My internet connection is too slow to go through your portfolio, but based on your scores and some thumbnails, I'd definitely say you're capable of producing images good enough for iStock. Some of what I've seen in your portfolio may be to arty for stock however - study what sells there to see the kind of thing they're looking for.
When submitting, generally speaking it would be editted photos - just don't overdo it.
Definitely give it a try. I suggest more than one site as different things do well at different places - exclusivity doesn't work unless you're a really top photographer.
You can edit, but it really depends on what you want to achieve on whether you should. All (or almost all) of my stock shots have some sort of editing on them.
One thing you don't want to do is sharpen the images much. The reason being is that they sell them at several sizes.
sold my portfolio on istock and other micro sites for three months - total income $75
moved the entire portfolio to Alamy, Photog Direct, and MyLoupe - deleted micro accounts - now averaging about $200/month with the same photos. (I add to the portfolio monthly, but before I added, that was my average with the same photos) I sell far fewer photos, and make far more overall and per sale.
These guys are making a mint off people like you who think the aren't "good enough" to make real rates.
Please reconsider your aspirations - stock is a great way to make money, and keep your self respect - if you do it right
Let me add - I've gone to cross-processing my images - seem to get a better sale on those - but hardcore editing I'm just healing blemishes in my models and sending them along. The companies that buy $500 images have people that will do what they want to them anyway.
thank you everyone im going to give photogrpahers direct a shot and see how that fares then maybe ill press my luck with Almay. Im just having a hard time choosing what i think is worthy. Like would people by my model shots( yes i do have model releases)?
Im just having a hard time choosing what i think is worthy. Like would people by my model shots( yes i do have model releases)?
If you're in doubt and the images are technically good, submit them. The worst that will happen is that they won't sell. The fact that you have releases helps tremendously.
If you're in doubt and the images are technically good, submit them. The worst that will happen is that they won't sell. The fact that you have releases helps tremendously.
Submit images you are really sure about to get past the first step of Qlaity control on the sites you submit to. Then afterwards you are free to test the waters.
If you're in doubt and the images are technically good, submit them. The worst that will happen is that they won't sell. The fact that you have releases helps tremendously.
Submit images you are really sure about to get past the first step of Qlaity control on the sites you submit to. Then afterwards you are free to test the waters.
so its not really a only put your gems out type of deal. more of put all techinically good photos out there?
so its not really a only put your gems out type of deal. more of put all techinically good photos out there?
As long as it's a technically sound photo, you never know what will sell. You can't know what the buyer might want. Ofcourse, you don't want to flood your portfolio with technically sound crap either.
so its not really a only put your gems out type of deal. more of put all techinically good photos out there?
As long as it's a technically sound photo, you never know what will sell. You can't know what the buyer might want. Ofcourse, you don't want to flood your portfolio with technically sound crap either.
true
the one problem i always have is Pricing. im never good at pricing. im thinking like 50-100 bucks per print. is that reasonable? too high or too low?
the one problem i always have is Pricing. im never good at pricing. im thinking like 50-100 bucks per print. is that reasonable? too high or too low?
With stock sales you aren't selling a print - you are selling right to use. The stock agencies will set the prices.
Also with your submissions, remember an image of a normal flower no matter how good will probably not sell because there are literally zillions of them out there; but an image of a very rare flower growing in the wild would probably be a good seller. Keep that in mind with all of your submissions, you need images which are unique or special in some way to ensure regular sales.
the one problem i always have is Pricing. im never good at pricing. im thinking like 50-100 bucks per print. is that reasonable? too high or too low?
With stock sales you aren't selling a print - you are selling right to use. The stock agencies will set the prices.
Also with your submissions, remember an image of a normal flower no matter how good will probably not sell because there are literally zillions of them out there; but an image of a very rare flower growing in the wild would probably be a good seller. Keep that in mind with all of your submissions, you need images which are unique or special in some way to ensure regular sales.
okay thanks :)
and on Photographer's Direct you set your own pricing then give them 20%.
so i dont know how to price my stuff
When someone decides to buy the right to use your image. They give you a usage. Like say they want it for a magazine cover for 150,000 print run. There is a calculator on PD that you can look up that type of image use and see what is low, med, and high price for that image. Covers pay the most.
Type of Use:: Editorial
Specific Use:: Magazine
Press Run:: 100,000 to 250,000
Size:: Cover (Front)
Low Price:: $700.00
Average Price:: $1,100.00
High Price:: $1,500.00
Survey ::748
The buyer will give you a budget when they contact you usually. You then enter negotiations on the price. You may not get that much, you may end up with more. Depending on your negotiation tactics and skills.
It also makes a difference if your image is rare on how high it will go. If they can get another one similar from someone else... you wont be able to demand quite that much.
I think the earning potential at the micros is at least or consiberably larger than photographers direct, my loupe, and alamy. I have images on alamy and myloupe as well as other images on the micros so it is a good comparison. The micro's sell images cheaply but they sell a lot, so you can make a lot.
And as a side note, istock and shutterstock are a lot harder to get into than alamy and photographers direct.
I think the earning potential at the micros is at least or consiberably larger than photographers direct, my loupe, and alamy. I have images on alamy and myloupe as well as other images on the micros so it is a good comparison. The micro's sell images cheaply but they sell a lot, so you can make a lot.
I've heard a lot of people say they do better on the microstock sites. The best idea is probably to submit to both - only you'd have to forget about Photographers Direct, because they won't deal with people who have stuff on the microstock sites. As long as you have separate portfolios for microstock and macrostock, you should have no problem doing both. That way you'll at least find out what works best for you.
Personally I have no experience of macrostock - maybe when I get a DSLR one day, and when Alamy start allowing one to upload instead of sending a DVD/CD, I'll give them a try. Meanwhile I'm learning a lot from the micros.
okay so I'm contemplating becoming a member on iStock. first all, do you think i have some decent stuff in my portfolio to sell on istock?
and 2nd, when submitting so i put on edited on non edited photos?
thanks
-Dustin
To answer your questions directly, yes, Dustin I do think you have photos that will sell on istock, and no, I wouldn't suggest submitting unedited photos for the most part, although I would suggest keep editing to a minimum.
But the real point of my reply is to welcome you to the debate of macro v. micro. It doesn't matter that your question was direct and pointed and had nothing to do with the debate. I don't care one way or the other whether someone wants to be involved in this or that sales model. But I do get awfully tired of folks presuming to tell everyone else that theirs is the only right way. Heck, try them all, see what suits you. And good luck.
i think im going to give macro a shot first(photographers direct) and try my loupe and almay as well. This money doesnt need to support me or anything at all so itd just be some extra cash id blow on little accessories or save it up for new gear.
One important thing to remember about macro vs. micro is this: once an image is sold on a microstock site it can never be subsequently sold on a macrostock site. This is due to the management of rights issue, since you can't guarantee to a macro buyer that the image won't be used elsewhere. Just something to think about.
One important thing to remember about macro vs. micro is this: once an image is sold on a microstock site it can never be subsequently sold on a macrostock site. This is due to the management of rights issue, since you can't guarantee to a macro buyer that the image won't be used elsewhere. Just something to think about.
As I understand things this is not universally true; Alamy at least allows you to specify royalty free or non-exclusive licensing on your photos. But it's true that once you have sold an image royalty free via any method you can't then sell an exclusive license on it.
I'm only just starting out with the stock thing but I don't think it's unreasonable to have images with both macro and micro, putting the "commodity" images on microstock and the "good" ones on macro seems a common approach. And I don't see any reason not to put the commodity images on a macro site marked royalty free...
New to the stock world, just began getting stuff accepted by Fotolia. Myself and a few other photogs belonging to stock microsites don't necessarily have dslrs...YET...but I'm wondering if those of us not shooting in RAW, with 6.0 mp advanced p&s cameras, should consider waiting til we do have dslrs to try the big guys, or hold off til then.
My stock pix can be seen on Fotolia, search for me under snaffles.
