pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stocksy images for sale at CreativeMarket - Royalties?  (Read 23572 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: June 14, 2015, 14:18 »
0
Are you telling me that the two photos of the pineapple are good? Or that focus is not important?

I can't and won't comment on specific photos. I am just commenting on what I am seeing in the market.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2015, 14:47 »
+4
Are you seeing in the market that in focus is irrelevant ?

« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2015, 15:06 »
0

Semmick Photo

« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2015, 15:12 »
+3
That's deliberately out of focus with a purpurpose. That's not what this is about.

« Reply #29 on: June 15, 2015, 00:19 »
0
Tried to download free images from different sites, including 500px to see and in all cases i was disappointed with quality. For usage in any way these images were not worth for further postprocessing. So for what serves this give away? From buyer POV i would be careful to buy something for enough big poster from other artists, because i already saw "the samples" proposed by the agency. Noise will not be visible on web publications, but on full size prints - it can be only as intentional effect, which has nothing to do with bad post processing

...What I dont get is that the Stocksy packages are for sale for a lot of money. The pineapple pack cost $1300. If  were a buyer, and bought that pack for that kind of money, I would be outraged over the poor quality. Stocksy shouldnt want to sell that.

I can't imagine anyone on CM paying $1,300 or $2,800 (flower bundle) for anything, so possibly there'd be no outrage in practice?

I did once download a freebie photo pack (several months back) from Creative Market and the quality didn't look great from the thumbnails, but I thought I'd see what the 100% view looked like.

The bundle was uniformly dreadful - but it was free, so no harm done. What surprised me was a pile of comments saying "wow - great pictures" and "how useful" and other compliments. Perhaps people were just being nice? Perhaps the pixel peeping that the micro agencies have trained us to do isn't something buyers care about?

Yeah, I once downloaded a freebie vector just to see, and it was an auto trace of a photo...not acceptable to any of the big stock sites. Useless unless you wanted to just output a small jpg for the web. If you output it any larger you'd see it was just a jumble of blobs of color.

« Reply #30 on: June 15, 2015, 00:22 »
+4
Are you seeing in the market that in focus is irrelevant ?

I do know that I shoot images for premium sites I circumstances I wouldn't even have bothered taking for microstock because they are prone to have problems with focus, blur, noise. Then again I still have problems getting large numbers of images up because my mind set is still far too much microstocky. So I can't claim I have figured it all out. But also from seeing other images in more than thumb nail size I can say for sure that no premium size has such a fixation on technical issues than microstock sites do.

As I said I won't comment on single images nor single technical issues. I am sure we can all find terrible images in everyone's portfolios, and sometimes we have to wonder how they ever made it through an inspection.

However, to close this part of the topic (at least for me) back to your original question: If you want to find out about "what your standards would have to be", there is no point in reviewing images in 100%. When you get significant amounts of images online in microstock on a regular basis, you most likely have all the technical skills. It's mostly a question of content.

fotorob

  • I am a professional stock photographer

« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2015, 03:44 »
+1
The original question was: Does anyone know how much a photographer of these images gets for each sale?

Semmick Photo

« Reply #32 on: June 15, 2015, 04:19 »
0
Well there are 77 stocksy images. I don't know how much other images there are. But there are 72 packages in total. Stocksy has 4 packages. So the royalties can only be pennies. If everyone gets a fair share it can't be more than 27 cent per pack. Or 0.0035 cent per stocksy image.

« Reply #33 on: June 15, 2015, 05:15 »
+2
If everyone gets a fair share it can't be more than 27 cent per pack. Or 0.0035 cent per stocksy image.

Or perhaps the division is proportional to the original list price of the individual packages. And the Stocksy packages are amusingly priced at $thousands each - for a one-project license, not RF.

I've been spending a lot of time at Creative Market lately - mostly browsing potential app UI elements although the content is also potentially interesting. I haven't bought anything there but I find it interesting in terms of the trends. I like browsing Creative Market in many ways although it seems difficult to decide what might actually be any good. I cannot decide if I am wasting my time looking at it. And it would be a lousy place to search for stock photos I think.

Personally I'm not sure I am ever going to want a random grab-bag of stuff which I would then have to waste time picking through. Same as I mostly hate free stuff.

ETA: On the other hand - quality packs of style or subject themed images might do well at the actual stock sites. Stocksy started out as a great looking collection - but those packs are a poor advert for them IMO.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2015, 05:20 by bunhill »

« Reply #34 on: June 15, 2015, 06:14 »
0
As a general OP answer, there is this thread on creative market: https://creativemarket.com/discussions/3122-How-CreativeMarket-bundles-work-for-authors

Shelma1

« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2015, 06:52 »
+10
This is ridiculous. They sell the Stocksy Pineapple photo pack for $1,300 and then unsell it at the top of the page by directing you to the Photography Bundle, where you can get the same pack and other photos for $39. The comments say it all. People see this and think Stocksy prices are laughable.

What a sad way for Stocksy to undercut itself.

https://creativemarket.com/Stocksy/280455-Stocksy-Pineapple-Pack

« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2015, 09:21 »
+14
Stocksy is a big failure on many levels, and now it seems they are getting desperate for sales. 90% of the the failure is the curation, it is done by 12 year old hispterfan teengirls recruited from random instagram accounts. They are extremely good at picking out the useless, chaotic stuff - to be "so different"... I guess. Just look at the opening page, it has become an ugly mess.

« Reply #37 on: June 15, 2015, 10:09 »
+5
Stocksy is a big failure on many levels, and now it seems they are getting desperate for sales. 90% of the the failure is the curation, it is done by 12 year old hispterfan teengirls recruited from random instagram accounts. They are extremely good at picking out the useless, chaotic stuff - to be "so different"... I guess. Just look at the opening page, it has become an ugly mess.

Huh? From the inside looking out, I can tell you you are dead wrong. Substitute "big success" for "big failure" and you would have it right. Like it or not, Stocksy has been nothing but a success story. You don't have to agree with the editing and content choice, but I can assure you failure is not a word you can associate with this company.

Shelma1

« Reply #38 on: June 15, 2015, 10:12 »
+5
It's a shame, really. I had a lot of respect for both Stocksy and Creative Market at the beginning, because I thought curated design and photography could sell for a premium price, and they could break away from the pack. But the bundles are getting crazy. It's worse than DPC.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2015, 10:22 by Shelma1 »

« Reply #39 on: June 15, 2015, 10:14 »
+2

Semmick Photo

« Reply #40 on: June 15, 2015, 10:19 »
+6
http://www.success.com/blog/no-more-bad-stock-photos-how-a-great-image-helped-inspire-me-to-launch-stocksy

580% revenue growth is not failure to me


Depends on your cost really.

And also on the actual revenue reported. If your revenue first year is 2000 and second year its 13600, its a 580% growth, but nothing out of the ordinary. Start ups tend to see high revenue growth. You wont see those growth numbers after 10 years of being in business.

Shelma1

« Reply #41 on: June 15, 2015, 10:22 »
0
http://www.success.com/blog/no-more-bad-stock-photos-how-a-great-image-helped-inspire-me-to-launch-stocksy

580% revenue growth is not failure to me


Depends on your cost really.

And also on the actual revenue reported. If your revenue first year is 2000 and second year its 13600, its a 580% growth, but nothing out of the ordinary. Start ups tend to see high revenue growth. You wont see those growth numbers after 10 years of being in business.


Lies, damned lies, statistics...

jen

« Reply #42 on: June 15, 2015, 10:26 »
+3
Stocksy is a big failure on many levels, and now it seems they are getting desperate for sales. 90% of the the failure is the curation, it is done by 12 year old hispterfan teengirls recruited from random instagram accounts. They are extremely good at picking out the useless, chaotic stuff - to be "so different"... I guess. Just look at the opening page, it has become an ugly mess.

You bash Stocksy every chance you get.  Why do you care so much?  Why don't you just ignore them? 

« Reply #43 on: June 15, 2015, 11:40 »
+3
What I don't understand is why RM and Midstock agencies aren't trying to be sure their images are at least technically sound.  Cover all the bases.  The standards have gotten * high in microstock; so why don't they also increase in the market that charges 10x the price?  Pay more and get less?  Oh yeah, that can be found in any market.  When you pay more for something, you're not necessarily getting more.

Many big RM agency collection images high-res have always looked noisy, OOF, or just outright laughable technically every time I've zoomed in.  Maybe it's time the technical bar was raised, across the board.  The smartphone and iphoneography stuff is now bringing the technical standards back down, perhaps.  A camera that's always in your pocket is better than no camera... but does that make the image worth hundreds of dollars, even if it was captured on a piece of crap?  I guess so.  Art is always subjective.  Feed me 3 bottles of sriracha sauce with a few beers and and bunch of old taco meat and let me vomit it on a canvas, and then I can sell it to the highest bidder as .:abstract art:.


Shelma1

« Reply #44 on: June 15, 2015, 12:10 »
+2
I guess it depends where it's being used and who's licensing it. If it will appear in a newspaper or online and tells the right story it doesn't need to be tack sharp, but if you're buying it for advertising it does, because it will be used across different media and would look awful on a billboard, for example, if OOF.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #45 on: June 15, 2015, 14:28 »
+5
Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

objowl

« Reply #46 on: June 15, 2015, 16:18 »
+1
Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

Don't forget the emotion, a pineapple that can make your heart bleed is your minimum requirement.  No really, I once went to the Tate and saw what I perceived to be a glass of water, yet it was apparently an oak tree, and the greater the price the older and grander the oak will be.  Once you get an handle on these concepts you will be an artist for sure and Stocksy will come knocking on your door.

« Reply #47 on: June 15, 2015, 16:22 »
0
Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

Don't forget the emotion, a pineapple that can make your heart bleed is your minimum requirement.  No really, I once went to the Tate and saw what I perceived to be a glass of water, yet it was apparently an oak tree, and the greater the price the older and grander the oak will be.  Once you get an handle on these concepts you will be an artist for sure and Stocksy will come knocking on your door.

After the comments he left on CM I suspect it will be a long, long time before Stocksy come knocking.

« Reply #48 on: June 15, 2015, 17:24 »
+3
Hahaha, this thread is gooooold  ;D ;D

I mean, given that the guy from iStock is now at Stocksy, I guess they're trying to bring back the "golden days of microstock", when absolutely everything was bought, for their little family of loyal followers. Now that it's much more difficult to sell at microstock and the golden days are over, they'll just ditch the technical requirements, put on some VSCO filters, set prices to 10x of microstock and hope for the best. And it seems to be working, I also didn't think that the technical quality of Stocksy images was this poor. So congrats  ;D

Semmick Photo

« Reply #49 on: June 15, 2015, 17:28 »
+2
Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

Don't forget the emotion, a pineapple that can make your heart bleed is your minimum requirement.  No really, I once went to the Tate and saw what I perceived to be a glass of water, yet it was apparently an oak tree, and the greater the price the older and grander the oak will be.  Once you get an handle on these concepts you will be an artist for sure and Stocksy will come knocking on your door.

After the comments he left on CM I suspect it will be a long, long time before Stocksy come knocking.

Why? Because I question the quality of their product? Honest buyer feedback? But I guess you are right; agencies have a knack for retaliating against troublemakers. If they cant handle honest critique and reject my application, so be it. What they could do is re-review the images, and take them down.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
58 Replies
18054 Views
Last post February 15, 2010, 21:56
by RacePhoto
2 Replies
3382 Views
Last post June 13, 2014, 15:45
by TanyaLittle
18 Replies
4687 Views
Last post May 04, 2014, 21:43
by Jonathan Ross
127 Replies
26219 Views
Last post February 24, 2016, 19:54
by Jo Ann Snover
1 Replies
894 Views
Last post March 23, 2016, 21:08
by goober

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors