Post by: stockmarketer on November 05, 2015, 10:54
I used to wear rose-colored glasses. I'd insist that people who knew what they were doing could continue to grow their microstock income into the foreseeable future.
People who've done this longer than me called me naive. But I said I'd never hit the wall because I had a unique niche, style and workflow.
Ha.
Over the past year, the wall has come down on me. Hard. Overall, I'm down from last year by 25%.
I still try to improve. Explore new topics. Come up with new styles. The result? Still down by 25%.
Increased my port size by about 20% in the past year. Earnings down 25%.
I'm now thinking that if I'm still in microstock five years from now, I'll be earning around one third of what I earn today.
<<< NEWSFLASH from five years in the future -- 2020 -- see my answer to the 2015 me on page 5 of this thread! >>>
Your results aren't the same as mine? You're probably either still new(ish) to micrsotock and have yet to hit the Wall (when your rate of portfolio growth is lower than the rate of total agency portfolio growth). Almost every single veteran who has been in the top seller ranks for several years is singing the same tune today... earnings are down and by BIG numbers.
My family and I have become addicted to this income. I've been desperately trying to hold on to as much as I can, thinking things will get better. But reality is finally sinking into my thick skull. I know I may have to give it up and move on, and the sooner the better.
I'm been trying alternatives. Selling on my own doesn't work. (OK, I get some sales, but a tiny fraction of what I earn from agencies. It could never replace that income.) Video looks to be in a similar state as photos and illustrations. There's a price war, far smaller number of buyers, and video veterans seem to have it even worse than photogs and illustrators.
So what's the point of all this whining?
1. Trying to talk some sense into the heads of people who think this is a place to make decent money. Don't get fooled by your first few months of a few dollars here and there. The glory days of microstock are long gone. The competition is too fierce. The laws of supply and demand will crush you.
2. A wake-up call to agencies. Your experienced contributors are going to drop like flies if you keep playing the "my collection is bigger than yours" game with your competition. Why would any artists with talent want to waste their time at this if there's no return? I'm one of your top-selling contributors. You've told me so yourself, reaching out to me for feedback on your processes and latest offerings. And I'm thinking of throwing in the towel. If many more of your top-sellers feel the same way, and this forum suggests that they do, that's experience that can't easily be replaced. Yes, new contributors will continue to pour in to replace us, but it will take years for them to develop the market knowledge it takes to supply images that your customers demand.
Microstock is broken. It's unprofitable and unsustainable for contributors. If the agencies think they can survive with content from hobbyists, they're mistaken, but will soon have to learn that the hard way.
Post by: panicAttack on November 05, 2015, 11:26
1. Is this your full time job and how many hours per day do you work on stock photography?
2. How many images do you have on your biggest earner agencies?
3. Do you invest in your images (models, equipment, travel or other expenses)?
4. Have you tried to change your style? Popular images today have nothing in common with popular images 6-7 years ago
Thank you!
Post by: etudiante_rapide on November 05, 2015, 11:29
it's like the real stock market... where conspiracy are what creates crashes, so that the ones who actually make money continue to make money.
i join in the part of the whining, as you say, because i am giving support to my peers. many , if you noticed , are absent conspicuously or purposely. perharps , you ask why too?
it's like all monopoly or government. the more the corporation , tyrant, corrupted official,etc think they have the general public as puppets, the more they will do worse for everyone under them.
and regardless of shouting or not, i only know that ss is the only agency worth uploading,
so naturally i will keep shouting until there is no money coming in.
for now, i sit on my bum and my earnings still come in. why should i want to jump ship?
Post by: Pauws99 on November 05, 2015, 11:31
Post by: VB inc on November 05, 2015, 11:43
Shutterstock has this artist spotlight type of thing. http://www.shutterstock.com/panorama/ (http://www.shutterstock.com/panorama/)
Very telling when the contributors they spotlight are all outside the united states. Tells me that it doesn't make financial sense for a talented artists to submit their work on this platform.
Post by: Pauws99 on November 05, 2015, 12:07
Post by: VB inc on November 05, 2015, 12:16
Aren't there any talented artists outside the US?
Theres talented artist all over. Why isn't there any shown in the USA was my point.
Post by: Elenathewise on November 05, 2015, 12:20
You're saying - our experience can not easily be replaced, sure, that's true, however, they don't need our experience. I worked some time ago for a big very well known corporation that routinely let go experienced people only to replace them with new graduates - you don't have to pay them much, they're still optimistic and energetic and they work their butts off. Of course, their luck of experience and skill results in poor quality of the company's products. But guess what - the company (and many others like that) is still doing thriving business, just because they are huge, and their customers just suck it up - some for not knowing any better, some for lack of an alternative.
Microstock has become big corporate business. We're veterans with lots of skill and experience that nobody really cares about. Agencies are happy with younger less experienced and more enthusiastic crowd submitting maybe not so high quality, but fresh content. It sells. Who is to say they're wrong?
Where does this leave us? We'll see less and less money. But it was a bit naive to think that the ride will last forever. I love making pictures, and I can still support myself with this business. I don't think I can stop doing it even if the big $$$ is not there anymore. I do agree though that it is time to start thinking about new ventures. I just a met a person who teaches stay-home mums some DSLR basics once a week and makes very nice living out of it. Something to think about :-)
Post by: Pauws99 on November 05, 2015, 12:21
Post by: cobalt on November 05, 2015, 12:28
We all know we canīt outshoot the flood.
Post by: stockastic on November 05, 2015, 12:29
Increasingly, the new images will be coming from new, inexperienced contributors and they will be mostly things that cost nothing to shoot. Eventually these agencies' archives will start to give off a scent of mold, and buyers will react. Things will change after that, but it's impossible to say what the direction will be, and it will take a long time.
Post by: Shelma1 on November 05, 2015, 12:30
"If the agencies think they can survive with content from hobbyists, they're mistaken, but will soon have to learn that the hard way." Imho The objective evidence such as Shutterstocks earnings don't support this conclusion.
That's where the industry came from...crowd sourcing hobbyists. That's why prices were and are low. The pros saw a way to make quick money and started contributing high quality work. I'm not sure who to blame for that.
Post by: amabu on November 05, 2015, 12:35
But it was a bit naive to think that the ride will last forever.
It was VERY naive! I am always amazed how people (who consider themselves very experienced) could seriously expect their income to continue to rise "forever".
Post by: ArenaCreative on November 05, 2015, 13:19
Thank you, college... for the 4 year BA degree that got me a job working as a full-time graphic designer for almost 4 years; which then introduced me to stock imagery; which later became my main income source for 8 years full-time... now on to the next adventure. I'm still thankful to the microstock community for helping me get through the last decade financially.
You have to view everything is a stepping stone. Businesses and commercial industries change all the time (supply/demand). Hardly anyone retires from the same job anymore. You have to constantly re-invent and morph your career as you need to. It's just how the world works nowadays.
Stock will still be a side-hobby, but with dwindling returns at best. Is it still worth me submitting? Maybe for a little bit of extra income. It's definitely not going to be cost-effective in terms of your time, for too much longer.
Post by: stockmarketer on November 05, 2015, 14:04
You're saying - our experience can not easily be replaced, sure, that's true, however, they don't need our experience.
I should have been more clear. When I say a new contributor lacks experience, I don't just mean the experience of creating an image. I mean the knowledge of what sells. How to keyword. How to crop and frame so an image gets more attention on a search results page. How to find niches. These are the most important aspects of experience that not only benefit the contributor, but also the agency. The better a contributor is at all those things I listed, the more money the both the contributor AND agency makes. The big agencies will lose all that invaluable experience if veterans are shoved out the door and newbies have to learn those lessons from scratch.
Post by: cascoly on November 05, 2015, 14:06
I'm done focusing on microstock as my main and sole income from here on in. This year is the last straw. The last few years have been down at least 25%, consistently. I will be supplementing this dying income with other photographic opportunities, from skills I've developed through this business. So for me it's like this...my experience followed yours in reverse - I had a different career, which included 10 years as a computer games designer; I left the latter for new ventures as Hollywood took over games production and concentrated on database consulting
Thank you, college... for the 4 year BA degree that got me a job working as a full-time graphic designer for almost 4 years; which then introduced me to stock imagery; which later became my main income source for 8 years full-time... now on to the next adventure. I'm still thankful to the microstock community for helping me get through the last decade financially.
You have to view everything is a stepping stone. Businesses and commercial industries change all the time (supply/demand). Hardly anyone retires from the same job anymore. You have to constantly re-invent and morph your career as you need to. It's just how the world works nowadays.
Stock will still be a side-hobby, but with dwindling returns at best. Is it still worth me submitting? Maybe for a little bit of extra income. It's definitely not going to be cost-effective in terms of your time, for too much longer.
I started selling stock in the 70's and it was a decent side income thru the mid 90s; I switched to digital around 2000 but my first cameras were low MP so I didn't enter microstock til about 7 years ago
it's never been my full time job, but MS allowed me to retire early from my computer consulting business to spend more time on travel; that continues to be the case and my MS income is up about 15% this year (my SS portfolio increased about the same, but most sales are from older images)
so while MS may look bleak for those expecting a full time paycheck, there are many other ways to keep it going
Post by: PeterChigmaroff on November 05, 2015, 14:10
I'm now thinking that if I'm still in microstock five years from now, I'll be earning around one third of what I earn today.
That sounds about right, and that's only if you keep producing.
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on November 05, 2015, 14:28
You said "Microstock is broken. It's unprofitable and unsustainable for contributors." What needs to be added to that is "for people who expect long term income growth"
I think the growth wall is because every image has a sales lifecycle. Grow, plateau, die. I don't know what the formula is but maybe let's say you need to double your portfolio every year to just to break even. If you start off with 25 photos it's not hard to quaduple that to 100 photos in a year and you perceive that as growth. Same for next year going from 100 photos to 400. Life is wonderful in microstockland. But a few more years down the road as on old timer how many people can go from 10,000 to 40,000 photos or even 20,000. Not many. So in the long term it's probably unsustanable for most people.
But for the agencies like SS who are seeing record financials and are doubling their collection quarterly, that would indicate that for every one person that abandons ship there are maybe dozens or even hundreds of people jumping aboard. And in a few years those people may abandon ship. And so on. So for certain distributors they dont see a problem. More people joining than leaving and record revenue and profits? What problem?
Who knows when or if the ratio of people jumping versus coming aboard will ever reverse. Until then it's probably not a concern for most or all distributors. This is kind of like the California gold rush. The only people who made money were the ones selling tools to the miners.
I've removed most of my collection from microstock to sell direct and also sell outside of stock. Turned out to be a good decision for me. Like I said before I'm grateful to have had micro give me the opportunity to learn the business. It has opened a lot of doors into other things.
Post by: etudiante_rapide on November 05, 2015, 14:49
Well I'd partially agree with you on some points.
You said "Microstock is broken. It's unprofitable and unsustainable for contributors." What needs to be added to that is "for people who expect long term income growth"
I think the growth wall is because every image has a sales lifecycle. Grow, plateau, die. I don't know what the formula is but maybe let's say you need to double your portfolio every year to just to break even. If you start off with 25 photos it's not hard to quaduple that to 100 photos in a year and you perceive that as growth. Same for next year going from 100 photos to 400. Life is wonderful in microstockland. But a few more years down the road as on old timer how many people can go from 10,000 to 40,000 photos or even 20,000. Not many. So in the long term it's probably unsustanable for most people.
interesting. i did not read the rest as i agree with what you say above.
i also think it's about your own returns. if say with 10k photos today, will 20k double your earnings?
most i read say no. so in this case, i would not bother double my portfolio.
otoh, if i have 5k now, and my income has either stabalized or better than last year,
i will see no reason to bother another 5k new works, consider that my last 12 months new work earned me 0 to $5 cumulative while 75% of my daily income came from works i uploaded as a beginner with ss. why bother adding more new stuff if i don't even get $10 on any of them.
sustainability? i think it is sustainable, but so long as ss don't eff up on my search of my regular earners. if i have to rely on 50 out of 5k images to earn payout every month, which i have reach every month since 5 years ago, i think i will consider it sustainable.
and wait till i see my new images earn me something worthwhile before i add any new ones.
but to be fair, i have to admit, some of the new ones did earn me the biggest single earnings.. 28 to 102 bucks each. so i am not wasting time really,
just wasting time uploading too many, instead.
what do you dsay to that, paulie?
Post by: Hongover on November 05, 2015, 14:49
What's happening is that EVERYONE has more competitors now than ever. I hate to burst some people's bubbles...but things will continue to moving along even if everyone on this forum pull our portfolios. And the generation that replaces us will be just as talented, if not more so. Do a search for "stethoscope" and there are over 250,000 images. You take a bucket of water from a lake and you still have a lake.
Apple used to own the Tablet market when the iPad came out. Now that market is saturate, every company is seeing declining sales. So is the tablet market broken? No, it's just saturated.
Nobody is being shoved out the door. People can choose to stay or choose to leave. That's like me saying the Apple App Store is shoving me out the door. No, I choose to stop developing apps because Microstock makes me 700% more revenue.
Post by: stockmarketer on November 05, 2015, 15:05
I don't think microstock is broken. I mean broken for who? It's thriving like crazy right now.
Here's what's broken. A contributor used to see a payoff for creating and uploading images. Today due to oversaturation, falling prices and lower commissions, the payoff is gone. There's no reason to do it.
No payoff for veterans to keep submitting new images if it doesn't slow the falling of their earnings. I increase my port size by 20%. My earnings fall by 25%. That's broken.
And certainly no reason for a newcomer to even start.
The dream of microstock is broken. The hope many of us had of funding trips, a child's college tuition, or even just equipment is broken.
Customers are happy (for now). Agencies are happy (for now). But when top suppliers are by and large unhappy and stop supplying, the market is broken.
Post by: panicAttack on November 05, 2015, 15:11
Who knows when or if the ratio of people jumping versus coming aboard will ever reverse.
I only disagree with this one.
For now, it's like you said. But wait for time when all agencies will have about 100-200 millions of images (in next few years probably) and we will see that less and less people will join (and continue to work for microstock)
Why?
Because at this moment new contributors upload 100-200 images and they can even earn some money out of it in few months. In the future they will make less then a dollar with the same amount of images and just quit it in the start.
Technically they will join, but they will not be real contributors or competitors if they quit quickly.
Post by: ArenaCreative on November 05, 2015, 15:13
It may just get back to that more, and that's where we come in... actually knowing what we are doing by now, and able to handle professional commercial assignments for those companies with larger budgets and deeper pockets. It's up to us which side we want to be on. The "residual income growth" road has been blocked or at least drastically cramped.
Post by: Hongover on November 05, 2015, 15:36
I don't think microstock is broken. I mean broken for who? It's thriving like crazy right now.
Here's what's broken. A contributor used to see a payoff for creating and uploading images. Today due to oversaturation, falling prices and lower commissions, the payoff is gone. There's no reason to do it.
No payoff for veterans to keep submitting new images if it doesn't slow the falling of their earnings. I increase my port size by 20%. My earnings fall by 25%. That's broken.
And certainly no reason for a newcomer to even start.
The dream of microstock is broken. The hope many of us had of funding trips, a child's college tuition, or even just equipment is broken.
Customers are happy (for now). Agencies are happy (for now). But when top suppliers are by and large unhappy and stop supplying, the market is broken.
Every market faces saturation at one point for another. When a platform is young, first moves make a lot of money, but anyone with a sense of reality know that it's not going to last. Soon, others will jump on board very quickly and dilute your earnings. Not only that, the newcomers will have better content than you do and force you to compete harder.
Increasing the size of a portfolio means nothing. It's not relative to your income, it's only relative to your specific portfolio. You can increase your portfolio by 100% and see your income increase by 10%. The explanation is fairly simple. Every new image you upload starts at the BOTTOM and it must compete with existing images. It also needs to climb the search results, which can take months or it may not climb at all if your competition is better. Your old images can earn money because some of them are in the 1st page of the results, but your new images are in page 100. In the mean time, your existing images gets more competition from others, cause your download numbers to decline. That's what's happening.
Your expectations is that you expect the world to stay still while you continue to progress. That's not how it works. I see people develop a sense of entitlement because they've been doing something longer than others.
I'm still consider a "newcomer" since I started this year. There are very good reason for anyone to start. If I can climb to a weekly position of 1610 with 184 images as a newcomer on FT, someone else can do just as well if they take the time to learn the business.
Post by: MisterElements on November 05, 2015, 16:12
Post by: pancaketom on November 05, 2015, 17:24
I think in some ways micro is going to return to what it should have been - low cost images sold for low prices. The anomaly was the relatively brief time when it was worth it to put high production images there. The question is will the buyers still be able to find what they need there or will enough of them decide to head to higher cost sources and can we take advantage of that?
As always, search is king, so if you can get your images onto the first page or the first few pages you will do fine. The problem is that with all the competition that will be harder and harder and for established contributors every big search shakeup will probably dislodge more of your well placed images than it will lift up hidden ones.
Post by: stockmn on November 05, 2015, 17:43
I think in some ways micro is going to return to what it should have been - low cost images sold for low prices.
I agree! This is where everything went wrong. Getty should have used iStock as a farm team of sorts and identified the high quality, high production contributors and moved them and their images into the Macro market.
While microstock is a needed low end market for a certain segment of buyers, it allowed buyers who were quite happy paying MUCH more for an image to get used to high quality images for pennies.
Using thousands of dollars in camera equipment to produce images that sell at micro subscription prices is not and has never been sustainable. It just seemed like it to some for awhile.
Post by: mlwp on November 05, 2015, 17:48
And don't discount self-marketing. Calendars, greeting cards, magazines, the list goes on. It's a tough nut to crack but once you get established with particular companies or publishers or corporations it can be very rewarding.
There are good alternatives to microstock. Jumping ship doesn't have to mean the end of your photography income.
Of course, your mileage may vary.... ;)
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on November 05, 2015, 18:23
Who knows when or if the ratio of people jumping versus coming aboard will ever reverse.
I only disagree with this one.
For now, it's like you said. But wait for time when all agencies will have about 100-200 millions of images (in next few years probably) and we will see that less and less people will join (and continue to work for microstock)
Why?
Because at this moment new contributors upload 100-200 images and they can even earn some money out of it in few months. In the future they will make less then a dollar with the same amount of images and just quit it in the start.
Technically they will join, but they will not be real contributors or competitors if they quit quickly.
I see what you're getting at but I think these distributors know the game pretty well.
They know that they keep reducing benefits and commissions to increase their profits, bunches of contributors leave, and they're still getting record growth with new contributors and images. Why? Because every group of people that joins has their expectations set at that time. Even if most old users are earning 25-75% less than a few years ago, this year is the BYE, BME, BDE for most new users. And when todays users have 75% drops the new users that replace them will be having BXE's.
Somebody nailed it earlier. Who cares if the old expensive jaded employees leave when they can be replaced by new enthusiastic people who are ecstatic to earn anything more than a compliment.
1990 - Wow I can earn $1,000,000 a year in stock photography
2005 - Wow I can earn $100,000 a year in microstock photography
2015 - Wow I can earn $10,000 a year in microstock photography
2020 - Wow I can earn $1,000 a year in microstock photography
Post by: stockxfoto on November 05, 2015, 19:21
Post by: etudiante_rapide on November 05, 2015, 19:30
1990 - Wow I can earn $1,000,000 a year in stock photography
2005 - Wow I can earn $100,000 a year in microstock photography
2015 - Wow I can earn $10,000 a year in microstock photography
2020 - Wow I can earn $1,000 a year in microstock photography
well, we all have suffered with each industrial revolution.
same as the musicians, of which i was one both music and photography..which reads
as below to complement your era to era list
1970 - wow, we can earn 30% of the bar tab playing at the university pub night
1980 - wow i can earn $150-300 a page with the newspaper
- wow, we can earn $300 a night playing rock music (divided by 3 , each brings home 100)
2005 - wow, i can earn $20 an hour as a photo-retoucher
- wow, they actually think it's worth-while playing in a club for a case of beer a night
2015 - wow , i can earn $10K in microstock (re: Paulie above)
- wow, i can get to play for the fiest musica and become famous with the girls (no pay)
the bottom line is always sinking...
the dinosaurs can either adapt or be vanquished
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on November 05, 2015, 19:44
the dinosaurs can either adapt or be vanquished
Rawrrrr. Watch out for those microasteroids!
Post by: weathernewsonline on November 05, 2015, 22:25
I don't think microstock is broken. I mean broken for who? It's thriving like crazy right now.
What's happening is that EVERYONE has more competitors now than ever. I hate to burst some people's bubbles...but things will continue to moving along even if everyone on this forum pull our portfolios. And the generation that replaces us will be just as talented, if not more so. Do a search for "stethoscope" and there are over 250,000 images. You take a bucket of water from a lake and you still have a lake.
Apple used to own the Tablet market when the iPad came out. Now that market is saturate, every company is seeing declining sales. So is the tablet market broken? No, it's just saturated.
What do you think about 4K? right now the market is saturated and yes some agencies are getting a bit strict with curation as pretty much everything has been shot in HD and obviously it costs them to store our files but there aren't 60 million 4K video files around on these sites, think that might be a much needed second wind?
Wonder what you shoot that you are making a 700% increase here vs your previous job. Keep it up, full throttle!
I am trying same but getting promotion around the world is hard, that's a full time job in itself as I am finding out.
Nobody is being shoved out the door. People can choose to stay or choose to leave. That's like me saying the Apple App Store is shoving me out the door. No, I choose to stop developing apps because Microstock makes me 700% more revenue.
Post by: EmberMike on November 05, 2015, 23:05
Quote
This boat is sinking. So why aren't we jumping?
Because this isn't a "jump" kind of business. You can be in microstock for years without lifting a finger to do anything, just riding out your portfolio and getting those diminishing returns for as long as possible. There is really no "quit" or "jump ship" unless you want to be really dramatic and pull your portfolio when you decide to stop contributing to microstock. But that doesn't make much sense.
There is no need to jump when we can just decide not to work on the ship anymore but stay on while it drifts for a few years.
Post by: Hongover on November 05, 2015, 23:52
What do you think about 4K? right now the market is saturated and yes some agencies are getting a bit strict with curation as pretty much everything has been shot in HD and obviously it costs them to store our files but there aren't 60 million 4K video files around on these sites, think that might be a much needed second wind?
Wonder what you shoot that you are making a 700% increase here vs your previous job. Keep it up, full throttle!
It's not an increase from my previous job. Making apps and games was a hobby. Even though I stopped doing it on my free time, I still do a lot of it for the company I work for, though I'm more of a designer/artist.
If I'm making $100-$200 on my apps per month, a 700% increase is not that much, but it's a much better investment of my time. My portfolio is a mix between photos and vectors with a focus on technology, healthcare and business.
As for 4K. It could pick up 5 years from now the same way HD gained steam or it may not. If broadcasters are still streaming sporting events at 720P, there is no need for 4K. But some content providers are trying to future proof their content by using 4K. The electronics industry really wants to push 4K, but more and more people are watching TV shows, concerts, sporting events and movies on their tablets, smartphones and laptops. The Roku 4 is started to have a lot of 4K content, so the market could grow.
Like you said, 4K takes a lot of server space, so curation is absolutely necessary. If sales don't exceed the server bill, they're going to get more strict and start taking more commission from the contributors. Maybe a few years from now, people will start cursing video stock sites and say how they're screwing the veteran contributors.
Post by: kmlPhoto on November 06, 2015, 06:10
Rob Sylvan wrote "Taking Stock" five years ago and was pretty clear about how hard this business was and what the realistic potential was. I actually think he was too optimistic.
The trajectory of this business is not unlike other nascent online business models. Constant change and accelerating commoditization. Doesn't mean I dont look forward each morning to checking my overnight sales.
Post by: weathernewsonline on November 06, 2015, 23:12
What do you think about 4K? right now the market is saturated and yes some agencies are getting a bit strict with curation as pretty much everything has been shot in HD and obviously it costs them to store our files but there aren't 60 million 4K video files around on these sites, think that might be a much needed second wind?
Wonder what you shoot that you are making a 700% increase here vs your previous job. Keep it up, full throttle!
It's not an increase from my previous job. Making apps and games was a hobby. Even though I stopped doing it on my free time, I still do a lot of it for the company I work for, though I'm more of a designer/artist.
If I'm making $100-$200 on my apps per month, a 700% increase is not that much, but it's a much better investment of my time. My portfolio is a mix between photos and vectors with a focus on technology, healthcare and business.
As for 4K. It could pick up 5 years from now the same way HD gained steam or it may not. If broadcasters are still streaming sporting events at 720P, there is no need for 4K. But some content providers are trying to future proof their content by using 4K. The electronics industry really wants to push 4K, but more and more people are watching TV shows, concerts, sporting events and movies on their tablets, smartphones and laptops. The Roku 4 is started to have a lot of 4K content, so the market could grow.
Like you said, 4K takes a lot of server space, so curation is absolutely necessary. If sales don't exceed the server bill, they're going to get more strict and start taking more commission from the contributors. Maybe a few years from now, people will start cursing video stock sites and say how they're screwing the veteran contributors.
I am getting the same feeling, SD to HD was a major step with a major improvement that everyone had to have, 4K? given the cost of all the upgrades involved in the workflow and supply chain I am starting to wonder if it will happen soon in this economy, maybe five years like you say. I do see a lot of high priced 4k sales on P5 but I think server space and cost will be a huge problem right now, it could fall flat like 3D did due to the costs. It almost feels like it hasn't been thoroughly thought out but that's ok with me, can't afford to upgrade any of the equipment now anyways let alone storage drives. Still have 30,000 more HD clips to upload and tag to the three sites I am using now.
Post by: Hongover on November 07, 2015, 01:46
I am getting the same feeling, SD to HD was a major step with a major improvement that everyone had to have, 4K? given the cost of all the upgrades involved in the workflow and supply chain I am starting to wonder if it will happen soon in this economy, maybe five years like you say. I do see a lot of high priced 4k sales on P5 but I think server space and cost will be a huge problem right now, it could fall flat like 3D did due to the costs. It almost feels like it hasn't been thoroughly thought out but that's ok with me, can't afford to upgrade any of the equipment now anyways let alone storage drives. Still have 30,000 more HD clips to upload and tag to the three sites I am using now.
I think it's a bit different from 3D, since that was just a gimmick. 4K represents an advancement, but not the advancement from SD to HD. It's more of a luxury at the moment.
4K still presents a lot of problems for the entire market since 4K broadcasts are limited at the moment. And unless you have Google Fiber or in your area or live in a European country with fast internet, streaming 4K is a struggle. H.265 and VP9 can compress a single movie to about 20-40GB, but your internet need to be fast enough to download 20-40GB of data in a 2 hour period. And you can forget about it if you're on a data plan.
I think the market could warm up in the next year or so now that 4K TVs are becoming affordable and the technology is starting to catch up. I just may pick up a NX1 and take a dip into the market if my budget allows it.
Post by: sharpshot on November 07, 2015, 07:05
Post by: Hongover on November 07, 2015, 12:51
4k TV that I've seen looks amazing and they sell a 4k TV for around the same price HD TV's were a few years ago in my local Tesco now. If the internet is going to be too slow, I wonder if there will be 4K rentals like the old VHS and DVD days? Would be easy to put a film on a USB stick in the post.
USB stick so everyone can just make a copy? Probably never, but Ultra HD Bluray players and discs are expected to get released in a few months. Once the porn industry adopts it and they will, it's going to give some momentum to the entire market.
Post by: VB inc on November 07, 2015, 13:00
4k TV that I've seen looks amazing and they sell a 4k TV for around the same price HD TV's were a few years ago in my local Tesco now. If the internet is going to be too slow, I wonder if there will be 4K rentals like the old VHS and DVD days? Would be easy to put a film on a USB stick in the post.
USB stick so everyone can just make a copy? Probably never, but Ultra HD Bluray players and discs are expected to get released in a few months. Once the porn industry adopts it and they will, it's going to give some momentum to the entire market.
Porn in 4k? no thank you!!! :o
do we really need to see any more clearer than hd??? Even HD is just too much imo. hehe
Post by: sharpshot on November 07, 2015, 14:40
USB sticks can be protected as well as any other medium. Michael Jackson "This Is It" was sold on a hard drive, no difference to a USB.4k TV that I've seen looks amazing and they sell a 4k TV for around the same price HD TV's were a few years ago in my local Tesco now. If the internet is going to be too slow, I wonder if there will be 4K rentals like the old VHS and DVD days? Would be easy to put a film on a USB stick in the post.
USB stick so everyone can just make a copy? Probably never, but Ultra HD Bluray players and discs are expected to get released in a few months. Once the porn industry adopts it and they will, it's going to give some momentum to the entire market.
Post by: PixelBytes on November 07, 2015, 18:29
4k TV that I've seen looks amazing and they sell a 4k TV for around the same price HD TV's were a few years ago in my local Tesco now. If the internet is going to be too slow, I wonder if there will be 4K rentals like the old VHS and DVD days? Would be easy to put a film on a USB stick in the post.
USB stick so everyone can just make a copy? Probably never, but Ultra HD Bluray players and discs are expected to get released in a few months. Once the porn industry adopts it and they will, it's going to give some momentum to the entire market.
Porn in 4k? no thank you!!! :o
do we really need to see any more clearer than hd??? Even HD is just too much imo. hehe
LOL! Too true! I don't want to be able to make out the pimple on some blokes ar$e! Too real for me. :P
Post by: DavidZydd on November 09, 2015, 04:11
I've started to make stock vectors 2 years ago, and I joined ShutterStock on January 2014. I've made about 4000 vectors until now.
I already had the necessary skills 5-6 years earlier, but I simply didn't know about this industry. I sometimes wonder, how much money I'd make 5-6 years earlier with the same portfolio.
Am I right, that contributor numbers grown much-much higher rate than customer numbers since then?
So, the whole game is for me is about time-management:
-I have a good idea, and I can make 1 image in 2 days --> no,no!
-I have a mediocre idea, and I can make 50 images in that niche in 1 day --> go!
(I'm not able to make those top-seller type images.)
So, I usually make larger batches of one type of vector:
http://www.shutterstock.com/g/davidzydd/sets (http://www.shutterstock.com/g/davidzydd/sets)
I have a very special method of making vectors, I don't use Illustrator. (except converting to eps)
Post by: rinderart on February 23, 2020, 20:42
Post by: stockmarketer on February 23, 2020, 22:58
How about a update 5 years later....
Sure, only fair that I start, since I began this thread five years ago.
I just read my words from all those many moons back. Boy, was I teed off. I've since come to accept the fall. The rise was too good to last, and too many copycats jumped in thinking they could steal our ideas and strike it rich. They may not be swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck (if there's a goddess in heaven they're not!) But they sure did screw up the search results and push down the work of the old timers (first time I've ever called myself that... yikes!) Anyhoo, I've taken some deep breaths and decided to keep feeding the beast on my own terms. I cut way back on my uploads and the work is far more enjoyable than it was at the peak. All in all, that's a trade off I can live with. The free fall in my earnings has leveled off, and I'm calmer now. Life is too short to worry about dollars over all else.
As long as I keep enjoying it, I'll stay on the ship, and if it sinks... well, I'll just doggy paddle over to the nearest island and reflect on what a nice cruise I had while it lasted.
Post by: marthamarks on February 23, 2020, 23:52
As long as I keep enjoying it, I'll stay on the ship, and if it sinks... well, I'll just doggy paddle over to the nearest island and reflect on what a nice cruise I had while it lasted.
That's pretty much my attitude, too. I'm too old (73) to worry over worthless stuff, and I never ever attempted to do stock photography for a living.
As long as I enjoy making the kinds of images (and now videos) that I make, I'll continue uploading them to my sites of choice (currently AS & SS in the top tier, DT and P5 lower tier), where many of them do still find buyers.
But if the day comes when sales totally dry up, you'll see me doggy paddling over to that same island with you. Maybe we can share a piņa colada or rum punch as the sun sets into the sea.
Post by: Chichikov on February 24, 2020, 04:52
We stay because we are not rats.
We will fight till the death (their death of course)
Post by: Pauws99 on February 24, 2020, 06:39
Rats abandon a sinking shipWhich is why rats will rule the earth when we are gone ;-).
We stay because we are not rats.
We will fight till the death (their death of course)
Post by: georgep7 on February 24, 2020, 07:07
Actually piranhas sound more suitable but i dunno if they exist in open sea :P
Post by: Hannafate on February 24, 2020, 09:08
Post by: marthamarks on February 24, 2020, 09:15
Rats abandon a sinking shipWhich is why rats will rule the earth when we are gone ;-).
We stay because we are not rats.
We will fight till the death (their death of course)
Yep. Along with the cockroaches.
Post by: Uncle Pete on February 24, 2020, 09:43
Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is!
Yes, to all those who have resigned to the position I accepted some years ago. Whether that's 2 or 3 or 8 years ago. I'm only in this for the entertainment, challenges, inspiration or making ideas into images. Anything I make is nice to have, but I'm not going to expect much or depend on any of that income. That and I can still eat what I shoot and hope to offset the cost of my meal?
The grilled bratwurst I had for lunch at the races, has finally been paid for. Uploaded 3/13/15 earned me $5.16 Plop and Shoot, natural Sunlight.
I just read my words from all those many moons back. Boy, was I teed off. I've since come to accept the fall. The rise was too good to last, and too many copycats jumped in thinking they could steal our ideas and strike it rich. They may not be swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck (if there's a goddess in heaven they're not!) But they sure did screw up the search results and push down the work of the old timers (first time I've ever called myself that... yikes!) Anyhoo, I've taken some deep breaths and decided to keep feeding the beast on my own terms. I cut way back on my uploads and the work is far more enjoyable than it was at the peak. All in all, that's a trade off I can live with. The free fall in my earnings has leveled off, and I'm calmer now. Life is too short to worry about dollars over all else.
As long as I keep enjoying it, I'll stay on the ship, and if it sinks... well, I'll just doggy paddle over to the nearest island and reflect on what a nice cruise I had while it lasted.
You have always been good at record keeping, for your own work, observing the market and ethical effort, with hard work. If anyone is proof that the market has changed and not some wild conspiracy being the cause, you are that person.
(https://i.postimg.cc/YqSKbn7s/microstock-sinking-sales-future.jpg)
Treading water or swimming against the current, drifting down the river on a lazy afternoon, in the Sunshine, never give up. However it's also good to see the truth, Microstock isn't what it was when we started.
Post by: Mimi the Cat on February 24, 2020, 10:30
Stayers or jumbers, rats or humans, they will all be eaten by sharks around the ship.
Actually piranhas sound more suitable but i dunno if they exist in open sea :P
Piranhas are fresh water fish with an over rated reputation piranhas typically do not represent a serious risk to humans
Sharks however are a different kettle of fish ;D
Post by: RCerruti on February 25, 2020, 06:03
'cause we all hope that if enough people will jump, the ship will stop sinking and we, which did not jump will survive!
We forget to look that for each one which jumps ship, ten new jump in!
Btw I stopped uploading (jumped ship?) to all sites between '14 and '16, maybe earlier, and I still make about 100$ per month. The problem is that every now and then I think that I could upload something new :(!
Post by: Brasilnut on February 25, 2020, 06:08
Post by: georgep7 on February 25, 2020, 07:19
Just kidding! :) what is the future of video?
Reading back the full thread, here ais a sensitive coment, hope not offending anyone.
Things were simpler to talk back then?. The porn industry does appeared in the conversation without any political correctness police comments. Video industry will follow porn indusrty when adopt 4k. What a great and truthful statement. No artistic mambo jumbo! It is an industry all video related and technically connected.
Speaking on porn industry, there is this same date as original thread date, documentary (i think series it was?) that explain what happened (and what we are now facing) with people knowing how to build a site, populate it with third party content and sell subscriptions remotely. Not putting name or link, it contains and some offensive content i think. You can easily find it in IMDB.
But:
Long before people here start protesting for low price or sub video sales, porn "agencies" offerred free previews to dl and see, use, or even make compilations and reupload and $2 for full video view. What was that? Creators content misuse from "agencies".
:/
Post by: Uncle Pete on February 25, 2020, 08:40
If you no longer rely upon income from your microstock, you have jumped.
What if I never did? ;)
Microstock paid for these:
(https://i.postimg.cc/J7FWYrGJ/cameras_drawer.jpg)
and this:
(https://i.postimg.cc/XvHQ4tnT/ardbeg_jan_2020.jpg)
I'm not sure I ever made a real profit, like a business would through legitimate bookkeeping, expenses against gains? I'm pretty sure I never got any useful income from Microstock, because I used money for discretionary spending. AKA squandered it on equipment and scotch.
I think there are many others who never relied on income from Microstock. Can't jump ship, if you never got on it? ;D
Post by: MotionDesign on February 25, 2020, 13:37
Great, now everyone is gonna be a videographer! Hahahah!
Just kidding! :) what is the future of video?
Maybe motion design (lot less competition than videos) and movie quality videos (but you must have some knowledge
also about compositing and color grading)
I'm focused on motion design (2d and 3d) and scientific/medical animation.
Time will tell :)
Post by: marthamarks on February 25, 2020, 16:08
If you no longer rely upon income from your microstock, you have jumped.
What if I never did? ;)
I'm not sure I ever made a real profit, like a business would through legitimate bookkeeping, expenses against gains? I'm pretty sure I never got any useful income from Microstock, because I used money for discretionary spending. AKA squandered it on equipment and scotch.
I think there are many others who never relied on income from Microstock. Can't jump ship, if you never got on it? ;D
You and me too, Pete.
Over all these years, I've bought almost all my photo gear with stock earnings, which I then plowed back into more photo gear. :)
One other thing paid for by my photography is a lovely bright-yellow teardrop camper that I use to get out into nature, close as possible to the birds and critters I love to (non-lethally) "shoot."
I have the luxury of doing this and hope to continue another 8-10 years.
Post by: Pauws99 on February 25, 2020, 16:34
Or as George Best famous Irish soccer player said "I spent most of my money on women and booze and squandered the rest". I'm guessing only a tiny proportion of contributors ever had this as their sole or even main source of income.If you no longer rely upon income from your microstock, you have jumped.
What if I never did? ;)
Microstock paid for these:
(https://i.postimg.cc/J7FWYrGJ/cameras_drawer.jpg)
and this:
(https://i.postimg.cc/XvHQ4tnT/ardbeg_jan_2020.jpg)
I'm not sure I ever made a real profit, like a business would through legitimate bookkeeping, expenses against gains? I'm pretty sure I never got any useful income from Microstock, because I used money for discretionary spending. AKA squandered it on equipment and scotch.
I think there are many others who never relied on income from Microstock. Can't jump ship, if you never got on it? ;D
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on May 05, 2020, 23:19
Blast from the past. Most people dont jump. They stay in the boat and stop rowing while tons of new enthusiastic people jump in to grab the oars. :)
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on May 05, 2020, 23:41
Post by: Horizon on May 06, 2020, 00:48
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on May 06, 2020, 06:19
Uncle Pete is right micro-stock have paid for much throughout the years. I have not uploaded since 2018 but my income is almost the same today. The horrendous quantity factor especially on SS and Adobe have sort of killed off any incentive I'm afraid.
I haven't uploaded in about three years and my income is one-third of what it was at last upload. Need to get out the hamster wheel. But yes microstock, and photography as a whole, has paid for a ton of stuff and brought a lot of happiness for which I'm grateful.
Post by: 08stock08 on May 06, 2020, 07:10
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
Post by: Horizon on May 06, 2020, 13:48
Post by: 08stock08 on May 06, 2020, 14:52
08stock08! sounds promising and its good you have a plan! I guess most of us who's been in this business long enough also had plans and agendas but it seems that when putting it into works most agencies especially the big ones always find ways of wrecking any plans and voila you're back to square one! :)
You are right. Currently struggling with unplanned situation arising from Coronavirus. Waiting to get it over and resume the work. As long as the right volumes are pushed to agencies, we are good. Nothing to worry about. Money will also follow soon.
Post by: SuperPhoto on May 06, 2020, 23:09
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
Post by: 08stock08 on May 07, 2020, 00:33
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
You can see who are top contributors at SS on the site microstockrank . Add dot com at the end of microstockrank . By volume I mean, number of videos or images. You have to have material to sell.
Post by: Uncle Pete on May 07, 2020, 09:14
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
Ranked by number of photos/videos not sales. I'm 10757 th / 22,727 photographers :) Says I have 4,708 as of January 26th. I have 5099 which means, I'm guessing, Vectors and Illustrations don't get counted?
Video tells a story, interesting to me. 5523 th / 14,192 videographer and I have no video. (I removed all of mine) If that's accurate, there are 8,669 artists on SS with Zero videos?
Lowest rank is 2 photos at 117,652 and 29,161 people have under 100 photos.
I didn't want to click click click to see how many have 1,000 images, which personally is starting to be serious effort. Around 4,300 people are over 10,000
Good reading!
Post by: georgep7 on May 07, 2020, 09:57
ooh! Nice! TubeBuddy for MicroStock!!
:D :P
Post by: Sean Locke Photography on May 07, 2020, 10:46
As long as the right volumes are pushed to agencies, we are good. Nothing to worry about. Money will also follow soon.
How inspiring.
Post by: Horizon on May 07, 2020, 12:06
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
You can see who are top contributors at SS on the site microstockrank . Add dot com at the end of microstockrank . By volume I mean, number of videos or images. You have to have material to sell.
Yes but this is only rank by volume and that means nothing. Rank of earnings would be much more informative! you can have 100K files of virtually just everyday subjects earning almost nothing and then another guy who's got just 10K files with top notch content earning a fortune!
Post by: 08stock08 on May 07, 2020, 15:18
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
You can see who are top contributors at SS on the site microstockrank . Add dot com at the end of microstockrank . By volume I mean, number of videos or images. You have to have material to sell.
Yes but this is only rank by volume and that means nothing. Rank of earnings would be much more informative! you can have 100K files of virtually just everyday subjects earning almost nothing and then another guy who's got just 10K files with top notch content earning a fortune!
I do not think any agency will ever reveal how much each of their contributors is earning. This data is not available. You have some data which is usable. Such data is number of files in their ports. Contributors websites which also reveal what kind of structure they have. Like gorodenkoff has presence on SS and has the website as well. You get good data this way.
You have to avoid few things in this business. One is trying too much to walk path of idealism and producing piece of art. Produce what has commercial value. You need material to sell. Have enough to sell and let your customer decide what he wants to purchase from you.
Post by: Mrblues101 on May 07, 2020, 17:06
Wise words. When i read the title of post i think it was a COVID related post... but it isnt.
As vector illustrator my earnings in one month are now the half of what i earned in my best time (2016). And slowly the amount is lower and lower...
The main problem is the dependence to this incoming; and the fact that due to the time im spent over the last 10 years by working as MS agencies contributor, i didnt develop any new ability (job ability) and i was unable to spend time creating my own business.
Time to reinvent myself, but i cant stop uploading vector illustrators in the process.
Sleep later and wake up earlier is the only way. To spend time in something new.
Post by: SuperPhoto on May 07, 2020, 17:25
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
You can see who are top contributors at SS on the site microstockrank . Add dot com at the end of microstockrank . By volume I mean, number of videos or images. You have to have material to sell.
thanks, & lol! holy crap some of those are spammiiiiiieeeeeeeeee portfolios...
Post by: Rage on May 08, 2020, 04:47
"microstockrank"Shows me as 29723th out of 14192 videographers? Thats not even possible
ooh! Nice! TubeBuddy for MicroStock!!
:D
Looks good but seems to make little sense
Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk
Post by: georgep7 on May 08, 2020, 07:20
If those numbers do mean 29723-14192=15531 deleted or deactivated video ports, this is a huge hit for Shutterstock I guess.
Post by: 08stock08 on May 08, 2020, 09:23
Post by: Uncle Pete on May 08, 2020, 10:16
Increased my port size by about 20% in the past year. Earnings down 25%.
The glory days of microstock are long gone. The competition is too fierce. The laws of supply and demand will crush you.
Microstock is broken. It's unprofitable and unsustainable for contributors. If the agencies think they can survive with content from hobbyists, they're mistaken, but will soon have to learn that the hard way.
Sorry to re-quote and remove most of what the OP posted, but I wanted to bring back the summary. Someone who I know over the years, has worked very smart and hard at creative marketable products, just added 20% more, and his profits went down 25%.
We're already seeing the small agencies that can't afford to stay open when they lose money, month after month. They are closing. Yes the world pandemic has pushed that forward, but look at the numbers and debt of recent closures. That's not new, that's a long term problem.
I'll add the word Most. Microstock is broken. It's unprofitable and unsustainable for most contributors. And most of the smaller agencies will follow.
Post by: Rage on May 09, 2020, 00:01
Its like game development, its brutal, pays little but people do it
Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk
Post by: Uncle Pete on May 09, 2020, 12:22
I think the appeal ia that it allows us to be creative at our own pace, following our own interests and get some money for it. Hence people don't jump till they find another way to do that.
Its like game development, its brutal, pays little but people do it
Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk
Actually you have a good point, depending on what we expect and what we get back, there are many answers and reasons. I personally have other sources of income that bring in more, and I never saw Microstock as the answer to extra or needed income. Easy for me, I'm following my own interests, being creative and getting some money for that. Just like you wrote.
Nothing for me to jump from and nothing to jump into. :)
I think much of the disappointment is from higher expectations or financial hopes from stock photography. There are people who did well and some will continue, but the growth of the market and the earnings are not what they once were. There have been some who invested time, effort and bought equipment, to make money. The time to make money or a return on that investment has pretty much gone away.
When someone increases their portfolio 25% and makes 20% less, and that person is someone who has seen the success, there's a message to the rest of the new people or less serious and hard working. (that's me too by the way, I'm a hobby shooter) Don't get your hopes up for any future increase in profits.
(https://i.postimg.cc/YqSKbn7s/microstock-sinking-sales-future.jpg)
Post by: Rage on May 09, 2020, 13:33
So while we look at that overall number and weep its only the relevant part of the port that continues to earn while the rest is lost till someone needs a vintage pic
Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk
Post by: Uncle Pete on May 09, 2020, 13:53
Let me ask and unpopular question on this. While we all talk about making the portfolio 25% bigger and earnings dropping we also disregard that older files, maybe from the start if the journey are retiring, they get outdated in look, style, surroundings, quality, treatment etc. So essentially you added some stuff but that just replaced stuff that retired
So while we look at that overall number and weep its only the relevant part of the port that continues to earn while the rest is lost till someone needs a vintage pic
Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk
Vintage Images, from a fine vintage photographer? 8)
I only quote the OP because I know I can trust what he writes I'll assume his quality and standards are as good as ever, so sales of new should grow, just like they did before. That's where adding images and sales dropped, come in.
If it was someone else who just makes numbers, for the sake of bigger numbers of images, I'd discount sales dropping even when uploading new materials. I considered the source as important.
Now about myself. Old images and New images, sell equally well. I never bought into the how many images, make how much money, because it's never been numbers, and always has been about quality and buyers needs. I just had a first time download for an image from 2013. I have no idea why now. The driver is retired, the car is two models out of date, there's nothing news about the shot. Hey, thanks for the sub though?
I have some newer images that get downloads, and they aren't much in light of the competition and being competition with "1,185 two eggs and muffin stock photos" a plop and shoot of breakfast. Watch now as the number of eggs and muffin shots double in a week. No it's not only how many, it's that my shot has some appeal and qualities that buyers want. Maybe because it's one of only two variations? (I wouldn't want breakfast getting cold while I was posing and shooting it, would I?) If the competition was 10,000 my results might be different.
There's far too much superstition and too many made up facts, that people working stock, want to believe, and no end to new ones being made up. The reviewer has photos like that, they reject competition. Really? Or their friend does. That's been around since the first I joined and some of the IS reviewers were also artists, nothing new in that claim. Always blame someone else, that's not new either.
Here's how I see it, and I'm only saying, part of the story. Competition, everyone with a camera is competition. Everyone who can get a website up and running is an agency. The photo factories are churning out reasonably good, selective subjects, by the thousands. Competition is, more than that. Just about everything anyone can think of, has been photographed, in many ways. Anything that's a popular subject has been shot by the hundreds of thousands.
We aren't producing a special product, art or creative, most of the time or anymore. We are manufacturing a commodity that has hundreds of times more supply, than any demand. More good choices from more different people. Tough market to be growing sales, profits or a bigger share. Plain and simple, that's one of the biggest reasons.
Needs, price competition, a whole number of also important considerations are also taking a bite out of earnings, but the biggest single cause for dropping sales and income is competition.
Post by: Rasika on May 10, 2020, 03:36
Post by: YadaYadaYada on May 11, 2020, 05:44
I have already sold most of my equipment, and invested in another field. I have a port of over 17k videos, and in the past I had days with over 800$ sales. Now I am happy if this much sells in a week.
Good I hope many more will do the same, photo and video.
Post by: georgep7 on May 11, 2020, 06:01
I have already sold most of my equipment, and invested in another field. I have a port of over 17k videos, and in the past I had days with over 800$ sales. Now I am happy if this much sells in a week.
No or rare sales here but i don't think that i will ever sell basic gear if not in an emergency need. By basic i mean low cost prosumer gear all fitting in one backpack, not loads of high end gear of course...
Post by: cascoly on May 12, 2020, 04:36
I think the appeal ia that it allows us to be creative at our own pace, following our own interests and get some money for it. Hence people don't jump till they find another way to do that.
Its like game development, its brutal, pays little but people do it
...
as a former game developer, microstock has proved to be a better option for extra retirement income i may not make a lot but i dont have 60 hr weeks working mostly on spec
Post by: everest on May 12, 2020, 04:55
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition.
Post by: offisapup on May 12, 2020, 05:42
The only way the traditional MS sites are going to be able to survive is by reducing royalties, which means the people who upload make even less money until that money gets close to zero (or 0.02 as istockers will know very well). So if people are looking to make money off their photography with ordinary everyday photos on MS, they're in for it. They're going to have to supply images that make the pages of the National Geographic and even then, they would probably not get a sale.
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on May 12, 2020, 06:41
I hate to say this and may get a lot of hate for saying this but, the future of microstock (at least when it comes to photography) is Pexels and Unsplash and the other "free" sites and the reason is, more photographers every day are uploading their premium high quality images there. More buyers with every passing day are realizing they can make do with what they get on those sites as long as they get them for free. And there's increasing funding for apps and websites which provide search algorithms enabling easier AI based search for clients who download from the free sites.
The only way the traditional MS sites are going to be able to survive is by reducing royalties, which means the people who upload make even less money until that money gets close to zero (or 0.02 as istockers will know very well). So if people are looking to make money off their photography with ordinary everyday photos on MS, they're in for it. They're going to have to supply images that make the pages of the National Geographic and even then, they would probably not get a sale.
Partially agree. I think there will always be a percentage of companies that will be more comfortable with more formal licensing and will avoid potential legal problems with the free sites. But yes, if you can get amazing images for free, why not? It's definitely not helping photographers who are trying to earn a living by driving already low prices further down.
The thing with the free sites that drives me nuts is the photographers who submit to them. Some of the work I've seen is amazing and could probably be licensed at a premium or even be sold at higher costs as art. Statistics here in the USA show a majority of people aren't financially secure. A surprising amount are living check to check and are one problem away from financial disaster. Especially now with the pandemic the news is alarming everyone with "worst economy since the great depression". So why are a huge amount of photographers spending time and money creating great images only to give them away when they could be helping their own financial situation? Even crazier is that other people are making money from their photos and not them. I think it was Unsplash that recently changed their license to prohibit resale of art obviously because vultures must have been making a killing reselling it.
Maybe there's an opportunity for someone to recruit these people away from free sites.
Post by: georgep7 on May 12, 2020, 07:01
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on May 12, 2020, 08:31
QuoteThe thing with the free sites that drives me nuts is the photographers who submit to them.I might be wrong though. I cannot really understand this new "community" driven world.
A lot of the community people seem to feel companies like Unsplash are a noble cause for the greater good. And for other people, the rush of seeing their photos get likes and views is better than money. Seems to be no shortage of these companies with warm and fuzzy mission statements looking for do-gooders and attention-junkies. It's a murky line between being noble and being taken advantage of.
Post by: georgep7 on May 12, 2020, 08:44
I remember that in both careers, "offer free or low cost services to attract clients" was a normal period.
After that all free services were simply denied except some work for non-profits or people in real need.
My problem is that I cannot pass this stage and for stock for a third time in one lifetime.
Not as a noble fellow that also sells some work nor as a victim of those who took advantage of this "free culture".
Post by: fotoVoyager on May 12, 2020, 10:06
So if people are looking to make money off their photography with ordinary everyday photos on MS, they're in for it. They're going to have to supply images that make the pages of the National Geographic and even then, they would probably not get a sale.
Ironically, the cover image for National Geographic in July is one of mine bought through Getty or iStock (don't know which).
Check it out next month!
Post by: sgoodwin4813 on May 12, 2020, 10:14
So why are a huge amount of photographers spending time and money creating great images only to give them away when they could be helping their own financial situation?
Seems like you've answered your own question here ...
And for other people, the rush of seeing their photos get likes and views is better than money.
I agree it's completely nuts that people go to the trouble to take great images, modify them in Photoshop, then spend all the effort to upload them basically for nothing, except to help the owners of the web sites. I suppose getting a lot of likes and attention is great for many people but they won't pay the bills. Totally bizarre.
I love doing photography and do stock mostly for fun, but I would not keep doing it if I didn't make at least enough to cover the costs of new equipment and some travel. I don't submit as much as I should just because the return on effort is no longer there - it is only when I have some free time and want a break from other activities. Doing it all just for likes or even the occasional sale is crazy, but there seems to be a ton of that going around these days.
Post by: Horizon on May 12, 2020, 11:01
Image part of microstock is over-saturated now and there is fierce war. The video market has almost no competition. If you search for keywords such as car on SS, you get millions of images, few thousands in videos and further filter it for 4k and non-editorials, the result is in thousands. The myth of Russia, Ukrain and Thailand based contributor's dominance in microstock market is also busted with hard-core numbers.
I spent good amount of time if location has an advantage for contributor. It has an edge but none if there is no business sense.
Top 3 contributors on SS are : 1st is from Kazakhstan, 2nd is from Canada, 3rd is from Russia and I do not see Thailand in top 10 list anywhere. Yes 4th is from Britain.
We have to operate it like business. You have to look at gorodenkoff, google it you will get everything. He is able to run it like business and has team of people.
Finally, look at the microstockrank site. The numbers are till Jan 2020 but those numbers speak a lot of value.
My graded plan is working, moving slowly from image to videos. Right now doing 4k. and for future, upgrade the video camera and move to 8k and put yourself at right angle.
Another interesting statistic is : Each of 90% of total contributors has less than 1000 images/videos on sale. 20% of 10% are ruling the game.
how/where are you seeing who the top contributors are? and you do you mean by volume? or sales?
You can see who are top contributors at SS on the site microstockrank . Add dot com at the end of microstockrank . By volume I mean, number of videos or images. You have to have material to sell.
Yes but this is only rank by volume and that means nothing. Rank of earnings would be much more informative! you can have 100K files of virtually just everyday subjects earning almost nothing and then another guy who's got just 10K files with top notch content earning a fortune!
I do not think any agency will ever reveal how much each of their contributors is earning. This data is not available. You have some data which is usable. Such data is number of files in their ports. Contributors websites which also reveal what kind of structure they have. Like gorodenkoff has presence on SS and has the website as well. You get good data this way.
You have to avoid few things in this business. One is trying too much to walk path of idealism and producing piece of art. Produce what has commercial value. You need material to sell. Have enough to sell and let your customer decide what he wants to purchase from you.
Yes I know what you mean but even so rank by volume will only tell quantity and really as far commercial that means nothing. I remember in the old days an agency called Image-Bank where some guys boosted a huge 15K images and remember this was in the days of trannies but the guy who moneywise topped them all just had a meager 2000 trannies in files earning a fortune in those days. :)
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on May 12, 2020, 11:27
I agree it's completely nuts that people go to the trouble to take great images, modify them in Photoshop, then spend all the effort to upload them basically for nothing, except to help the owners of the web sites. I suppose getting a lot of likes and attention is great for many people but they won't pay the bills. Totally bizarre.
I love doing photography and do stock mostly for fun, but I would not keep doing it if I didn't make at least enough to cover the costs of new equipment and some travel. I don't submit as much as I should just because the return on effort is no longer there - it is only when I have some free time and want a break from other activities. Doing it all just for likes or even the occasional sale is crazy, but there seems to be a ton of that going around these days.
Right, and I'd guess a large percentage of those people aren't in the greatest of financial shape and really could use the money.
Post by: offisapup on May 12, 2020, 11:33
Quote
I agree it's completely nuts that people go to the trouble to take great images, modify them in Photoshop, then spend all the effort to upload them basically for nothing, except to help the owners of the web sites. I suppose getting a lot of likes and attention is great for many people but they won't pay the bills. Totally bizarre.
That's because you underestimate the dopamine hit a million views or a 1000 downloads gives people. That's the reason people spend hours and even money on instagram liking and following other accounts (and buying likes and followers) while uploading their photos there even if they make no money from it. An ego boost or validation can be more valuable to people than a few dollars on microstock. The free sites offer those in spades.
Also sites like Pexels and Unsplash pick out images to showcase on its front page. They need not necessarily be the best pictures (or even good pictures) because the point of the exercise is to give people an incentive to upload more pictures. People like their pictures being showcased. That's the reason people kept uploading to flickr, in the hope that they would make the Explore page. So vast majority of people on the internet upload images for reasons other than money. And it, of course, hurts the people who do it because they want to make money.
Post by: PaulieWalnuts on May 12, 2020, 17:35
QuoteI agree it's completely nuts that people go to the trouble to take great images, modify them in Photoshop, then spend all the effort to upload them basically for nothing, except to help the owners of the web sites. I suppose getting a lot of likes and attention is great for many people but they won't pay the bills. Totally bizarre.
That's because you underestimate the dopamine hit a million views or a 1000 downloads gives people. That's the reason people spend hours and even money on instagram liking and following other accounts (and buying likes and followers) while uploading their photos there even if they make no money from it. An ego boost or validation can be more valuable to people than a few dollars on microstock. The free sites offer those in spades.
Also sites like Pexels and Unsplash pick out images to showcase on its front page. They need not necessarily be the best pictures (or even good pictures) because the point of the exercise is to give people an incentive to upload more pictures. People like their pictures being showcased. That's the reason people kept uploading to flickr, in the hope that they would make the Explore page. So vast majority of people on the internet upload images for reasons other than money. And it, of course, hurts the people who do it because they want to make money.
I guess it's the new version of the old timers I've run into at local photo clubs. They spend a fortune on equipment to win ribbons at local fairs and be recognized as the "pro" at the club. They're happy to give away their work to local publications and get ooohs and aaahs from it. Their ego boost is pretty expensive.
Post by: stockmarketer on May 13, 2020, 03:42
First, the tiny sliver of good news, at least for me. My 2020 'feels' pretty similar to 2019 so far. Even in these early days of the virus ravaging the planet (and yes -- these are still the early days -- it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better), my sales 'seem' pretty flat to last year. I say 'feel' and 'seem' because a few years ago I stopped doing detailed, daily tracking that I had been doing my first 8 years in micro. It had become too depressing tracking the downward spiral. So now I'll occasionally check SS or AS to see how much I made in the same month a year ago and based on these infrequent checks, I'm holding the line.
Now for the bad...
I decided a year or two ago that continuing to upload at a breakneck pace was pointless. New uploads just don't sell. For me anyway, they take a while to get noticed and then start selling. And this lack of instant gratification has been seriously demotivating. So now, I'm uploading a small fraction of my old daily output, for two reasons: I still get a bit of creative fulfillment, and I fear that if I completely stop, my sales will drastically drop. (Still have to 'feed the beast' just to keep it alive.)
My overall micro revenue is down about 1/3 from its peak in 2014. At that time, it accounted for half my total income. I was comfortably supporting a family of six on my two incomes, and thankfully I had saved a lot for my kids' future college tuitions. Now the kids range from midway through college to about to start, and that financial burden is no longer a concern. So in a large way, my objective for microstock has been met, and my expectations for it to be a big money maker for me are no longer there.
Plus, my 9 to 5 career has done well as micro has been sinking -- earning a fair amount more in my "real job" than I did in 2014. So I don't lose sleep over micro's future. With the risks much lower for me, I'm even considering what I'll do when the inevitable happens and the big agencies start cutting our royalty rates. I'm toying with setting up a site that could eventually give away all my work for free, supported by Google and affiliate ads. Prior to doing micro, I ran a few sites like this and made a decent side income from it, and I may just return to those roots if and when the big players slash my micro income to the point of being a footnote on my tax returns.
So, thanks microstock, it has been a nice ride, and I'll continue to enjoy the view as the train slows for its eventual stop. But when that day comes, I'll move on, thankful for the experience but ready for the next chapter.
Post by: Snow on May 13, 2020, 04:10
Not that groupies/hobbyist crap floating around here but a realistic view on the situation!
Niche and factories might still do well but I think that's pretty much it, well besides those who can live from 500 bucks a month and believe me there are still plenty.
SS used to do more then 1k for me with less then 2k images, for some that's a lot (especially newbies or hobbyists who don't have a clue) for others that's similar to what they make/made on a few hundred clips or illustrations. Now it's 1/3 of that on a very good month!
Since there are no sales on new images anymore it is impossible to get back up and extremely difficult to even get into the game.
Post by: Rage on May 15, 2020, 04:32
Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk