MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: November Sales  (Read 8174 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: November 24, 2018, 13:35 »
0
I guess its more about deleting an image.
If the image is deleted it can't be found and some work of an AD may be destroyed.


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #51 on: November 24, 2018, 13:41 »
0
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

ShadySue

« Reply #52 on: November 24, 2018, 14:32 »
+2
I thought 'they' always said that the (only?) advantage of low-cost subs was that lots of pics would be purchased on spec., maybe several for one layout, but not used.
To be honest, if big companies/buyers are that stingy, they deserve to 'lose' files.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2018, 19:15 by ShadySue »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #53 on: November 24, 2018, 22:04 »
0
I wonder if SS should do what Dreamstime does- any image that doesn't sell in a time period is removed. Of course, if SS just didn't accept the poor image in the first place they wouldn't have to worry about cleaning it up!

How's DT doing? Hmm, they went from 13.6 four years ago, people here earning an average of $680 a month to now, averaging $230 a month. Some great plan?  ::)

I won't neglect that SS has dropped $500 a month for the average person here as well.


« Reply #54 on: November 25, 2018, 09:32 »
0
I wonder if SS should do what Dreamstime does- any image that doesn't sell in a time period is removed. Of course, if SS just didn't accept the poor image in the first place they wouldn't have to worry about cleaning it up!

How's DT doing? Hmm, they went from 13.6 four years ago, people here earning an average of $680 a month to now, averaging $230 a month. Some great plan?  ::)

I won't neglect that SS has dropped $500 a month for the average person here as well.

I've gone from around $180 a month to $20 a month on DT and from $800 a month on SS to, well, this month will be $400, last month $500, so a drop based on a sudden change. 

« Reply #55 on: November 25, 2018, 11:08 »
0
The hard truth is anyone can take a technically sound photo. A decent DSLR on full auto takes care of the exposure and focus for you and if you shoot in good light noise won't be an issue. TADA a photo SS will accept.

Hence the flood of snap shots coming into the SS collection. Unfortunately there has been a rash of free image sites crop up in recent years. Unsplash, pixabay, pxhere etc. etc. etc. all providing comparable quality images for free.

"Why download an image for free when you can get the same quality...FOR MONEY!" as a marketing strategy, doesn't work.

Those free sites won't go away and will only get bigger so the only way SS and the like can compete is to close the flood gate and curate a collection of high quality images you can't get for free. That and the liability insurance of having model and property releases.

SS is obsessed with having the largest collection in the universe though which has the side effect of making finding a good pic harder for buyers and if good enough is good enough and they don't care so much about releases, the free sites win.

Any suggestions on how to take down Unsplash, pixabay, pxhere and the likes to force them to close for good? They're clearly driving the prices down, and eating from our sales.

ShadySue

« Reply #56 on: November 25, 2018, 11:42 »
0
Any suggestions on how to take down Unsplash, pixabay, pxhere and the likes to force them to close for good? They're clearly driving the prices down, and eating from our sales.
Not unless you can prove they're doing anything illegal, like giving away stolen files.
Otherwise, it's just what the trad agency members wished they could do with iS, then SS et al, when they started.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #57 on: November 25, 2018, 12:15 »
+3
I wonder if SS should do what Dreamstime does- any image that doesn't sell in a time period is removed. Of course, if SS just didn't accept the poor image in the first place they wouldn't have to worry about cleaning it up!

How's DT doing? Hmm, they went from 13.6 four years ago, people here earning an average of $680 a month to now, averaging $230 a month. Some great plan?  ::)

I won't neglect that SS has dropped $500 a month for the average person here as well.

I've gone from around $180 a month to $20 a month on DT and from $800 a month on SS to, well, this month will be $400, last month $500, so a drop based on a sudden change.


Haha! get this for a laugh!!  this is a right rollercoaster!   I have gone from 2500/month to 1800 down to 800 and nowadays 600!! oh yeah bar Sept which was around 800. this is true!!!  I am down 4 times the amount I originally was earning!.........no wonder people are losing faith in SS.

As far as DT??  dead, dead, just dead!

Now you woul think Adobe would try and capitalize on this BUT they dont they are immitating SS in every move, takes a couple of weeks and they they do exactly what SS is doing!
« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 12:20 by derek »

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #58 on: November 26, 2018, 05:51 »
0
I think we can safelty assume agencies like SS and Adobe will NEVER go back to its shall we call good days, hey days if you know what I mean. Right now there are two agencies being launched next month.
They are governed by people with huge experience and its 50/50 split with contributors. These are agencies who will gear themselves towards the creative buyers, designers, ad-agency people etc, etc and not to be mistaken for pic off the peg outfits.

Keep your eyes open it might be something who knows?

« Reply #59 on: November 26, 2018, 07:16 »
+1
Unfortunately I think the time for new agencies is long over. Be it 50 or 80% to contributors. Even Stocksy with all their traction,expertise,good will and excellent content is barely making a dent in the global market share, taken by the 3 big players. In the digital world one year late in the game might be a tough barrier to overcome but 10 years late is like the distance between the Milky Way and Andromeda, impossible to overcome with current knowledge.

This is unfortunate but unless something unpredictable and very disrupting happens I don't give any of the new agencies a serious chance to change the actual panorama of the industry.

I think we can safelty assume agencies like SS and Adobe will NEVER go back to its shall we call good days, hey days if you know what I mean. Right now there are two agencies being launched next month.
They are governed by people with huge experience and its 50/50 split with contributors. These are agencies who will gear themselves towards the creative buyers, designers, ad-agency people etc, etc and not to be mistaken for pic off the peg outfits.

Keep your eyes open it might be something who knows?

« Reply #60 on: November 26, 2018, 07:25 »
0
Unfortunately I think the time for new agencies is long over. Be it 50 or 80% to contributors. Even Stocksy with all their traction,expertise,good will and excellent content is barely making a dent in the global market share, taken by the 3 big players. In the digital world one year late in the game might be a tough barrier to overcome but 10 years late is like the distance between the Milky Way and Andromeda, impossible to overcome with current knowledge.

This is unfortunate but unless something unpredictable and very disrupting happens I don't give any of the new agencies a serious chance to change the actual panorama of the industry.

I think we can safelty assume agencies like SS and Adobe will NEVER go back to its shall we call good days, hey days if you know what I mean. Right now there are two agencies being launched next month.
They are governed by people with huge experience and its 50/50 split with contributors. These are agencies who will gear themselves towards the creative buyers, designers, ad-agency people etc, etc and not to be mistaken for pic off the peg outfits.

Keep your eyes open it might be something who knows?
I think the only hope for a new agency is something truly innovative. "were a bit better than SS" isn't going to cut it. Blockchain is looking pretty dead in the water. A genuinely intelligent search capability which understands an individual buyers needs might do it as  anything that saves them time would be a benefit.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #61 on: November 26, 2018, 11:18 »
0
Paws and Everest!...well you could be right! however after so many years, 20! of working with all sorts of picture-agencies, for the first time in say the last 10 years, This sounds interesting, like a new avenue and train of thoughts really ( not the usual spiel about join us and all that crap) no the people involved are people with tons of photographic and running, knowing the routine of selling pictures and goes back all the way to 98, thats lots of know how!

Anyway the way I see it is that anything is better then having to be at the mercy of places that house 100-200 million pictures where because of all the garbage accepted some 70% should really have gone into the dustbin!

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #62 on: November 26, 2018, 13:41 »
+3
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

« Reply #63 on: November 26, 2018, 13:46 »
0
Thanks to higher than usual video, EL and SOD sales, I managed to pull second best month (so far). Othwerwies, number of sales average, number of ODDs also on the lower side. I'm expecting december to be disastreous.

« Reply #64 on: November 26, 2018, 13:47 »
+1
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

Don't even read what this dude is writing, he's so full of lies, even he probably cannot differentiate between truth and lies from what he's saying.

« Reply #65 on: November 26, 2018, 13:53 »
0
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

Don't even read what this dude is writing, he's so full of lies, even he probably cannot differentiate between truth and lies from what he's saying.
and miss all that entertainment?

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #66 on: November 26, 2018, 14:17 »
+1
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

Yes of course I did! ::)


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #67 on: November 26, 2018, 14:24 »
+1
Blimey fellas! hoho!  no one forces you to join anything!  stay stuck here then!!  it was just some info you will find out soon enough anyway. Just an idea people, no big deal! :) :)

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #68 on: November 26, 2018, 14:49 »
+1
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

Yes of course I did! ::)

Seems appropriate  ;)

Or maybe if he's real you should warn him, his job is at risk because he's incompetent and shouldn't be in such a position if he can't understand how the Internet works. What logical person would bookmark a search result for anything? I mean if it was an article on Google, the search page could be different in an hour. You have to bookmark the actual location or that or in the case of a photo, the actual photo, not a search?

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #69 on: November 26, 2018, 14:55 »
0
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

Don't even read what this dude is writing, he's so full of lies, even he probably cannot differentiate between truth and lies from what he's saying.

This goes against your five core habbits!!...or?.......

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #70 on: November 26, 2018, 15:04 »
0
They also bookmark a picture for future ref's go back and because of the constan search-change they cant find it!...oh well...
So they bookmark a single picture, and when they try to get it again, the URI for that picture has changed:?
Run a mile from SS in that case. If that's really so, they have totally lost the plot.
(Though to be honest, I can't see how the 'constant search change' would mean a single bookmarked pic couldn't be found. That would have to be a deliberate URI change.)

Yep! Just to give you an example! I know an AD at greys Advertising co who constantly buy hundreds perhaps even thousands of fill out shots for annuals, company profiles etc, etc and he always bookmark shots for future use, they all do!  and when he goes back to page this or that the pics are gone of course, why?? well simply because they changed the algorithm which they always do!

The location or ID of an image doesn't change if the search changes. If you mean the person goes to page six of the search for something, or bookmarks that, that's really a dimwit move. New files come in, old files move, more popular move up. Only a total idiot would bookmark a page of a search for future use! Of course the search changes, it changes in minutes, hours and days, all the time.

Tell the truth, you made this AD persons experience up, right?

Yes of course I did! ::)

Seems appropriate  ;)

Or maybe if he's real you should warn him, his job is at risk because he's incompetent and shouldn't be in such a position if he can't understand how the Internet works. What logical person would bookmark a search result for anything? I mean if it was an article on Google, the search page could be different in an hour. You have to bookmark the actual location or that or in the case of a photo, the actual photo, not a search?

Dont worry about it Pete, water under the bridge by now!.....it wasnt your statement just that it sparks off the usual glibb and waffle brigade!....anyway have you EVER seen or experienced an Art-Director at work looking for a picture in an agency??  utter stress! they will flick through 3-4 pages and then move on! unless its a major campaign then they drool over it for days, why? because the client spends a heck of a lot of money!

« Reply #71 on: November 26, 2018, 15:09 »
+6
Whether people like it or not, the market is starting to consolidate. It's similar to social networks and search engines of yesteryear trying to compete with each other.

Everyone wants a piece of the pie until 2-3 giants take over the industry. And I believe the 2 giants of the microstock industry will be Shutterstock and Adobe Stock.

Adobe Stock because of its integration with its software and cloud products. Shutterstock because of their resources and business reach. I just don't see iStock or 123RF being able to challenge them in the next 10 years.

There's more competition among contributors than ever on SS and AS and it's not going to get any easier. Some contributors will do well, but most won't. There is no choice but to step up and compete against the best contributors of Microstock if you want success in this industry.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #72 on: November 26, 2018, 15:19 »
0
Whether people like it or not, the market is starting to consolidate. It's similar to social networks and search engines of yesteryear trying to compete with each other.

Everyone wants a piece of the pie until 2-3 giants take over the industry. And I believe the 2 giants of the microstock industry will be Shutterstock and Adobe Stock.

Adobe Stock because of its integration with its software and cloud products. Shutterstock because of their resources and business reach. I just don't see iStock or 123RF being able to challenge them in the next 10 years.

There's more competition among contributors than ever on SS and AS and it's not going to get any easier. Some contributors will do well, but most won't. There is no choice but to step up and compete against the best contributors of Microstock if you want success in this industry.

Too true! and a good post!........what you say is spot-on!  and thats the time an intelligent person would move on!

« Reply #73 on: November 27, 2018, 05:32 »
+1
it is one of the worst months in a while, november normally is a good month for me, but all agencies are FAR below average. i am at 25% of what i used to make

« Reply #74 on: November 27, 2018, 06:51 »
+1
Whether people like it or not, the market is starting to consolidate. It's similar to social networks and search engines of yesteryear trying to compete with each other.

Everyone wants a piece of the pie until 2-3 giants take over the industry. And I believe the 2 giants of the microstock industry will be Shutterstock and Adobe Stock.

Adobe Stock because of its integration with its software and cloud products. Shutterstock because of their resources and business reach. I just don't see iStock or 123RF being able to challenge them in the next 10 years.

There's more competition among contributors than ever on SS and AS and it's not going to get any easier. Some contributors will do well, but most won't. There is no choice but to step up and compete against the best contributors of Microstock if you want success in this industry.

Good post and what we might see sooner then 10 years.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
1581 Views
Last post November 28, 2013, 01:45
by leaf
43 Replies
12479 Views
Last post December 23, 2013, 09:22
by Red Dove
34 Replies
10314 Views
Last post December 20, 2014, 09:25
by PaulieWalnuts
36 Replies
4815 Views
Last post December 25, 2016, 15:42
by YadaYadaYada
3 Replies
550 Views
Last post November 10, 2018, 18:51
by KimsCreativeHub

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors