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 - eurobanks

Pages: [1]
1
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 11, 2013, 20:19 »
Sean is like his avatar--Superman of stock.  Although this probably stings a bit now, his creative business mind can now go ape sh_t. 

Well said.  And I'll be here waiting for him to start iLockephoto. :)

2
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 11, 2013, 13:05 »
You've got to wonder exactly what business motive they had for dropping Sean.  Surely this wasn't an emotional decision on their part! :)  Considering how many salaries Sean's portfolio has covered at Getty/iStock, you'd think that some heads would have to roll immediately to make up for the abrupt loss in revenue.  It's not as if his body of work can be easily replaced by newcomers or established stockers. 

As for Sean, I know he'll come out of this on top.  Thanks for sharing your many talents, knowledge and inspiration with us over the years.  You're a leader in this industry.  I wish you and your family the best and even greater success than you had with iStock.

3
Stocksy / Re: Bruce, Our Knight in Shining Armor? Stocksy Co-op
« on: February 08, 2013, 16:01 »
Thanks for posting the update, Jo Ann.  It's good to hear things are still rolling behind the scenes.  That Stocksy has received such an overwhelming response already shouldn't be a surprise.  It's a sign that we contributors have been in need of something better for a long time. 

4
Stocksy / Re: Bruce, Our Knight in Shining Armor? Stocksy Co-op
« on: February 07, 2013, 08:59 »
This is exciting news!  With the benefit of experience behind him - good and bad - he has the potential to create a win win for contributors and buyers, and bring back the fun and inspiration that stock photography once was.

5
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Image Deactivation Tally for iStockPhoto
« on: February 02, 2013, 16:07 »
103 total deactivations.  More possible in the future as I continue to reassess my business relationship with iStock.

6
iStockPhoto.com / Re: D-Day (Deactivation Day) on Istock - Feb 2
« on: February 01, 2013, 16:57 »
I'm not waiting.  So far, I've deactivated 30 images, 7 of which were flames, and plan to pull even more.  I estimate that the 30 I removed have brought iStock/Thinkstock between $40k - $50k in revenue to date (my portion is waaaaay smaller), so they have lost some strong earners.   They are valuable to me, too, which is why I can't afford to have them floating around out there for free.  Fortunately, I dropped the exclusive crown over a year ago and can at least earn something on them elsewhere. 

Pulling my photos from iStock is going to have a significant impact on me financially, and since I reinvest a big portion of my earnings back into photography, my gear budget is going to take a hit.  Plans for purchases at Canon, Tamron, Adobe, B&H Photo, AlienBees, Kelby Training, and my local camera shop will have to be reduced or eliminated this year, depending on how things shake out across the board.   And worse, I'll have to slow down production of the photo project I've been working on for special needs kids.  My earnings are funding the project. 

What a shame.  This dirty deal is going to impact more than just the contributor.     

7
 
[/quote]

I think you will see it fluctuate.  I am not saying that there is a drop in exposure since you dropped exclusivity but it's only been a month for you and the best match and search will change.  Having been non-exclusive for a year now, I only noticed a drop in sales (downloads) the last few months.  Before then my sales (downloads) were about the same and sometimes higher than before going indie.  There's definitely been some tweaking of the site lately, and I don't think it will stay that way, they are always adjusting and tweaking the search engine.
[/quote]

Thanks, I hope you're right!  If the decline hadn't happened immediately after dropping the crown, I wouldn't have been so quick to identify the cause.  But it was a pretty stunning and sudden change that I hope swings the other way before long.  It's been pretty disheartening to see years of hard work become almost worthless overnight.  Still, I like being independent and seeing my older images sell again (however slowly) elsewhere. 

8
I can tell you without a doubt that best match ranking for non exclusives is very poor.  I'd been a diamond exclusive since 2006 and dropped my crown about a month ago.  Not only did my commission drop over 50%, but my downloads immediately dropped at least 50% as well.  I'd had pretty steady numbers for several years (i.e., no growth) throughout most of the best match changes, so this drop was a big shock and definitely linked to exclusivity status.  Total damage has been about an 80-85% loss of income.   It's going to take a long time to recoup that money on other sites because placement in the searches for new files has been tough where I've uploaded so far.

I hope not to discourage anyone from doing what they want to do, but be prepared for a bumpy ride if you want to drop the crown.   I have no regrets.  With no growth opportunity on istock, I had to make the leap to determine whether stock photography is worth my time at all.  It's too soon to tell. 

Leslie

 

9
Shutterstock.com / Re: I wonder who they're aiming this at
« on: November 19, 2011, 09:58 »
What's weird is that a few of my vettas on iS weren't accepted because they had "limited commercial value", even though they've sold a good number of times at a high price on iS. Is there an appeal process on SS? If this is off-topic never mind.

Nothing formal, but I had a similar experience with some ex-Vettas and best sellers rejected for limited commercial value. For some I resubmitted with a note to the reviewer of how many times the files had sold on iStock and in most cases they were accepted the second time. I always note when it's a resubmission and what I've changed or why I'm trying again - in the note to reviewer, another nice feature. I would strongly discourage trying again without a note and I don't think a support ticket will get you anywhere other than referred to SS's critique forum. I don't think the latter's helpful unless you think there's something wrong with your image and you want to figure out what and how to fix.

What you'll find is that there  are some types of shots where SS will happily accept things iStock never would but also that some things that (a) I think are commercial (b) iStock accepted and (c) are technically sound that SS just won't take. For a variety of reasons this is also true of other sites - DT has problems with more than a handful from a series, 123rf is super-picky about property releases, even for things shot from a public place, and so no. Fight a few if you think it's worth it, but otherwise just move on. The agencies generally don't budge if you hit one of their policy walls.

Thanks for the helpful hints, Jo Ann.  I'm finding the same issue with limited commercial value rejections on SS that I know are proven sellers on IS.  I'm glad to know that SS will reconsider sometimes. 
I have to scratch my head with the amount of latitude SS gives inspectors with the LCV rejections, especially in an area that is completely subjective.  To me, SS is leaving good money on the table by trying to guess what designers want and don't want.  But as you say, each agency has its hot buttons and they are all trying to keep their swelling databases under control, so in most cases, I'll just move on.

10
Shutterstock.com / Re: I wonder who they're aiming this at
« on: November 16, 2011, 20:31 »
I actually might be the culprit behind that article.  I was a diamond exclusive at istock and recently dropped the crown.  During my 30 day notice period that istock requires to drop exclusivity, I submitted my first 10 to be accepted as a contributor on Shutterstock and got in within 24 hours.  Not only was I surprised that it happened so quickly, I also didn't know that my initial submission would be posted and for sale immediately.  At istock, you have to resubmit your initial submission.  When I found out, I immediately deleted the 10 images in my SS portfolio and resubmitted them after my 30 days were up.  I didn't know until after the fact when I contacted support about the feature SS pointed out in the article.  So maybe that's why - it's an important feature to know about.

11
I don't think you should upload anything other than your first 10 (downsized to 2000x3000 probably or smaller to make sure they are perfect looking).  Your best match placement will be horrible if you upload them and they just sit there not getting downloaded, when I was there it really made a huge difference how you uploaded not just what you did.  By the way I'm near DC now if you ever want to do a shoot in the city I'm up for it.  Good luck with this.
[/quote]

Ah, good point! Thanks!  A city shoot would be fun.  Thanks for the luck - I'm gonna need it!

12
My main concern after hearing that Shutterstock has become tougher on acceptances was not getting 7 of 10 approved and having to wait another 30 days to reapply.  I'd like to get approved first before I cancel exclusivity with istock.   And of course, it would be good to have a small portfolio in place at Shutterstock once I was cleared from iStock.

13

[/quote]

yes you can get accepted there and start uploading even while you wait the 30 day waiting period for your exclusivity to end.  that is, assuming you did cancel the exclusivity and are in the 30 day wating period.  you just opt out of everything at shutterstock, then when your exclusivity is canceled at istock, opt in to the sales programs you want at shutterstock and your portfolio will go live.
[/quote]

Fantastic.  Thanks!  I haven't cancelled yet.  Still working on my timeline.

14
To get started with Shutterstock, can you submit your 10 for initial review before dropping exclusivity with iStock?  In other words, is it just part of the admission process or would those accepted be automatically put in your portfolio?

Thanks, Leslie 

15
If you're spending money on models, I'd suggest avoiding the "stand around portraits" that you have in large numbers, like this one, for example: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14336573-young-woman-portrait.php - they just don't sell.  They really need to be doing something, as you can see from the sales of the business ones.
[/quote]

Yes, I do need more activity, but oddly enough, an almost identical one to the one you cited is the only one from that series of college kids hiking that was starting to sell regularly.  It sold 9 times in one month (which for me is pretty good) after I uploaded it last summer, until a best match "tweak" sent it packing.  It was one of those bugs where the more an image was viewed or sold, the further back it got pushed. That day, it stopped selling, of course, except for 1 sale a couple weeks ago.  I uploaded the similar one you cited above hoping it would be seen again in the searches.  If the first one would have stayed on pace, it would have quickly recovered the cost of the shoot and given the rest in that series some exposure through the litebox link.  But it didn't and that series has been relatively dormant since then.  After that and the royalty cuts, I decided to stop hiring models until a couple weeks ago when I did it just for fun.   

So that's why I say, by trying other agencies I will finally get to answer the question of whether or not I should continue doing stock photography or hang it up for good. 

16
Jo Ann, I completely agree.  Istock is heading in a direction I just can't follow, nor do I have the incentive to try to follow.  For the last couple of years, new content has been seriously hindered by Best Match which makes it extremely difficult to grow earnings. 

I spent over $10k in equipment and software last year, started hiring models, and really tried to treat it as a "business" as Sean has so often stressed.  But none of the those model shoots have panned out the way I was hoping - they've only helped me maintain my already weak numbers in slow drip downloads.  And even when it seemed that a series would take off, a Best Match "tweak" would come along and interrupt the natural lifecycle of my better sellers.  That has happened over and over again. 

So by possibly ditching the crown, I'm not expecting the grass to be greener at other agencies, I just want the grass to be more evenly cut.  So in cases when iStock's 2 word search function is broken, when new uploads aren't posting, when new uploads are sent to the very back of the searches, when aRGB thumbnails look like the color of dirt, when royalties are cut, when Best Match is "tweaked," etc. etc. etc., I will at least have an alternate source of earnings to fill in the gaps. 

And, if uploading to other sites doesn't improve my earnings, I'll know for sure if iStock was the problem or if I should just throw in the towel.

17
Wow!  I can't believe how strict Dreamstime is!  But thanks for the warning. And Lisa, your work is fantastic! I've been a longtime fan.  Leslie

Thanks Leslie!  I just checked out your work, and was really impressed.  I especially like your photographs of Washington DC.  I have loads of family there but have somehow never managed to get there when the cherry blossoms are in bloom.  You have captured them beautifully!  You can count me as a new fan :D

Thanks, Lisa!  It's funny you mention that about DC.  I've been living in the DC burbs for 17 years and this is the first time I've gotten downtown to photograph them.  For some reason, DC just seems so far away even though it's right down the road!

18
Wow!  I can't believe how strict Dreamstime is!  But thanks for the warning. And Lisa, your work is fantastic! I've been a longtime fan.  Leslie

19
Leslie, just one additional piece of advice about Dreamstime.  Recently they are VERY strict on uploading similars.  I would suggest culling out a few of the very best images from each series, rather than uploading them all to Dreamstime.  It is important to have a high acceptance ratio at Dreamstime, more so than the other sites, because it is a big factor in search placement. 

Lisa -by similars, does that mean they won't take a series of expressions?  For instance, where I have a model isolated on white and she's looking up in one, looking to the side in another, smiling in one and with a neutral expression in another, would they consider those to be similar?  Otherwise, I don't think I'll run into that problem.  It takes me sooo long to process one image it's hard to imagine having time to process multiples!  Also, on the istock forums awhile back, didn't you say you were having trouble becoming exclusive at istock because other agencies had long lag times for removing your images on their sites?  Is that still an issue?  Thanks for the advice! Leslie

20
Thanks, everyone.  You all gave me alot of helpful advice.
Leslie

21
yes they will!  that was one of my major concerns as well.  You just have to remove the istock logo and address from it.  There is a generic model release (i think that is the getty one) that you can use with all the sites.  I had been exclusive with istock since I started there in 2004 and dumped the crown after the September RC announcement.  I saw the writing on the wall and I have no regrets.
[/quote]

Thank you!!  That's a relief!

How are inspections at other sites?  Are they as tough as istock or just different?  It seems like every time I try to take a risk with processing on istock, I get rejected.  Sometimes I just want to let the market to decide. 

22
Jo Ann - thanks for providing more details.  I have much to learn!  I value your posts on your experience going back and forth between indendent and exclusive.  Even though I've been agonizing over this for quite some time (as my husband just reminded me!), the simple answer is my numbers should be growning not shrinking.  And that's just not happening at istock and it is never going to.   

My biggest concern in making the decision is the model release.  I've always used iStock's form, so does anyone know if the other sites will accept it?  I'd hate to go back and ask my models to fill out new ones.  Of course, I'll use Getty's form going forward, as I believe Lisafx recently recommended in another post.

Thanks!

Leslie

23
I'm strongly considering dumping my crown, too.  I appreciate everyone's input here in making my decision, which is a very difficult one.  I've been exclusive to istock since 2007 and have never uploaded to other sites.  It seems a bit daunting, but I'm tired of flatlining at istock.  I feel like after all my hard work, my portfolio should be worth more than 20-30 downloads a day.  I'll never know unless I try. 

Good luck, Jo Ann!  I'm pretty quiet on the istock forums, but I do read them.  I appreciate you always watching we contributor's backs.

Pages: [1]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors