PW4GDF

A long wait in a medical waiting room and looking though much outdated magazines, I saw an article "Turn your photos into cash" well who wouldn't like to do this? It makes it sound like you can make $$$$ very easily............so my question is, has anyone done this profitably with Shutterstock or Stockphoto etc? If so can you share a good way to get started, and then continue?
Thanks,
Wendy

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

What was not really that easy long ago, becomes exceedingly harder as time goes buy. If you happen to find a specialty niche, you might get lucky, but it would still be an income on the side, just one part of some ones photography business. I had an image used by the GEO magazin (German version of national geographic), that went through a stock agency. That was back in the 80,s. GEO used that image for a opening spread on an article about Caribbean Islands and to my surprise, I got payed in the amount of $3000.00, just for that single image, it all had to do with the amount of magazines sold, the size in the magazine ( it was a double side spread) and some other factors I don't quite remember. I still have some recent images in a german stock agency, because a friend of mine works there now and entered them for me, but so far, none of them were used for anything.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

The micro stock image have ruined the market. Images can be purchased for quite literally pennies - a few dollars for large images. Since everybody and his brother wants to sell images, they are flush with inventory.

You CAN make money with stock, but you have to find that niche, have superb images and have a few hundred or more.

It is NOT easy to make REAL money, but then it is easy to enter and who knows - you might have just THE image that someone will pay $10.00 for !

JaiGieEse Loc: Foxworth, MS

What the Captain said. I got into the mix with iStockphoto many years ago, expecting to make a few hundred a year at a minimum. BUT. You cannot simply upload an image and begin selling royalty-free rights to it. First, the image has to get past iStock's ln-house monitors and they can be extremely picky, and your image's aceeptability is subjective and very dependent upon who looks at it. One person might pass it and another will reject it. There are ways to appeal a rejection, but they're time-consuming

Beyond that iStockphoto was once a start-up begun by a guy who wanted a place for photographers to share their work, but it has been bought by Getty Images and now it's more akin to one of the larger stock agencies.

You go into it thinking you'll be seen by all these high-powered image buyers and then one day the realization hits that while people who put together school projects, small brochures and other such low-profile projects will buy from these micro-stock agencies, no art director who's tasked with a super-expensive project for an advertiser or high-end magazine is gonna use micro-stock, knowing that several other people, perhaps dozens of other people, may well be using the same image.

And then there's my experience with iStock's forums. They claim to be there for the same reason as is UHH - for iStock contributors to have a place to exchange ideas and techniques and to seek help with problems. BUT, again, there's a big asterisk. The people who'll be of the most help are those with large iStock portfolios. Many of these folk have made stock photography their full-time business and while some have been helpful, most see you as competition and they just do not want to help their competition get a leg up. You ask a question about lighting or about how to get grocery stores and other businesses to let you shoot on their property, you will probably not get an answer at all, or else you'll get a one sentence and very useless answer, or at worst, a snotty one, basically a not-so-subtle way of saying "Go Away!!"

I have encountered some irritating and snotty folks on those forums, and not just from the large-portfolio crowd. IStock's forums were over-populated with trolls who apparently live to piss others off.

Um. We don't have any of those here, do we??

At any rate, I was serious about this stock photo thing for a coupla years, but I could never make more than $125 a year at it. Finally, I grew tired of it all and stopped uploading new images. Haven't uploaded anything since 2006. I dropped out of those forums even before that, having grown weary of swimming through a sewer to find one nugget of useful information.

Just left my existing portfolio in place. Aside from that, I've expended no effort at at on iStock since late 2006 - and I still get about $100-$125 a year from royalties generated by the portfolio I have on-ine there.

You can make money with stock photography - IF you jump in with both feet, are prepared to devote lots of time to uploading and maintaining a portfolio and are prepared to drop lotsa bucks on lighting, models, and so on.

My basic problem lies with the concept of stock photography. Stock images are intended to serve as pieces and parts of someone else's project. A stock photo agency is akin to a hardware store. You go there to buy nails and lumber and paint with which to build a house. Maybe you'll be able to see your particular two-by-four in the finished product and maybe not.

Me, I prefer to shoot imagery which will stand on its own. Some might say I'm into fine art photography. I leave it up to others to decide whether my work is either fine or art, but it ain't stock.

Stock can be fun, if you don''t mind the level of work it requires to be any good at it, AND if you don't mind your work being used by someone who may or may not credit you for it.

All that said, iStockphoto, as I mentioned, was bought by Getty Images some time ago and it ain't what it was at the outset. Things could have improved for the photographer there - they do now accept editorial imagery, illustrations, audio and video and so on - but I haven't the interest to find out. Not my cuppa.

PW4GDF

Wow all of your replies have been very helpful, thanks. I must admit that is sort of what I thought. The magazine articles make things look oh so easy!
Again thanks for your honest replies.
Have a good weekend.
Wendy

One Camera One Lens Loc: Traveling

Hey Wendy neighbor, I live in Melbourne. Want to say to help you unless your a known shooter, the stock agency business is no place for a beginner. I spent many years in LA as a photojournalist and got to know a lot of photographers. Some where good and some not so good, the point is the not so good tried stock and maybe made $100.00 per year, where as the good photographer problely ran in the $3-4000.00 per year, not enough to live on. What ever your choice good luck and keep shooting........................

bfphoto Loc: Houston, TX

If you really want to learn something about stock photography, look up Yuri Arcurs on Google. I guess Yuri sells more stock than anyone else in the world and he doesn't mind sharing how he does it. As has already been pointed out, you won't make a living doing this unless you can upload a lot of images (thousands); however, what it can do is make you a better photographer. You will get a lot of rejections, but the critiques will let know know what you need to improve. To me the easiest agency to get on and sell is Shutterstock, but ever here, they are getting more picky on what they will accept.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Many people do make a lot of money from stock photo sites, but the majority of submitters make nothing. Some basketball players make millions, but most make nothing.

Check out recommendations of photo sites and learn what and how to submit. Like anything else, a lot depends on your preparation, both for the photos and for where you submit them.


http://www.google.com/search?q=free+stock+photo+site+reviews&oq=stock+photo+site+ratings&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l2.9292j0j4&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=where+to+submit+stock+photos

346pak Loc: Texas

Everything everyone says here rings true. These places are difficult to deal with, and at best they give you .25 each time so
Wone downloads your photograph for about $25.00 per download. Guess who are the ones making the money????

KotaKrome

I believe you'll do better if you move to Los Angeles, hide in trees and behind lamp posts and take photos of celebrities for The Enquirer <G>.
Those paparazzi guys seem to make big bucks.
I'm going to make it big by moving to Washington and getting some clear, in focus, shots of Big Foot.

(Now that everyone carries a still/video camera in their pocket the aliens seem to have stopped visiting earth.)

cfhousler

recommend going to breakfast stock club, which is part of American writers - awai. they have good info and help.

TheDman Loc: USA

I've been on istockphoto since 2005, and while it is certainly past it's heyday (mostly due to it's own stupidity), my portfolio of 500 or so shots still brings in a few hundred $$ per month. Haven't even uploaded anything there in over a year, as my focus has shifted to fine art/art show material.

I agree that it's highly unlikely you'll make a living at it, but I don't think it's as dire a situation as this thread may have made it out to be.