Author Topic: Landscape images on Offset or Stocksy? (Read 10476 times)

fieldsphotos · « **on:** May 01, 2014, 16:13 »

Not really sure where to put this question. I have been thinking about attempting to get accepted at one of the newer places like Offset or Stocksy. For anyone who is a contributer there, do landscapes do well?

Browsing through the collection, Stocksy's landscapes are few and are the complete opposite of what I shoot. So I am guessing I won't be a good fit there. However, Offset's are a bit closer to my style, especially when I search on keywords for places I have shot (Death Valley, Yosemite, etc).

I guess the reason I am looking into this now, is I just got back from a trip with a new batch of Yosemite images and I am wondering about starting to put my landscapes elsewhere other than just the micros. They sell well in microstock, but I wonder if I could do better with them at a different place. (I have a few things at Alamy, but I don't seem to get any traction there - their collection is too giant I think).

Of course this assumes I could even get accepted at either of these places.

I applied at Stocksy when they first fired up and was rejected, but that was before anyone really knew anything about them.

Here are a few of the latest Yosemite batch I am working on just as an example of my landscapes (the ones with people aren't for stock, obviously): https://www.flickr.com/photos/fieldsphotos/sets/72157644428448711/show/

Opinions welcome. And if anyone knows some niche landscape places that do well, let me know.

stock-will-eat-itself · « **Reply #1 on:** May 01, 2014, 17:50 »

Get accepted to either agency first, you're putting the horse before the cart. As a rule of thumb higher production value shoots that are not easily copied should go into macro agencies.

If you don't get in keep trying, clients are always willing to pay higher prices for quality work.

fieldsphotos · « **Reply #2 on:** May 02, 2014, 11:25 »

Quote from: stock-will-eat-itself on May 01, 2014, 17:50

Get accepted to either agency first, you're putting the horse before the cart. As a rule of thumb higher production value shoots that are not easily copied should go into macro agencies.

If you don't get in keep trying, clients are always willing to pay higher prices for quality work.

Well, of course I need to get accepted first. But which agency to put the time and effort towards getting accepted at for landscape images - THAT is my question. I wouldn't want to spend a bunch of time and effort to get accepted to say, Stocksy for example, only to find out once I upload that they hardly ever sell landscape images - that their buyers are mostly looking for lifestyle or something.

Just hoping someone else had some experience selling landscapes at these sites so I wouldn't have to jump in blind. But maybe my situation is uncommon enough that I will have to do that in the end anyways.

7Horses · « **Reply #3 on:** May 02, 2014, 11:29 »

The most usual way is take the plunge an start swimming. That's how I did it and I'm still struggling not to drown.

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #4 on:** May 02, 2014, 12:32 »

Hi Fieldphotos,

We just sent you a PM we would love to work with you. These images are " Best in Show " and the Macro agencies will love to get this quality of work. I look forward to your reply. This goes for all of you that might be interested in testing the Macro waters. We distribute to 90 agencies from Getty to Corbis and everyone in between in both RM and RF. we offer a 50/50 split and we also offer the best key wording available and some small retouching all for no extra charge. We are now taking location lifestyle as well to offer our buyers more and to allow our contributing photographers to get the greatest return from their locations. If you want to test out Macro please PM me and we can discuss anything about our agencies that might be of help.

Cheers,
Jonathan

tickstock · « **Reply #5 on:** May 02, 2014, 12:54 »

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #6 on:** May 02, 2014, 16:45 »

Hi Ticktock,

I cannot share our agreement with Getty but I assure you that you cannot get your content in front of as many eyes as you can through our agency. Even if it were half of what you could get by going direct you would not be able to have those same images available through the 90 resellers we offer. If you are submitting to Getty for instance you cannot submit those same images at Corbis, and Masterfile, Gallery Stock etc. you are limited to only the one agency but at Spaces we can distribute your content to everyone.
You can kind of look at our distribution like Micro is without the hassle of key wording and uploading to multiple sites. If you are represented by Spaces Images you submit to only one site and you don't worry about key wording. We even do some of the small retouching that so often gets kicked back by even the Micros. From small dust spots to removing grid lines or paths as well as resizing your image if it is too big. Our goal is to get our contributors content to market as fast as possible so if it takes a bit of time on our end to make an image shine rather than kick it back and have to start the process all over we are ready to help out on some of the basics at no charge.
Thank you for the questions they are really helpful if there are any other questions you might have please feel welcome to ask and I will do my best to answer them in detail.

Cheers,
Jonathan

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #7 on:** May 02, 2014, 17:13 »

I think it is only fair that a prospective contributor know what their content is being licensed for. Without knowing what you receive for a sale, I can't see how you could make an informed business decision.

gostwyck · « **Reply #8 on:** May 02, 2014, 17:39 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on May 02, 2014, 17:13

I think it is only fair that a prospective contributor know what their content is being licensed for. Without knowing what you receive for a sale, I can't see how you could make an informed business decision.

Exactly. I hate these endless 'middlemen' trails. One thing you can be sure of ... the artist ends up with with the smallest percentage.

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #9 on:** May 02, 2014, 17:47 »

Hi Sean,

Actually it is completely the norm for all third party agencies that represent their work through multiple resellers it is not information we are allowed to share. I am sure you can understand that when you are dealing with multiple resellers that those relationships and the information about them has to stay private for the integrity of the agency that is representing your work.
If I share what deal we were able to work out with say "Getty " every other agency that is represented by Getty would start asking for the same deal. This is the norm if you want clarification please contact any of the leading third party agency from Image Source to Cultura and everyone that plays in the Macro market and they will tell you the same. Also just so it is clear Spaces offers up online sales statement to every photographer to show where their image sold and for what price.
Whenever I wanted to try out a new agency if they accepted me I gave them a handful of images to see how well they would perform, very similar to what you just did with Shutterstock. I have always been one to test markets, this offer is available to anyone that would like to test our market and see if we can deliver. Thanks for the question it really helps to clear away some of the misconceptions.

Cheers,
Jonathan

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #10 on:** May 02, 2014, 20:17 »

"Also just so it is clear Spaces offers up online sales statement to every photographer to show where their image sold and for what price."

So, then, once you are in, you would be able to know the share trail and decide if it's an acceptable arrangement. That's good. You just don't want to let people know before the are under a confidentiality contract?

I think if I made $50 from such a deal and found out that that ended up being 5% of what the image sold for, I would be pretty annoyed.

I don't understand why it's a bad idea for every agency to have knowledge that would help them get the best payment for their artists.

cobalt · « **Reply #11 on:** May 03, 2014, 03:53 »

Apart from confidential information about royalty percentages in contracts I think a major difference in working with a macro distributor is that files that come in via blend,,spaces or westend61 can be ranked much higher in best match than the files of an individual artists.

And again, these placements and rankings will be confidential as well, but as an artist you can just do a search and see where files from a macro agency show up in a respective best match.

I understand that it is frustrating that I cannot see the actual contract, but by sending files and looking at the results, I can get an idea if the results are acceptable. And because I was directly with Getty before i can compare.

in addition you get the income from any direct sales made, which especially on extended licenses can be a huge sum.

I only have few files on westend and am still in the early stages of building my portfolio, but because they are the best known German macro house I am very confident that I will like the longterm results.

There will be a mix of direct sales, plus distribituion and my files can go to every player in the market - corbis, getty and also offset. If the agencies select my files of course, i don't think they take everything.

And then there is the more personal feedback when working with a small agency.

Not everyone can get into stocksy and maybe spaces will also take styles that wouldn't fit the stocksy style guide. For instance on westend they will also take people and objects on white.

So I think spacesimages is an interesting additional opportunity for artists who would like to try macro.

bunhill · « **Reply #12 on:** May 03, 2014, 04:26 »

I wonder whether Stocksy will start securing distribution deals sooner or later. That's been the normal way of things for other boutique collections once they are established.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #13 on:** May 03, 2014, 08:04 »

Quote from: bunhill on May 03, 2014, 04:26

I wonder whether Stocksy will start securing distribution deals sooner or later. That's been the normal way of things for other boutique collections once they are established.

No idea, but as Jonathan knows, they are very transparent with members on numbers and stuff.

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #14 on:** May 03, 2014, 12:36 »

Hi All,

Great questions I am swamped today with family activities but I will be back on Monday and will answer all these questions. Just to support what Sean said Stocksy is very transparent and we think they rock. We love agencies that work directly with their contributors and support all their efforts. In the end it is our contributors work that makes us a successful agency. If we support our contributors needs then we all win. Looking forward to Monday to reply to everyone. Thank you all for your interest.

Jonathan

Jaak Nilson · « **Reply #15 on:** May 04, 2014, 11:05 »

If I am correct than Age Fotostock contract with Getty Right Managed images is 40 %. It is not secret, it has been published in Yammer platform between Age contributors. So if contributor will get 50 % of 40 % then it is actually 20 %. Usually a contributors will get 10-20 % of final deal if you are involved with aggregator, third party agency.

Age Fotostock is centered for RM images pretty strongly. Westend 61 loves more RF images. RF images sells usually better today than RM. Age Fotostock do not send RF images to Getty.

Contracts between third party agencies and Getty for Royalty Free images are usually lower than 40 %. They may be different.
Prices are low for RM and for RF too. RM images can bring very often couple of dollars only. Even cents like in micro. Ok, sometimes a thousands too, but it is pretty rare today.

Jaak Nilson · « **Reply #16 on:** May 04, 2014, 11:49 »

More info. So Age Fotostock and Westend 61 allows to photographer sell images directly to final customer. As stock images and fine art prints. It means you must ask a non- exclusive contract for Age. Westend 61 has exclusive contract only, but allows direct sales at same time for same images. But distributing must be for same images only via Westend 61. Westend 61 split is for photographer 40 %, after 10 000 euros it will be 50 %.

Age Fotostock allows to distribute images by contributor too. You can send same images to Alamy. Age asking from contributor does they could send images to Alamy. So there is option in or out for Alamy. Actually there is not very much options for indie macro. Age and Alamy. Alamy is centered very strongly for Great Britain stuff. Today there are agencies like 500px Prime, Pond 5, but they are not really big sellers yet. Surely there are some companies, but agency must be well known to have good sales.

Most of macro aggregators wish exclusive content and contracts are long. If agency does not perform well then your images are dead images to the end on contract. Most of macro agencies does not allow to sell images by contributor at same time. Do not forget that exclusivity is good for agency only. They can sell images, all agencies over the world can sell your images for some dollars, only you, photographer can not. Exclusivity is good if only an one agency is selling images. Like Stocksy does. Without sub-distribution.

There is one option for Right Managed editorial images. Lightrocket.
They asking 49.- USD per year and all your editorial content is directly available for Getty. Getty editors pick-up what they wants. No middlemen. No cuts. Direct contract. Lightrocket is On Asia photo agency. Now they are offering image hosting service like Photodeck, Photoshelter and some others.

So my 2 cents. Be very careful with exclusive contracts. There is no final truth, one business model works well for one, but not for other.

http://www.jaaknilson.ee

gillian vann · « **Reply #17 on:** May 04, 2014, 20:41 »

back on topic, i think a few might be ok for stocksy, but the clearly hdr stuff might be more offset style? good luck with whatever path you choose.

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #18 on:** May 04, 2014, 21:43 »

Yes Gillian,

It appears I have hijacked this post my apologies. Please direct any further conversation about Spaces to this link.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/spaces-images-are-expanding-our-collection/msg377602/?topicseen

Thank you,
Jonathan

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Landscape images on Offset or Stocksy? (Read 10476 times)

fieldsphotos

stock-will-eat-itself

fieldsphotos

7Horses

Jonathan Ross

tickstock

Jonathan Ross

Sean Locke Photography

gostwyck

Jonathan Ross

Sean Locke Photography

cobalt

bunhill

Sean Locke Photography

Jonathan Ross

Jaak Nilson

Jaak Nilson

gillian vann

Jonathan Ross

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors