Hi All,

I've been wondering about that for some time now, and figured I'd ask here...

I feel my sales on Fotolia are relatively much lower than average. My sales on SS and iStock are typically 6-10 time those on Fotolia, and very regularly, I make more 123rf than Fotolia. For the same set of submitted images, and with similar portfolio size. This contrasts a lot with, eg, Yuri's figures (http://www.arcurs.com/microstock-agencies-an-overview-for-beginners).

So... is it just me? Why? I tend to have 40+ keywords, and I don't spend too much time ordering them. I've read it might affect sales, but that much? Or maybe my stuff is not the kind that works there?

I'd appreciate any comments on this...

Thanks!
Antoine

I've never had great sales on Fotolia - nothing close to what I get on SS, IS and DT.

I did spot one thing in your comment though.  I believe Fotolia only uses the first seven keywords in your list.  Or maybe the first seven have higher impact.  Either way the first seven keywords in your list should always be the most pertinent to the image. This is for Fotolia only.  I don't think any of the other sites give a rip about keyword order.

I convinced my wife to do some keywording, she did for a few hours and then got a job the next day so there went that...

Phil

Hmmmmmm...I think I should try this with my youngest Son.  I'll put him to work with keywording and uploading.  He'll be so bored it will motivate him to get a "real" job and move out!! 

I don't have any help other than my Husband carrying equipment for me.  Of course, that's why I have thousands of images sitting on my hard drives waiting for keywording and post-processing.

I listened to a local professional photographer last night at the local photo club meeting.  She mentioned she has a Photoshop person that she hires when needed at $50 per hour.  I think I should change professions!

I'll definitely take a "wait & see" attitude.  I've wasted way too much time on some of these sites.  For example, I'll be spending the next 239 days continuing to delete one image a day from Albumo. 

My current plan is to stick with SS, IS and DT.  I'm dumping all other microstock sites as time permits.  For now I'm not uploading any more to them.

My focus is moving to Photoshelter and Alamy.  I might consider jumping on board something new in the midstock arena, but no more microstock.

I'll vote for Dreamstime too.  I can stop uploading for weeks and DT will continue to increase in sales.  SS drops off to nothing if you don't continue to feed it.  IS is just erratic.  If I ever decide to go exclusive, it will be with DT.  They are consistently my #1 or #2 earner each month.

Regardless of subs, I like their pricing structure much better than any other site.

Something like that would thrill me, but just once.  It would probably motivate me to dump microstock and concentrate on midstock and/or traditional stock.  It might even boost my confidence enough to jump into photography full-time (well maybe not - lol). 

This keyword thing is getting ridiculous.  I have an email from IS that these terms were removed from an aerial view of Manhattan:

Paris Metro Train (Subway Train), Paris Metro Sign (Subway Sign), Subway Station (Station), Chaos (Concepts)

Well yes, that makes perfect sense to remove those words since it isn't Paris or anything to do with a subway!  What I'd like to know is how those words got on my image in the first place!  I don't keyword spam - never have, never will.  I've never even been to Paris!!

Finally!

"Congratulations! You have reached $500 or more in all time Shutterstock earnings and your Standard License payout rate has been increased to $0.33 per download.

Best Regards,

Shutterstock "

It only took 18 months and 9 days!  lol

It's just another one of iStock's "great ideas."  Turning the community against each other.  And you can tell the admin isn't actually looking at the picture, they are just hitting "okay."  I mean, why would they remove the word "rose" when it's a freaking rose?  I also guarantee you there are a lot more independent contributors being wiki'd than there are exclusives.

I have to say that every time I see this stuff, I get a little more sick of microstock.  It seems like kindergarten run amok.  I cannot imagine this stuff goes on in the RM world.

Well said!  The management of the micro sites seems to becoming more and more amateurish. It's especially true when it comes to how they interact with their contributors.  They treat us like children.  I'm assuming this doesn't happen to exclusives or at least to the same degree as it happens to the rest of us peons.

Just another reason not to sell images of this caliber on microstock!

This question is for those of you who sell fine art prints and shoot with digital.  Do you sell your prints in the standard sizes of 8x10, 11x14, etc. or do you sell them at digital sizes like 10x15?  (Are digital sizes even standard or does that depend on whether or not you have a full frame sensor?)

I ask because when I shoot, I like to fill the frame with my subject.  I never think about possibly needing to crop to 8x10.  But now I'm wondering if I'm limiting myself when it comes to selling prints.

There's one by Laurin Rinder on there too - page 2 of "metro."

Yes, as long as you are the copyright holder you may sell them as stock.  Copyrights can be transferred from the original maker to someone else so even though you did not take the photographs you can still be the copyright holder.

UNLESS your annual income from microstock (or macrostock) is significant enough to be considered a living, i don't think anybody's life is going to be affected if microstock disappears into the crevice.

To be more exact, calculate the time you spent with the income microstock earns you. if you make more than minimum wage hourly, then i think it's something to consider. still, minimum wage does not make or break anyone's bank account

hahahahahahaha....tell that to all the people who have to live on minimum wage!  My youngest Son would definitely disagree with you.