Another new stock site - DPChallenge Forums

06/09/2005 02:59:18 PM · #26

Originally posted by dsa157:

You may get more crap to wade through because they have a large image catalog,

Exactly the kind of thing I couldn't be bothered with as a designer.

Go to Getty and find me one single "crap" image.

I agree, all of the "micro"-sites contain superb images...I'm just a bit surprised at the photos that some of the sites allow - of course, this doesn't include istockphoto...I'm consistently impressed by the fact that those photographers throw those photos out for so cheap.

Do the test, you'll see what I mean...

Message edited by author 2005-06-09 14:59:50.

06/09/2005 03:13:02 PM · #27

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

Go to Getty and find me one single "crap" image.

First image on a search for "car"

M

Message edited by author 2005-06-09 15:15:19.

06/09/2005 03:18:55 PM · #28

haha, I've never stood so corrected! That is a crap image!

Does my point still stand?

Maybe not...

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

06/09/2005 03:21:26 PM · #29

:)

It's ok - even corbis gets crap (though much less than Alamy, Getty, and micro RF sites)

M

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

06/09/2005 03:22:18 PM · #30

Out in the "real wold" what we call "crap images" have their place. You have to remember we look at photos with a photographer's eye, and we judge them harshly. From a designer's perspective, "striking" is not always good. It is possible for the imagery to overwhelm the message. Many wildly succesful stock images are actually very mundane "photographically" speaking...

Robt.

Message edited by author 2005-06-09 15:23:05.

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

06/09/2005 03:30:58 PM · #31

Originally posted by bear_music:

Many wildly succesful stock images are actually very mundane "photographically" speaking...

Sounds like my bag.

06/09/2005 03:33:36 PM · #32

Originally posted by bear_music:

I'm not sure if you're supporting the image I posted as "crap" or supporting the notion that "crap" on shutterstock really isn't crap..your text actually supports both. lol Whatever the case, I agree that "boring" images have their place in stock - that's all I try to upload.

moodville

Nikon D100

06/09/2005 03:53:02 PM · #33

Originally posted by mavrik:

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Go to Getty and find me one single "crap" image.

First image on a search for "car"

M

Hope you paid for that use!

06/09/2005 03:53:52 PM · #34

What use ;)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

06/09/2005 03:54:16 PM · #35

Actually, "educational fair use" ;)

M

smellyfish1002

Canon EOS-20D

06/09/2005 03:56:17 PM · #36

Someone from this site left a note in my Pbase gallery asking me to upload photos. Is that how the rest of you found out about it?
JD

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

06/09/2005 04:03:37 PM · #37

I found out through this thread.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

06/09/2005 04:17:59 PM · #38

Originally posted by mavrik:

:)

It's ok - even corbis gets crap ...

c.f. Sturgeon's Law

Sandymaya

Sony DSLR-A350

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon

06/09/2005 04:19:02 PM · #39

I think all in all it sounds great, but if I upload a photo there would that mean that I can not sell this partiular photo anywhere else? I read it is stock free, but for these prices? Why would someone want to spend $200.00 for stock free images if they can have them for 20 cent?

Or am I completely mistaken here?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

06/09/2005 04:20:06 PM · #40

Originally posted by dsa157:

Hi all -

I recently found another stock site that people might want to consider:

//www.imagevortex.com/

They don't go live until July, but are currently building their image catalog. It's still royalty-free, but you can set your own prices on the images you submit, ranging from, I believe, $20 to $300 per image. They take a 30% cut.

So ... how are people pricing their photos? I am no good at it myself ...

06/09/2005 04:20:53 PM · #41

I'm pricing everything at $99. lol

M

06/09/2005 04:21:26 PM · #42

Originally posted by Sandymaya:

If this site works and you get sales, I'll take my micro stuff down.

moodville

Nikon D100

06/09/2005 04:26:41 PM · #43

Originally posted by smellyfish1002:

Someone from this site left a note in my Pbase gallery asking me to upload photos. Is that how the rest of you found out about it?
JD

They emailed me too. I think they went through a lot of the people on pbase and just spam emailed them to join. Never a good practice :(

06/09/2005 04:29:09 PM · #44

I am pricing my good stock shots at $45 if it's something that I could go back and reshoot or something fairly standard.

Anything that is situational or very one-of-a-kind I'll price at $95.

Any of my Venice shots or other photos that clearly would take some work to find I'm pricing a little higher. I've priced my favourite photo at $175 because I really do believe it's worth that much. Perhaps I'm foolish, but I'll hold out until I'm proven wrong.