I’m sure there probably are several slightly different definitions of the word “portal,” but essentially a portal is a web-based stock distributor that provides contributors with a different kind of access to the stock photography marketplace. Portals do not require portfolio reviews. Editing is minimal, usually focusing on the technical quality. Photographers keyword and caption their own images. In other words, contributors do much of the work handled by traditional distributors. In theory (and probably in fact), portals are more efficient than traditional image suppliers and pay contributors a greater share of sales revenue.

I hope this answers your question.

Best,
Ron

Thanks for your reply. I also submit images to Alamy, and find them a great company to work with.

In my own mind I had made no separations between companies like Getty and Alamy, as to one being a portal, and the other not.

I know from personal experience that Getty is not all that interested in unknown photographers, while Alamy and Photoshelter is. I have considered Digital Railroad, but object to paying them a fee. I think a company should make enough commission from sales of work that they did not create, and refrain from charging fees of their photographers. I may not fully understand why DR does this though.

In any case, I am unclear why you call Alamy, PhotoShelter, and DR "portals." Please explain what you mean by this. I'm sure there are many others, besides myself, who are unclear of why this term is used for Alamy and not Getty, for instance.

Thanks for your fine work!

Warm regards,
Darrell Young
http://www.YoungImaging.com

A fully agree that the launch of PhotoShelter is an important development for photographers. And I think all photographers, myself included, want to see this company succeed along with other portals like Alamy and Digital Railroad. Photographers can be more successful if they have appropriate options for bringing their images to market.

We did not include a category for portals this year because there are so few and because this option is still so new. Had we included portals, we almost certainly would have given the award to Alamy, which is far and away the most successful portal to date. PhotoShelter would have been too new, having launched in the fall season.

For the last few years we have simply picked our own favorites for these awards, but maybe next year we should open this up for nominations in early December. I would be interested in what you and others think.

Warm regards,
Ron Rovtar
The Stock Asylum

I wish you had mentioned the new star rising. Photoshelter.com is drawing a large number of photographers to the Rights Managed photography world, and trying to educate microstock submitters in the process.

The Photoshelter Collection (PSC) is growing very quickly, and there is a lot of enthusiasm within the photographer community over submitting to it.

Most of the larger agencies have refused to deal with less experienced photographers, even though they may be turning out excellent work. That, and the open arms of the microstock agencies, along with sites that accept images under the Creative Commons license, has damaged this industry.

Photoshelter.com accepts images from both high-end professionals, and regular photographers that previously would only submit to micros. They carefully control the quality of the images, with very tight editing. Since PSC is primarily a Rights Managed style agency, with standard traditional image pricing and licensing, it is one of the first traditional agencies to realistically embrace everyday photographers.

What does this mean? In my opinion, it means that PSC has a chance to do something profound. By building an agency along the Getty and Corbis lines, and welcoming excellent, well-edited, high-quality stock from regular people, they may well grow very rapidly and even change the flow of this industry.

I am a submitter to PSC, but am not affiliated with them in any other way. I hope to see them succeed, and succeed well!

- Darrell Young