Showing posts with label dreamstime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dreamstime. Show all posts
Can I make a living from MicroStock?
Can i make money from my interest in photography and illustration? That's what i thought when i looked online a couple of years ago and the search results on google that came up often included words like 'microstock' and 'macrostock'.
Seemed like a good idea and pretty simple. Take pictures, upload them and sit back and wait for the buyers to snap them up. hmmm Nothing is ever THAT simple though is it?
But nothing ventured, nothing gained. So in April 2008 i registered with Dreamstime.com and like most got a ton of rejections. Apparently next doors cat (cute that she is on camera) wasn't going to cut the mustard or be a best seller after all. Shock! hmmmm "ok" I thought.. and after a few more rejections i ended up with a 50% approval rating and about 6 photographs approved and for sale.
I did register with a few other agencies but pretty much gave up and concentrated on other matters in life until late summer of 2009 i logged onto Dreamstime to find $10 sitting in my account. Now that's not much and in 'English' it looks even worse at around £6. But, it occurred to me that if 6 images could make £6 (albeit over 18 months or so) then what could 100 make.. or a thousand?!
Time to give it another go and this time try to stick at it and learn as much as possible.
Certainly my first interest is photography before illustration but getting quality photos (and popular ones) on the stock sites is tough (and getting tougher by the year) with so many brilliant and talented photographers out there and having a good computer i decided to try to make it work for me and downloaded the free open source vector graphics program Inkscape:
http://www.inkscape.org/
Picked it up pretty quickly (although room for improvement and still learning what it's capable of) and was surprised to find that a submission of illustrations to ShutterStock (after being completely rejected the previous year when submitting photos of that cat et al) was accepted with 9 out of 10 approved. (One failed due to possible copyright issues as it looked far too much like an Ipod for ShutterStock).
So i was off.. I signed up with other agencies and am slowly making progress. Income is tiny.. i mean really tiny but it is growing ever so slowly and with only around 35 unique images i am still only just beginning but hopefully, over time and with determination, my earnings will start so look more impressive and i can make a living from Microstock. :)
35 files on Dreamstime
35 images live and for sale on Dreamstime as of tonight. Not even a milestone really.. well maybe a mini-milestone. It certainly seemed a long way off when i started back into this game. I guess the next target is 50 and although i would love to reach that before the end of the month.. with only 6 days left i doubt i will get there. But i'll try to get closer at least. Here is number 35 (a valentine theme):
© Photographer: Devonsun | Agency: Dreamstime.com
© Photographer: Devonsun | Agency: Dreamstime.com
Alamy QC and CTR
So far Alamy has been ok to upload to. Until the other day i hadn't had a rejection although i also haven't had any sales.
The other day i uploaded a few illustrations of stage curtains along with an image of a cigarette at the end of a medical syringe which i like to think is my best quality creation to date. The curtains were not sharp but slightly diffused (as they were meant to be.)
The whole batch however was rejected due to just the curtains not being to their liking. I can live with that although i just don't understand Alamy's quality control procedure for rejecting ALL images in a batch even if only one fails. It seems a strange business model to me and a waste of time for reviewer as well as contributor. The syringe was later approved once it was uploaded (again) on it's own which seems to only confirm to me that Alamy like to cut their noses off to spite their face?!
Can you imagine Dreamstime rejecting 20 of your images because one failed/not required? Different site, different kind of market/buyers maybe but it still doesn't make much sense to me.
Anyone with a more insightful view of how Alamy's way of dealing with rejections (and binning anything else that was submitted at the same time) do please let me know as i would like to think i am merely missing something that means it's actually a good system. Not a bad one.
CTR:
I would also like someone to explain to me the rather odd (to me) statistics method they use. CTR (Click Through Rate) is still, after some reading, a mystery to me. Currently Alamy's "Average CTR" is 0.79. Whereas mine is 2.99. Is that good or bad? Who knows. I guess all you can do is submit saleable images and keyword properly at the end of the day ..
The other day i uploaded a few illustrations of stage curtains along with an image of a cigarette at the end of a medical syringe which i like to think is my best quality creation to date. The curtains were not sharp but slightly diffused (as they were meant to be.)
The whole batch however was rejected due to just the curtains not being to their liking. I can live with that although i just don't understand Alamy's quality control procedure for rejecting ALL images in a batch even if only one fails. It seems a strange business model to me and a waste of time for reviewer as well as contributor. The syringe was later approved once it was uploaded (again) on it's own which seems to only confirm to me that Alamy like to cut their noses off to spite their face?!
Can you imagine Dreamstime rejecting 20 of your images because one failed/not required? Different site, different kind of market/buyers maybe but it still doesn't make much sense to me.
Anyone with a more insightful view of how Alamy's way of dealing with rejections (and binning anything else that was submitted at the same time) do please let me know as i would like to think i am merely missing something that means it's actually a good system. Not a bad one.
CTR:
I would also like someone to explain to me the rather odd (to me) statistics method they use. CTR (Click Through Rate) is still, after some reading, a mystery to me. Currently Alamy's "Average CTR" is 0.79. Whereas mine is 2.99. Is that good or bad? Who knows. I guess all you can do is submit saleable images and keyword properly at the end of the day ..
Editorial on Shutterstock
I came up with an idea for an illustration based on the Olympic logo and thought after checking that it would be ok as an editorial on shutterstock.. I figured it would pass as i had found other images of the logo (which is copyright/tradmark protected) on SS.
Graphic Leftovers stated very quickly after i emailed them that such an image would be ok if it was very abstract (which mine wasn't.) So i just submitted it to SS and DT where i have previously found Olympic non-abstract images.
It was approved on DT but rejected at SS on the grounds that "Trademark--Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial."
© Photographer: Devonsun | Agency: Dreamstime.com
I emailed Shutterstock support over a week ago to get clarification on the matter but i haven't had a reply from them yet:
"Need some clarification on a recent rejection reason please. File ID: *******
Understood copyright aspects so submitted for editorial after finding similar
images on SS:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-44659942.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-40801201.html
But "Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial." was the refusal reason.
Is there a difference between illustrations and photographs when it comes to
acceptance for editorial?
Thanks. David"
Based on the reply from SS i may make "Olympic Construction" exclusive to DT. In any event i think i will have to contact SS again to get an answer.
Graphic Leftovers stated very quickly after i emailed them that such an image would be ok if it was very abstract (which mine wasn't.) So i just submitted it to SS and DT where i have previously found Olympic non-abstract images.
It was approved on DT but rejected at SS on the grounds that "Trademark--Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial."
© Photographer: Devonsun | Agency: Dreamstime.com
I emailed Shutterstock support over a week ago to get clarification on the matter but i haven't had a reply from them yet:
"Need some clarification on a recent rejection reason please. File ID: *******
Understood copyright aspects so submitted for editorial after finding similar
images on SS:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-44659942.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-40801201.html
But "Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial." was the refusal reason.
Is there a difference between illustrations and photographs when it comes to
acceptance for editorial?
Thanks. David"
Based on the reply from SS i may make "Olympic Construction" exclusive to DT. In any event i think i will have to contact SS again to get an answer.
Dreamstime Review Process
I hate to moan about rejections... we all get them. But when it's due to inconsistent reviewers at the same agency it's hard not to get slightly annoyed by the whole affair.
On Dreamstime they are very fussy these days about silhouettes and want extra confirmation during the submission process that you hold the copyright to the image. Personally, i think that the fact that we sign the agreement when we register should be good enough but you can't blame them for wanting to cover themselves.
It's fair enough (although the other agencies are not asking for added similar assurances, yet,) but after submitting silhouettes and putting a note in the editors box stating "i own the copyright" etc those images have been approved. So, i figured that was good enough for all future similar submissions. Apparently not though...
... after submitting a silhouette of a horse and carriage and having it rejected twice (after adding the note on copyright for reviewer) i have emailed Dreamstime to ask for an explanation (below):
On Dreamstime they are very fussy these days about silhouettes and want extra confirmation during the submission process that you hold the copyright to the image. Personally, i think that the fact that we sign the agreement when we register should be good enough but you can't blame them for wanting to cover themselves.
It's fair enough (although the other agencies are not asking for added similar assurances, yet,) but after submitting silhouettes and putting a note in the editors box stating "i own the copyright" etc those images have been approved. So, i figured that was good enough for all future similar submissions. Apparently not though...
... after submitting a silhouette of a horse and carriage and having it rejected twice (after adding the note on copyright for reviewer) i have emailed Dreamstime to ask for an explanation (below):
"I have previously submitted silhouettes and they were approved as i added a note in the 'comment for editors' box along the lines of "i confirm this is original artwork and i own all copyrights etc."
That was good enough before to get approved but now i have submitted the same image twice, and been rejected because: "This illustration appears to be traced from another source. etc".
I am quite happy to submit the original photo (taken while on holiday) but why does one reviewer accept written confirmation of originality and another not?!
Image ID: *******
It's a shame as, until now, i had 100% approval for Feb.
Also at what point do i submit the original photo in future (if required)? As 'additional format'?
Thanks,
David"
That was good enough before to get approved but now i have submitted the same image twice, and been rejected because: "This illustration appears to be traced from another source. etc".
I am quite happy to submit the original photo (taken while on holiday) but why does one reviewer accept written confirmation of originality and another not?!
Image ID: *******
It's a shame as, until now, i had 100% approval for Feb.
Also at what point do i submit the original photo in future (if required)? As 'additional format'?
Thanks,
David"
So, lets see what comes back. I had already read their statements about wanting the original photo along with silhouette submissions but i had read on the forums that placing a note stating originality was sufficient and that 'had' been my experience until now after previously receiving the "This illustration appears to be traced from another source" comment.
If they hadn't approved previous images without that photo i would have known better what the process was. So one reviewer is letting them through and the other isn't?!
What about the Tudor warship silhouette that i had approved recently? I made that up as i went along.. no photo exists for it so therefore a comment in the editors box is the only 'proof' i have of originality. Unless DT have a machine that can read the images in my head! ;-)
Be interesting to see what DT have to say.
Still better than the rejections of the medical infections signs i submitted a while back that were rejected because the reviewer didn't know that C.Diff and M.R.S.A were medical terms for hospital infections. Until i re-submitted them along with a link to a government website to prove they were real words and not "mis-spelt". ;-)
If they hadn't approved previous images without that photo i would have known better what the process was. So one reviewer is letting them through and the other isn't?!
What about the Tudor warship silhouette that i had approved recently? I made that up as i went along.. no photo exists for it so therefore a comment in the editors box is the only 'proof' i have of originality. Unless DT have a machine that can read the images in my head! ;-)
Be interesting to see what DT have to say.
Still better than the rejections of the medical infections signs i submitted a while back that were rejected because the reviewer didn't know that C.Diff and M.R.S.A were medical terms for hospital infections. Until i re-submitted them along with a link to a government website to prove they were real words and not "mis-spelt". ;-)
Reply from Shutterstock
Well it took them a while to get back to me regarding my question about the Olympic Rings illustration and why it was rejected.
Seems my initial thoughts were correct and well, read for yourself in their reply:
Seems my initial thoughts were correct and well, read for yourself in their reply:
"Hello David,
Yes there is a difference. The Olympic Rings you cited in the images below are actual newsworthy editorial shots of the Olympic Rings taken by submitters.
Your Olympic Ring illustration you submitted would not be considered true editorial as you created them yourself and it is certainly prohibited from being licensed for royalty free commercial use.
For more information you may see the following forum post:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76361"
Yes there is a difference. The Olympic Rings you cited in the images below are actual newsworthy editorial shots of the Olympic Rings taken by submitters.
Your Olympic Ring illustration you submitted would not be considered true editorial as you created them yourself and it is certainly prohibited from being licensed for royalty free commercial use.
For more information you may see the following forum post:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76361"
Actually, after reading (again) that post they mention, it doesn't really give a clear indication of their policy on such matters. All it says is "All Olympic logos and torches are trademarked designs. Unacceptable for commercial use."
It doesn't say "it's ok if you take a photo for editorial but not if you make it up from scratch" which would have been more helpful. But hey ho.. never mind. Dreamstime approved that image and now have it exclusively.
It doesn't say "it's ok if you take a photo for editorial but not if you make it up from scratch" which would have been more helpful. But hey ho.. never mind. Dreamstime approved that image and now have it exclusively.
Quick reply from Dreamstime
Speedy reply from DT this morning:
"Hello,
Thank you for contacting us.
As you can see in the refusal reason, the requirements for silhouettes and illustrations have changed. You are asked to upload as property release the image from which you traced it. If the illustration is not traced please confirm that you have created it from scratch.
We have introduced this requirement recently due to large number of frauds and, unfortunately, all users have to comply.
Sincerely yours, DT"
hmm That doesn't really explain why other silhouettes were passed without the extra upload. Oh well. I have better things to do and these communications with the sites are detracting from being creative so looks like i'll have to dig out the photo and re-submit (again).
Onwards and upwards!
By the way, this months earnings have beaten last months and Feb isn't over yet! My Earnings report for this month will probably be the next post unless another site annoys me and i want to rant a little on here first! ;-)
"Hello,
Thank you for contacting us.
As you can see in the refusal reason, the requirements for silhouettes and illustrations have changed. You are asked to upload as property release the image from which you traced it. If the illustration is not traced please confirm that you have created it from scratch.
We have introduced this requirement recently due to large number of frauds and, unfortunately, all users have to comply.
Sincerely yours, DT"
hmm That doesn't really explain why other silhouettes were passed without the extra upload. Oh well. I have better things to do and these communications with the sites are detracting from being creative so looks like i'll have to dig out the photo and re-submit (again).
Onwards and upwards!
By the way, this months earnings have beaten last months and Feb isn't over yet! My Earnings report for this month will probably be the next post unless another site annoys me and i want to rant a little on here first! ;-)
Feb Earnings + Updates
February was a better month again and the earnings total beat January with a total of £7.45 ($11.29).
At long last a sale on Canstock. (Actually 4 sales). That's been a long time coming. A.R there is 80%.
A little slow on Dreamstime during Feb. AR now 71.4%
Another sale on GraphicLeftovers and one for Istock (which i tend to get every once and while. Not bad when you consider only 4 images online with Istock.)
I can't, currently, add Vectors (EPS) files to sites like Fotolia and Istock etc due to the fact that Inkscape can't retain blurs and transparencies when saving as EPS. Hopefully that will be resolved in a later release.
First sale on BigStock netted me approx £0.32p. AR still 100%.
Shutterstock downloads a little less than hoped but still an increase at 12D for the month.
Still no sales yet on, Yaymicro, 3DStudio, Picturenation, Alamy, FeaturePics (although plenty of views there) or any of the others.
So, Feb was certainly a best month ever (BME) and i am really hopeful that with some quality submissions and some creative thinking i will push into double figure earnings for March... watch this space.
By the way. I tidied up the chart. Hope it looks more intersting and visually clearer.
At long last a sale on Canstock. (Actually 4 sales). That's been a long time coming. A.R there is 80%.
A little slow on Dreamstime during Feb. AR now 71.4%
Another sale on GraphicLeftovers and one for Istock (which i tend to get every once and while. Not bad when you consider only 4 images online with Istock.)
I can't, currently, add Vectors (EPS) files to sites like Fotolia and Istock etc due to the fact that Inkscape can't retain blurs and transparencies when saving as EPS. Hopefully that will be resolved in a later release.
First sale on BigStock netted me approx £0.32p. AR still 100%.
Shutterstock downloads a little less than hoped but still an increase at 12D for the month.
Still no sales yet on, Yaymicro, 3DStudio, Picturenation, Alamy, FeaturePics (although plenty of views there) or any of the others.
So, Feb was certainly a best month ever (BME) and i am really hopeful that with some quality submissions and some creative thinking i will push into double figure earnings for March... watch this space.
By the way. I tidied up the chart. Hope it looks more intersting and visually clearer.
Books on Microstock - Part 1
I thought i would write a little about the books i have read to expand my understanding of the microstock business. It's not a massive list of reading so don't worry.
Actually my book shelf currently contains 2 books on microstock specifically, a few on photography in general and one on the 3D software 'Blender' Program.
As i do hope to get back into 3D at some point in the future i thought i would add my thoughts on "The Essential Blender" publication also. But first:
Microstock Photography - By Douglas Freer
The title captures your attention in the first instance: "How to make money from your digital images". It starts off by giving a little background on how the microstock industry got started, how it has grown and progressed into what it is today after which you start to get an idea of what it takes, or rather, what mental attitude to take, to be successful at microstock.
There is background info on the top microstock sites out there and how they function (subscriptions/credits etc) and although that part is slightly out of date due to changes in pricing and the like its still helpful to read through especially if you are completely new to microstocking.
Chapter 3 "what sells and what does not" is very useful in that it reminds us that even the greatest landscape photo in the world probably wouldn't sell very well for stock if there wasn't any 'copyspace' to one side of the image for the potential buyer to stick their company logo or text on! There are plenty of full colour images as examples downloaded from, yes you guessed it, istock/shutterstock etc to show what sells and more importantly WHY it sells.
There is a chapter on the technical side of submitting photos to sites: The noise reduction, white balance, checking histograms etc as well as further advice for the home photographer on setting up a modest home lighting studio.
I particularly like chapter 10: Case Studies. In which a number of microstockers give their experiences and their earnings details from 2006 across all the sites they had a portfolio. Certainly that was 2006.. and it's now 2010 but all the same.. interesting reading.
The last chapter is all about copyright, trademarks, model releases etc.
These are by no means all the chapters or a complete list of everything in the book. It's just the parts i recall and remember stuck in my mind when i read it. Of course, i still read it and go back for inspiration when i feel the wheels are turning a little slower than i would like them to.
All in all i found it a good book. Interesting and useful but not patronising or overly detailed with a 'light' writing style that didn't make unrealistic and grandiose promises of massive amounts of money 5 minutes after putting it's principles into practice . I would recommend it to anyone already starting out in microstock. And if you haven't even started uploading your images to DT or SS yet then i would seriously consider reading this book more than once before you even attempt at submitting your images to stock sites. It will save you a lot of rejections!
Actually my book shelf currently contains 2 books on microstock specifically, a few on photography in general and one on the 3D software 'Blender' Program.
As i do hope to get back into 3D at some point in the future i thought i would add my thoughts on "The Essential Blender" publication also. But first:
Microstock Photography - By Douglas Freer
The title captures your attention in the first instance: "How to make money from your digital images". It starts off by giving a little background on how the microstock industry got started, how it has grown and progressed into what it is today after which you start to get an idea of what it takes, or rather, what mental attitude to take, to be successful at microstock.
There is background info on the top microstock sites out there and how they function (subscriptions/credits etc) and although that part is slightly out of date due to changes in pricing and the like its still helpful to read through especially if you are completely new to microstocking.
Chapter 3 "what sells and what does not" is very useful in that it reminds us that even the greatest landscape photo in the world probably wouldn't sell very well for stock if there wasn't any 'copyspace' to one side of the image for the potential buyer to stick their company logo or text on! There are plenty of full colour images as examples downloaded from, yes you guessed it, istock/shutterstock etc to show what sells and more importantly WHY it sells.
There is a chapter on the technical side of submitting photos to sites: The noise reduction, white balance, checking histograms etc as well as further advice for the home photographer on setting up a modest home lighting studio.
I particularly like chapter 10: Case Studies. In which a number of microstockers give their experiences and their earnings details from 2006 across all the sites they had a portfolio. Certainly that was 2006.. and it's now 2010 but all the same.. interesting reading.
The last chapter is all about copyright, trademarks, model releases etc.
These are by no means all the chapters or a complete list of everything in the book. It's just the parts i recall and remember stuck in my mind when i read it. Of course, i still read it and go back for inspiration when i feel the wheels are turning a little slower than i would like them to.
All in all i found it a good book. Interesting and useful but not patronising or overly detailed with a 'light' writing style that didn't make unrealistic and grandiose promises of massive amounts of money 5 minutes after putting it's principles into practice . I would recommend it to anyone already starting out in microstock. And if you haven't even started uploading your images to DT or SS yet then i would seriously consider reading this book more than once before you even attempt at submitting your images to stock sites. It will save you a lot of rejections!
April Earnings Report
Well, as expected, April's total wasn't very impressive. Without uploading any new material for the whole of the month i didn't even come close to the previous months figure.
I have spent the time looking closer at the Photomatix program and playing with the camera settings with a view to creating some decent HDR photos. A work in progress.....
I have spent the time looking closer at the Photomatix program and playing with the camera settings with a view to creating some decent HDR photos. A work in progress.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
