Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Stock Photography  (Read 12814 times)

Leonardo Barreto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
    • http://leonardobarreto.com/
Stock Photography
« on: October 04, 2008, 03:37:12 pm »

I want to begin producing and contributing images for stock. I have a studio (I'm in Bolivia for spouse's UN assignment), a 22mp digital back (P25-Mamiya).

My original plan was to work in commercial/ad. photography but I found out that won't get work permit here, so I can spend all my time shooting expressly for stock.

I'm planning to try with ALAMY since they have a well organized system for contributing and I could upload images on line --mailing disks is more complicated from where I am--

Is anyone here doing most of her/his work for the stock market? how long does it tale to begin earning etc.

Thank you for the advice

ps, just testing my studio and some filters...

Logged
[font=Comic Sa

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Stock Photography
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2008, 04:31:02 pm »

[quote name='Leonardo Barreto' date='Oct 4 2008, 08:37 PM' post='226836']
I want to begin producing and contributing images for stock. I have a studio (I'm in Bolivia for spouse's UN assignment), a 22mp digital back (P25-Mamiya).

My original plan was to work in commercial/ad. photography but I found out that won't get work permit here, so I can spend all my time shooting expressly for stock.

I'm planning to try with ALAMY since they have a well organized system for contributing and I could upload images on line --mailing disks is more complicated from where I am--

Is anyone here doing most of her/his work for the stock market? how long does it tale to begin earning etc.

Thank you for the advice

ps, just testing my studio and some filters...






Having been with Tony Stone Worldwide (Getty) for many years in the past, having witnessed many changes to the industry, none of which seemed to be to my advantage, I would say that stock is okay as long as you don´t have to spend anything to produce it. Should you just be a hobbyist with something that the rest of the world wants to buy, then go for it; I could not recommend it anymore, though once thought it to be very good.

Of course, it could well be that what I used to do is no longer wanted - who can tell?

How long before you earn anything? How long is a piece of string?

Would love to be able to be optimistic, but that would be a false stance on my part.

Rob C

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Stock Photography
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2008, 04:54:58 pm »

Good luck selling at Alamy with over 13 million images in their library.  I'm glad they have image upload now.  When I first joined, we had to send in DVDs.  Very annoying.

I started at Alamy, but I recently decided to request deletion of all of my images at Alamy, and they all will be deleted by January, 2009.

I moved to Microstock which a lot of pros have been doing (boo! hiss! you're crazy! Ahh!) and have been about 100x more successful in terms of money earned.

Whether you go with Alamy or Microstock, I have some advice for you:  SHOOT A LOT OF IMAGES.  *Don't try to be artistic at first, or EVER*.  Shoot a SH!T load of simple objects and people DOING THINGS, not just portraits of people.  People doing SOMETHING.  90 percent of the high quality fashion images shown in the medium format forum shot by the top professionals on this board DO NOT sell.

For objects, don't think that some pretty flowers are going to make you some money.  If you want to make money, take a picture of a Fluorescent light bulb, a glass of water, a glass of beer, MONEY, an LCD screen, or any piece of technology for that matter.

It's tricky.  The shot you think is a masterpiece will not sell.  The shot that you think is CRAP, but you put in your portfolio anyway, will become your best seller.

Good luck!  
 
Logged

Leonardo Barreto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
    • http://leonardobarreto.com/
Stock Photography
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2008, 11:53:33 pm »

Thank you for the advice, it seams I will need all I can get. There has to be some images sold for 11 thousand photographers to be sending them to Alamy alone, I guess I will be one more.

It is creative work, not easy, but so is everything in life... I have no overhead since the studio is at home, I have a ton of equipment including a 60megabites camera. I think that I want to do the elaborate concept images AND the simple abundant ones... just everyday work.

Can you please elaborate on micro stock?

One other thing. Is there a way to sort images that are best sellers on different stock agencies?

thanks again
Logged
[font=Comic Sa

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Stock Photography
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2008, 02:23:10 am »

I agree there is some creative work that you can benefit from, but I found that starting out with simple, boring objects shot in the way that high quality commercial products are shot will result in a non-stop flow of earnings, even when you're sitting on your ass doing nothing (which is why I like stock photography).  

You can do the artistic stuff at the same time, but I found it's better to establish a solid, generic portfolio with some images that will sell consistently, rather than spending so much time on an elaborate creative idea, and then having it not sell as many times as the boring stuff, or not selling at all.

At istockphoto.com you can sort images by "downloads" after searching for a subject, and you can see which ones have sold hundreds, or even thousands of times for any given subject, like "beer."

I won't get into microstock, as many people seem to have a grudge against it.  Don't want to start a flame war.  You can research it yourself throughout the Internet.  Most of what you'll read will probably be negative.  

Just remember, I started out like you, with Alamy.  I thought that was the right direction, and it is for some people.  But I ended up doing both Alamy (Rights Managed) and Microstock (Royalty Free) at the same time, and then I ended up moving completely to Microstock.

 

Logged

Quentin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1222
    • Quentin on Facebook
Stock Photography
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2008, 10:58:36 am »

Quote from: T-1000
I won't get into microstock, as many people seem to have a grudge against it.

I don't. As you know, I wrote a book about it  .   See sig line.  Anyone with a grudge against microstock has a grudge against the Internet and digital imaging, which spawned it.

In fact even if you have no long-term plans in microstock, its a useful place to win your "chops" because technical standards are high.  And as microstock is such a large and growing part of stock generally, you really cannot discuss one without the other.

In any event, for Leonardo's benefit, whether you prefer micro or macro, do your research and in particular consider carefully what sort of shots would want to take and match those to a suitable library.  I have had some success (outside of microstock) with smaller specialized libraries.  Alamy is fine but as you already know, it is large and sales volumes are somewhat low.  You should consider an alternative specialised companion library as well.

Quentin
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 11:01:27 am by Quentin »
Logged
Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, Arbitrato

Leonardo Barreto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
    • http://leonardobarreto.com/
Stock Photography
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2008, 11:07:58 am »

T-1000, I'm glad to hear positive and specific advice like yours, it all makes sense, I will work on a regiment similar to the nutrition pyramid larger in the base (with the generic stuff) and some at the top with conceptual creative things (that could be trophy for my portfolio). I want to try to get exotic landscapes here in Latin America. I will go to Japan at in December since my wife is Japanese, so I will bring the Mamiya alone to shoot some images in Tokyo...

It is interesting what you mention about Microstock, on one side people are against it and on the other people live Alamy to be in Microstock... can you define the difference in the two formats? I did a search of such topic threads here and in other forums but couldn't find them...


Quote from: T-1000
I agree there is some creative work that you can benefit from, but I found that starting out with simple, boring objects shot in the way that high quality commercial products are shot will result in a non-stop flow of earnings, even when you're sitting on your ass doing nothing (which is why I like stock photography).  

You can do the artistic stuff at the same time, but I found it's better to establish a solid, generic portfolio with some images that will sell consistently, rather than spending so much time on an elaborate creative idea, and then having it not sell as many times as the boring stuff, or not selling at all.

At istockphoto.com you can sort images by "downloads" after searching for a subject, and you can see which ones have sold hundreds, or even thousands of times for any given subject, like "beer."

I won't get into microstock, as many people seem to have a grudge against it.  Don't want to start a flame war.  You can research it yourself throughout the Internet.  Most of what you'll read will probably be negative.  

Just remember, I started out like you, with Alamy.  I thought that was the right direction, and it is for some people.  But I ended up doing both Alamy (Rights Managed) and Microstock (Royalty Free) at the same time, and then I ended up moving completely to Microstock.
Logged
[font=Comic Sa

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Stock Photography
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2008, 08:38:32 pm »

Hi Quentin, I guess I wasn't thinking of you when I wrote that, because I already knew you're one of the few people on this board that isn't against it, and that you wrote a book on it.  

Leonardo, in general, Microstock is basically Royalty Free images that can be sold anywhere from .25 cents (people like to say "you're selling your images for pennies!") to something like $40, depending on the size of the image, whether it's an extended license or not, and the PRICE MODEL of the particular agency (there's a lot of microstock agencies out there, some pay more than others).  

(Some) People have a problem with selling their images at such low prices, but the key to success in microstock is the size of your portfolio, and volume of sales.  Instead of making a few big sales a month, you make hundreds, or thousands of sales per month to be successful, and it's not too hard to do.

Macrostock is the more traditional places, like Alamy, that sells both Royalty Free and Rights Managed.  Royalty free images from Alamy cost more than Royalty free from a Microstock agency.  In order to compete with Microstock, Alamy just started this new thing called "Limited Use for $1."  They had to do this to compete with their loss of sales from the Microstock agencies.

Rights Managed images from Alamy allows you to sell an image with a price that is determined by the usage.  For example, the price of my Rights Managed sales (Traditional Licenses) at Alamy was determined by the size, media type, print run, etc.

Here's the details for one of my Alamy RM sales:

Country: United States
Usage: Editorial
Media: Consumer Magazine
Industry: Retail books/magazines/newspapers
Sub-Industry: Food and Drink
Print run: up to 1 million
Placement: Inside
Image Size: Spot size
Start: 01 December 2006
End: 01 January 2007

It was sold for $225.  That's for one sale.  That doesn't happen in Microstock with one sale.  So it makes you think immediately that traditional RM and Alamy is the right path to go with because you can potentially make that $1,500 sale if you get lucky, but it might not be the right path.  I'm one of the people who have moved completely to Microstock, making less per sale, but a very high volume of sales per month and per year in comparison to a traditional license agency.  That means more money in my case.  It might be different for you.

BTW, you can do Rights Managed and Royalty Free at the same time (Alamy and a Microstock site) as long as the images are not the same on both sites.  Even if you've signed to be "exclusive" with a Microstock agency, you can still do Rights Managed at Alamy.  Just don't do any Royalty Free at Alamy if you're with a Microstock agency.  It's kind of against the rules.  So try both with two sets of images.  If one site performs better than the other, delete the images from one site (takes 6 months at Alamy) and put all your eggs with the site that is more successful.

If you don't do Alamy at all, you can also do more than one Microstock site at the same time with the SAME images if you don't go "exclusive" with one of them.  For example, you can have a portfolio with the same images at 6 different Micro agencies earning from all 6 at the same time (it's tough to manage 6 sites, but some people do it).

One quick fact:  55% of all stock sold in North America is sold by iStockPhoto, a Microstock Agency, not a traditional agency.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 08:52:51 pm by T-1000 »
Logged

Leonardo Barreto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
    • http://leonardobarreto.com/
Stock Photography
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2008, 10:39:47 pm »

Fantastic information, thank you again...

Quote from: T-1000
Hi Quentin, I guess I wasn't thinking of you when I wrote that, because I already knew you're one of the few people on this board that isn't against it, and that you wrote a book on it.  

Leonardo, in general, Microstock is basically Royalty Free images that can be sold anywhere from .25 cents (people like to say "you're selling your images for pennies!") to something like $40, depending on the size of the image, whether it's an extended license or not, and the PRICE MODEL of the particular agency (there's a lot of microstock agencies out there, some pay more than others).  

(Some) People have a problem with selling their images at such low prices, but the key to success in microstock is the size of your portfolio, and volume of sales.  Instead of making a few big sales a month, you make hundreds, or thousands of sales per month to be successful, and it's not too hard to do.

Macrostock is the more traditional places, like Alamy, that sells both Royalty Free and Rights Managed.  Royalty free images from Alamy cost more than Royalty free from a Microstock agency.  In order to compete with Microstock, Alamy just started this new thing called "Limited Use for $1."  They had to do this to compete with their loss of sales from the Microstock agencies.

Rights Managed images from Alamy allows you to sell an image with a price that is determined by the usage.  For example, the price of my Rights Managed sales (Traditional Licenses) at Alamy was determined by the size, media type, print run, etc.

Here's the details for one of my Alamy RM sales:

Country: United States
Usage: Editorial
Media: Consumer Magazine
Industry: Retail books/magazines/newspapers
Sub-Industry: Food and Drink
Print run: up to 1 million
Placement: Inside
Image Size: Spot size
Start: 01 December 2006
End: 01 January 2007

It was sold for $225.  That's for one sale.  That doesn't happen in Microstock with one sale.  So it makes you think immediately that traditional RM and Alamy is the right path to go with because you can potentially make that $1,500 sale if you get lucky, but it might not be the right path.  I'm one of the people who have moved completely to Microstock, making less per sale, but a very high volume of sales per month and per year in comparison to a traditional license agency.  That means more money in my case.  It might be different for you.

BTW, you can do Rights Managed and Royalty Free at the same time (Alamy and a Microstock site) as long as the images are not the same on both sites.  Even if you've signed to be "exclusive" with a Microstock agency, you can still do Rights Managed at Alamy.  Just don't do any Royalty Free at Alamy if you're with a Microstock agency.  It's kind of against the rules.  So try both with two sets of images.  If one site performs better than the other, delete the images from one site (takes 6 months at Alamy) and put all your eggs with the site that is more successful.

If you don't do Alamy at all, you can also do more than one Microstock site at the same time with the SAME images if you don't go "exclusive" with one of them.  For example, you can have a portfolio with the same images at 6 different Micro agencies earning from all 6 at the same time (it's tough to manage 6 sites, but some people do it).

One quick fact:  55% of all stock sold in North America is sold by iStockPhoto, a Microstock Agency, not a traditional agency.
Logged
[font=Comic Sa

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1211
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com
Stock Photography
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2008, 12:57:05 pm »

Yes, terrific information thanks.
Hey T One thou:
I live in Mayan country. Do you think ethnic stock would sell at Alamy? i'm not interested in micro. Thanks again.
Eduardo
Quote from: Leonardo Barreto
Fantastic information, thank you again...
Logged

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Stock Photography
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2008, 06:03:51 pm »

When you say "ethnic" do you mean pictures of the people of the Mayan culture just as regular people, being themselves, and the different environments in your country?

I ask this because I think Alamy is better for landscapes and also editorial type of images that show the culture of a specific country and its people (National Geographic style, I suppose).

On the other hand, if you're planning to put people in business suits and make them look like successful business people, homeowners, or show them as a happy family, there seems to be a demand in Microstock for images that show people of different races, colors, and cultures participating in these different roles.

I hope that doesn't sound confusing...
Logged

Leonardo Barreto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
    • http://leonardobarreto.com/
Stock Photography
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2008, 10:31:39 pm »

Not only not confusing but totally relevant. There is a growing Latino (or Hispanic) market in the US, so for those of us that happen to be in a Latin American country contribute to the same concepts but adapted to the Latino look may be a good idea. In our countries there is the obnoxious custom of using models that look "American" to sell any product, from cellars to houses ...

PS;Eduardo: what do you normally do in Guate?



Quote from: T-1000
When you say "ethnic" do you mean pictures of the people of the Mayan culture just as regular people, being themselves, and the different environments in your country?

I ask this because I think Alamy is better for landscapes and also editorial type of images that show the culture of a specific country and its people (National Geographic style, I suppose).

On the other hand, if you're planning to put people in business suits and make them look like successful business people, homeowners, or show them as a happy family, there seems to be a demand in Microstock for images that show people of different races, colors, and cultures participating in these different roles.

I hope that doesn't sound confusing...
Logged
[font=Comic Sa

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1211
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com
Stock Photography
« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2008, 02:31:30 pm »

On "ethnic" I mainly mean photographs of people without doubt looking native of the Yucatan peninsula (full mayan and mestizo) doing all kind of chores, entertaining, family, etc., in their everyday environment. In many ways similar to NG.

I live in Mexico not Guatemala. I've always seen a lot of stuff from Guatemala. Books, calendars, etc. Guatemala has been photographed probably to exhaustion (I may be wrong). Such a beautiful and truly colorful country with a very bad rep in human rights make a paradise for photojournalists. The reality in the Peninsula is different both for photographers and journalists. But still rich in culture and oportunities for photography.
Eduardo

Quote from: Leonardo Barreto
Not only not confusing but totally relevant. There is a growing Latino (or Hispanic) market in the US, so for those of us that happen to be in a Latin American country contribute to the same concepts but adapted to the Latino look may be a good idea. In our countries there is the obnoxious custom of using models that look "American" to sell any product, from cellars to houses ...

PS;Eduardo: what do you normally do in Guate?
Logged

Dinarius

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1212
Stock Photography
« Reply #13 on: January 14, 2010, 03:44:38 am »

Found this thread using the Search facility........

I'm considering dipping my toe in the stock pond as a possible means of additional income (though I fully accept the points made regarding competition etc.) and as a way of getting myself to get up off my a** and shoot when I'm not shooting to order.

I note from the date that this thread was last active in October 2008. Leonardo, I'm just wondering (if you're still out there!   ) what your experience of the stock industry has been in the last 15 months, or so?

Thanks.

D.
Logged

DarkPenguin

  • Guest
Stock Photography
« Reply #14 on: January 15, 2010, 12:09:01 am »

Quote from: Dinarius
Found this thread using the Search facility........

I'm considering dipping my toe in the stock pond as a possible means of additional income (though I fully accept the points made regarding competition etc.) and as a way of getting myself to get up off my a** and shoot when I'm not shooting to order.

I note from the date that this thread was last active in October 2008. Leonardo, I'm just wondering (if you're still out there!   ) what your experience of the stock industry has been in the last 15 months, or so?

Thanks.

D.

Looking at Leonardo's profile he hasn't been seen on the forums (logged in, anyway) since Oct of last year.  You might consider PM'ing him since that might send him an email.  (Alternately his email is listed on his web site.)

I am also curious as to his stock experience.
Logged

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Stock Photography
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2010, 10:16:51 pm »

Woohoo, old thread is back alive!

I also want to hear from Leonardo...
Logged

MarcusNewey

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Stock Photography
« Reply #16 on: January 29, 2010, 10:02:19 am »

So T-1000 are you still happy with your move to entirely microstock, still getting the high volume of sales ?

What kind of numbers do you think you need to submit, say monthly, to see a significant return?

Marcus
« Last Edit: January 29, 2010, 10:02:47 am by MarcusNewey »
Logged

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Stock Photography
« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2010, 03:46:14 am »

Hi Marcus, yes, I'm microstock only forever.  I wouldn't think of submitting to those rights managed guys anymore, even though I could if I wanted to.  It would be a complete waste of time, really.

I don't know about monthly submissions (just try your best to shoot useful images for stock; quality and useful images over quantity still counts), but once you have a portfolio of about 1,000+ images, you're good to go with a good income, from basically doing nothing at all.  I got consistent sales when I had a portfolio of only 200 images.  

2,000 (useful) images, and you'll probably be able to sit on your ass 6.9 out of 7 days of the week doing nothing at all.  But as I said above, there are people making perfectly good incomes with 500 images or less because of the repetitive selling of popular images in their portfolio, over and over again, due to quality and usefulness of the image.

People who don't believe me and roll their eyes aren't up to date on the newest pricing structure of the top microstock agency, especially if you're exclusive to only that agency.  It also depends on the size of the image that is purchased, and what level of downloads you have.  All of this determines how high your earnings will be.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2010, 03:48:24 am by T-1000 »
Logged

vandevanterSH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 625
Stock Photography
« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2010, 12:21:55 pm »

This is a very interesting thread.  I didn't have a clue what microstock was until my GF bought a image from istockphoto a few months go.  After adding up all of the possible use options for the image, IIRC, the cost was ~$250.  Of the total cost to the end user, what percentage goes to the photographer?

Steve
Logged

AldoMurillo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
Stock Photography
« Reply #19 on: March 03, 2010, 09:23:11 pm »

Hi, first post at LL! (I'm from Mexico, sorry for my english)

I hope this info helps you:

I've been working in microstock for 3 years now (istockphoto.com/aldomurillo). Full time job. I have 3,040 images in my portfolio,  adding aprox. 150-250 images per month. Right now I have sold 132,000 licenses so far.  At istockphoto.com first you get 20 cents for every dollar you sell, when you become an "exclusive" you can earn as much as 40 cents for every dollar (thats my case).   Well, for every license that you sell yo can earn from $0.76 (Xsmall size, bronze level) to $18.30 (XXLarge, Diamond level).   If you sell an "extended license" you can earn as much as $395 depending on several variables.  

First of all I'm a designer, who used to buy stock for my freelance proyects. I started to upload images that I could't find on istockphoto.com "to see what happends" and after a year I started to work full-time on microstock, and right know I have 2nd photographer, a retoucher, an assistant and also my wife works with me full-time, all from my microstock earnings.   Well, I live in México so I earn dollars and spend Mexican pesos, so it's a win win situation.  

I still do some design proyects, but just the ones that I feel comfortable, and in the microstock world I can tell you that you need to think as a designer before you make a photo shoot ( you have to think in copy space, bleed, white backgrounds etc etc), also the image quality has to be perfect (no CA, no color noise, lowest posible ISO, etc etc)  .  I also do work for hire type of jobs a (artistic images, weddings, portraits etc) but thats a completely different world, and I'm completely aware of that.  At microstock you need to work with stereotypes, themes that sell, and believe me, thats an art hard to be good at.  

Well heres a couple of interesting links where you can find info about microstock:

Yuri Arcurs Site (he sells about 2,000 licenses every day!)
Microstock Diaries
Lise Gagne  (Has sold a million liceses on istockphoto.com)

I hope It helps

Aldo
Logged
Aldo Murillo
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up