Stock Photo Agencies... Whats your opinion?

Nicky-D60VR

Nicky-D60VR

Messages
140
Edit My Images
Yes
Okay.

My plan to quit my 'sensible' 9-5 job and enter the world of Photography has taken a little bit of a back seat as am now pregnant. (y)

BUT, I am still photographing every second I get. Am half way through my Digital Imaging Diploma course and am starting to get depressed that my poor pictures are just sitting on my laptop rarely ever getting looked at.

My OH introduced me to some stock photography agencies for example Istockphoto and I just wondered if anyone has any experience working with them, if its worth the hassle etc? :help:

Any help/advice is appreciated.

Many thanks,
Nicky :)
 
I'd avoid the micro stock agencies and go for the rights managed agencies like Alamy. The larger stock agencies are worth the hassle, but you have to put into them to get out and be patient doing so.
 
I am with Fotolia (termed as a micro) and Alamy. Fotolia pays for all my kit, Alamy has not given me a payout yet and some of my sales on Fotolia earn me more than those on Alamy

Having said that I am exclusive to Fotolia for royalty free images, having left all the other RF sites, and I am working my way up the rankings - both of which mean I am not on the lowest payment tier as new submitters would be.

Is it worth it - yes it can be if you are prepared to work at it.
 
Micro stock is morally wrong. It makes it much harder for anyone to sell at normal prices. Whenever you decide to move up, it may be very hard to get out of micro stock.

Alamy doesn't work for me either. I don't shoot much newspaper material. Getty is too big and greedy. Perhaps smaller specialized agencies could be the answer.
 
daugirdas said:
Micro stock is morally wrong. It makes it much harder for anyone to sell at normal prices. Whenever you decide to move up, it may be very hard to get out of micro stock.

Alamy doesn't work for me either. I don't shoot much newspaper material. Getty is too big and greedy. Perhaps smaller specialized agencies could be the answer.
Click to expand...

I didn't think Alamy were a news agency??
 
boyfalldown said:
I didn't think Alamy were a news agency??
Click to expand...

Well technically they are not, but they seem to sell a lot to newspapers. If all the micro stock buyers came to alamy I might be happier with them, but now nobody even searches for floral photos (they don't have any of my landscapes, nor portraits).
 
they sell to alot of publishers also. In no way are they a news agency. People not searching for or buying the subjects you take is a different matter and not really down to them.
 
daugirdas said:
Micro stock is morally wrong. It makes it much harder for anyone to sell at normal prices. Whenever you decide to move up, it may be very hard to get out of micro stock.

Alamy doesn't work for me either. I don't shoot much newspaper material. Getty is too big and greedy. Perhaps smaller specialized agencies could be the answer.
Click to expand...

So you don't like micro stock, you don't like Alamy and you don't like Getty. That would be about 95% of the market.
 
I just registered with Alamy and one of their requirements is:

"Uncompressed file sizes of more than 24MB. This means you should make your JPEG file from an 8 bit TIFF file that is at least 24MB. If you have a camera that is capable of producing an uncompressed 8 bit file of over 24MB then leave it that size."

What exactly do they mean? Are the photos from my 4MP Canon G3 good enough for this? What about my Nikon D5000? My files are nowhere near that large...

Also, looked like it is completely free to use and submit, right? I won't lose any money if I don't sell?
 
Alamy publish a list of suitable cameras, I don't know about either of yours, why not have a look? They mean how large a TIFF file can be created from the JPG file you upload

You won't lose money if you don't sell.

Edit - Your G3 is on their unsuitable camera list. You can't use it. The D5000 is on the recommended camera list
 
boyfalldown said:
Edit - Your G3 is on their unsuitable camera list. You can't use it. The D5000 is on the recommended camera list
Click to expand...

That's a shame, only got my D5000 last week but have travelled the world with my G3 for almost a decade. Can't use that for much then...

The guys on that Alamy forum sound like they just want you to go away unless you're super serious... Is that the general attitude? I was browsing photos on there and lot of them are pretty bog standard location photos.
 
daugirdas said:
Well technically they are not, but they seem to sell a lot to newspapers. If all the micro stock buyers came to alamy I might be happier with them
Click to expand...

That's a faut of Microstock, not Alamy. People USED to go to Alamy (and similar RM agencies), now they go to microstock sites.
 
morsing said:
That's a shame, only got my D5000 last week but have travelled the world with my G3 for almost a decade. Can't use that for much then...

The guys on that Alamy forum sound like they just want you to go away unless you're super serious... Is that the general attitude? I was browsing photos on there and lot of them are pretty bog standard location photos.
Click to expand...


Fairly uniquely for a forum, the guys on there all compete with each other. You can't expect them to regard it as a laugh.

'Bog Standard' photos? or do the people who submit them understand what sells?.

The balancing rock in your gallery for example. 1,260 photos of that on Alamy - if you don't understand whats going to sell then it'll just get lost with all the others
 
boyfalldown said:
'Bog Standard' photos? or do the people who submit them understand what sells?.

The balancing rock in your gallery for example. 1,260 photos of that on Alamy - if you don't understand whats going to sell then it'll just get lost with all the others
Click to expand...

Had to read your post a couple of times but I think I understand what you're trying to get at. You meant the balancing rock photo is the kind of stuff that sells but not necessarily mine as there are 1000s of others, yes?

I was searching my hometown, Ringkoebing, and the photos there are almost all the same, all based around the harbour, none in the lovely town, and the photos are not at all exceptional. Or do I not know what I'm looking at? I assume photos from an unknown little town have no change of selling, that's what you mean?

So basically, whatever sells has already been put up there...
 
Ive just hit the year mark in selling photos online through stock agencies (micro and macro). Although I havent really uploaded much I have gotten money that I wouldnt have had otherwise. I wouldnt say microstock is as bad as people say, My earnings from microstock (mostly shutterstock, istock and stockxpert while it was still around) topped my macro sales at alamy (all be it one sale). From my experience macro will get you the odd sale here and there, but it will be a big sale (~$100) whereas micro will get you anywhere from pennies to a couple of quid for the majority of their sales (the odd one will be a decent $25 or so), but it will add up. A very annoying thing though in microstock is how once you stop uploading, sales can drop like a stone (something to do with the way the search engines generate results)
 
So basically, whatever sells has already been put up there...
Click to expand...
not always, just gotta be creative, conceptual pictures that get across an idea in a new or different way will do well, but if you take a picture of an everyday household object on a white background then your not going to see many sales.

If your just go for it, spend a couple of months at it, uploading, looking at the forums, looking at the types of photos that are selling etc, then you will build up an idea of what will sell.
 
morsing said:
Had to read your post a couple of times but I think I understand what you're trying to get at. You meant the balancing rock photo is the kind of stuff that sells but not necessarily mine as there are 1000s of others, yes?

I was searching my hometown, Ringkoebing, and the photos there are almost all the same, all based around the harbour, none in the lovely town, and the photos are not at all exceptional. Or do I not know what I'm looking at? I assume photos from an unknown little town have no change of selling, that's what you mean?

So basically, whatever sells has already been put up there...
Click to expand...

no not quite - sorry I wasn't clear. for example, your Rock picture must have something about it that will appeal to Alamy's buyers too sell it, else it will get lost with the others.

By no means has every sellable image been put there already - but an understanding of what sells (use Alamy measures for this) is essential, and what people buy may not appeal to you or I (or not seem exceptional).
 
Keywording is another key issue. It all depends on these few words, and the way the search engine rank the photos. It seems I am simply not good enough for it, or they get in micro for next to nothing.
 
Kerioak - thanks for your replies :)

Still thinking about it to be honest. Trying to get some advice at the moment to see whether its worth my while or not... :( so confused. Its a mine field it seems !!

Looking around online at the moment...
 
Thanks everyone for your replies... well I am comforted to know that some of you guys use Alamy and others... I was scared that it might be some sort of money pit but its definitely comforting that some of you have had good results.

Thanks all :)
 
Sent 4 images to Alamy last night got a "37 hour wait for QC" message went down to 24 hour wait just prior to bedtime ..........:clap: just got the all clear, worse than waiting in the dentist, now just have to sort out the key wording, get more images uploaded and see what happens, they may as well sit on their HDDs with a very small potential to earn something, than just languish on mine.
 
I've been with Alamy for a few years, but only have about 150 images on there as I am very slack at uploading. It's a long term game doing stock IMO, not a quick fix. I'm in to a 4 figure sum for the amount my images have made from sales, profit to me from that on the other hand is very different...!
 
Interesting thread as I've considered this in the past but ended up not bothering.
My thoughts at the time were that putting my best shots on to the microstock sites would devalue them, I put quite a bit of effort into some of them & don't really like the idea of selling them for pennies - I'd rather not sell them at all, which may seem a bit odd I suppose

Tha larger sites like Alamy seem better suited to my way of thinking, I might give them a try

Simon
 
Richard Peters said:
I've been with Alamy for a few years, but only have about 150 images on there as I am very slack at uploading. It's a long term game doing stock IMO, not a quick fix. I'm in to a 4 figure sum for the amount my images have made from sales, profit to me from that on the other hand is very different...!
Click to expand...

When I first started I did not think my images would be good enough for Alamy, in fact they are much more lenient than the (micro) stock libraries. Maybe one day I will get that mythical large sale there which will make me believe in them. So far this month I have taken out much more from Fotolia than I have earned in over two years at Alamy - it is useful as it pays for my kit and software etc.

simonkit said:
Interesting thread as I've considered this in the past but ended up not bothering.
My thoughts at the time were that putting my best shots on to the microstock sites would devalue them, I put quite a bit of effort into some of them & don't really like the idea of selling them for pennies - I'd rather not sell them at all, which may seem a bit odd I suppose

Tha larger sites like Alamy seem better suited to my way of thinking, I might give them a try

Simon
Click to expand...

I have to admit I felt a bit like this when I first started but now many of my shoots are done purely with stock in mind, although a few pictures I do get precious about, especially of my dogs, but try and get over it :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top