Alamy vs. Microstocks - DPChallenge Forums

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

03/22/2006 08:34:54 PM · #1

I know there have been some threads that have touched on this, but I havenâ��t found a specific thread, so I thought I would post this. I am currently involved with several microstock sites and have been doing OK. My original goal was to get started with them, and then try to get on Alamy when I had improved my skills and thought that they might accept my submissions. As I have been reading, some have posted that they do as well on microsotcks as they do on Alamay. Assuming one has photos that will be accepted on Alamy, how does one decide if it is worth posting some pictures there, all pictures there, or no pictures there. I have been reading the The Alamy Challenge thread and it seems like many are very anxious to join with Alamy and the big question is whether they will be accepted. That thread really doesnâ��t give a chance for those that might not care to be on Alamy to speak up, so how does everyone feel? How do you decide if and when it is time to sell with Alamy?

Note: this thread is not intended as a discussion on whether microstocks are ripping photographers off or anything like this. This is for those that can see the merits of both sides and have made a choice one way or the other.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

03/22/2006 10:12:46 PM · #2

I would (if I could) place at Alamy larger, more unique files, which I think someone might be tempted to pay $250 for. You need to start (according to their suggestion) with at least a 6MP image, and upsample it until it's over 48MB (approx. 4500 x 3750 pixels in 8-bit RGB, uncompressed TIFF mode).

I do place at Shutterstock (and a couple other sites) smaller, more common images, which people might be willing to spend a buck or two on.

Images that I really like I put up as prints, and not as 'stock' at all.

bfox2

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/22/2006 10:44:17 PM · #3

I'd say one of the best things about the 'micro' sites for me was the convenience of uploading pictures. I wanted to start 'stock' last fall, but since I've been abroad since last August it just wasnt feasible for me to be burning a ton of cd/dvds and sending them in. Personally I feel like once you get a feel for what 'stock' pictures are acceptable, whether or not they sell, and have the time/ability to move on to the next level there's really no reason you shouldn't. I'll be putting a submission CD together for Alamy when I get home this summer.

Also, moving on to Alamy is nice becasue they don't have any qualms about putting up images from people who also submit to Microstock sites, so you don't have to worry about removing all your images and closing those accounts.

Whether or not you upload to alamy for RF sale the same photos you have on microstock sites though, is another debate all together.

-Ben

dswebb

Canon EOS-20D

03/22/2006 11:10:22 PM · #4

No harm or cost in giving Alamy a shot... Why not try? I sell RF on a microstock site (iStockphoto) and RM on Alamy. So far 'micro' has generated more total $, but I've been on there longer, and also have a few more pics on 'micro'. I'll continue to submit to both I think. In my experience, 'micro' tends to be a steady but smaller income, (~$3 a day currently), while Alamy is a "once in a blue moon" large income. Some who have larger portfolios on Alamy do get consistent sales there though. Depends on what you want... But why not try both? You can always drop one or the other if you decide you want to concentrate somewhere...

Oh, and I find Alamy much easier to get submissions accepted than at iStock. Just my experience...

Doug

03/22/2006 11:51:35 PM · #5

Thank you so much for the feedback so far. It is very helpful. I just wanted to add a comment o Doug's question, why not try both? I guess the biggest disadvantage is that if I save some pics for Alamy, send them off, get them approved, adn then wait pateitly for say 6 months or so to sell and int he meantime, I send a bunch more to Alamy, then all of these pictures that have gone to Alamy cannot be making money for me on a microstock, where I know they will sell. I am not sure how much money lost this would result in, but I assume it is significant. In reality, I agree with giving it a try as Doug said, but I just wanted to mention what I have been thinking as a con. So far, it sounds like people are very much pro Alamy. Please keep the comments coming.

bfox2

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/23/2006 12:01:30 AM · #6

See, but what you say about sending images off to alamy and not using them to make money on microstock sites is debateable. If you decide to sell them at royalty free on Alamy, then legally there is nothing keeping you from putting those same images up on a microstock as well. Some people, however, would probably call this morally reprehensible since your selling it somewhere for $1 and then on alamy for $AlotMore. However, I imagine that alot also differens between the client base on alamy and on microstock, so in the end its really up to you.

03/23/2006 12:12:54 AM · #7

bfox2 - good point. I have not even explored the RF 'vs'. RM issue, but my current plan would be that anything I put on Alamy would nto be available elsewhere, even though I might be able to do it. I am coming more from a supply and demand side. There probably isn't a lot of client overlap between Alamy and the microstocks, but if word did happen to get out that my work on Alamy were also available on microstocks, I think it would hurt what I might be able to earn on Alamy, both from the particular picture standpoint and what designers would think of me as a photographers.

03/23/2006 03:19:26 PM · #8

Just wondering if anone else out there has an experience or opinion about Alamy 'vs'. microstock sites, or maybe it is pretty obvious - do those doing microstock feel that microstock is fine and they would love to be on Alamy too? What about those of you that are on both sites? Just curious why not all the one or the other. If one is better for you, why not everything there? Might it be because of the types of pictures the different sites take. I talked to one and he posts all of his editorial 'stock' on Alamy. Thanks in advance for your help.

dswebb

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II

03/23/2006 03:50:05 PM · #9

Well, one other reason to go to Alamy is this...though it may not apply to everyone. The 'micro' site I belong to, I am exclusive on. This means I get a higher percentage of each sale. But it also means I can't sell RF images anywhere else. However, I can sell RM images elsewhere. So, the RM stuff goes to Alamy, and the RF stuff goes to 'micro'.

But you're right, what you sell on one you (typically) can't sell on the other. So you just gotta decide which is better. I figure in a couple of years if Alamy is way outperforming 'micro', I can drop 'micro'. Or vice versa. Or, maybe if both are performing good, just keep both! But if you never try one, you wont know what kind of income it can generate.

Doug

Pixlmaker

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

03/23/2006 04:00:35 PM · #10

I just started with RF (istock for about 1.5 months, and I just got my first 5 images accepted at fotolia today), and so far I like the idea of making a little bit per day on images, as opposed to waiting weeks or months on end to hopefully get a bigger payout on a 'macro' site. I look at it like restaurants--the restaurant selling $45 Filet dinners is certainly making more per customer than a comperably-sized McDonalds, but McDonalds is ultimately making much more $$$ by making a dollar or two off of hundreds of customers per day. I don't have delusions that people are going to want to spend a lot of money on my photography yet, so I'm happy where I am. Someday I may decide to submit to 'macro' sites in addition to RF (to echo what's already been said), but one thing to keep in mind is that there are some fantastic photographers on RF sites and they are making an excellent living. If you can build up a library of 1,000 great images (or more) on an RF site, you can easily pull in LOTS of money per month, even when you aren't shooting. I guess it really depends on what your philosophy is, but, like what's been said above, try both.

ganders

Canon EOS-40D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

03/23/2006 05:22:22 PM · #11

Originally posted by Litl:

What about those of you that are on both sites? Just curious why not all the one or the other. If one is better for you, why not everything there?

We have stuff on both Alamy and 'micro' sites; I basically reserve shots that are really top-notch quality, the ones I really care about, for Alamy. I like the fact that they're valued, I like the fact that I have some idea of what's happening to them.

The stuff that goes onto 'micro' 'stock' is "everything else"; stuff that is either not technically up to the standards I hold for Alamy stuff (either taken on one of our older cameras that weren't really up to the job, or less than perfect shots, or needing heavier cropping than I'm willing to take for Alamy shots) or just fairly uninspired, classical 'stock' shots that I have invested little in and want to turn into money ASAP.

Ultimately, to me they represent two entirely different markets, that take different products, and I want a slice of both of them :-)