pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock 'Offset' - a new high end marketplace for stock photos  (Read 35502 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rubyroo

« Reply #50 on: March 22, 2013, 08:32 »
0
Well yes of course you can :)  But I don't imagine they were thinking of your nose when they wrote that.  ;D


« Reply #51 on: March 22, 2013, 08:43 »
0
is SS "afraid" of Stocksy? when have they started to think of this project? looking forward to see what will happen in the next weeks

« Reply #52 on: March 22, 2013, 08:55 »
0
I just got tis e-mail from offset.
 "Hi Paul, 
 We have received your request for Offset thank you!   
 We are continuously adding imagery from top artists around the world and are striving to build the most comprehensive collection of unique images available through simplified licensing.   
 We look forward to inviting you in soon. 
 
 The Offset Team "

Same email here

« Reply #53 on: March 22, 2013, 09:03 »
+1
They have no reason to be afraid of anyone. I think the customers are lucky that offset and stocksy are coming to the market in the same year. They will be offered more choices. There hasn't been anything or anyone new in the upscale market for years.

What is ironic though is that getty is introducing it's 360 site, which sounds like an "all images are equal-all you can eat buffet" like shutterstock.

It's a good year for the customer.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2013, 09:05 by cobalt »

« Reply #54 on: March 22, 2013, 11:05 »
+2
The photos in the video look amazing. If shutterstock can make us decent money with $0.25-0.33-0.36 downloads, I imagine you can make a true stock photo income with their new site.
The only way to insure consistent high pricing is to make the site photo-exclusive. I have a lot of photos I've held back from alamy thinking to find an more boutique outlet, but knew I needed a huge backlog of images.
I was actually about to apply to a traditional site that sells only food and architecture/garden, now that I have enough to make a large initial submission, so I'm thinking that I'd like to try them at offset instead. I hope I have a chance to apply there. It's definitely a very different feel than shutterstock and it looks like it will be a very high bar to admission but certainly worth pursuing. I was kicking myself that I've held back my better work for so long hoping to place it elsewhere, but maybe this is the place to try. They certainly know how to market photos and I've always found them to be good people to deal with so I find the news very exciting.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #55 on: March 22, 2013, 11:11 »
0
This was discussed yesterday on SS and there is talk of certain size images which will limit the who's who of the site.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=129352&start=0

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Photographers
categories
news
Contact

Todd Antony
Kaz Arahama
Roberto Badin
Samuel Bristow
Jesse Burke
Lane Coder
Julian Dufort
Sophie Ebrard
Don Freeman
David Harriman
Cig Harvey
Alex Hoerner

Max Kim-Bee
Flynn Larsen
John Lawton
Larry Letters
Gerhard Linnekogel
Maura McEvoy
Bill Miles
Travis Rathbone
Peter Ross
Joe Schmelzer
Danny Zapalac


http://i2iphoto.com/ptf/Maura-McEvoy/interiors

Click on photographers or categories and select whoever you want to see.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I breezed through here today and didn't notice where anyone else caught it here is the link to the news.

http://thenextweb.com/media/2013/03/20/shutterstock-announces-plans-to-launch-offset-a-new-high-end-marketplace-for-stock-photos/

And see what it says on the bottom for those like I and others who tried to login and couldn't.

According to Shutterstocks event invitation, a preview of the service will be available on March 27th. The site appears to be slated for a public launch within the next few months.

If it has been discussed I missed but just in case here it is.

Tror

« Reply #56 on: March 22, 2013, 11:37 »
0
A really great move by SS! I was hoping for something like that.

High quality stock channels opens doors for creativity for anyone who has enough inspiration to not simply copy Yuris style.. Hopefully other Agencies start projects like this too. The implications of exploring this new Market segment (which is not necesarrily microstock) are broad...

aspp

« Reply #57 on: March 22, 2013, 13:25 »
+4
@ruxpriencdiam

I read that thread on SS. What I could not figure out is where anyone is getting the idea that those people are also all going to be putting their stock archives with Offset? Those of them that even do stock. That list of photographers is just a list of people who, like Maura McEvoy, are also represented by i2i for commissions - and who therefore have portfolios (representing examples of their styles) at the i2i site.

The size of images, the sort of camera you have got, is not going to be a primary factor in determining whether someone is in or out. It is going to be about the substance of their amazing work.

This was discussed yesterday on SS and there is talk of certain size images which will limit the who's who of the site.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=129352&start=0

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Photographers
categories
news
Contact

Todd Antony
Kaz Arahama
Roberto Badin
Samuel Bristow
Jesse Burke
Lane Coder
Julian Dufort
Sophie Ebrard
Don Freeman
David Harriman
Cig Harvey
Alex Hoerner

Max Kim-Bee
Flynn Larsen
John Lawton
Larry Letters
Gerhard Linnekogel
Maura McEvoy
Bill Miles
Travis Rathbone
Peter Ross
Joe Schmelzer
Danny Zapalac


http://i2iphoto.com/ptf/Maura-McEvoy/interiors

Click on photographers or categories and select whoever you want to see.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I breezed through here today and didn't notice where anyone else caught it here is the link to the news.

http://thenextweb.com/media/2013/03/20/shutterstock-announces-plans-to-launch-offset-a-new-high-end-marketplace-for-stock-photos/

And see what it says on the bottom for those like I and others who tried to login and couldn't.

According to Shutterstocks event invitation, a preview of the service will be available on March 27th. The site appears to be slated for a public launch within the next few months.

If it has been discussed I missed but just in case here it is.

« Reply #58 on: March 22, 2013, 13:40 »
0
Camera requirements are a holdover from the old days of traditional stock photo business models - but they are not necessarily invalid. You gotta remember that some of these agencies cater to a group of buyers who are in the market for images that can be blown up into very large prints and the standard for that kind of printing is well into the medium format world, even large format. If you're that type of customer, you wont' even bother with micro - there's no guarantee that any file you like was shot with a good enough system for your use. Why do you think Yuri shot with medium format? Because he probably understood that issue and did his own direct marketing making it known - that's what I would have done ;) Also keep in mind that even if the customer is going to commission the shoot, it will most likely be shot with a medium format camera, unless you're doing something that requires high speed bursts, etc... medium format isn't used for action.

I'm at one agency right now, traditional, that will not accept anything less than 12 megapixels.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2013, 13:43 by cardmaverick »

Poncke

« Reply #59 on: March 22, 2013, 13:43 »
0
I am with an agency that excepts nothing less then 50mb uncompressed, which comes down to about 18mp. All I am shooting is panoramas and stitched images for them. Love it.

« Reply #60 on: March 22, 2013, 13:44 »
0
The irony with micro - small images for web use - check. But the web is getting high res too ;) 4K internet is coming after it bombards TV standards.

mlwinphoto

« Reply #61 on: March 22, 2013, 14:14 »
+1
The D800 is a great camera.   :)

« Reply #62 on: March 22, 2013, 18:38 »
0
Interesting that they seem to be featuring Maura McEvoy. She was an interior stylist when I was a photo assistant long ago. She seems to have made the transition nicely.

« Reply #63 on: March 22, 2013, 19:38 »
0
Ponke, that agency's requirement is surprising since not all MPs are created equally.
Nikon's flagship D4 at 16.2 MP wouldn't make it?!

I am with an agency that excepts nothing less then 50mb uncompressed, which comes down to about 18mp. All I am shooting is panoramas and stitched images for them. Love it.

Poncke

« Reply #64 on: March 22, 2013, 19:56 »
0
Ponke, that agency's requirement is surprising since not all MPs are created equally.
Nikon's flagship D4 at 16.2 MP wouldn't make it?!

I am with an agency that excepts nothing less then 50mb uncompressed, which comes down to about 18mp. All I am shooting is panoramas and stitched images for them. Love it.

Correct. Its not the only agency that asks for 50mb uncompressed. And its 8 bit uncompressed, so you need a 100mb 16bit tif file to start with. Thats why I am shooting panoramas and stitched images to get to that number. You can do stairstep interpolating as well, but only if the image is sharp enough to do that.

« Reply #65 on: March 22, 2013, 21:57 »
+1
As expected and written, the market has found it's deepest level. Now anyone is starting new ideas for higher prices.
This next wave will kill the RM-agencys.

« Reply #66 on: March 25, 2013, 17:50 »
+10
I guess SS wants to cover the remaining part of the market - buyers that still snub the micros... which I don't see a problem with, however my opinion is that there is so much absolutely amazing work on micros these days that this "high-end" agencies would work purely on psychological basis. It's kinda like people who pay thousands for designer clothes and bags, but there is nothing really special about them except for the brand name, and they are often inferior to other things you can find for 1/100 of the price, but I guess these people feel good spending money on "names". The reality is that with Shutterstock very fast and highly relevant search you can find your amazing magazine cover or spread in minutes, of the highest quality and artistic value, and they'll give you the license you want (I've had those lovely sales and many magazine covers). So really, this would be to sell to people with not enough common sense...  ;)


Tror

« Reply #67 on: March 25, 2013, 18:37 »
+4
I guess SS wants to cover the remaining part of the market - buyers that still snub the micros... which I don't see a problem with, however my opinion is that there is so much absolutely amazing work on micros these days that this "high-end" agencies would work purely on psychological basis. It's kinda like people who pay thousands for designer clothes and bags, but there is nothing really special about them except for the brand name, and they are often inferior to other things you can find for 1/100 of the price, but I guess these people feel good spending money on "names". The reality is that with Shutterstock very fast and highly relevant search you can find your amazing magazine cover or spread in minutes, of the highest quality and artistic value, and they'll give you the license you want (I've had those lovely sales and many magazine covers). So really, this would be to sell to people with not enough common sense...  ;)

I agree generally....buuuuut:
1. In the past I had several times the problem to find content requested by a someone. Once you look at the sites with the eyes of a Ad agency they suddenly look like a desert. All looks the same.
2. Once a sales possibility is open, people my fill it. Nowadays the most profitable channel is Microstock (I guess), so all the content goes there. If sites like Stocksy or Offset manage to bring money all this content may go to those highend sites. And new content will be produced for these sites which may have never been produced for pure micros.

However, I could be all wrong, so I just sit back for now and enjoy the microstock market daily soap opera...

« Reply #68 on: March 25, 2013, 21:09 »
+8

I agree generally....buuuuut:
1. In the past I had several times the problem to find content requested by a someone. Once you look at the sites with the eyes of a Ad agency they suddenly look like a desert. All looks the same.
2. Once a sales possibility is open, people my fill it. Nowadays the most profitable channel is Microstock (I guess), so all the content goes there. If sites like Stocksy or Offset manage to bring money all this content may go to those highend sites. And new content will be produced for these sites which may have never been produced for pure micros.

However, I could be all wrong, so I just sit back for now and enjoy the microstock market daily soap opera...

I don't know the details about Stocksy or Offset, but it seems to me that those would be image-exclusive establishments, and also very picky about photographers, more like "closed clubs". They are basically doing what Getty was always doing, and then microstock came and blew them out of the water because microstock is open pretty much to everyone. And about image exclusivity - I tried that for a while with some agencies, and it sucks! Even if you're locking  just part of your portfolio with one agency, and the agency doesn't do well, you images just sit and age and it's wasted work. For an agency to start bringing really good returns they have to be something really special these days, revolutionary even, and so far I haven't seen anything of the kind. There are lots of collections out there that are calling themselves "premium" already, and the competition is stiff, and their sales are not really that impressive. Their content by the way also looks "the same", just different "same" - lens flares, retro film effects, blurs, weird crops... these things seem to be "in" right now, but will they be "in" in 5 years? I have images from 2005 that are still selling regularly, nothing "special" about them, and that's why:)

« Reply #69 on: March 26, 2013, 01:58 »
0
Guess it's all speculation at the moment, but would it not make sense for the new venture to scoop the best 10% of images off the top of their existing SS contributions?

Linked to some kind of exclusivity deal for chosen images the results would effectively stop premium content going to SS downstream competitors. That way the new agency would be as much about entering a new market and giving it to Getty as it would be about restricting SS competitors.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #70 on: March 26, 2013, 07:02 »
0
Preview available tomorrow.

« Reply #71 on: March 27, 2013, 08:46 »
0
Got this email this morning.


stocked

« Reply #72 on: March 27, 2013, 08:49 »
0
Got this email this morning.



Isn't that the standard-email everyone got?

« Reply #73 on: March 27, 2013, 08:54 »
0
Probably.

« Reply #74 on: March 27, 2013, 12:26 »
+2
The huge problem with non-exclusivity models is that people only have pricing to compete with, and once that happens, you will see you're earnings fall. Never compete on price.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
2691 Views
Last post October 16, 2012, 11:19
by gostwyck
9 Replies
2967 Views
Last post July 11, 2013, 01:21
by picture5469
7 Replies
8021 Views
Last post April 15, 2015, 21:47
by onepointfour
20 Replies
5405 Views
Last post December 02, 2015, 12:10
by Monty-m-gue
0 Replies
1089 Views
Last post October 06, 2016, 06:00
by Stock Performer

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results