I have wanted to do this for a while, and THIS THREAD got me motivated.

I am happy to announce that the polls are now open
You can get to them by clicking the 'polls' link at the top of the page, or by clicking here.

Results are posted here, but there is also a link on the 'polls' page you should be able to find.

Let me know if you have any problems or if you have any suggestions as to how to make it better - or if you don't understand anything.  I plan to integrate the poll results into the site a little better later on - and add the rest of the sites (or at least most of them) into the voting.  Perhaps I could say this is the 'beta' mode that seems like such a popular phrase for the time being.

May the best stock site win

NOTE: you can only fill in the fields in one poll at a time before you click submit.  if you fill in more than one they will be ignored - if that didn't make sense you will figure it out soon enough.

Done.

I'm curious about some results.  FT gets less that IS in consistency review.  I have a low rejection rate in FT, is it not common?  In BigStock also, rejections are very low (I gave it a 10, although it isn't necessarily a good thing - but it's consistent!).

Regards,
Adelaide

Done.

Done! The last question I found too similar to the "website user interface" question. (or I am missing something  )

I have never dealt with customer service at any sites so I did not vote. I do however appreciate steve-ohs consistent posts here (and on stockxpert) and must give them kudos for that.

Congratulations to SS they are winning every single category.

It looks like there has been at least 31 voters so far - so things seem to be working.  Would be good to get at least 100 votes though so we can see a 'real' average.

with the 'overall' category i just wanted sort of an overall rating for the site.  i thought about trying to calculate one automatically - which is perhaps what i should do but then the various catagories whould be weighted different.  Earnings is perhaps one of the most important factors so it should be weighted heavier. - so in the end I decided to just let everyone vote for their 'overall opinion' of a site.

I am not sure the best way to word it though, so if anyone has any suggestions feel free to voice them.  Or if there are poll categories I missed - let me know of any suggestions.

with the 'overall' category i just wanted sort of an overall rating for the site.  i thought about trying to calculate one automatically - which is perhaps what i should do but then the various catagories whould be weighted different.  Earnings is perhaps one of the most important factors so it should be weighted heavier. - so in the end I decided to just let everyone vote for their 'overall opinion' of a site.

Heres an idea for a calculation:

Earnings x 5
Upload x 1.5
Service x .5
Consistency x 1
Website x 1.5

42
13.05
3.75
8.1
12.45

Shutterstock = 79.35

29.5
11.1
2.65
6.9
11.25

Dreamstime = 61.40

36.5
5.25
2.65
6.6
10.95

Istockphoto = 61.95

25
11.7
3.4
4.6
11.25

StockXpert = 55.95

25
8.85
2.35
6.3
8.85

Fotolia = 51.35

19
9.9
3.15
7.4
9.15

Bigstockphoto = 48.60

You can add overall in there somewhere too, that might make it more accurate.

Ok :-)

I think the ease of upload should be rated heavier (x3?).
Don't care about the web-interface so much (x.5?).

Ok :-)

I think the ease of upload should be rated heavier (x3?).
Don't care about the web-interface so much (x.5?).

yeah i thought the same.  Ease of uploading is a BIG factor when submitting to numerous sites.  If they were all as hard as shutterstock we could only feaseably upload to 3or4 sites.  When they are as easy as crestock, lucky oliver or stockxpert it is a breeze to get your portfolio online.  After, we are photographers - not 'image uploaders' - anything to make computer time for efficient is welcomed.

I think earnings should have the highest weight percentage. If you increase the weight of ease of upload then that reduces the weight for earnings. I would much rather spend time uploading to a site like iStock (which is a royal pain in the ass) than to a site like Crestock. Reason being, the uploads on iStock will actually make you money, the time you spent on Crestock will get you hardly anything.

(I do upload to Crestock, and have nothing against them.)

Website should be more than .5 (as suggested by some) because having the ability to edit your files information easily and check detailed statistics is important, in my opinion at least. Certainly weighted more than .5.

you make a good point that webiste is important.  I dread ever wanting to try and delete or edit a photo on shutterstock.  To try and figure out which upload batch it is in is nearly impossible...

here is my suggestions (out of 10)

earnings x 5
upload x 2
service x 1
consistency x 1
website x 1

yeah i plan on doing that actually - but i need time before it will work.  if I am going to say that a site went up or down a certain % then I have to compare it to a time before.  I have planned to compare the sites to themselves month by month - so as soon as next months voting starts we can see which sites have gone up and down.  I think this will be most interesting in regards to earnings, but will also be interesting to see peoples opinions on things like user interface and site design when sites change their layout.

I agree that the results should be weighted.  The key component is MONEY.  An agency might have the best web site and customer service in the world, but if they cannot sell one's pictures all of that is pointless.

On the other hand if an agency is very successful in selling and generates a very good economic return on one's images, then complex uploading procedures and/or high quality requirements are worth the effort.