Stock Photo Sites

[steve cottis]

So I was sitting looking at a few of my photos and then looking at a stock photo site and thinking to myself some of my pictures are almost as good as some of these (not bigging myself up, my photos are average at best ) So I thought id give it a go. I submitted about 40 photos and they accepted 21. I don’t expect the money to come rolling in if any at all but as Photography is an expensive hobby any extra cast would be helpful. Am I just wasting my time or do these sites actually work, have any of you had any luck if so which ones. Ive only tried Dreamstime so far.

 

[melaniejane]

They used to, but sadly it's getting harder and harder to make any serious money without many thousands of stockworthy photos.

 

[melaniejane]

I should add, with 21 photos at Dreamstime, I wouldn't expect more than a couple of $ a year, unless you have a shot that really takes off. As with most things, the 80/20 rule tends to apply - 20% of your shots will make 80% of your income.

 

[steve cottis]

Thanks Melanie, That was only a tester batch I did just to see if they were acceptable. Now I know what they will take and what not to send ill be sending a lot more than 40. Im under no illusion that im going to make a fortune at this but if you don't try you'll never know. Thanks for the reply.

 

[melaniejane]

If you want any pointers, just ask - but the best advice I can give is to shoot specifically for stock. I've just had a look at your flickr page....you've got some nice stuff, but (if this is the type of stuff you intend to upload) your problem will be that landscapes don't really sell (unless they are amazing), and anything taken on private property, or of a lot buildings, won't be accepted without a property release, nor anything with people accepted without a model release.

As for sites - Shutterstock, iStockphoto and Fotolia are probably the best to try.

 

[steve cottis]

Thanks again I appreciate your time, They do confuse me sometimes though with what they'll take and what they wont for example they accepted this one of Leeds Castle taken in there grounds and I didn't obtain any release forms.
Leeds Castle2 by Steve J Cottis, on Flickr
But they didn't accept this one because of the name on the boat and the sign in the background. (understandable )
boats-bw by Steve J Cottis, on Flickr

 

[melaniejane]

Hmmm, I'm not sure what restrictions Leeds Castle put on professional photography, and I'm assuming that that shot was taken from within their grounds, but I doubt that it really should have been accepted. The trouble is that the reviewers are probably scattered around the world, so it could have been accepted by someone in the USA, Japan, South Africa, etc who might let stuff slip through simply because they assume that Britain is littered with castles all on public land.

As for the 2nd shot - yes, you'd need to clone all the names, logos, etc out. To be honest, I doubt the shot has the commercial value to warrant the work. A pointer I've often used is to try and think of 5 different possible uses, or customers, for a particular photo. If you can't imagine what anyone would use it for, then I doubt it will ever sell.

 

[steve cottis]

Lol yer I know they think its like all Errol Flynn and Robin Hood, But some good points there thanks a lot.