Hi Charlie,

You asked questions on a number of threads. So I thought I'd start a new one here that sort of answers all of them from my perspective.

The first few months can seem like an awful lot of work for not much return. However, as you proceed the effects seem to me to be more than steady growth. There is a certain exponential quality to the growth. I can't back that up with hard stats, but I can tell you that several things happen:

1. Your images improve and get more "microstock" friendly as you learn what works
2. Less of your images get rejected for the same reason
3. The simply geometry of adding images on top of more images
4. Sometimes sites/MS agencies may court you
5. You get better and faster at the submission process
6. The stars fall into the correct alignment

All that said, there are very few people getting rich. However, I think you might be able to adjust your numbers (from one of your posts) up a bit. Maybe. It just depends on how tenacious you are.

If not getting rich (and there may be a couple who are) there are people who make a solid living on MicroStock. That's my plan. I'm a filmmaker and commercial photographer. I've worked professionally in the media all my professional life. So I have some understanding of how things work. Not always right on, but at least a feel for all of it. So I do microstock as my full-time job when I'm not working on a freelance project of some sort. That means I work every weekday, all day, at either a project I'm being paid for by a client or at microstock.

In about 9 months I've built...from scratch...a portfolio of 1,000 images. About 85% of those are people images. More on that in a moment...

When i started I thought, "hey, I've got some cool images...I'll sell those." What I learned is that microstock requires shooting in a different way. Many of my old images were shot at ISO 400. Fine for any other application...but too much noise for MicroStock. I had to learn the trade and really get my ego clipped a few times. Funny, now I don't worry at all about rejections. My acceptance rate varies from 68% on IStock to about 85% or 90% everywhere else. Mostly because I fix problems now before they have to point them out to me.

You asked about subject matter and story. I'm probably a little different than many. I shoot what I like, including idiosyncratic stuff, and submit it all. (Check out here if you want to see what I mean: http://www.photospin.com/directory-ad-listing.asp?user_id=522 ) My buy rates are probably lower than some of the best. However, because I do mostly people, my sales are still pretty good.

I do like to do business metaphors and funny people doing funny things. I try to mix a lot of props and situational stuff. I often compose with LOTS of copy space. I'll do several versions of any shot, including having the person look to where copy might appear.

I have a very good friend who is an amazing photographer. He does big hotel chains, colleges, etc. It mystifies him that I get as much talent to be in my shots for TFP as I do. here's how I do it. Offer your services to actors, models, musicians, etc. Trade the images for their signature on a release that lets you use them elsewhere. Find good models and use them more than once.

I also offer services which I would typically charge for in trade for services. The company that provides our organic produce and the musician who teaches our son guitar and vocals, for instance. I trade for their services AND work a deal where I can use images I take of them for microstock.

It's amazing. if you are good, when people find out that you are a photographer they will sort of sheepishly approach. "Hey, i was thinking of doing some shots for my website..." or something like that. You can charge them. Of course. But you can also offer some sweet trade deals that give you good images you can sell for a long time and makes them super happy. Even if you don't do people...think about the local bike shop, ice cream parlor, chiropractor, etc., etc.

Finally, there seem to be two modes of thought. One is go exclusive with ISTock as soon as you can. The second is to put your images out there to as many places as possible. I don't know many people who are exclusive at sites other than IStock. I'm not sure the numbers work...but I could be wrong. maybe Dreamstime or Fotolia or StockXpert can payoff enough. I think IStock probably has the exclusive thing locked up as they seem to be the consistent best seller.

I choose the latter. Lost of images at lots of sites. I review my sales every now and then and cut a site loose. However, if they are very easy to submit to, I'll keep them on even if sales are slow. If they are time-consuming to submit to I will stop throwing images up for a while and keep an eye on them to see if they sell anything.

You mentioned that it may take months for the first sale. My experience is that is not the case. Good images seem to take off fairly well right away. In fact, there is a sort of halo in the first month or so.

I have three kinds of images:
+Sell well right away and tail off quickly
+Sell steadily over time
+Sell one or two and vanish

Of course, I try to analyze the sales and do as many of the "sell steadily over time" shots as possible. I'm getting better at it.

Finally. To tell a story or not to tell a story. Your questions. I think the answer can be either. I just try to think about what a creative director, magazine editor, blogger, etc. will like and go with it. Think of current themes in the media and maybe explore some of those. Business metaphors. I sell a bunch of images of people wrapped up in red tape. It's fun and an immediate visual "story."

In my other life I sometimes direct TV commercials. We try to tell a story in 30 seconds. You have to introduce the characters in about 3 to 5 seconds. i think my photography should be like that (for microstock, anyway). There may be some hidden surprises, but I basically want people to figure it out in about 5 seconds MAX. How long does it take you to decide to turn a magazine page or stay for something interesting? maybe a second...maybe 2. Maybe less. So that's why big sort of emblematic stuff sell. In my opinion.

Charlie. All this is just one guy's perspective. I may be 100% wrong. Or 100% right for me but wrong for someone else. I do know a bit about the tials of getting started...and the curiosity of "can I make a career out of this?" My answer is, "Maybe."

I haven't done it yet myself. But I'm working on it.

Cheers,

Scott

Scott, you said

"You mentioned that it may take months for the first sale. My experience is that is not the case. Good images seem to take off fairly well right away. In fact, there is a sort of halo in the first month or so."

You're absolutely right. On DT, I posted some Valentine images back in December when I first really started, and received sales withn days.

The key though as you allude to in your comments is shooting for the market. If you upload the mundane, common subject matter where thousands of shots exist this will not give you a good revenue stream. Put a twist on it and your image may stand apart from the crowd.

As far as exclusivity, iStock is the only one worth considering based on potential revenue. A girl I know who shoots average stuff, pretty lackluster, made the mistake of signing as an exclusive photographer with Dreamstime. After 6 months, the portfolio is near 200 with only about 20 sales. Her problems are just boring, although technically good images, and she has problems with her keywording, failing to take into account how proper image titling will affect the search ranking of an image. Now she wants to test images elsewhere, but I thnk it's pretty hard to get out of the Dreamstime Terms for Exclusive photogs.

And you are right here too:

I do know a bit about the tirals of getting started...and the curiosity of "can I make a career out of this?" My answer is, "Maybe."

To try and define "typical earnings" just can't be done unless you prime yourself for "stock" from the beginning, and you can't make financial predictions based on someone else's numbers. You have to get out there and test it out yourself. An up and coming shooter may have grpping photos that grace a 6 page spread in Photo District News, are reviewed over and over by artsy folks as stellar, but they won't make a dime on micro. Shoot a photo of a beagle on a white backgound with his plain food bowl next to him, and bingo, you've got some money in the bank.

For my own micro experience, which have included some dreadful failures with regards to selecting sucky agencies in the beginning like Albumo, you can see my blog. Right now micro is pretty good side cash for me, and perhaps I can consider full time sometime next year. I started my own micro ventures about Septemeber of last year on a pretty casual basis.

http://niagarashooter.blogspot.com/

For Charlie

You may find these posts of particular interest.

http://niagarashooter.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html

I blasted Shutterstock pretty good there, but ironically SS is my top earner now. So proof right here that outslooks on things change with time and some experience.

Just some comments - hope they help.

ngirl wrote:

Scott, you said

"You mentioned that it may take months for the first sale. My experience is that is not the case. Good images seem to take off fairly well right away. In fact, there is a sort of halo in the first month or so."

You're absolutely right. On DT, I posted some Valentine images back in December when I first really started, and received sales withn days.

The key though as you allude to in your comments is shooting for the market. If you upload the mundane, common subject matter where thousands of shots exist this will not give you a good revenue stream. Put a twist on it and your image may stand apart from the crowd.

As far as exclusivity, iStock is the only one worth considering based on potential revenue. A girl I know who shoots average stuff, pretty lackluster, made the mistake of signing as an exclusive photographer with Dreamstime. After 6 months, the portfolio is near 200 with only about 20 sales. Her problems are just boring, although technically good images, and she has problems with her keywording, failing to take into account how proper image titling will affect the search ranking of an image. Now she wants to test images elsewhere, but I thnk it's pretty hard to get out of the Dreamstime Terms for Exclusive photogs.

And you are right here too:

I do know a bit about the tirals of getting started...and the curiosity of "can I make a career out of this?" My answer is, "Maybe."

To try and define "typical earnings" just can't be done unless you prime yourself for "stock" from the beginning, and you can't make financial predictions based on someone else's numbers. You have to get out there and test it out yourself. An up and coming shooter may have grpping photos that grace a 6 page spread in Photo District News, are reviewed over and over by artsy folks as stellar, but they won't make a dime on micro. Shoot a photo of a beagle on a white backgound with his plain food bowl next to him, and bingo, you've got some money in the bank.

For my own micro experience, which have included some dreadful failures with regards to selecting sucky agencies in the beginning like Albumo, you can see my blog. Right now micro is pretty good side cash for me, and perhaps I can consider full time sometime next year. I started my own micro ventures about September of last year on a pretty casual basis.

http://niagarashooter.blogspot.com/

For Charlie

You may find these posts of particular interest.

http://niagarashooter.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html

I blasted Shutterstock pretty good there, but ironically SS is my top earner now. So proof right here that outlooks on things change with time and some experience.

Just some comments - hope they help.

Hi, Scott!

I GREATLY appreciate your taking time to write such a worthwhile post - it will probably become one of the 'most read' posts on this forum. It certainly helps me out.

Got a few questions for you:

I suggested that a full time pro would probably generate - on average - about 100 new shots a month. At 1,000 shots over 9 months, you're averaging about 111 shots a month; so it looks like my guess regarding a reasonable submission rate was pretty close to correct.

But I'm curious about my 'average' 25 cents per month per image income estimate. How does that tally, from your own experience? I'm trying to avoid specific cases; I know there are probably single images that generate far more than that, per month. But I'm trying to get a feel for what the entire portfolio is worth. So: does 25 cents per month, per image seem like a reasonable number? (Not trying to trap you into making financial declarations; feel free to keep your answer generic, and let it reflect your casual observations of the industry in general, if you prefer.)

Really liked your suggestions regarding taking 'people' shots. Is there a generic model release that the microstock agencies provide? Or is there one on line that you would suggest?

Saw a photog who was using a nikon D3 (full frame sensor) submitting shots taken at 200 ASA, and having them rejected for noise. To me, that seems a technical impossibility. So: do you filter your stuff through noise ninja, or use the noise filters in photoshop, or what?

In general, what equipment are you using?

I'm getting the impression that microstock should be best viewed as a small, supplementary source of income for most photographers. That is, most reasonably motivated and skilled photographers can probably get to the $300 - $500 a month level, if they work at it a bit. But climbing beyond that - to levels exceeding $1,000 a month - is not something that most photographers ever achieve. Would you agree with that observation?

Thanks for your help, Scott. Hope things continue to click for you!

Best wishes, Charlie

Hi, NGirl... thanks for your comments. Visited your blog, enjoyed your stuff... you have some good observations to share.

It seems that you're doing what many are doing; using microstock photography to supplement an existing income. Nothing wrong with that... I'm just seeking proof that a $4,000 a month income from microstcok is happening, at least for a few.

However, that evidence is not present. $500 a month incomes are much more the norm; and that assumes that you're good, and that you work at it consistently.

C'est la vie. One must accept what is.

Thanks for your feedback!

Hey, Scott... meant to mention: you seem to be a talented writer, and enjoy sharing your insights. You might want to check out helium and elance. They're kind of the literary equivalent of photographic microstock agencies, except the income is driven by advertising. You write for them, they publish it, they post ads, people read your stuff and you get a share of the advertising revenue. Way cool.

Take care all - Charlie

Hey Charlie,

I'll tackle your questions in order. Remember, this is just my experience and may vary a lot from anyone else.

I've actually accelerated my image creation in a few different ways. I'm setting up three shoots a week (when I don't have other paid gigs). I really plan to go at this aggressively...so the last few months I've probably been creating images at the rate of two or three times as many as I had been. I had a HUGE backlog of images...lots of shoots but not much time to retouch. Frankly, I've gotten help...including hiring retouchers on a per-image basis. Yes, that cuts into my profit, and the results are yet to be seen. However, I'm finding the acceleration in creating images is worth it. So I may put up 400 images this month. Of course, IStock chokes that down to 20 a week, but everyone else is taking them. I'm also finding that my acceptance rate is about 90%...so the quality makes a difference and helps the portfolio build more quickly.

I'd have to say that I'm way above 25 cents per image per month. More than $1.00 an image on average...and sometimes quite a bit more. I'm also spread across a LOT of sites. On top of that I also sell some images outright through a few different avenues...so that adds in. I don't even count that as microstock...but they are the same images. A lot of the images I do are also part of trade agreements that save me money. Organic produce and music lessons for my son come to mind. Remembering that it takes $2.00 in income to cover every $1.00 I spend the net result is great for me and can add several hundred dollars or more in net gain a month. It just doesn't show on the balance sheet. It also results in things like free theatre tickets (I shot the publicity photos for a local playhouse). That sort of thing. I can't really count the exact earnings...but it makes a difference. I'd go to the play anyway.

On model releases. I have created my own over time. Here's what I do. I use two. One release for Dreamstime (their own) and one for everyone else. I just found that Dreamstime was so specific that it made sense to use theirs. After getting several images bounced because I used my own and they weren't happy with the format or wording, I went with the one they provide. You can download it from the site. Then I made another release that included the "best" of about 10. You can go on the microstopck sites and download what they have there...then just do sort of a cut and paste. The important info to be filled in (other than the legal stuff):

Photographer's name
Model's name
Model's address (full, including city and zip and country)
Model's email address
Model's signature and date

If under 18 (or 21 in some places)
Legal Guardian's name and signature and date
Legal Guardian's contact info - everything you see above

Witness name
Witness Signature and date

Photographer's Signature and date

**********

Make sure it is all very complete. I've had releases bounced because the model didn't fill everything out and I missed it. It is often a real pain to resubmit the releases. The sites just don't make it easy. It's not a priority. they want it right the first time.

If you are entrepreneurial, I think microstock can be a lot more than the small supplemental income. I do think that's what it is for most people. However, I also know of real success stories. I've seen the images from the success stories. they are very nice...but not super human. You and I can both do what they do...in our own way...and if we want to. It's a lot of work, but the income and other rewards really do compund. It gets MUCH easier and your acceptance rate gets MUCH higher naturally as you move along. You also figure out all the little ways to work the system.

I guess the last thing I want to mention is that...at least for me...it has meant an investment of both time and money. I improved my gear, bought serious professional strobes, upgraded my camera, etc. I don't know if I'll break even this year. But I should be dynamite next year when a lot of my investment is in and more of the income goes to the bottom line. So I'm not really too concerned with the monthly income at the moment...only that it increases steadily all the time. I'm looking at the horizon of a year or so from now when the geometry starts to pay off.

It is a gamble, in a way. Like any business venture. But it is a gamble that allows me to follow my passion, have fun, work with great people and do art that people pay me for every day. How cool is that?

I'd love to hear more from you and see how it goes. Consider posting a monthly diary here so we can follow your progress.

I'm happy to answer any other questions. Just remember, experience varies widely. In the end, I think attotude is key.

Cheers,

Scott

BTW...thanks for the helium and elance references. I'll check them out.