Author Topic: Sean Locke featured on DP (Read 25479 times)

Poncke v2 · « **on:** June 01, 2013, 01:52 »

Big banner on the home page at DP

THP Creative · « **Reply #1 on:** June 01, 2013, 02:05 »

He also has started at the top-most royalty level, Platinum. Nice negotiating Sean!

falstafff · « **Reply #2 on:** June 01, 2013, 02:14 »

Locke with DP?

? I find that extremely hard to believe, surely not with their set base royalties?

I thought he was dead against low-based royalty places as a code of honor.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #3 on:** June 01, 2013, 04:56 »

The guy probably has a mortgage to pay. Reality has a habit of trumping ideology. Presumably he will be on all the sites now.

falstafff · « **Reply #4 on:** June 01, 2013, 05:13 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 01, 2013, 04:56

The guy probably has a mortgage to pay. Reality has a habit of trumping ideology. Presumably he will be on all the sites now.

"reallity has a habit of trumping ideology". Yep thats for sure.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #5 on:** June 01, 2013, 06:17 »

Quote from: falstafff on June 01, 2013, 02:14

Locke with DP?? I find that extremely hard to believe, surely not with their set base royalties? I thought he was dead against low-based royalty places as a code of honor.

I find the pricing and royalty level ok and on par with GL, for instance. So, I'm OK with that. No plans for "every" site.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 01, 2013, 09:15 »

Quote from: sjlocke on June 01, 2013, 06:17

Quote from: falstafff on June 01, 2013, 02:14
Locke with DP?? I find that extremely hard to believe, surely not with their set base royalties? I thought he was dead against low-based royalty places as a code of honor.

I find the pricing and royalty level ok and on par with GL, for instance. So, I'm OK with that. No plans for "every" site.

have you opted out on subs? (if that is even allowed)

lisafx · « **Reply #7 on:** June 01, 2013, 12:59 »

Congrats on being featured Sean. I am certain that you will be featured artist on any and all sites that get your work.

falstafff · « **Reply #8 on:** June 02, 2013, 01:43 »

Cant help thinking. here comes Sean placing thousands of highly skilled images with a bunch of Micros thats has never had his images before.
Man!! I would just hate to be a lifestyle, model shooter right now with all these smaller agencies. Got no chance in hell. Good thing is, some 75% specializing in this category will have to go back to the drawing-board and raise their standards or else. Goodbye Mr. Chips.

Healthy competition.

ShadySue · « **Reply #9 on:** June 02, 2013, 04:32 »

OTOH, buyers are an odd bunch.
Before I was on stock, I used to check out some micro forums. I think it was at SS (but might have been another) there was a request forum (this was 2006 or before) and people would ask for particular shoots, and for some reason people would do them, then the OP would say things like, "I don't like the 'look' of your model, could you do it again with another who looks more (forget)" (that one more or less a direct quote), or 'could you do it again with a model with darker/lighter skin/hair, long/short sleeves, or having specified a particular colour of clothing, wanted the colour tweaked a bit. Looking back, I could never understand why people would do that for peanuts, UNLESS the requested images commanded a premium, which I can't remember (IIRC, there was such a scheme on iStock, which did command a premium, but it folded around the time I joined). Often the requests were very specific.
At least on that long running recipe request thread on iS, you get to eat the props.

Also, depending on agency marketing, there are many geographical regions which do not have a preference for 'all-American' models and styling, excellent as these are for their large target market.

gostwyck · « **Reply #10 on:** June 02, 2013, 05:35 »

Quote from: sjlocke on June 01, 2013, 06:17

Quote from: falstafff on June 01, 2013, 02:14
Locke with DP?? I find that extremely hard to believe, surely not with their set base royalties? I thought he was dead against low-based royalty places as a code of honor.

I find the pricing and royalty level ok and on par with GL, for instance. So, I'm OK with that. No plans for "every" site.

Your images would probably average $1 per image/month at SS, possibly better given time to become established in the default sort order. In other words if you uploaded 10K images to SS then they should generate an income of $10K+ per month. Because of the high-volume it is also remarkably steady income too. If you can find a better return than that elsewhere, as an independent contributor, then I'd love to hear about it!

Mantis · « **Reply #11 on:** June 02, 2013, 06:32 »

Congrats, Sean. I took some time to view your latest work and what a WOW factor it continues to be. You are a very talented artist.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #12 on:** June 02, 2013, 09:38 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 02, 2013, 05:35

Quote from: sjlocke on June 01, 2013, 06:17
Quote from: falstafff on June 01, 2013, 02:14
Locke with DP?? I find that extremely hard to believe, surely not with their set base royalties? I thought he was dead against low-based royalty places as a code of honor.

I find the pricing and royalty level ok and on par with GL, for instance. So, I'm OK with that. No plans for "every" site.

Your images would probably average $1 per image/month at SS, possibly better given time to become established in the default sort order. In other words if you uploaded 10K images to SS then they should generate an income of $10K+ per month. Because of the high-volume it is also remarkably steady income too. If you can find a better return than that elsewhere, as an independent contributor, then I'd love to hear about it!

Maybe, but I'm in place right now where I don't need to support sub programs, and would rather not.

Quote from: Mantis on June 02, 2013, 06:32

Congrats, Sean. I took some time to view your latest work and what a WOW factor it continues to be. You are a very talented artist.

Thanks! I'd rather be shooting then keywording 8 years of images.... I quite like the new garden center series - I'm going to do a BTS blog sometime this week.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2013, 11:53 »

believe I am missing something Sean, my RPD at DP (all time) is 52 cents

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #14 on:** June 02, 2013, 12:02 »

You're pretty good at analysing these things Sean - I and quite a few others would be interested to read your thoughts on which sites pass the 'Locke Test'.

cthoman · « **Reply #15 on:** June 02, 2013, 12:13 »

Quote from: sjlocke on June 02, 2013, 09:38

Maybe, but I'm in place right now where I don't need to support sub programs, and would rather not.

I think that is a decent idea. It's kind of hard to back out of once you go down that road. I know I've been trying to fix the mess I've made for myself over the last few years.

MisterElements · « **Reply #16 on:** June 02, 2013, 12:26 »

Congrats Sean! I feel DP is a great site!

shudderstok · « **Reply #17 on:** June 02, 2013, 14:25 »

so this is what the industry has come to... guys like sean who produce decent work for a few bucks per pop. i would give anything to have the days back where we all get what an image is worth. get what you can now kids. if you asked me ten years ago, i would have never guessed we'd be selling work of this caliber for a couple of bucks per pop.

gostwyck · « **Reply #18 on:** June 02, 2013, 14:47 »

Quote from: shudderstok on June 02, 2013, 14:25

so this is what the industry has come to... guys like sean who produce decent work for a few bucks per pop. i would give anything to have the days back where we all get what an image is worth. get what you can now kids. if you asked me ten years ago, i would have never guessed we'd be selling work of this caliber for a couple of bucks per pop.

You'd never have guessed that they would sell in such volumes either ... by the tens of thousands per month if your stuff is good enough.

That never happened with the closed-shop, protective practices of "the good old days" did it? It was good for the chosen few that were allowed in but very bad for buyers and everyone else.

Travelling-light · « **Reply #19 on:** June 02, 2013, 14:57 »

Quote from: sjlocke on June 02, 2013, 09:38

Quote from: gostwyck on June 02, 2013, 05:35
Quote from: sjlocke on June 01, 2013, 06:17
Quote from: falstafff on June 01, 2013, 02:14
Locke with DP?? I find that extremely hard to believe, surely not with their set base royalties? I thought he was dead against low-based royalty places as a code of honor.

I find the pricing and royalty level ok and on par with GL, for instance. So, I'm OK with that. No plans for "every" site.

Your images would probably average $1 per image/month at SS, possibly better given time to become established in the default sort order. In other words if you uploaded 10K images to SS then they should generate an income of $10K+ per month. Because of the high-volume it is also remarkably steady income too. If you can find a better return than that elsewhere, as an independent contributor, then I'd love to hear about it!

Maybe, but I'm in place right now where I don't need to support sub programs, and would rather not.

Quote from: Mantis on June 02, 2013, 06:32
Congrats, Sean. I took some time to view your latest work and what a WOW factor it continues to be. You are a very talented artist.

Thanks! I'd rather be shooting then keywording 8 years of images.... I quite like the new garden center series - I'm going to do a BTS blog sometime this week.

But don't DP have subs? We put a few hundred on there, but got very few sales (although I'm sure that won't happen to you Sean) - almost all sales were 30 cent subs.

In fact when we asked them to remove our photos, they offered a higher level, but with so few POD sales, it would have made little difference.

Has something changed?

gostwyck · « **Reply #20 on:** June 02, 2013, 15:01 »

Quote from: Travelling-light on June 02, 2013, 14:57

But don't DP have subs? We put a few hundred on there, but got very few sales (although I'm sure that won't happen to you Sean) - almost all sales were 30 cent subs.

In fact when we asked them to remove our photos, they offered a higher level, but with so few POD sales, it would have made little difference.

Has something changed?

Sean's images don't appear to be available to download via subscription on DP. Presumeably there's either an opt-out or they did Sean a special deal.

shudderstok · « **Reply #21 on:** June 02, 2013, 15:04 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 02, 2013, 14:47

Quote from: shudderstok on June 02, 2013, 14:25
so this is what the industry has come to... guys like sean who produce decent work for a few bucks per pop. i would give anything to have the days back where we all get what an image is worth. get what you can now kids. if you asked me ten years ago, i would have never guessed we'd be selling work of this caliber for a couple of bucks per pop.

You'd never have guessed that they would sell in such volumes either ... by the tens of thousands per month if your stuff is good enough.

That never happened with the closed-shop, protective practices of "the good old days" did it? It was good for the chosen few that were allowed in but very bad for buyers and everyone else.

i beg to differ. it was never a closed shop based upon "protective practices" for the chosen few situation. the difference between then and now is that you had to submit 100 original transparencies that proved you were good at what you do, and a willingness to submit frequently, or your contract was terminated. i luckily got onto every agency i ever applied for, and ironically they all got bought up by getty. microstock for me has always been about placing the images into agencies that got rejected elsewhere, namely getty.
now you just submit 3 images and anyone can be a "pro" as long as you spend your days on forums like this thinking you are a pro and complaining about everything. half of the modern day shooters i see on all these microstock sites would have never seen the light of day in the good old days, and that was not due to closed shop protective practices, it was based solely on skill.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #22 on:** June 02, 2013, 15:09 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 02, 2013, 15:01

Quote from: Travelling-light on June 02, 2013, 14:57
But don't DP have subs? We put a few hundred on there, but got very few sales (although I'm sure that won't happen to you Sean) - almost all sales were 30 cent subs.

In fact when we asked them to remove our photos, they offered a higher level, but with so few POD sales, it would have made little difference.

Has something changed?

Sean's images don't appear to be available to download via subscription on DP. Presumeably there's either an opt-out or they did Sean a special deal.

It wasn't something I asked for. I had told them I wasn't interested in licensing there since they sold via subscriptions.

It was something they offered and on that condition (and partner distribution opt out), I accepted. If others took the same approach at the Middle and Low Tiers, maybe it would make a difference. I don't know.

shudderstok · « **Reply #23 on:** June 02, 2013, 15:15 »

^^^ sean we all need to abolish subscription sites. that is about as low as one can get in this industry, and will eventually kill it. good to hear you are not supporting subscription sites. i wish everyone did that.

elvinstar · « **Reply #24 on:** June 02, 2013, 15:40 »

Quote from: shudderstok on June 02, 2013, 15:04

half of the modern day shooters i see on all these microstock sites would have never seen the light of day in the good old days, and that was not due to closed shop protective practices, it was based solely on skill.

And many of the photos that I see on trad sites would never see a sale in microstock. There are literally thousands of skilled photographers that wouldn't have been accepted by trad agencies that now make their living with microstock.

If the buyer sees value in your work and you pay your bills, where is the problem?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Sean Locke featured on DP (Read 25479 times)

Poncke v2

THP Creative

falstafff

BaldricksTrousers

falstafff

Sean Locke Photography

luissantos84

lisafx

falstafff

ShadySue

gostwyck

Mantis

Sean Locke Photography

luissantos84

fotoVoyager

cthoman

MisterElements

shudderstok

gostwyck

Travelling-light

gostwyck

shudderstok

Sean Locke Photography

shudderstok

elvinstar

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors