pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ericfoltz

Pages: [1]
1
When I started out with micro back in 2006, I was with IS, SS, DT & FT.

After the first year I saw that the only site that consistently performed for me was IS. It was always 60-80% of my royalties each month and didn't seem dependent upon constant uploads to maintain download levels.

I was silver when I switched to exclusive and my royalties doubled over what they were on all sites combined in the first month.

I like only having to deal with one agent. Two of the agencies I dealt with before I will never again do business with based upon my experiences with them.

While there have been anxious times with best match changes and other things at IS, my royalties have been rising consistently even though I am not the most prolific uploader.

About 5% of my portfolio is in the Vetta Collection and those higher royalties have stabilized my monthly earnings so that there aren't any wild fluctuations from month to month.

2
iStockPhoto.com / Re: How much do you like Istockphoto?
« on: December 01, 2009, 15:58 »
I used to submit to multiple agencies with IS consistently outselling them all combined.

I went exclusive back in 2007 and IS provided 40% of my income with print sales making up the other 60%.

With the collapse of the Art market last year, IS has made up 90% of my income for over a year now and my royalties have been increasing steadily since I joined.

Sorry, but I'm a loyal exclusive.




3
Photo Critique / Re: How are these landscapes?
« on: May 07, 2009, 01:20 »
I have seen other photographers who specialize in traditional landscape do quite well on the micros, in particular Eric Foltz and AVTG on IStock seem to do quite well for some reason.

Hmmm.... Not sure if you're paying me a compliment or expressing surprise that I have managed to have some success selling landscapes at IS.

Anyway, here's some advice.

1. Diversity. By diversity I mean shoot at as many locations as you can. Start with the National Parks, then State Parks, then landmarks and just keep expanding your portfolio.

2. Diversity. Don't just shoot the "trophy" shots. Look for unique views of well known landmarks.

3. Don't expect to visit a location once while on vacation and get a bestseller. Over the last 15 years, I've been to almost all the national parks multiple times, visited hundreds of state parks, and have crisscrossed the entire U.S. 12 times to get the shots I have in my portfolio.

4. Be honest. Compare your images to your competition. Just because you have a shot of Mesquite Dunes in Death Valley does not guarantee that it will sell when matched up against the 100s of other similar shots from the same location. Is your shot the best shot you've seen from that location? If not, keep going back until you get the shot that you know you'll never be able to beat.

Instead of posting here asking if your shot of Rainier is any good, try posting your shot and what you consider to be the best shot of Rainier on IS and ask people which they would buy.

5. Accurate keywording and good captions.

Good luck.

4
When I was uploading to multiple sites, I had a pretty simple rule:

Don't upload to any site you don't see advertising in the design magazines.

It seems a lot of sites have a couple of tech guys that can throw together a website but no real marketing budget to go out and get buyers.

And since most of the content on these sites is already available on more established sites, luring buyers away can be pretty tough, especially since they are all competing at the pretty much the same price level.

5
iStockPhoto.com / Re: It's not just Alexa.
« on: August 17, 2008, 00:14 »
Housing crisis and rising gas prices both started hitting the news and making an impact right around late Feb/early March.

6
iStockPhoto.com / Re: It's not just Alexa.
« on: August 16, 2008, 23:51 »
Just a couple of thoughts about all of these stats:

1) If you have the largest percentage of market share, you'll probably see more dramatic changes when there are dips in the economy (especially if the bulk of your buyers are in the US where the economy is pretty dismal right now).

2) I don't see a corresponding rise in traffic at any of the other sites that would lead me to believe the IS customers are going to the main competition.

3) The new sites do show some growth but this is alot like the new contributors who post huge growth percentages when they first start. If you start with no traffic, then any traffic makes a dramatic increase in your stats.

I personally think the economy is what is driving the downturn. Every business is being affected and many small businesses (the bulk of micro customers) are going under.

Hopefully when/if it turns around, sales will go back up.


7
General Stock Discussion / Re: Selling art
« on: August 16, 2008, 01:23 »
Is it the same if you're selling your images as RM?  I was under the impression I could still sell fine art prints even though I have the same images on Alamy, PSC and MyLoupe as RM.

Yikes, am I wrong?

Is what the same? Calling them 'limited edition'? Or just selling them?

I think you can sell them as and how you want ... you are, after all, the copyright owner.

But if you sell an image as a 'limited edition' fine art print I would imagine buyers would be pretty pissed off if they then saw their treasure illustrating an article in a magazine, or plastered over billboards.

Let me start by saying that about 45% of my income comes from selling prints through art consultants, galleries and at art festivals.

I have an image that is used for all the product packaging for a fine art paper manufacturer. I get a lot of orders for that print from people who saw the image on the packaging. I've also gotten orders from people who saw the same image in an online travel guide.

My best selling print got that way from taking orders from people who found out that I sell prints of the image they saw in a calendar.

David Meunch, Galen Rowell, William Neill and pretty much every modern photographer offer their images through stock agencies. When you go to their galleries, you will see the same images offered as Limited and Open Edition prints.



8
It's important to keep in mind that most magazine use is editorial and the magazines like to have RM images so that they can be assured that the images they use don't show up in their competitors publication in the same month.

I'd be interested to know how many of the images used in the ads in those magazines came from micro vs macro.

9
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock subs... How much did you get?
« on: August 01, 2008, 19:17 »
Had a few so far. All XS or Medium.

M: $1.70
XS: .29

10
First - Yes, there are limits on their extended licenses.

Second - They are my second best selling site after IS and I actually have my highest royalty per sale through them.

Experiences may vary - I am simply relating mine.


11
I've been on FT since April and have seen increased views and sales every month. I've also sold more extended licenses through them than on any other site I submit to.

No problems getting paid and I really like the commission increases as you sell.

Pages: [1]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors