MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Stocksy => Topic started by: Artist on March 25, 2013, 13:40
-
Check the link..
http://www.stocksy.com/ (http://www.stocksy.com/)
-
I like it, inspirational and I can see room to grow with the design. Push the industry hard Stocksy!! give them a good kick to reality!
-
Seems a bit buggy. (mac/safari)
Page won't load fully and when you scroll back to the top the header and images disappear.
Other than that...
-
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!
Will probably take a while to took off but an AWESOME step in the right direction for us all :D
-
Well, I was afraid it would go that direction. That trendy look is going to look so dated this time next year.
-
Well, I was afraid it would go that direction. That trendy look is going to look so dated this time next year.
What's trendy? The site design? The content? I'm not seeing anything particularly unusual, but maybe I'm missing something.
-
Well, I was afraid it would go that direction. That trendy look is going to look so dated this time next year.
What's trendy? The site design? The content? I'm not seeing anything particularly unusual, but maybe I'm missing something.
The submissions. That "faded color" look is hot in all the commercials right now.
-
Might as well go for something the other sites haven't and that trendy look has been around for years but http://www.photocase.com/ (http://www.photocase.com/) got there first.
-
The submissions. That "faded color" look is hot in all the commercials right now.
Hmm. I'm seeing a fair variety of style. Nothing groundbreaking though - they've even got the requisite business handshake photos... :)
-
Seems a bit buggy. (mac/safari)
Page won't load fully and when you scroll back to the top the header and images disappear.
Other than that...
A BIT buggy? The site won't open at all for me ... all it says is "this page can't be displayed" ... and I'm soooo curious!!
-
So can those of us that never got a reply to the email after they asked for a selection of our photos apply now? Now I know what they've accepted, I think it should be much easier to supply what they want.
-
Might as well go for something the other sites haven't and that trendy look has been around for years but [url]http://www.photocase.com/[/url] ([url]http://www.photocase.com/[/url]) got there first.
I'd say photocase is more "low-fi". Stocksy seems more "artsy", at least in my humble opinion.
-
Guess I was hoping for a smooth kick-off, but it seems more like a buggy istock release ;)
Chrome doesn't display it right, 1st search for 'people' showed no results, and uh, large thumbnails aren't watermarked? First page is slow but looks nice, but beyond that there's clear css and alignment issues.
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/48487421/Pics/stocksyscreenshot.JPG)
I'm sure they'll have these sorted out in few days, and I hope it's successful enough to thrive :)
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
-
I clicked on the contributor page. A few names I recognized from iStock, but all artists are using real names so they all dropped their iStock names. Sean has about 1,200 images up so far.
-
If you can't get the front page to open, these are interesting and may open for you:
http://blog.stocksy.com/ (http://blog.stocksy.com/)
http://www.stocksy.com/service/about (http://www.stocksy.com/service/about)
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
It's exclusive!!!!
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
I can't find the same images on other sites. Lots are ones that used to be on istock but they aren't there any more. Can you see any selling on other sites?
-
The facebook group and page are live as well.
-
Main page freezes my browser on my iPhone for long periods while it loads batches of thumbnails. During that time I can't do anything except quit the browser. No scrolling, pinching, or anything. Oh well.
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
I can't find the same images on other sites. Lots are ones that used to be on istock but they aren't there any more. Can you see any selling on other sites?
http://www.stocksy.com/asset/4806 (http://www.stocksy.com/asset/4806)
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-5594825-amazonian-butterflies-behind-glass.php?st=a3bc3a2 (http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-5594825-amazonian-butterflies-behind-glass.php?st=a3bc3a2)
-
working fine for me at the mo', looks great, hope to be able to contribute one day!
-
Empty your browser cache and it should kick in fine :-)
http://blog.stocksy.com/blog/2013/3/21/stocksy-a-new-hope (http://blog.stocksy.com/blog/2013/3/21/stocksy-a-new-hope)
-
If you can't get the front page to open, these are interesting and may open for you:
[url]http://blog.stocksy.com/[/url] ([url]http://blog.stocksy.com/[/url])
[url]http://www.stocksy.com/service/about[/url] ([url]http://www.stocksy.com/service/about[/url])
Thank you so much!
-
Looks really good on my phone, but a total mess in my browser.
Ah, just refreshed the page. Now, it looks the same.
-
Interesting pricing. I've had success selling small sized images at those prices, but the top end stuff might be a little pricey.
-
I do like the approach though with the real names and faces of the contributors and a page so you can see all the contributors at a glance. It gives it that home grown, organic feel, it says who the real people are behind it all, gives it an honest and approachable feel, and I think that will appeal to designers.
-
Wow. Quite a few ex Istock inspectors are there.
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
I can't find the same images on other sites. Lots are ones that used to be on istock but they aren't there any more. Can you see any selling on other sites?
[url]http://www.stocksy.com/asset/4806[/url] ([url]http://www.stocksy.com/asset/4806[/url])
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-5594825-amazonian-butterflies-behind-glass.php?st=a3bc3a2[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-5594825-amazonian-butterflies-behind-glass.php?st=a3bc3a2[/url])
That's interesting. I wonder if he's leaving istock? I don't know if he was exclusive there but I can't see his portfolio on other sites. Might be the usual problems getting images off istock?
-
Very strange collection. Shallow dof, cross processed, snapshottish compositions.
I do not like it, but that doesnt matter as long as the customers do, and I suppose those folks know what they are doing.
Certainly not the same collection as on the other agencies, although I can see where they got the inspiration from.
I would not know what and how to shoot to make pictures like that.
-
That's interesting. I wonder if he's leaving istock? I don't know if he was exclusive there but I can't see his portfolio on other sites. Might be the usual problems getting images off istock?
Doesn't matter, because he has this (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=110770700) on Shutterstock and it's also on Stocksy. As well as several other images.
Was it ever confirmed by someone at Stocksy that they are image-exclusive? I can't find anything on the Stocksy site saying that.
And sorry, Simon, to be picking on your stuff. It's just some of the easiest work to find elsewhere because I know where to look (SS and istock).
-
The site is a bit slow for me... and no mouseover previews? Having to click each image to see a larger preview feels a bit old fashioned.
And the style they're looking for seems to mean that they're not really competing with the other agencies. And no vectors... no video, no audio.
-
The total amount of content might be a bit light for a full on site launch though. They have just under 120 contributors and perhaps about 50,000 images online or less. That probably does not offer enough subject coverage yet to make it a worthwhile stop for designers yet. They will have to grow that a bit more first I think.
-
Awesome site! I love how blocky/minimal it is.
-
It's great to see such beautiful images. Definitely a great collection.
-
Was it ever confirmed by someone at Stocksy that they are image-exclusive? I can't find anything on the Stocksy site saying that.
Confirmed loud and clearly!
-
Was it ever confirmed by someone at Stocksy that they are image-exclusive? I can't find anything on the Stocksy site saying that.
Confirmed loud and clearly!
I think they should state it in their home page "All images exclusive", or something like that. That's an interesting information for customers.
-
They can't be exclusive if some people have the same images on other sites. Is it just a mistake? Seems hard to believe it can be a mistake because it's so easy to find images on other sites but it must of been chaos doing the launch, so I wouldn't be surprised.
-
Was it ever confirmed by someone at Stocksy that they are image-exclusive? I can't find anything on the Stocksy site saying that.
Confirmed loud and clearly!
Where exactly?
-
Was it ever confirmed by someone at Stocksy that they are image-exclusive? I can't find anything on the Stocksy site saying that.
Confirmed loud and clearly!
Where exactly?
Blog, Forum, Guide etc.
-
Blog, Forum, Guide etc.
Unless I'm reading the wrong blog, the Stocksy blog only has 1 entry and it says nothing about exclusivity.
And this forum is obviously not a direct source.
Can I ask for a link to where any of this is stated?
Thanks
-
dude, it is image exclusivity. :D
-
Blog, Forum, Guide etc.
Unless I'm reading the wrong blog, the Stocksy blog only has 1 entry and it says nothing about exclusivity.
And this forum is obviously not a direct source.
Can I ask for a link to where any of this is stated?
Thanks
http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30 (http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30)
-
dude, it is image exclusivity. :D
According to who? Us?
I assumed it was, like everyone else here, but I see nothing on the website about it, and obviously there are images on the site that are available elsewhere. I'm just asking for a little official confirmation, or a link to something that confirms the exclusive policy. Something other than just forum chatter.
-
[url]http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30[/url] ([url]http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30[/url])
For some reason that link goes back to the homepage for me.
-
If it's image exclusive, is it RF-type of exclusivity and can you sell the same image as prints and posters on third-party sites?
AFAIK iStock exclusives are able to do so, because the exclusivity is limited only to (RF) licensing.
-
dude, it is image exclusivity. :D
if so why the example Mike talked about on the 1st page ::)
p.s. OMG what is the problem with my entry? get a life guys, have I offended anybody???
-
[url]http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30[/url] ([url]http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30[/url])
For some reason that link goes back to the homepage for me.
I suspect you need to be logged in to see some of the site features. Not much showing to me either atm.
-
The total amount of content might be a bit light for a full on site launch though. They have just under 120 contributors and perhaps about 50,000 images online or less. That probably does not offer enough subject coverage yet to make it a worthwhile stop for designers yet. They will have to grow that a bit more first I think.
I Agree, and only 2,200 people images... a bit tiny for a launch.
-
I dropped istock exclusivity a short while ago but haven't got around to uploading elsewhere yet except for an initial submission to Alamy (which was accepted). Yesterday I found a link on Stocksy to send an email if interested in contributing, but doesn't seem to be there today, just one link to create an account. I doubt that my style would suit Stocksy but as its image exclusivity if they want anything I guess I should offer it there first. Anyone know how to go about it now?
-
The total amount of content might be a bit light for a full on site launch though. They have just under 120 contributors and perhaps about 50,000 images online or less. That probably does not offer enough subject coverage yet to make it a worthwhile stop for designers yet. They will have to grow that a bit more first I think.
I Agree, and only 2,200 people images... a bit tiny for a launch.
I think its funny when people say you need x amount of images considering on istock if you think back to positioning on best match in a search subject. First page top left first slot of best match gets more dl than the second photo, second gets more than 3rd. First row photo gets more than second row. second row gets more than 3rd row. 1st page gets more than 2nd page. 1st image on 1st row on popular best match search word could 50 dls a day. 4th page photo could get a couple of dls if it was moving up.
Knowing this the drop off of interest on past the first page is like of a cliff, how many images are needed on a search word? People stay in the shallow end when looking for images on a search word.
-
I dropped istock exclusivity a short while ago but haven't got around to uploading elsewhere yet except for an initial submission to Alamy (which was accepted). Yesterday I found a link on Stocksy to send an email if interested in contributing, but doesn't seem to be there today, just one link to create an account. I doubt that my style would suit Stocksy but as its image exclusivity if they want anything I guess I should offer it there first. Anyone know how to go about it now?
If you create an account, then click on the 'support' link at the top of the page. Then scroll down to the very bottom and you'll find a 'Call to Artist's' link on the bottom bar.
Good luck!
-
I think the size of the collection is quite reasonable comparable to many curated collections on other stock agencies. They all have editors to bring together a certain style and who go over the millions of file to find the best ones for whatever new gallery they are putting together. Think of the flickr collection, vetta when it started out...etc...
As long as it is strongly focussed a designer will know what to expect when he or she comes to stocksy.
-
I dropped istock exclusivity a short while ago but haven't got around to uploading elsewhere yet except for an initial submission to Alamy (which was accepted). Yesterday I found a link on Stocksy to send an email if interested in contributing, but doesn't seem to be there today, just one link to create an account. I doubt that my style would suit Stocksy but as its image exclusivity if they want anything I guess I should offer it there first. Anyone know how to go about it now?
If you create an account, then click on the 'support' link at the top of the page. Then scroll down to the very bottom and you'll find a 'Call to Artist's' link on the bottom bar.
Good luck!
Y0u dont have to sign up. Just click on an image and the call to artist is at the bottom
-
Lomography comes to mind
-
"The emperors new clothes" comes to mind.
-
[url]http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30[/url] ([url]http://www.stocksy.com/blog/30[/url])
For some reason that link goes back to the homepage for me.
Non-contributors do not have access to the same things contributors do.
Yes, it is image/series exclusive. If images are on other sites still, they are probably in the process of being removed. This is not some hard case police state. We're all working together for success.
-
This is not some hard case police state. We're all working together for success.
How refreshing to read that :D
-
I do love the simplicity of the pricing. I suspect buyers will too.
-
Looks like Stocksy and Shutterstock's Offset are going after the same target market. I bet Offset's launch will be a lot slicker, with a lot more choices, including illustrations. We'll find out March 27th. Lots of talent on both sites.
-
I think the size of the collection is quite reasonable comparable to many curated collections on other stock agencies. They all have editors to bring together a certain style and who go over the millions of file to find the best ones for whatever new gallery they are putting together. Think of the flickr collection, vetta when it started out...etc...
As long as it is strongly focussed a designer will know what to expect when he or she comes to stocksy.
I suppose it could draw some buyers who like the flickr look and enjoy browsing photos. But if you want anything specific like a picture of a family having dinner, you'll see Sean's 18 photos and... well that's all.
They have updated the format and got the css file referenced correctly now though so the photo detail page looks real good.
-
I would not know what and how to shoot to make pictures like that.
I would :) cos I shoot editorial for a magazine and that's how they like it, and up til now I've had less success getting that work across as stock with the usuals. oh, now I'm dying to be accepted!
there's clearly no camera list, as the first image I clicked on was taken with a D90.
-
Love the photography up at Stocksy! Having said that, it's not imagery that I think will sell at a high volume.
Which, of course, is fine but if that's the case the prices are kinda low. Speaking of pricing, it seems to be at a mid-stock level. What agency that has entered the market with mid-stock pricing has ever succeeded? There may be one but I can't think of it.
It'll be interesting to see where Stocksy goes from here. I wish them the best!
Edited to add: Forget what I said about mid-stock pricing. I hadn't yet seen the extended pricing options. Definitely not mid-stock.
-
there's still plenty of "proper"images there, ie nicely exposed, crisp with true to life colouring. Like Sean's work. it's not all gloomy and blue temp lomo'd cupcakes (not that there's anything wrong with that!) :)
-
there's clearly no camera list, as the first image I clicked on was taken with a D90.
I found several taken with an Iphone. Which is fine. If you can take those pictures with a phone, there's nothing wrong with it...
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
It is image exclusive. If someone has the same image elsewhere I'm guessing it is in the process of being removed (if it isn't gone already)
-
I do like the approach though with the real names and faces of the contributors and a page so you can see all the contributors at a glance. It gives it that home grown, organic feel, it says who the real people are behind it all, gives it an honest and approachable feel, and I think that will appeal to designers.
Yes it's professional not like some of the standard Microstock identity crisis, anonymous BS. It's also good for branding and the artist as some people have risen to the top of the market. Real People and honest.
Some people have said page "looks like" and in this case, here's one that's very similar in the way it extends the pages down as the viewer moves down. http://foap.com/market (http://foap.com/market)
Nice clean look, nice photos, hope they find the buyers and take off. Did someone write about co-op for a few years? Here it is... :)
Go getem' Stocksy!
-
Looks like it's not image exclusive, as was speculated earlier. At least as far as I can tell. Some of Simon's stuff is the same stuff I've seen elsewhere, including the famous twitter bird.
It is image exclusive. If someone has the same image elsewhere I'm guessing it is in the process of being removed (if it isn't gone already)
Tyler, you and Sean beat me to it.
it has taken time for contributors to get our images online at Stocksy and removed elsewhere, but image exclusivity is the goal/required.
-
Frankly, unless I am part of it I couldn't care less how they do. Cheering for the sucess of an exclusive agency that you are not part of is just dumb. And that's being realistic, it's not sour grapes.
-
Frankly, unless I am part of it I couldn't care less how they do. Cheering for the sucess of an exclusive agency that you are not part of is just dumb. And that's being realistic, it's not sour grapes.
That's understandable. I guess I see things as a bit different. If models like this are successful, then it creates the potential for similar models to pop up. Or for this model to expand to include me or you. The big four are already competing against my best interests (whether I contribute to them or not), so I'd rather see my competition putting out a site that offers great royalty rates and prices.
-
.
-
Frankly, unless I am part of it I couldn't care less how they do. Cheering for the sucess of an exclusive agency that you are not part of is just dumb. And that's being realistic, it's not sour grapes.
It's only image exclusive, not full exclusivity so why aren't you going to be part of it? I'm going to try to get in, they didn't reply when I sent a link to some of my portfolio but I've not had a rejection, so I'll do some new stuff over the next few weeks and see if that will be OK for them. I don't know if Stocksy will be big in a years time but it has to be worth getting in to.
-
Found this on petapixel
http://www.petapixel.com/2013/03/25/why-im-ditching-getty-images-in-favor-of-stocksy-for-my-stock-photo-sales/ (http://www.petapixel.com/2013/03/25/why-im-ditching-getty-images-in-favor-of-stocksy-for-my-stock-photo-sales/)
-
Found this on petapixel
[url]http://www.petapixel.com/2013/03/25/why-im-ditching-getty-images-in-favor-of-stocksy-for-my-stock-photo-sales/[/url] ([url]http://www.petapixel.com/2013/03/25/why-im-ditching-getty-images-in-favor-of-stocksy-for-my-stock-photo-sales/[/url])
Good read.
-
Tyler, you and Sean beat me to it.
it has taken time for contributors to get our images online at Stocksy and removed elsewhere, but image exclusivity is the goal/required.
Thanks everyone for the info.
Guess it's just a bit of an overlap in transitioning/deleting portfolios elsewhere to move stuff to Stocksy.
-
Why am I still associated with Getty in any manner whatsoever.....(just asking my inner self).
-
Frankly, unless I am part of it I couldn't care less how they do. Cheering for the sucess of an exclusive agency that you are not part of is just dumb. And that's being realistic, it's not sour grapes.
That's understandable. I guess I see things as a bit different. If models like this are successful, then it creates the potential for similar models to pop up. Or for this model to expand to include me or you. The big four are already competing against my best interests (whether I contribute to them or not), so I'd rather see my competition putting out a site that offers great royalty rates and prices.
I can see both of your points, like BaldricksTrousers I find it hard to get excited about a party that I wasn't invited to. But on the other hand if the Stocksy approach is successful, it could change the industry for the better -- we might see new agencies appear that treat contributors with respect and pay a fair royalty. But I don't care HOW great they are - I never want to see any one agency get too powerful, too much power will corrupt the best of them.
-
I do love the simplicity of the pricing. I suspect buyers will too.
Yes, I like the way they handle pricing/licensing. The site is impressive IMO; no bugs for me (Firefox, PC). I can see shopping there for my design work. Did not see a way to dl comps, but maybe if I register?
-
I like the look of the images they are offering, but I don't get the feeling it is really a place that commercial photo buyers will find the bread and butter stuff they need on a day in day out basis. At least not from what I have seen on the site so far. I could be wrong, but the type of images I am seeing there are not images I normally see used in advertising, for general corporate use, and etc.
I can see people enjoying browsing through the collection of imagery for the creative and artistic aspects of what is there to be seen, like the way people like to look through a photo sharing site for inspiration and pleasure, but I am not sure how much real buying will be going on for that genre of imagery in general if you are looking to place an image in an ad or a commercial layout.
For commercial use, people generally go for images that portray a clear concept or message, don't seem a bit eluf in their conceptual message, that are cropped in traditional ways showing a more complete subject, that have typical lighting and colors, that offer isolated subjects with crisp edges so perhaps they can be composited with other images, and etc. I am not saying they won't sell images. Of course they will sell some and I truly hope they do becuase there are some nice shots on there, but personally I don't think I would start shooting the style of imagery they are offering as a stock photo career move thinking I am going to make a lot of sales with them on a commercial stock photo site. In fact, I don't even see what they are offering as being competition for most stock sites. So most other stock artists don't have to worry either. And I still tend to think that the images people will buy time and time again are images that are more generic, clear, well in focus, with more depth of field, and the like.
I give them credit for what they are doing and are trying to do, the spirit and style of the site, and for trying to be out of the box. But as a shooter trying to get the highest returns for my efforts, I think I will stick with shooting the type of content most others shooters shoot, and in the way I know that sells in a traditional commercial stock photo market, rather than taking a risk of shooting something in a new genre that is trying to perhaps create a new market and take it in a whole new direction. So I guess it is easier to continue doing what you know already works rather than trying to reinvent the wheel in some way.
I guess if Stocksy-Style is already the way you shoot anyway, then you have nothing to lose. You put up some of your work there and you see if it can sell to a more limited niche commercial market. But most contributors who try and make a real living from their work need the mass photo buyer market to make it work on a day in day out basis rather than trying to appeal to a smaller, niche, artsy wanting buyer market.
So if you have to adjust your shooting style to try and go after a market that we are not sure even really exists in large numbers commercially, whilst pulling away from the style you normally shoot that has a proven track record of selling already, then I would say it is rather more of a risk to go Stocksy than to stick with what you know already works.
-
OMG photos of inspiration - let the naysayers nay nay nay - go finish your isolated apple or that model whose body is so over pinched - Yo- top drawer designers will love this stuff - quality over quantity.
-
I wonder if when clip art started to change (and be called "vectors", and "font" became "typeface") if the illustrators said "that new stuff will never catch on, it's not quirky and cute enough".
-
I like the look of the images they are offering, but I don't get the feeling it is really a place that commercial photo buyers will find the bread and butter stuff they need on a day in day out basis. At least not from what I have seen on the site so far. I could be wrong, but the type of images I am seeing there are not images I normally see used in advertising, for general corporate use, and etc.
I can see people enjoying browsing through the collection of imagery for the creative and artistic aspects of what is there to be seen, like the way people like to look through a photo sharing site for inspiration and pleasure, but I am not sure how much real buying will be going on for that genre of imagery in general if you are looking to place an image in an ad or a commercial layout.
For commercial use, people generally go for images that portray a clear concept or message, don't seem a bit eluf in their conceptual message, that are cropped in traditional ways showing a more complete subject, that have typical lighting and colors, that offer isolated subjects with crisp edges so perhaps they can be composited with other images, and etc. I am not saying they won't sell images. Of course they will sell some and I truly hope they do becuase there are some nice shots on there, but personally I don't think I would start shooting the style of imagery they are offering as a stock photo career move thinking I am going to make a lot of sales with them on a commercial stock photo site. In fact, I don't even see what they are offering as being competition for most stock sites. So most other stock artists don't have to worry either. And I still tend to think that the images people will buy time and time again are images that are more generic, clear, well in focus, with more depth of field, and the like.
I give them credit for what they are doing and are trying to do, the spirit and style of the site, and for trying to be out of the box. But as a shooter trying to get the highest returns for my efforts, I think I will stick with shooting the type of content most others shooters shoot, and in the way I know that sells in a traditional commercial stock photo market, rather than taking a risk of shooting something in a new genre that is trying to perhaps create a new market and take it in a whole new direction. So I guess it is easier to continue doing what you know already works rather than trying to reinvent the wheel in some way.
I guess if Stocksy-Style is already the way you shoot anyway, then you have nothing to lose. You put up some of your work there and you see if it can sell to a more limited niche commercial market. But most contributors who try and make a real living from their work need the mass photo buyer market to make it work on a day in day out basis rather than trying to appeal to a smaller, niche, artsy wanting buyer market.
So if you have to adjust your shooting style to try and go after a market that we are not sure even really exists in large numbers commercially, whilst pulling away from the style you normally shoot that has a proven track record of selling already, then I would say it is rather more of a risk to go Stocksy than to stick with what you know already works.
Because it's not artist exclusive, there's no reason photographers can't pursue both. High end work to stocksy, and the low-mid level spread across the micros.
...and I tend to disagree with your belief buyers won't go for this. When I first saw the type of work they were asking for I thought the same as you, but lately I'm seeing it everywhere - especially in the fashion world (urban/youth chains in particular). It'll be a different market to objects isolated on white, but then, it always was.
-
I think it's quite exciting, a change is a good as a holiday and all that ;) But traditional stock images, while still needed for some businesses, are also something to be mocked in other circles ("women laughing alone with salad", anyone?) and those groups want fresh and inspiring images.
I think it's likely that the fashion for this style will change over time, but there's no reason for Stocksy not to change with it if they keep in close contact with their buyers and what's hot through Pinterest, Twitter etc. Social media gives sellers (of anything) an unprecedented glimpse into what people really want to buy, if the seller takes the time to look (as I'm sure the Stocksy founders have done).
-
Frankly, unless I am part of it I couldn't care less how they do. Cheering for the sucess of an exclusive agency that you are not part of is just dumb. And that's being realistic, it's not sour grapes.
That's understandable. I guess I see things as a bit different. If models like this are successful, then it creates the potential for similar models to pop up. Or for this model to expand to include me or you. The big four are already competing against my best interests (whether I contribute to them or not), so I'd rather see my competition putting out a site that offers great royalty rates and prices.
I actually meant exclusive as in "exclusive club". It seems rather like the old Getty trad model with lower prices, where only an elite are allowed in and the hoi-polloi are left kicking at the doors.
The point is that if I can't join then every customer they pull in is potentially a customer lost to an agency I can supply, so it's not good for me - the only effect it can have would be to take sales away from me.
Of course I will attempt to join but they didn't bother to reply to my initial mail so I guess I'm not what they are looking for.
This doesn't look original enough to me to be a game changer, it's just midstock with image exclusivity thrown in. It's more or less revisiting Bruce's original (failed) idea of iStockPro. For those who don't remember the start, iStock was not meant to be the money-spinner, it was meant to be the training ground before people graduated to the real agency, iStockPro, that would sell at much higher prices. But iStockPro flopped and iStock took off like a rocket.
Maybe this will work, but I certainly can't imagine it being a template for the future direction of microstock.
-
...Of course I will attempt to join but they didn't bother to reply to my initial mail so I guess I'm not what they are looking for...
I'm in the same position as you but I intend to get in. It might take me a while but I like a challenge. Unlike Getty, that pay only 20% commission and seem to of lost all respect for their suppliers, Stocksy has a good deal for those that can get in. Having a higher barrier to entry is an added incentive to me because it should keep the collection relatively small and earnings wont get as badly diluted as they do with other sites. If they don't sell much after a few years, I'll have another bunch of photos for alamy.
-
well i wish them all the luck. regarding the fact that they are now direct competition for some (all?) of us. competition is the only thing in this greedy world that can force things to change. (or die :) ).
-
hmm, they didn't invite Yuri to play? or he declined?
-
maybe this question is for yuri or for them? :)
-
First look at Stocksy...
It is exciting to see a co-op finally come to market, but otherwise, it's a little disappointing.
-- It looks cliquey, a bunch of friends getting together, and compromising their editorial standards in the process. Editing is weak, too many similars, and uneven standards of acceptance. I would reject more than 50% of what's there if I were one of their inspectors. They need to take care, there's an earlier echo of this problem at iStock itself, it's being repeated.
-- Mostly it looks like a collection of Vetta and Agency quality material. On the Agency front, we're looking at top of the range microstock, but it's still microstock. People smiling at camera or doing very obvious things, literal tropes and formulas employed.
-- On the Vetta side, we see works that reach the half way mark, quality executions in search of a concept. The authors are in too much of a hurry to create cool shots. Self-editing is weak, as is conceptual self-understanding, planning and preparation.
So I think we're still waiting for the holy grail, a new agency styled as a co-op, targetted not at designers but at art directors, with old Taxi type quality. Clever, unique, strong concepts, the kind of work the best assignment photographers produce, or used to produce before Getty largely lost their form.
Good luck, Stocksy, here's looking forward to your evolution and improvement.
-
First look at Stocksy...
It is exciting to see a co-op finally come to market, but otherwise, it's a little disappointing.
-- It looks cliquey, a bunch of friends getting together, and compromising their editorial standards in the process. Editing is weak, too many similars, and uneven standards of acceptance. I would reject more than 50% of what's there if I were one of their inspectors.
why? i spent more than half hour last night browsing images randomly, i found less than 10 that if was mine, i would delete while still on CF card :).
on other sites if i take a look on "newest", i believe that percentage would (should) be even more than 50%
-
maybe this question is for yuri or for them? :)
but it's ME who is curious :P
-
hmm, they didn't invite Yuri to play? or he declined?
The Yuri look and the Stocksy look might not be compatible. I'm sure Yuri could adapt, like many of us will but is he bothered? He already has his own site to play with. It's quite refreshing to see a new site that isn't swamped by Yuri and his clones. I've nothing against Yuri and I think his portfolio is a must have for most sites but not if it doesn't fit their niche.
-
I think it looks very promising. Obviously it's possible to nitpick but on the whole the images look great, and as a collection it already has an aesthetic that's clearly somewhat different from everywhere else. Questions of marketability and critical mass will remain for a while but it's an auspicious start.
-
+1
they said they definiatly do not want microstock type shots, yet if you browse you get plenty of people shots with terribly forced smiles, food falling in and out of mouth + very amateurish over-retouching, the kind of stuff that even micros should have started rejecting long ago.
First look at Stocksy...
It is exciting to see a co-op finally come to market, but otherwise, it's a little disappointing.
-- It looks cliquey, a bunch of friends getting together, and compromising their editorial standards in the process. Editing is weak, too many similars, and uneven standards of acceptance. I would reject more than 50% of what's there if I were one of their inspectors. They need to take care, there's an earlier echo of this problem at iStock itself, it's being repeated.
-- Mostly it looks like a collection of Vetta and Agency quality material. On the Agency front, we're looking at top of the range microstock, but it's still microstock. People smiling at camera or doing very obvious things, literal tropes and formulas employed.
-- On the Vetta side, we see works that reach the half way mark, quality executions in search of a concept. The authors are in too much of a hurry to create cool shots. Self-editing is weak, as is conceptual self-understanding, planning and preparation.
So I think we're still waiting for the holy grail, a new agency styled as a co-op, targetted not at designers but at art directors, with old Taxi type quality. Clever, unique, strong concepts, the kind of work the best assignment photographers produce, or used to produce before Getty largely lost ;D their form.
Good luck, Stocksy, here's looking forward to your evolution and improvement.
-
from what i can see it's all show, no go and mastery of hype. some great images there for sure, but stock worthy in volume? that remains to be seen. i do like the pricing and the royalties offered, but a bit late for that. IS originally started this race to the bottom in pricing to the point where it is the norm these days to pay next to nothing for great work.
-
well i wish them all the luck. regarding the fact that they are now direct competition for some (all?) of us...
I don't think so. The Stocksy collection looks very different from any microstock collection. Prices are significantly higher. They're aiming at an entirely different market. No microstock buyer is going to leave a microstock agency completely to go buy exclusively at Stocksy.
-
from what i can see it's all show, no go and mastery of hype...
If it's just hype, it's the best we've ever seen. To make a guy like Thomas Hawk quit Getty and go all-in with Stocksy could only come out of the best hype ever conceived. That or there's more to it than hype.
...i do like the pricing and the royalties offered, but a bit late for that. IS originally started this race to the bottom in pricing to the point where it is the norm these days to pay next to nothing for great work.
I'll usually be the last person to defend istock, but when something is flat out wrong, it's just wrong. istock has raised prices more than any other microstock company, sometimes to their own detriment. How is that a "race to the bottom"?
-
race to bottom on terms of % to contributor
does anyone else pay as low as 15% to non exclusives
or 20% to exclusives?
-
race to bottom on terms of % to contributor
does anyone else pay as low as 15% to non exclusives
or 20% to exclusives?
True, percentage-wise, they're the lowest. I stand corrected.
-
First look at Stocksy...
It is exciting to see a co-op finally come to market, but otherwise, it's a little disappointing.
-- It looks cliquey, a bunch of friends getting together, and compromising their editorial standards in the process. Editing is weak, too many similars, and uneven standards of acceptance. I would reject more than 50% of what's there if I were one of their inspectors. They need to take care, there's an earlier echo of this problem at iStock itself, it's being repeated.
-- Mostly it looks like a collection of Vetta and Agency quality material. On the Agency front, we're looking at top of the range microstock, but it's still microstock. People smiling at camera or doing very obvious things, literal tropes and formulas employed.
-- On the Vetta side, we see works that reach the half way mark, quality executions in search of a concept. The authors are in too much of a hurry to create cool shots. Self-editing is weak, as is conceptual self-understanding, planning and preparation.
So I think we're still waiting for the holy grail, a new agency styled as a co-op, targetted not at designers but at art directors, with old Taxi type quality. Clever, unique, strong concepts, the kind of work the best assignment photographers produce, or used to produce before Getty largely lost their form.
Good luck, Stocksy, here's looking forward to your evolution and improvement.
Great post. My thoughts entirely.
What I find particularly fascinating is that Stocksy will almost immediately be going head-to-head with SS 'Offset', an apparently similar offering targeting a similar market. It's just like the old days with Brucie and Jon doing battle with each other! That was most definitely a 'hare and tortoise' contest though with IS having a huge head-start but SS plodding away to eventual victory (for Jon anyway).
I'm not sure I get the supposedly heavily 'curated' bit of Stocksy. It seems like certain contributors get to 'curate' their own stuff (and amazingly accept almost everything they produce themselves) whilst only a tiny fraction of others' work, often far more successful stock content providers, is deemed of sufficient quality. It appears that all are equal in Stocksy ... but some are more equal than others.
Despite the obvious flaws and uncertainties I do however wish both the Stocksy and Offset enterprises the very best of luck. The real target is Getty and I do so hope that they are able to make serious in-roads into Getty's market.
-
I really like it, nice to see more artsy stuff and less traditional stock.
-
I removed a few posts talking (negatively) about specific images. This isn't the place to point fingers and laugh.
If you want to talk about specific images or portfolios, please post your own for critique.
-
I removed a few posts talking (negatively) about specific images. This isn't the place to point fingers and laugh.
If you want to talk about specific images or portfolios, please post your own for critique.
No one was pointing fingers and laughing, a genuine question was asked why some image were on stocksy as they didnt seem to be the standard you would expect.
It seems that people accepted to Stocksy are a bit sensitive to critique. Maybe they should take it to heart and use it to their advantage.
-
I removed a few posts talking (negatively) about specific images. This isn't the place to point fingers and laugh.
If you want to talk about specific images or portfolios, please post your own for critique.
No one was pointing fingers and laughing, a genuine question was asked why some image were on stocksy as they didnt seem to be the standard you would expect.
It seems that people accepted to Stocksy are a bit sensitive to critique. Maybe they should take it to heart and use it to their advantage.
nobody complained about the images that were posted here - there is just a general forum rule that individual images or portfolios shouldn't be posted to be critiqued (unless they are your own)
-
I am really sorry that my post was interpreted in such a bad way.
My only intention was to show that stocky is moving into the wrong direction if images like those are accepted in the collection.
I was really happy about that site from the first moment. The way they said it is going to be, how is it going to function and what type of images are going to be sold there. The site looks very nice, and there is a great amount of nice artistic images, new style and new type of imagery which were not seen so much on the other sites.
And then those kind of images are like a slap on the face when you see them, I`m sorry, but I really feel like that. :(
It is pity that when someone browses through that nice gallery with so much beautiful pictures, bumps into something like that. Those images should not be part of stocksy, it is not good advertisement for them, especially not now, when they just started. And believe me, I would really like them to succeed, because they are suppose to be the game changer site, for all of us, the small contributors.
-
I don't see any difference at all between stocksy and other microstock agencies, the only one is the very special filtering of members, it's like a private club and it's better if the owner is your friend. Browsing some portfolios, I see many low quality photos with wrong cropping, inexpressive people etc. like always in microstock.
So, where is the real difference??? Maybe Offset will do it and in a more neutral way (no mafia).
-
I removed a few posts talking (negatively) about specific images. This isn't the place to point fingers and laugh.
If you want to talk about specific images or portfolios, please post your own for critique.
No one was pointing fingers and laughing, a genuine question was asked why some image were on stocksy as they didnt seem to be the standard you would expect.
It seems that people accepted to Stocksy are a bit sensitive to critique. Maybe they should take it to heart and use it to their advantage.
nobody complained about the images that were posted here - there is just a general forum rule that individual images or portfolios shouldn't be posted to be critiqued (unless they are your own)
Fair enough, but I think that rule is applied quite selectively then.
-
I don't see any difference at all between stocksy and other microstock agencies,
I guess you're missing the point then.
-
I guess you're missing the point then.
Maybe, It's my point of view from "outside". Anyway your answer is not an explanation.
-
And your statement wasn't a question :-D
but I'll try and answer
There are two main differences.
Ownership - management and contributors success is aligned
so contributors get 50% regular sales + 100% extended licenses + (90%*their contribution to profits)
Collection / Pricing
The collection is curated more than just inspected and is pricing at a premium
-
And your statement wasn't a question :-D
Ha!
-
The collection is curated more than just inspected and is pricing at a premium
Curated in which way ?? As I've said, I see (and you can see) many classical microstock photos, that's doesn't explain how was done the selection of "members".
I wish a good luck to all "in" members.
-
The collection is curated more than just inspected and is pricing at a premium
Curated in which way ?? As I've said, I see (and you can see) many classical microstock photos, that's doesn't explain how was done the selection of "members".
I wish a good luck to all "in" members.
"Curated" as in the editors select content they feel should be in the collection, and not just anything in focus.
-
I don't see any difference at all between stocksy and other microstock agencies,
I guess you're missing the point then.
At least looking at the first data on alexa Stocksy is rocketing up in interest and traffic. Considering the high end market that is being targeted and fair sharing on the commission, No wonder getty was so scared of this ideal.
-
I don't see any difference at all between stocksy and other microstock agencies,
I guess you're missing the point then.
At least looking at the first data on alexa Stocksy is rocketing up in interest and traffic. Considering the high end market that is being targeted and fair sharing on the commission, No wonder getty was so scared of this ideal.
That could just be us. MSG has 35000 members. A lot of them are frantically surfing Stocksy, include the interest of a few buyers and the Getty/IS board and yes of course there is heavy traffic. If that traffic is still there in 3 months you know a lot more. Not from the first week.
-
The collection is curated more than just inspected and is pricing at a premium
Curated in which way ?? As I've said, I see (and you can see) many classical microstock photos, that's doesn't explain how was done the selection of "members".
I wish a good luck to all "in" members.
"Curated" as in the editors select content they feel should be in the collection, and not just anything in focus.
Please Sean, tell them to be more careful, it is ruining the whole idea of the site, and this is what you, and all the other photographers there know very well.
Also the contributors should be a bit more objective, and not even send those kind of images, because at the end you know that those kind of pictures are not going to sell anyway.
-
Ok, thanks, I will talk more of Stocksy if one day it becomes "alive" among the "mortals", all these "tips" are clear like brackish water.
I 've been really stupid to send 10 photos to an agency who explain absolutely nothing about their expectations and who send back a robot message in return saying nothing, that's just a disappointment for me and I'm just very angry, so I better shut up like the Ex-Istock Guru is doing.
-
Please Sean, tell them to be more careful, it is ruining the whole idea of the site, and this is what you, and all the other photographers there know very well.
Also the contributors should be a bit more objective, and not even send those kind of images, because at the end you know that those kind of pictures are not going to sell anyway.
I'm always surprised at what sells. I just licensed an image from 2005 of a handshake for $50, privately. I keep thinking I'm not going to put my old stuff online, but then someone shows up who still wants it.
-
The collection is curated more than just inspected and is pricing at a premium
Curated in which way ?? As I've said, I see (and you can see) many classical microstock photos, that's doesn't explain how was done the selection of "members".
I wish a good luck to all "in" members.
"Curated" as in the editors select content they feel should be in the collection, and not just anything in focus.
In other words, the same approach taken by sites other than IS ;)
-
Heywoody, you replied within the quote which now looks like Sean said what you said
-
slightly offtopic, but they caught me, I guess I'm not the first victim : http://www.socksy.com/ (http://www.socksy.com/):D
I guess their traffic will also grow now. It took me few seconds to realize I'm somewhere else.
:P
-
Ron,
Oops - fixed :-[
-
The collection is curated more than just inspected and is pricing at a premium
Curated in which way ?? As I've said, I see (and you can see) many classical microstock photos, that's doesn't explain how was done the selection of "members".
I wish a good luck to all "in" members.
"Curated" as in the editors select content they feel should be in the collection, and not just anything in focus.
There are several agencies out there that should do the same.
-
There will always be varying opinions about what constitutes "good". But I'm perplexed how much negativity has been expressed by the usual suspects here, considering Stocksy is precisely, even optimally what many here wanted to see happen. Personally, I couldn't have envisioned a more perfect execution of a co-op agency. I didn't see it coming so quickly and so beautifully. It is here, and it is thrilling to be part of it.
-
There will always be varying opinions about what constitutes "good". But I'm perplexed how much negativity has been expressed by the usual suspects here, considering Stocksy is precisely, even optimally what many here wanted to see happen. Personally, I couldn't have envisioned a more perfect execution of a co-op agency. I didn't see it coming so quickly and so beautifully. It is here, and it is thrilling to be part of it.
I don't see much in the way of 'negativity' on this topic, almost everybody is wishing the venture well. There's a certain amount of caution and natural scepticism but I'd consider that healthy. The gushing praise and love expressed for Istock didn't help in the long run did it? Bruce still sold it along with the ambitions and the futures of so many.
Where Stocksy is coming up short for me ... is that I can't see it becoming a means of replacing microstock incomes any time soon ... if ever. Therefore Stocksy is certainly not precisely or optimally what most of us would probably like to see. With it's highly 'curated' collection it won't even remotely serve the full stock needs of many buyers and will also leave most of it's contributors looking elsewhere to place the majority of their portfolios and earn most of their money.
I note, for example, that Sean currently only has about 1200 images accepted at Stocksy. Hopefully there's many more to come because any stock agency, selling at those sort of prices, that refuses over 80% of Sean's portfolio would just be throwing money out of the window. I don't really understand yet what Stocksy is trying to be? It is a gallery for 'serious artists' (who don't mind starving) or is it a commercially-oriented stock agency?
-
@gostwyck: sure, there is bound to be suggestion/constructive criticism, which I think is probably welcomed. everyone is entitled to their opinion. hope the bunny comes to........too
-
Cheers and hope the Easter bunny brings everyone some chocolate.
I've given the Easter bunny specific instructions to stop at Godiva for my basket. Hope he complies. ;D
-
removed one post which was a silly negative jab, one member to another.
-
Cheers and hope the Easter bunny brings everyone some chocolate.
I've given the Easter bunny specific instructions to stop at Godiva for my basket. Hope he complies. ;D
he should swing past the liquor store too...:-)
-
Cheers and hope the Easter bunny brings everyone some chocolate.
I've given the Easter bunny specific instructions to stop at Godiva for my basket. Hope he complies. ;D
he should swing past the liquor store too...:-)
After this month at iStock I'll need the liquor much more than the chocolate.
-
^ but can you afford it?
:(
-
removed one post which was a silly negative jab, one member to another.
:D Just wait, it wont be too much longer before they are coming from the other side. ;)
-
Stocksy 1 : 0 Offset
For instance Stocksy looks more attractive IMO. The prices are more affordable, adapted to freelancers pockets.
Exclusivity is a good idea too. Buyers often are considered as idiots. I'm buyer too and don't appreciate the fact that the same product could be find for 100 times less (or rather that I'm paying 100 times more then regular price).
I like Stocky's sustainable approach. I like the fact they accepted photos not 100% matching with theirs standards from contributors, excellent photographers btw, who needed help. Finally a little dose of humanity in stock business.
-
Stocksy 1 : 0 Offset
For instance Stocksy looks more attractive IMO. The prices are more affordable, adapted to freelancers pockets.
Exclusivity is a good idea too. Buyers often are considered as idiots. I'm buyer too and don't appreciate the fact that the same product could be find for 100 times less (or rather that I'm paying 100 times more then regular price).
I like Stocky's sustainable approach. I like the fact they accepted photos not 100% matching with theirs standards from contributors, excellent photographers btw, who needed help. Finally a little dose of humanity in stock business.
Man and this excellent post got the arrows down... (was mine
us 3 before I gave it a heart), need a break from this forum all this negativism I better spend my time for new shoots for Stocksy and building up my Symbiostock-site.....
-
I think stocksy sends an important message. That we as artists, who produce the content, should do all we can to get the income from our work. stocksy might not be a solution for everyone and even for those of who are in, we cannot place all our work there. But if the community focusses their online power on supporting the sites that treat us fairly, I believe we can do much more than people think.
Maybe there are other photographers who want to start a coop as well, maybe you just really work together to build your own shops and link them together.
Maybe someone can lobby Apple to open the iTunes store for creative artists. They pay out 70% for apps and ebooks, what if they had an area for images and video as wallpaper or resource for schools and projects?
I think stocksy is the beginning of a more multi polar world for selling stock. The customers will get much more diversity and choice and stock can indeed be a sustainable career for those who work hard at it and want it.
-
I like what Stocksy is trying to sell, i will certainly apply as a contributor.
On the other side, it seems at the moment they're trying to sell as RF stuff that belongs to RM.
In plus, plenty of their images can be found for a pittance on micros.
The logo should be just "Stocksy", sorry but buyers dont give a sh-it if photographers make a living or if it's a coop or if it's ISO 9001 of if it's ethical and eco-friendly.
I can't imagine Stocksy making billions but certainly it can find its niche as "midstock".
-
...The logo should be just "Stocksy", sorry but buyers dont give a sh-it if photographers make a living or if it's a coop or if it's ISO 9001 of if it's ethical and eco-friendly...
Actually buyers do care. I had an email exchange with a buyer recently and when I asked how they found my work on Stockfresh, they told me that originally they found my work through a Google image search that brought them to istock, but they didn't want to buy at istock because of the Getty/Google deal.
Fair trade practices do matter to some buyers. Not all of them, but definitely some. I think there is enough of an interest in fair trade that it's worth mentioning for a company like Stocksy.
-
WOW WOW
Are you having fun?
-
Don't feed the spammer...
-
I reported him ...
-
I removed a few posts talking (negatively) about specific images. This isn't the place to point fingers and laugh.
If you want to talk about specific images or portfolios, please post your own for critique.
Great move!
-
I like what Stocksy is trying to sell, i will certainly apply as a contributor.
On the other side, it seems at the moment they're trying to sell as RF stuff that belongs to RM.
In plus, plenty of their images can be found for a pittance on micros.
The logo should be just "Stocksy", sorry but buyers dont give a sh-it if photographers make a living or if it's a coop or if it's ISO 9001 of if it's ethical and eco-friendly.
I can't imagine Stocksy making billions but certainly it can find its niche as "midstock".
I usually see you busting ppls' balls here for the fun of it, but now I'm sad to say I agree. There are a lot of images of the kind you can find on SS by the hundreds, so is it tightly curated or not? Also those kind of images get instant rejection if they come from other contributors, exactly for not being special enough - thats pretty nausiating. But anyway, those are overpriced. On the other hand there are also great images that make the pricing actually look cheap, those should be selling for thousands - especially many travel images that obviously come at great cost. 50 bucks might sound great to micro'ers but for someone more old school this would look like the dirt cheap sellout of the last high value category left.
The ELs are nice, had a few close to each other so they made up for the lack of generic income, but I'm not foolish enough to beleive you can make a projection from that. That's like playing the lottery to pay your bills.
Also, you might work for hours and hours, get into a lot of cost if you want something a bit special, and all that effort expands your port by handful of shots, becasue that's as good as it gets with tight curation. How long will it take to build a signfifcant port like this, probabaly two decades. How is that sustainable? More rewards / effort / sustainabilty comes from the micros ppl love to hate. We'll be radioactive mutants running around in undergroud tunnels from the fallout fo WWIII before this fruits. ehh.... I will submit like a couple more shoots and tell myself to halt and wait, or I might just have to face later that I got ripped of like a total tool tvshop style.