What’s Your Preference?

genielamb · #21 (**permalink**) 11-21-2008, 04:08 PM

a truly stunning photo is not necessarily a good stock image. To be successful at stock photography you have to have a huge portfolio of images that follow specific themes or cover a topic of interest and they usually need to have good copy space. You also need to look for a fresh, different perspective than everyone else especially if the subject is well covered in the database already. I have noticed that companies with more than one photographer/ graphic artist generally do very well as they have both the resources and the equipment to take/make good stock images.

On the other hand, stock photography takes time. Time to build a good portfolio and time to get noticed and start selling (buyers sometimes search stock sites by photographer/alias not keywords). To me it is a hobby and an adventure. At the same time it may be a lucrative source of extra income in a few years time when I have a huge portfolio. Don't think you will go into the business and makes a fortune from the start. My research tells me that people only start making any kind of 'money' after a few years and then the average is only a couple hundred a month. Yes some make thousands BUT from what I have seen those are again companies of more than one photographer working as a team.

As I mentioned above, because an awesome photograph is not necessarily a great stock image and visa versa, I find it easy to keep the two seperate. As such my stock portfolio and my so called photography portfolio are completely different. so the comment

Quote:

When you start making contacts with your photos and they find out that they're also available on stocks for $1 apiece, you lose all your credibility. There are people who have lost real sales because of that.

simply does not apply!

digirebelva · #22 (**permalink**) 11-21-2008, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genielamb

simply does not apply!

Actually, I think it does, as I have seen the same issue mentioned on other sites that sell macrostock (and on other photography forums)...some even have the stipulation that if you have an image in a microsotck site then they wont accept the same image as you have now devalued the image below what they consider their acceptabe price range..

Think about it, if you can get an image for $1 and another site has the same image for $15, honestly which site is going to get your business....

True professional will do what you suggested, keep their images seperate..stock images are just that...while the high value images will never be placed on a microstock site..kind of hard to get a good price if your clients can get it cheaper online...

genielamb · #23 (**permalink**) 11-21-2008, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digirebelva

Think about it, if you can get an image for $1 and another site has the same image for $15, honestly which site is going to get your business....

True professional will do what you suggested, keep their images seperate..stock images are just that...while the high value images will never be placed on a microstock site..kind of hard to get a good price if your clients can get it cheaper online...

I definately do not call myself a professional but I do agree with you. The reason I said it does not apply to me is because I DO keep both portfolios seperate. Not only that I work exclusively with one online agency. Not the way to make tons of money because everyone suggests a portfolio on as many stock sites as you can get. In time I may create seperate portfolios on different sites but for now one is all I can manage. Moral is, my stock portfolio is only available on ONE site (one price) while my so called photography profile contains completely different images and is quite seperate.