MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: Dumc on December 12, 2017, 12:23
-
https://petapixel.com/2017/12/11/sold-photo-adobe-stock-earned-pennies/
-
Someone who didn't do their research before submitting, it seems.
Admittedly, I thought their minimum was 25c; but as I don't submit for that, I hadn't checked any further.
-
He did get 25¢, with 7¢ withheld for tax (he didn't fill out his tax forms).
-
He did get 25¢, with 7¢ withheld for tax (he didn't fill out his tax forms).
::)
-
Someone who didn't do their research before submitting, it seems.
Admittedly, I thought their minimum was 25c; but as I don't submit for that, I hadn't checked any further.
The blog post or whatever that is, is highly inaccurate and one sided. Nice way to open the door for the Microstock haters to jump in with their versions of why we are stupid, or how they make much more by some other means. Then the also usual how digital and autofocus ruined photography or how Microstock ruined income because anybody can sell now.
That's the point of Micro, anyone can sell their work and make some money! ;D
Then the professional genius peeps who say, they tried with 100 photos and only got some 25c subs, so they quit. What did they expect, money raining down from the sky, because they added a minimum starter group. Doesn't matter who they are, 100 for two months isn't a good test. Try 2,000 for two years, that's a start.
My last ten sales on Adobe. $1.24 .27 1.65 .99 .99 .27 .27 .33 .99 .99 which beats SS but not as many sales on FT. Believe me I don't have models or great work, bronze, but that's what I get and it's more than the people who answered the blob post.
DUMC what did you think you would get after you read here, saw the polls, read the Adobe payment terms for artists details? You did read them
? https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html
-
I wish there was an article like this every day. Dissuades people from trying microstock. Less competition. 8)
-
I wish there was an article like this every day. Dissuades people from trying microstock. Less competition. 8)
And I wish there were no articles like this.
I get so bored of people who can take the time to moan and in this case write blogs/articles that moan, (as ShadySue said) "Someone who didn't do their research before submitting, it seems."
This is just a baseless trash article that serves nobody any benefit.
-
"So if I can make a couple of dollars along the way, I am happy to do so." Then why complain about earning 18 cents on the first photo? He would be at a couple of dollars in no time, especially if he has a good port. You are right Shelma, good advertising to discourage more competition. And like Yada said, most of my sales are way above the minimum. 29 cents is the lowest I have seen.
-
I wish there was an article like this every day. Dissuades people from trying microstock. Less competition. 8)
I'm with you.
-
Considering this isn't the most commercially appealing and versatile of shots, perhaps he should be happy to earn 25 cents.
-
Someone who didn't do their research before submitting, it seems.
Admittedly, I thought their minimum was 25c; but as I don't submit for that, I hadn't checked any further.
The blog post or whatever that is, is highly inaccurate and one sided. Nice way to open the door for the Microstock haters to jump in with their versions of why we are stupid, or how they make much more by some other means. Then the also usual how digital and autofocus ruined photography or how Microstock ruined income because anybody can sell now.
That's the point of Micro, anyone can sell their work and make some money! ;D
Then the professional genius peeps who say, they tried with 100 photos and only got some 25c subs, so they quit. What did they expect, money raining down from the sky, because they added a minimum starter group. Doesn't matter who they are, 100 for two months isn't a good test. Try 2,000 for two years, that's a start.
My last ten sales on Adobe. $1.24 .27 1.65 .99 .99 .27 .27 .33 .99 .99 which beats SS but not as many sales on FT. Believe me I don't have models or great work, bronze, but that's what I get and it's more than the people who answered the blob post.
DUMC what did you think you would get after you read here, saw the polls, read the Adobe payment terms for artists details? You did read them
? https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html
That's not my article.....
-
Someone who didn't do their research before submitting, it seems.
Admittedly, I thought their minimum was 25c; but as I don't submit for that, I hadn't checked any further.
The blog post or whatever that is, is highly inaccurate and one sided. Nice way to open the door for the Microstock haters to jump in with their versions of why we are stupid, or how they make much more by some other means. Then the also usual how digital and autofocus ruined photography or how Microstock ruined income because anybody can sell now.
That's the point of Micro, anyone can sell their work and make some money! ;D
Then the professional genius peeps who say, they tried with 100 photos and only got some 25c subs, so they quit. What did they expect, money raining down from the sky, because they added a minimum starter group. Doesn't matter who they are, 100 for two months isn't a good test. Try 2,000 for two years, that's a start.
My last ten sales on Adobe. $1.24 .27 1.65 .99 .99 .27 .27 .33 .99 .99 which beats SS but not as many sales on FT. Believe me I don't have models or great work, bronze, but that's what I get and it's more than the people who answered the blob post.
DUMC what did you think you would get after you read here, saw the polls, read the Adobe payment terms for artists details? You did read them
? https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html
That's not my article.....
Took me awhile to see that and the name is a standard Hollywood pseudonym for anonymous film directors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Smithee whole article about the 18c is a waste of time. Except to point out how many haters there are ready to slam Microstock at every chance.
-
If I posted a picture like that I'd think 18c was a fair return ;-). In fact I might put the camera on a timer and take some random pics of the sky. A couple of thousand should do it ;-)
-
Someone who didn't do their research before submitting, it seems.
Admittedly, I thought their minimum was 25c; but as I don't submit for that, I hadn't checked any further.
The blog post or whatever that is, is highly inaccurate and one sided. Nice way to open the door for the Microstock haters to jump in with their versions of why we are stupid, or how they make much more by some other means. Then the also usual how digital and autofocus ruined photography or how Microstock ruined income because anybody can sell now.
That's the point of Micro, anyone can sell their work and make some money! ;D
Then the professional genius peeps who say, they tried with 100 photos and only got some 25c subs, so they quit. What did they expect, money raining down from the sky, because they added a minimum starter group. Doesn't matter who they are, 100 for two months isn't a good test. Try 2,000 for two years, that's a start.
My last ten sales on Adobe. $1.24 .27 1.65 .99 .99 .27 .27 .33 .99 .99 which beats SS but not as many sales on FT. Believe me I don't have models or great work, bronze, but that's what I get and it's more than the people who answered the blob post.
That's not my article.....
Sorry :-[ I didn't realize from the post that you were just creating click action, nothing but a link, leading subject, no explanation of why you posted that.
-
I thought it was interesting and funny read.
-
Considering this isn't the most commercially appealing and versatile of shots, perhaps he should be happy to earn 25 cents.
Nice photo, where is that?