry have been exceedingly generous sharing their knowledge with me over the years.

Quote from: lisafx on May 17, 2011, 02:04
Shocking that any startup agency would not be willing to spend $495 - $700 for such a useful and comprehensive guide to the industry.  I don't see how an agency could possibly hope to succeed if finances are so limited that they would balk at a relatively minor investment.  Heck, I invested more than that getting my personal site up and running. 

To clarify, some of those who say it's too expensive probably already know 50% - 60% of it already, so it's not as simple as not being able to afford the price (though I suspect that's actually still the case for one of them). Another established agency had recently undertaken their own research recently so they didn't think they'd get much additional benefit from mine, which I can understand.

Quote from: sjlocke on May 14, 2011, 13:01
On Microstockdiaries, Lee's offering a microstock "industry report" for $700 that will take you from novice to expert in 100 pages .
http://www.microstockdiaries.com/research-report

While I'm sure it took some time to write up, from the table of contents, it seems like something many independents here could write themselves.  So you may want to look into producing your own for some side business.  You may end up with more value as someone with more active/working knowledge of things.

Hi Sean. You're absolutely right. There are quite a few people in the industry who have the knowledge to write something similar, some of whom are contributors and participants here at MSG. The primary difference between them and me is simply that I've written the report and they haven't. A secondary difference is reputation - I'm certainly not known for my photography skills, but I have been producing written content for, and about, the market for years. I'm confident that this fact has helped with the sales of this report, but not nearly as much as the first factor - just being the one who did it.

I won't have any problem if other contributors with the knowledge, time and patience (I had to look up a lot of stats and do a lot of fact checking) to write something similar choose to do so. If they go in at a cheaper price (my report was actually $495 from launch last November until recently) they may catch some of the newer microstock agencies who baulked at my price. I wrote mine over the period of a year, though I estimate it was probably equivalent to about three months of work. Given the total number of sales so far and that quantity of work, it's been worthwhile for me (compared to other ways I earn), but not by a big margin.

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on May 14, 2011, 13:10
Reading from Lee's comments, that report is more targeted to agencies than contributors: "This report is written for business people working in, for, or with microstock agencies. It's not intended for microstock contributors or buyers."
So he's looking to sell a small number at an high price.

While many independents here are very knowledgeable indeed, the same may not be true for some agencies - at least judging from their decisions. So I really hope they'll buy Lee's industry report - they surely can spend $700.

Correct - it's not targeted at contributors, but as other have said, that does appear to be what Sean was suggesting. If I ever create a product for contributors, you'll see me here promoting it enthusiastically.

You'd think many could surely spend $700, wouldn't you! Turns out many are more cheap than we expect. After conversations with interested but unwilling agency bosses I'm convinced that two of them - well known brands - are on their last legs. $495 (price at the time of the conversations) is a lot of money for a company struggling to stay afloat (i.e. cover just operational costs or provide any believable prospect of generating a return on funds invested), especially when their traffic is falling and contributors are leaving. While I will respect the privacy of these two agencies and not mention them by name, if they do close soon it won't come as much of a surprise to most of us.

Quote from: jsnover on May 14, 2011, 19:38

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on May 14, 2011, 13:10
Reading from Lee's comments, that report is more targeted to agencies than contributors...

I saw a documentary about the California Gold rush and apparently the folks who sold supplies to the arriving miners were the ones who really made money. I don't see a huge rush of incoming agencies, but perhaps there are enough to sell a few at $700?

There's indeed enough to sell "a few", though new entrant microstock agencies are only half the target market, as I explained in [url http://www.microstockdiaries.com/my-experience-publishing-an-industry-research-report.html]this blog post[/url].

Quote from: visceralimage on May 15, 2011, 01:53

Quote from: jsnover on May 14, 2011, 19:38I don't see a huge rush of incoming agencies, but perhaps there are enough to sell a few at $700?

Many want-a-bees never get off the ground but invest tons of money in start-up costs; if they purchase a product for $700 but never go online, you still made a sale.

Here here!  One customer told me he decided against persisting with his plans to start a new microstock agency after reading the report, and thanked me for saving him a lot of money.  In this case I'm obviously happy to take the sale price, but it also saves the prospective entrepreneurs from investing in something they're not in a position to make work, and saves contributors' time in uploading to an agency that has little chance of success (though most microstockers know enough to tell which ones are non-starters anyway).

Quote from: cthoman on May 16, 2011, 05:30
In Lee's defense, he's gone out and interviewed and talked to a lot of people in the industry. I think he has a unique perspective that many contributors don't have. I haven't read his report, so I can't really say what is in it or the value of the information. But, I don't really see that as a reason to dismiss it as something that anyone can do though. I wish him success.

Thanks Cory. Very kind. I have spent a lot of time talking with people in the industry and attending events, and I like to think that the knowledge I gained there is beyond that of most contributors, thus giving me an advantage with producing a report like this. However, a large portion of that knowledge didn't make it to the report for one of two reasons. Either it's unverifiable information or it's private information.  I fact-checked everything I could and excluded all information that I could not stand behind or direct people to supporting evidence. I also didn't want to burn any bridges with agencies or other industry people, so I excluded a lot of commercially sensitive information. Unlike some others in similar positions (industry "journalists"), I'm not in the business of 'outing' someone or spreading their secrets just for the sake of a story or some extra attention. Maintaining positive relationships and keeping my mouth shut when appropriate has worked for me so far, and I have no intention of changing. But still, I believe the report benefits greatly from my experience hanging around the industry.

Quote from: holgs on May 16, 2011, 07:25

Quote from: cthoman on May 16, 2011, 05:30
In Lee's defense, he's gone out and interviewed and talked to a lot of people in the industry. I think he has a unique perspective that many contributors don't have. I haven't read his report, so I can't really say what is in it or the value of the information. But, I don't really see that as a reason to dismiss it as something that anyone can do though. I wish him success.

+1 to that - there's not so many people that have the level of knowledge, contacts or insights that Lee has, let alone a balanced perspective of the industry.

Thanks Holgs. Lots of sessions in beer gardens add up.    And the 'balance' part is not easy - removing all rants shortened the report significantly.

Quote from: leaf on May 16, 2011, 08:10

Quote from: cthoman on May 16, 2011, 05:30
In Lee's defense, he's gone out and interviewed and talked to a lot of people in the industry. I think he has a unique perspective that many contributors don't have. I haven't read his report, so I can't really say what is in it or the value of the information. But, I don't really see that as a reason to dismiss it as something that anyone can do though. I wish him success.

Agreed. There are few people who have as much impartial knowledge about the 'owners side' of the many many microstock sites than Lee.  How the sites work, how the search works, are reviews done in-house, out sourced, by a networked global team etc. etc. etc... which makes him a very good candidate to have written the book.  Add to that, that he writes well and is thorough, it seems like a good match. 

Considering the time it took to write the report, the minimal market for the report and the savings a start-up would experience by not making one of the many many mistakes we see new start-ups make over and over again - I think the report is a fair price.

Thanks Tyler!  One customer verifies that.  They delayed the launch of their microstock agency after reading the report, seeing that there was a lot they didn't realize that they didn't know (as opposed to what they knew they didn't know). They'll be soft-launching shortly and I'll likely blog about them when they do.

As for the price, I'm not a big fan of the "fair" concept, but sales indicate it's priced at around what the market will bear. Would I have made more sales with a lower price? Definitely. Would I have grossed the same revenue with a lower price? I don't think so.  The market is - as you say - very small. 

Quote from: sjlocke on May 16, 2011, 12:23

Quote from: cthoman on May 16, 2011, 05:30
In Lee's defense, he's gone out and interviewed and talked to a lot of people in the industry. I think he has a unique perspective that many contributors don't have. I haven't read his report, so I can't really say what is in it or the value of the information. But, I don't really see that as a reason to dismiss it as something that anyone can do though. I wish him success.

To be honest, the Table of Contents doesn't seem to indicate much that any independent wouldn't have a full grasp on, "interviews" or not. 

That's valid enough. I have no doubt that there's nobody who wouldn't learn anything from the report, but as you point out, many well-read contributors could write intelligently about each topic listed in the table of contents.  There's also a lot I could learn from reading a similar report produced by someone else too.

To be honest, the interviews don't contribute much in the way of new knowledge. They're created for the audience and there's rarely a question to which I don't already have a good idea of the answer.  It's the regular online conversations with people from all areas of the industry, the open discussions at industry events, and late nights in restaurants / bars in different cities around the word chatting about the industry that create that extra level of knowledge.  I feel a lot of it translated into beneficial insight within the report, and the feedback has certainly said so.

Thanks all for the discussion. I didn't expect to be discussing this here, but it's fun to see different people's views.

iStock paid US$50,000 for microstock.com in October 2009.

Quote from: click_click on January 27, 2011, 18:17
Does anyone know what agency is affiliated with them?

They're listed here: http://www.panthermedia.net/index.php?page=cms/pages/display2.php&cms_id=196

Hey Brian, enjoy the new role and thanks for all the laughs, beers and meatball sandwiches!  It was a pleasure.

And I'm very happy to hear that it's Chelsey is stepping in to this role. She left a very positive impression on me at PhotoOp.

Thanks Jonathan. 

For those who haven't seen it, here's John's interview with Jonathan: http://www.johnlund.com/Interview-andersonross.htm  Lots of awesome stuff in there too, as you'd expect. 

Yes, the Veer shoot was awesome. Obviously it wasn't just Tyler and I who shot all those photos otherwise our index fingers would have really been tired. From memory, I think I shot only 5,000 frames, 2,000 of which were on the first day - my count went down very quickly which is either me becoming more selective as I learned, or just exhaustion.  The Veer producers did pretty much all the work, including driving us out-of-towners to the shoots, so we didn't have much excuse for being tired. Anyway, the reported total frames for all photographers over all four days was 80,000, with around 7,000 selects. 

I have a post on it here and it was also discussed a little here on MSG in this thread.