What's possible - Page 2

digitalskillet · #11 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 08:18 AM

Thanks Hatman. You made some really good points. I couldn't figure out why I would double my daily down loads with new photos and then go back to my normal daily dl. That makes a lot of sense.

hatman · #12 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 08:44 AM

No problem. Please remember those are only my views. Others will have different opinions.

Although I really like SS and admire Jon for what he has achieved, one must put aside such preferences in taking decisions for the future.

Some people might say 'that's okay - I'll always be uploading to SS so it's not a problem'.

Fine. But what happens if that person gets hospitalised for three months? Bad enough without ones income falling by 50% and more.

At least with IS, DT, FT and perhaps SXP one can be reasonably sure that ones portfolio will continue to sell uninterrupted (or as sure as one can be about anything nowadays).

It's not just about headline money numbers - there are other considerations such as certainty, reliability and (most important) achieving a solid long term return from ones work.

sharpshot · #13 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 08:49 AM

I have mads twice as much with SS than with IS each this year. I have been able to upload a lot more photos to SS. The IS restrictions have cost me a lot of money and it must cost them a huge amount of money. Look at how many photo Yuri Arcurs has on IS. He has been uploading the maximum allowed each week but the last time I looked, IS only have a small proportion of his portfolio.

I am sure this is going to cause problems for IS in the future. People are going to be looking at other sites that have the full portfolios of the top photographers.

Sales do fall off if you don't upload to SS for 2 months but I don't intend to do that. I can upload just a few each week and sales are fairly consistent. In March, IS had a search change and my sales halved. It has taken the rest of the year to get back to March levels and I have been uploading lots all that time.

I think people don't download the full amount each month with SS because they have a limit every 24 hours. This means that when they have a day off, they can't keep up with the downloads.

sharpshot · #14 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Batman2000

Also, they are the only "agency" that requires their RF photographers to be exclusive for them. I could live with image exclusivity (under certain circumstances, as many agencies do), but to be RF exclusive is just too much to ask for so little to gain. It would also mean that you could not sell RF at traditional sites and there are images that are not for micros that sell well at traditional prices at much higher levels.

That's a good point. I presume IS exclusives can sell RM to traditional sites but I have started to upload to Alamy and the Photoshelter collection and it would be restrictive to only be able to sell RM with them. Another reason why I wont go exclusive with istock.

perkmeup · #15 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 10:04 AM

DigitalSkillet....

I joined microstock about the same time as you did and currently have roughly the same numbers as you on IS...as far as downloads...your's are slighty higher but good enough for comparison.

I submit to the 8 major sites and and IS accounts for only 35% of my income....so even when i make Diamond...(hopfully by March) ...if I went exclusive I would still be losing over 30% of my current income.

It is a pain in the ass to submit to all the sites, but I think it pays off....why do you think Yuris does it???

I have a very regimented process with my photos and I submit the same photos to all sites..so I have roughly the same amount on all sites with the exception on IS...of course..

Take yesterday for example....sales on IS were terrible...for you, me, Yuris, andrer...so probably everybody.....but the other sites made up for it....

I don't think if I stopped downloading to SS on a regular basis, that my downloads would drop 70%....maybe 30%....many ....many of my daily downloads are my old photos....but the new ones do always sell well for the first week or so....

I would never go exclusive with IS myself...it would cost me alot of money....it does drive me nuts to see them sell my photo for $100 and I only get around $20....boy are they making alot of money on me....

It is true that I have only about 40% of my photos on IS compared to the other sites...but there is no guarentee that they would take all of them...sometimes they are very picky..for no reason...

Just my personal opinion... I think we all have to decide for ourselves...

jimiking · #16 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 10:43 AM

I'm a long way off from making such a decision, but I just had a look at Yuri's personal website and he claims to sell around 400,000 images a year across all the agencies (he has sold just over 160,000 non-exclusively with iStock in just over two years).

Compare that to Lise Gagne who has sold a total of just over 600,000 exclusively with iStock in around four and a half years and it seems like a no-brainer to me.

Incidentally Yuri has approximately half the number of images at iStock that Lise does.

LazyAnn · #17 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 11:56 AM

But you must compare too return. Is not the same selling an image for 0,30 or 035 $ comission at some subscription site, than get 3 $ for an L or 11 $ for an XXL. That's ten or 30 times more.

jimiking · #18 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 12:37 PM

I agree. And if all Yuri's claims were true, then apparently he sells 1000 images a day on Shutterstock, which means 365,000 sales a year on there alone. Unlikely I would have thought, particularly if you add that to his iStock average and the sum of those two alone comes to more than 400,000.

However if you look at sales from agencies like Fotolia & Dreamstime where you do get good returns for L's and XL's (even Bigstock return $1 a time at least half of the time in my experience), then there's still a big argument for being a microstock tart.

The fact that iStock reject an awful lot of stuff would influence my decision too. I'd have a load of images that I know would sell well that I would have to basically throw away.

sharpshot · #19 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimiking

I agree. And if all Yuri's claims were true, then apparently he sells 1000 images a day on Shutterstock, which means 365,000 sales a year on there alone. Unlikely I would have thought, particularly if you add that to his iStock average and the sum of those two alone comes to more than 400,000.

I don't think he has claimed to hit 1,000 every day. I remember he posted on the SS forums when he first sold 1,000 in a day. That was a while ago, so he probably has a lot of 1,000 download days now.

jimiking · #20 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 02:53 PM

Well I suppose he could have been misquoted.

Microstock Celebrity - Yuri Arcurs | Microstock Diaries

Even a hundred a day would be nice. I doubt it would help much with his overheads though.