[dudlew]

Hello all,

I am interested in trying to make a few measley dollars from my photos. I have been checking online and trying to see if there are any sites that might be interesting.

Most sites take a commission, but most sites also charge a membership fee. Is it worth it checking a site that takes a membership fee for the casual guy looking to see if anyone wants his prints? Or am I better off with a site like Crestock, which is free for membership, but takes most of the earnings?

If any of you guys use these commercial sites to sell your works, could you tell me your experience, and your recommendations on suitable sites? I have looked at Shutterstock, Crestock, Shutterpoint and iSockphoto if I remember correctly, but all of these charge a fee except crestock.

I found one a few weeks ago that looks good but lost the link to the page.

Thanks
D

[roentarre]

Hey there

Welcome to the club.

The money is lucrative and this is very fun way to get some cash feeding LBA

Crestock has a higher standard comapring to other stock photo sites. My success rate for pics being used in that site is very low 12% ish. In actual fact, I had to use another user name to arouse their interests reviewing my submissions again.

In general, the artistic photographs are not the key for sale. It is about what the market wants. So all my better artistic photographs never get sold. But boring toilet signs with a bit of bland bokeh were giving at least 40 or 50 Sales.

It is kind of fun to do stock photos but you would have to be tentative to know what the current market needs (which comprises of clients in multimedia , graphic design , travel agency or brochure making etc)

Shutterstock has a funny selection process for photographs - some of my images were submitted 3 months ago and these old images were only reviewed last week! This site also has a high standard for quality stock shots as well (not as tough as crestock)

Shutterpoint and istockphoto are easier to get your pics submitted but you would earn less. I sort of ignored them because of poor communication

The general trend is the need of people's photographs. Like chefs, police or whatever you can think off. These people's images could be used for commercial or brochures or power point presentation.

The stock images are preferred to be simple, not cluttered with distractions. Black or white or mono colour background is the best. Larger Megapixels are more popular for photo manipulation by some of stock photo clients.

Enjoy shooting. You will know when you get a couple of ejections to know the feel of need in the market. p.s. Look at other people's work and what is being rejected and what is not

Cheers

James

[roentarre]

One more thing is

Do not bother submitting flower or scenery shots. Rejection rate is almost 100% and market is hardly interested in them. There are too many of them available and market does not really need this type of photographs

[dudlew]

Thanks for the replies roentarre. You just shot me out of the water with that comment on forgetting scenery all together. people shots here are hard to get. My friends run from me with the camera and we all overpose for pictures when we do want them. The only people to get natural looks from are kids.

Hmm. well I may have to look for other avenues for selling prints.

I willl check around locally, and see what is available.

D

[roentarre]

Thanks for the replies roentarre. You just shot me out of the water with that comment on forgetting scenery all together. people shots here are hard to get. My friends run from me with the camera and we all overpose for pictures when we do want them. The only people to get natural looks from are kids.

Always glad that I can be of help.

Scenery shots are not really in demand but you might get a few of your scenery shots submitted and approved if these photos were labelled correctly with key search words properly reflecting your region's unique geography or local culture. (Tourist agency sometimes uses these shots in brochsure - but the sale will be little)

Do not feel daunted by what I said. I got hundreds of photostock rejection to tell you this - making me kind of depressed for a while hehe

You can try studio shots with simple home set up. Avoid too much work like what the pro do with copywork or commercial studio set up. Just plain background with small tent set up and some simple lighting. Start taking photos of anything that might be unique in your place or area - local craft, hats, food, anything you think that might be interesting and some people might find them useful. Build up a large photostock yourself and there are always some weirdo wanting to buy your effortless photographs - you will be surprised. (This really amazed me some time - some of my shots were even OOF with pathetic colour shot by canon)

I have a photograph capturing a men's urinal in public toilet in which the brand name ToTo was removed in order not to breach the copyright rule of photostock website. That photo was sold 3 times!! That shot could be taken by any one and was so ordinary. I got 1.5 US dollar from the sale. Not bad, huh?

At least try before you give up on the sites. That adds to our personal photography experiences ...

Cheers

[dudlew]

Thanks again.

I won't give up that easily. I just need to build up some stock as you said. I am going to see if I can sell to the local hotels if they are interested. This in itself may be a possibility.

I am in a unique situation in that I can make money where I am, but the issue is time. Alot of people approach me for photos, but I usually don't have the time to take them as such. If you notice, most of my shots are late afternoon or early morning, because of my work hours. BUT My gear and gear dreams are too expensive to be just a hobby. So there is a need to get some monetary benefit from it.......... Someday.

D

[dudlew]

Thanks again.

I won't give up that easily. I just need to build up some stock as you said. I am going to see if I can sell to the local hotels if they are interested. This in itself may be a possibility.

I am in a unique situation in that I can make money where I am, but the issue is time. Alot of people approach me for photos, but I usually don't have the time to take them as such. If you notice, most of my shots are late afternoon or early morning, because of my work hours. BUT My gear and gear dreams are too expensive to be just a hobby. So there is a need to get some monetary benefit from it.......... Someday.

D

[Rolly]

My 2 bob's worth.
Stock photograhy as a means of making your principle income is not an option for the feeble or fainthearted.
It requires huge amounts of time and dedication and, unless you have a well developed sense of the ridiculous and a high boredom threshold, it can be quite soul destroying.
The primary market is the advertising and promotions world where crassness is king.
A thorough, critical, assessment of the material with which we are continuously bombarded in order to part us from our cash is really the only way to get to grips with the absolute perfidiousness of the whole business.
Get that right and you're on a roll.

A general point about selling your goods and services: Always cast off customers who are more trouble than they are worth. ( With the exception, of course, of philanthropic activities.)
You can build a client base of good customers without enduring the angst of having to please all of the people all of the time.
And there are folk who are never pleased any of the time.
They even pop up occasionally on fora such as this.

[jbarnhart]

perfidiousness

Had to look that one up. Thanks for the word!
Here's my gift back to you...

coprophagous

I use it at least once a week now!

[Rolly]

Had to look that one up. Thanks for the word!
Here's my gift back to you...

coprophagous

I use it at least once a week now!

Yeah, with the amount of "copro" that passes for food in the supermarkets and fast food outlets, you could say that we almost all fit that description.
I got the "p" word from Julius Caesar who coined the phrase (in translation - my latin in non-existent.) "perfidious albion"" when describing the British people.
I have the Apple dictionary on the computor, which gets frequent usage if only to check my dodgy spelling.
Being based on American English it also serves as a translator.

[Ivan Glisin]

Positive: very good selection process for photographers with high technical requirements for the content. iStockphoto does NOT charge contributing photographers -- they do if you want to download and use photographs which is of course normal. So it is free for contributing photographers.

To become a member: You'll have to complete online training, pass online "exam", upload three samples for simulated approval, and upload a copy of your photo ID to confirm identity. Once approved, you can start uploading with a limit of 15 photographs per week, which will grow with your status (based on number of downloads). Approval procedure usually takes about one week. At first it seems to go slow but then it gains momentum.

Finance: At first you get 20%. After 500 downloads you can apply for the "exclusive" status (working only for iStockphoto) and slowly increase your slice to 40%. Once you accumulate $100 or more you can request a check.

Now, the most important part: although some users have 1000s of files, probably less than 10% generates them almost all downloads and revenue. For example, my library is only 65 at the moment with 5 photographs generating over 50% of downloads and cash. This one is number one, although not the best in my collection:

Royalty free stock image | Cup of coffee and a business presentation | iStockphoto.com

Also, larger photographs cost more and you could make more money with less downloads if users require better quality for larger formats. This one has generated me most money with half the downloads compared to the previous one, but most downloads were larger sizes (most likely for print):

Royalty free stock image | Wine bottle and glasses | iStockphoto.com

So my advice would be: do not waste your time shooting and uploading 15/week just to keep extending your library hoping that sheer volume would make you more money. Interestingly it won't! Better do just a few at a time but something that will sell well. There are examples of simple photographs downloaded 1000s of times. Check this one for example: over 2000 downloads in less than a year -- the guy probably made around $1,000 on ONLY ONE submission:

Royalty free stock image | wishes | iStockphoto.com

And also follow this guideline: do not design for designers!!! Provide simple and effective content that designers could use the way they want (or just part of it) to produce desired final result. Stock photography is a raw material and support for graphics design, not final design itself. Check "Designer Spotlight" to see how is the content used by designers (very interesting examples):

Design Community: Designer Spotlight | iStockphoto.com

Hope this helps.

[Rolly]

Words of wisdom directly 'from the horses mouth.'

[mediaslinky]

And also follow this guideline: do not design for designers!!! Provide simple and effective content that designers could use the way they want (or just part of it) to produce desired final result. Stock photography is a raw material and support for graphics design, not final design itself.

As the supervisor for 3 graphic designers, and occaisional producer of videos containing still images, I cannot concur enough with the above. In all the projects we have ever done, we have never used a stock photo just by itself.

However, we often use stock photos for our projects because of time. Yeah, we could take the picture we need, but we need it asap because the deadline is short.

slinky

[Khukri]

Dear Rolly,
Permit me to compliment you on your style & syntax. The underlying cynicism, wit and humour quite made my day. Shades of a 20th Century critic or societal mores? Any which way, thank you!