You are reading my mind. I want it Leo, looks good, and I don't care about uploading to DP. Just need a good self publishing site, raster and vector. Also yes to selling video would be a good match for most of us.

Make the basic good working site first, add the tricks and fancy parts later.

Thanks Yada. It appears by the comments and views on this thread there is interest, so I might get official in eventually releasing what I've shown above.

I am currently rewriting it, and will post updates.

Regarding video, I've done a few animations. If I had to make a system for myself including video this is what I would do:

Interface with Youtube somehow (either directly or API) and have all of my previews there. Then I would simply have a youtube preview on the given product, included in as seemless a way as possible.

I would do this for myself for these reasons:

1: Youtube is a promotional area anyways, and I can passively acquire a fan base there.
2: Youtube has a perfected system and I wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel.
3: No load on my personal site.
4: Far easier, less error prone. This is not laziness, but practicality.

[edit, I just realized not everyone has access to youtube, but the same reasoning applies in using a complementing service, but I will look into the on-site option as well]

The system is more concerned with selling products unspecifically, unconcerned with types, so that your limitations are removed. I believe this approach takes away one's constraints as the years force them to have to adapt.

I'd like feedback on the video thing. Including video streamers on-site seems like an unecessary use of resources with unecessary complexities...but if its otherwise please let me know.

I think it will only be perfection when we have one site to upload to, instead of many people having their own site and wasting money paying for domains and hosting fees.  I still think the majority of people will find it hard to break even running their own site and what's the point of that?

It truly is a tough call. I really like having my own site to sell from, and given a choice I would never get rid of it. But others rightfully take your view as well. If there was a genuinely good and profitable agency that could be counted on indefinitely, it would certainly be worth shutting down my independent pursuits. But this world promises much and gives little, so I've developed my own strategies just to find a happy and productive medium.

I'll see if the idea takes, and if not I'll check in another year from now as things continue to evolve.

Continued from here: http://www.microstockgroup.com/symbiostock-general/to-the-'legacy-users'/msg474259/?topicseen#new

I've had a few people nudging me on my past endeavors to create an ideal stock-image sell-direct solution.

[edit: thread has been aggressively trolled, so I've distilled the Q/A into this main post here:]

---

See the screenshots below. These are images of a working system I use for myself. Its a client-side website generator for your stock images. It removes the complexity of web design by pre-generating and pre-processing on your computer, then uploading the resulting website to your server.

This allows an artist to simply input FTP credentials (like any stock website) and the software manages everything else.

I created this system because I wanted to set up my website to stand the test of time, and require 0 maintenace -- forever. By reducing dynamic files and not using CMSs like Wordpress, there is no need for upgrades and maintenance. Hacking threats are reduced as well. Server resources are used only to serve html and images.

The main beauty in this is absolute simplicity and the speed resulting.

What it is:

-A simple static website generator.
-A way to simplify and save time in self-hosting your image store.
-A way to use "cheap hosting" without sacrificing performance.

What it isn't:

-A solution to microstock political/economic issues often spoken about.
-A guaranteed way to sell independently (this differs from person to person).
-A network or co-op.
-Complicated.

How can a static (html-only) site perform ecommerce functions?

All functionality is Javascript run (browser) and not server side.

Why not just use some other self-hosting solution.

You certainly can. Other solutions can be useful for people with some experience in web design. The purpose of this is ultimate simplicity and stability, not to mention SPEED. Most dynamic sites can be rather high maintenance or resource hogs. This removes all those burdens.

Will it generate AWESOME looking websites?

It will generate minimalistic and clean websites, devoid of a style-statement, with all focus on your product and a rapid-checkout scheme. The pages (much like my website) will be mobile-device compliant and standards compliant, besides having the basic SEO considerations.

Is it better than the other stuff everyone has tried?

It is far different, with different priorities (simplicity, speed, user-friendliness). If you want a super-feature-oriented, super-customizable site, it might be better to learn a bit of web-culture/design and use one of the common options. This is for people who, like me, don't want to be bothered with my site except to just add products occasionally.



Please note that I am currently refining and rewriting the systems for largescale use, but it works thus far. My website is Django-run, but the client-side page-generator works fine.

More information provided on previous thread.

Image explorer (not unlike Adobe Bridge)


Image search:


Meta data:


Previews/sales info:


Uploader:


Site monitor/viewer:


Speed, performance, and crystal-clean code is usually my objective. I'm not so concerned with boastful gloss in ecommerce sites -- I believe in functionality first and minimalism so as to keep focus on the product.

Currently I am pursuing other things, having left off from microstock a long time ago. But still, people may wish to find a "graveyard" or final resting place for their images that they can leave for 10 years without thinking about it. That is what I did, and I enjoy sales on my site too. Because my site runs so clean, it has absolutely no issues on minimal-charge hosting.

It is my honest opinion that for any continued survival in this business more changes will be needed in expectations as well as pursuits. Meanwhile I do enjoy building this stuff
 

As early as 2011 I realized for certain where things were going with Microstock. Today, August 5th, I have decided to stop uploading and pursue a new industry. I'll let my work fall below a certain point in income then I will shut down all of my agency connections. Customers will only find me on my website.

I should praise microstock for bringing me from a sign shop to being a programmer, 3d artist, web designer, etc, besides the many customers who searched me out because they found me on an agency. Microstock has been full of good times. These things would not have been possible without this industry. There was a genuine turning point when I saw Istock giving away my images, and the obvious crash was silent, but it has happened. Much like the 2008 housing crisis, people only realize what a huge fall that had occurred in retrospect.

With these online superstores there comes a point when you are gaming or getting gamed, or maybe a little of both. Obviously when it comes to shear profit and opportunity, you know who is making bank. I don't think the owners of the agencies are motivated by canister achievements and cute pixel badges. Random rewards are good for rats, but not for me. If I tweet "I got a sale on Dreamstime!" I'm not sure how this is helping me... but this is the proverbial "Skinner Box" where contributors are led on by less than logical motivations. Some recognize this, some don't. Its not a common subject.

On this island I walked into a photographer's shop (undersea photography). He had to sell enough of his work to pay rent in the Queen's Shops at least. He was roughly my age, give or take a few years. I said "Your work is phenomenal! I'm curious - have you ever sold through a microstock agency?"

He stated quite matter-of-factly that he would be throwing away his work and dooming his career if he did this. This was not a surprise to me - I've asked quite a few photographers around here about that and they responded similarly. I understand though there are different ways to approach a market or markets, so this is not to say they were "right" but rather decided what they thought, with obvious results, what sustainability meant. Its the difference between a gormet chocolatier (we have one on this island here too!) and someone who runs a general candy shop (in hilo! awesome shop!).

I'm not badmouthing Microstock. I did well up till 2013. It had its place. In my teens I could have easily been convinced that investing in Beanie Babies would put my unborn kids through college, and silly me, a few years later I would have a room stuffed with useless sock animals. But I'm 37 tomorrow, and I've decided to make a career change. I look at the ploys and obviously less-than-logical motivations this industry uses to lead people on, and I've put it behind me and below me. I recognized the methodologies as early as 2008 when I saw Istock "Steel Cages" but hey I was making money so I could overlook it. Besides, that little double-blue-flame was a fun thing to see at the time even if it inspired people to copy me. I could tolerate the "community" power plays and hierarchies because the money was good.

I was telling my wife, as I woke up with an epiphany, that I used to count my sales in $3-$7 increments multiple times a day on the same image, and multiple images would sell this way. Profits were astronomical across the board. While diversifying among agencies has slowed the decline, the dynamics and numbers are different now. Its enough to say "Ok, I'm out". The epiphany was that my first 100 images in the first months outperformed my 4000 images in these months. My production is higher in quality and some months quantity, but the return is fractional compared to before.

That is not to say, of course, that there not will be many newcomers who might actually come into this business and rock the house. But I haven't numbered myself among those obviously more qualified producers.

Since many of us have shared successes together, as well as declines, perhaps we might share the enlightenment too. As for anyone who can stick it out longer - no shame on you! You are probably the right animal for this savana. But I believe, like many here, this industry has polished us up for the next venture. Onward and upward!

If you've come to the same conclusion I have, feel free to speak up with the good bad and ugly times, and if you are happy to share your new direction please do. I hope for the success of everyone I had known in Microstock.

Leo

Nice to see someone has found a way to make decent money from their images in this business

I think the fatal flaw with ---- or whatever its called now is that we were all paying for our own sites.  There's a lot of money wasted on domain names, hosting and time wasted designing all those sites and keeping them updated and secure.  I don't think the sites do well enough with google or are attractive enough to buyers.  There will be some people that can make that work but not many.

Yes, and those people succeed wherever they upload. Its actually true.

I can say having tried this idea that it does seem good on paper, but unfortunately I have to conclude as many have that you must use an agency such as the big ones or go it alone.

Be careful when you throw your lot in with people you don't know. You might end up severely downgraded by association.

There is a joke I like, maybe you've heard it before.

A man walks into a bar and says "Lets start an agency run by contributors..."

I was that man, but sadly, I'm not a drinker.

Hi JoAnne! Hope you are well!

These days I'm happy to settle for the lesser evil. Copyright can be very enigmatic and subjective the same as any other specialty area of law. I try to stick with the usual rules and hope for the best. In the end its who can stack the most money on the scale of justice, especially when it comes to the cryptic laws and expensive lawyers who interpret them. Its a bonus I've even made it this far as an artist I suppose.

Regarding showing the image:

We are hoping you can provide concrete answers to these questions, and they do not require comparison to any other image. 

Most agencies can drop you with or without cause (according to their fine print) so its a bonus that it even worked out, and for that I'm thankful.

Scary indeed, but things are ok now.

Here is response:

Dear Leo Blanchette,

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.  We take copyright infringement seriously and when there is a claim we take every measure to thoroughly investigate.  Based upon the agreement you consented to when becoming a contributor, we retain the sole discretion to suspend accounts that may have infringing content, until matters are resolved.

Uploading has been turned back on and your account has been reactivated.

Regards,

Shutterstock Compliance

If nothing else the iron fist on the matter really shows what can happen to an actual plagiarizer, so that is good. The same system would crush a pirate in a second if they had undeniably stolen my work, so for that I am thankful.

Mostly I was concerned I would become collateral damage by a giant system not tuned for the details, but the end result is that they did a proper inspection and recognized the legitimacy of my image.

That being said, and nothing against Shutterstock in particular - I NEED TO GET OUT OF THIS BUSINESS LOL

Answer their questions and show them your original files.

That I've done unfortunately its just a vector but all explanations have been given.

Thanks for that update - its good to hear from a pro that things are down (its not just me!)