Author Topic: I just realized how pathetic rates for XL files can get; 1,2$ for a 21mpix file (Read 20050 times)

wut · « **on:** February 17, 2012, 13:43 »

And we bitch about getting 7c/cr at IS, which brings us 1.61$. But to be honest it really happens rarely at IS, but at 123RF it happens all the time in the best case scenario I get 2$. Yes, 2 lousy bucks!

I'm really thinking of not only stopping uploads on these small sites, but deleting the ports, I'm sure I'm loosing a sale here and there because of that at a better paying site. It's horrible to see how many ppl are blinded by the 50% royalties (which are going to get lowered for the vast majority anyway), when all that really matters is the bottom line earning. There's no basis for good bottom line earnings, volume is low or medium at best, but royalties for credit purchases, at least for XL files are the lowest (At least I get more at every single site I contribute to, 10 or so)

ETA I just noticed there that XXL is really 21 mpix and costs 5 instead of 4 credits, so you get 30-50c more. But I rarely get those DLs anyway. Still pathetic!

RT · « **Reply #1 on:** February 17, 2012, 13:55 »

You get 38 cents commission for an XXXL on Shutterstock

wut · « **Reply #2 on:** February 17, 2012, 14:12 »

Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 13:55

You get 38 cents commission for an XXXL on Shutterstock

I specifically emphasized I was talking about credit sales. Yet we still get this crap about SS almost every single time (usually from exclusives). Stay on topic ppl

traveler1116 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2012, 14:33 »

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 14:12

Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 13:55
You get 38 cents commission for an XXXL on Shutterstock

I specifically emphasized I was talking about credit sales. Yet we still get this crap about SS almost every single time (usually from exclusives). Stay on topic ppl

Nah, exclusives say "I get $26 dollars for an XXXL sale" or something like that.

wut · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2012, 14:44 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on February 17, 2012, 14:33

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 14:12
Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 13:55
You get 38 cents commission for an XXXL on Shutterstock

I specifically emphasized I was talking about credit sales. Yet we still get this crap about SS almost every single time (usually from exclusives). Stay on topic ppl
Nah, exclusives say "I get $26 dollars for an XXXL sale" or something like that.

That would at least be on topic, at least remotely

luissantos84 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2012, 14:54 »

from 76 sales this month 4 are XL (1.13, 1.26, 1.8, 4)

4 credits seem a bit low I agree..

RT · « **Reply #6 on:** February 17, 2012, 14:57 »

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 14:12

Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 13:55
You get 38 cents commission for an XXXL on Shutterstock

I specifically emphasized I was talking about credit sales. Yet we still get this crap about SS almost every single time (usually from exclusives). Stay on topic ppl

I know you did, but my point was to highlight that you're moaning about getting $1.20 for an XL file on one site, yet on another site you're happy to get 38c for an XXL, or is it that you're happy to get 38c commission as long as you know the buyers has bought a subscription package, even though out of that purchase you might only get one sale for 38c.

The point being, it shouldn't matter to you whether the image was bought by the buyer under a subscription or a credit package, at the end of the day you're selling an XL on one site for 38c and an XL on another site for $1.20. That's microstock for you - some commission sales some subscription sales, some sites pay more than others, some have higher sales some lower, as an independent contributor you should either get over it and stop moaning or do something about it - by which I mean pull your port from the sites that don't pay you enough commission, or who's upload process you don't like, or who's reviewers reject lots of your images for reasons you don't agree with.

So $1.20 commission for an XL sale on 123RF isn't as much as you'd get like for like on other sites, I agree and I'd like more, but then I'd like SS to pay us more in fact I'd like every site to pay us more - at least we can vote with our feet, that's the great thing about being independent isn't it

Oh and FTR I'm not an exclusive - but you know that could be a solution for you, find a site you are happy with and go exclusive there. Is there a site you're happy with?

wut · « **Reply #7 on:** February 17, 2012, 15:21 »

Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 14:57

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 14:12
Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 13:55
You get 38 cents commission for an XXXL on Shutterstock

I specifically emphasized I was talking about credit sales. Yet we still get this crap about SS almost every single time (usually from exclusives). Stay on topic ppl

I know you did, but my point was to highlight that you're moaning about getting $1.20 for an XL file on one site, yet on another site you're happy to get 38c for an XXL, or is it that you're happy to get 38c commission as long as you know the buyers has bought a subscription package, even though out of that purchase you might only get one sale for 38c.

The point being, it shouldn't matter to you whether the image was bought by the buyer under a subscription or a credit package, at the end of the day you're selling an XL on one site for 38c and an XL on another site for $1.20. That's microstock for you - some commission sales some subscription sales, some sites pay more than others, some have higher sales some lower, as an independent contributor you should either get over it and stop moaning or do something about it - by which I mean pull your port from the sites that don't pay you enough commission, or who's upload process you don't like, or who's reviewers reject lots of your images for reasons you don't agree with.

So $1.20 commission for an XL sale on 123RF isn't as much as you'd get like for like on other sites, I agree and I'd like more, but then I'd like SS to pay us more in fact I'd like every site to pay us more - at least we can vote with our feet, that's the great thing about being independent isn't it

Oh and FTR I'm not an exclusive - but you know that could be a solution for you, find a site you are happy with and go exclusive there. Is there a site you're happy with?

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 13:43

And we bitch about getting 7c/cr at IS, which brings us 1.61$. But to be honest it really happens rarely at IS, but at 123RF it happens all the time in the best case scenario I get 2$. Yes, 2 lousy bucks!

I'm really thinking of not only stopping uploads on these small sites, but deleting the ports, I'm sure I'm loosing a sale here and there because of that at a better paying site. It's horrible to see how many ppl are blinded by the 50% royalties (which are going to get lowered for the vast majority anyway), when all that really matters is the bottom line earning. There's no basis for good bottom line earnings, volume is low or medium at best, but royalties for credit purchases, at least for XL files are the lowest (At least I get more at every single site I contribute to, 10 or so)

ETA I just noticed there that XXL is really 21 mpix and costs 5 instead of 4 credits, so you get 30-50c more. But I rarely get those DLs anyway. Still pathetic!

I've really covered most of the things in your last reply, I've color matched it so you won't miss it this time

. me too, but as I said, the bottom line earnings are BY FAR the best, the volume is just there, so I can't really mind. I do really like SS and that's about it, I either don't have an opinion on other (meaning they're OK), most of them I don't like, they just don't deliver and there's just too much hassle with most of them (UL process, bugs, complete muppets reviewing and rejecting stuff that gets accepted everywhere else etc. All that being said I'm really thinking of deleting stuff from everywhere besides my top 2 earners (SS and IS) and give a chance to FT and DT (123RF just fell of the list obviously), those 2 bring decent earnings a couple of months in the year. 123RF is a bit better for now, well FT is looking a lot better this month, but by 2013, it'll go down for 95% of the contributors

Pixart · « **Reply #8 on:** February 17, 2012, 16:12 »

That is why I downsize for SS

wut · « **Reply #9 on:** February 17, 2012, 16:18 »

Quote from: Pixart on February 17, 2012, 16:12

That is why I downsize for SS

I did that during the first year, but then again, that can bring down your OD/WL sales. Now I downsize only if the photo is not really super sharp (it usually is on a 5D2 coupled with good primes), because they're really nitpicking when it comes to sharpness and focus. I'd say I downsize a third of my images.

wut · « **Reply #10 on:** February 17, 2012, 16:35 »

Quote from: RT on February 17, 2012, 14:57

I'm not an exclusive - but you know that could be a solution for you, find a site you are happy with and go exclusive there. Is there a site you're happy with?

I forgot to answer regarding this before; yeah I knew that, saw your speedometers

. As I said SS, but they don't offer it, if they would, I'd seriously consider it, and if my IS earnings started falling I wouldn't even think about it, I really wouldn't have any other options that to bet on a single horse

RT · « **Reply #11 on:** February 17, 2012, 19:02 »

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 15:21

I've really covered most of the things in your last reply, I've color matched it so you won't miss it this time . me too, but as I said, the bottom line earnings are BY FAR the best, the volume is just there, so I can't really mind. I do really like SS and that's about it, I either don't have an opinion on other (meaning they're OK), most of them I don't like, they just don't deliver and there's just too much hassle with most of them (UL process, bugs, complete muppets reviewing and rejecting stuff that gets accepted everywhere else etc. All that being said I'm really thinking of deleting stuff from everywhere besides my top 2 earners (SS and IS) and give a chance to FT and DT (123RF just fell of the list obviously), those 2 bring decent earnings a couple of months in the year. 123RF is a bit better for now, well FT is looking a lot better this month, but by 2013, it'll go down for 95% of the contributors

Then the only course of action is to make your own decision on which sites you think are worth your while submitting to based on your own requirements, we all get frustrated at the various sites and their various tactics to make money from our work, personally I have my own guidelines as to what makes a site tolerable, when a site passes a level I'm not happy with I either stop uploading or pull my port altogether, done that with Crestock, Featurepics, Yaymicro and most recently Stockfresh.

One thing I learnt a while ago is that no matter what you write here or on any other forum for the sake of venting, or in the vain hope that someone in power from said agency reads it and takes note, it's completely useless because each and every agency has one goal - to make as much money as they can from contributors work, which is fine by me after all it is a business.

wut · « **Reply #12 on:** February 17, 2012, 19:19 »

I agree a realistic post and good advice. I intend to do that and more, I've started a thread because I don't think it's so useless http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/time-to-punish-some-midlow-tier-agencies/msg243866/?topicseen#new.

This is the truth, we just have to realise it (politician=agency) and use our power https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150544272991446&set=a.479376116445.260563.734921445&type=1&theater

wut · « **Reply #13 on:** March 12, 2012, 11:01 »

I just hit the all time low, not just at 123rf but at any site; 1,2$ for an XL+M DL. How pathetic is that?!?!?

click_click · « **Reply #14 on:** March 12, 2012, 12:29 »

I got more cash from 1 XXXL sale on iStock than 5 sales on 123RF (2M, 1L, 2XL).

cthoman · « **Reply #15 on:** March 12, 2012, 15:07 »

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 13:43

I'm really thinking of not only stopping uploads on these small sites, but deleting the ports, I'm sure I'm loosing a sale here and there because of that at a better paying site.

I get the 123RF comments, but what are the other small sites?

wut · « **Reply #16 on:** March 12, 2012, 18:26 »

Quote from: cthoman on March 12, 2012, 15:07

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 13:43
I'm really thinking of not only stopping uploads on these small sites, but deleting the ports, I'm sure I'm loosing a sale here and there because of that at a better paying site.

I get the 123RF comments, but what are the other small sites?

Every single one besides top 4. Their prices are pathetic, it doesn't help at all that they pay us up to 50% royalties

cthoman · « **Reply #17 on:** March 12, 2012, 19:00 »

Quote from: wut on March 12, 2012, 18:26

Every single one besides top 4. Their prices are pathetic, it doesn't help at all that they pay us up to 50% royalties

That seems like a generalization because I don't find that at all. In fact, I'd say it's the exact opposite. Most of the big 4 have either poor royalties or prices compared to the others. They just make up for it in volume or sales consistency. There are some agencies that have worse deals, but there are some that have a lot better deals. Some are even better earners. The Big 4 agencies aren't necessarily everyone's best earners. I know they are not mine.

wut · « **Reply #18 on:** March 12, 2012, 19:20 »

Quote from: cthoman on March 12, 2012, 19:00

Quote from: wut on March 12, 2012, 18:26
Every single one besides top 4. Their prices are pathetic, it doesn't help at all that they pay us up to 50% royalties

That seems like a generalization because I don't find that at all. In fact, I'd say it's the exact opposite. Most of the big 4 have either poor royalties or prices compared to the others. They just make up for it in volume or sales consistency. There are some agencies that have worse deals, but there are some that have a lot better deals. Some are even better earners. The Big 4 agencies aren't necessarily everyone's best earners. I know they are not mine.

It's no generalization, it's a fact. You can say whatever you want and you actually are talking about it without doing the math. I've done the math, I did post it already and even if you get payed only 7c/credit at IS (which really happens rarely), you still get 1.61$ and not less than a dollar. But as well all know you usually get over 5$ even if you're getting only 15% royalties. So what good does that 50% cut do for you? Absolutely nothing, it's just something that is comforting you, but in fact only blinding you. And as we all know and you pointed it out, there's no volume, so in fact you don't only get over 5 times less, it's more like 50 times less. That's why ppl are reporting getting only 10% from non-top 4 agencies, even though they contribute to as much as 25 agencies!!! I really don't know what these ppl are thinking, they're so shortsighted, they don't see they're helping in the race to the bottom. And yeah, which top 4 agency has poor prices? I mean compared to the rest. Which is so utterly pathetic to charge only 5 cr for a full sized JPG (and the big uns usually charge more per credit)

Fran · « **Reply #19 on:** March 12, 2012, 19:35 »

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 16:18

Quote from: Pixart on February 17, 2012, 16:12
That is why I downsize for SS

I did that during the first year, but then again, that can bring down your OD/WL sales. Now I downsize only if the photo is not really super sharp (it usually is on a 5D2 coupled with good primes), because they're really nitpicking when it comes to sharpness and focus. I'd say I downsize a third of my images.

Would you mind elaborating why it brings down OD/WL? I always downsize on SS. Shouldn't I?

wut · « **Reply #20 on:** March 12, 2012, 19:44 »

Quote from: Fran on March 12, 2012, 19:35

Quote from: wut on February 17, 2012, 16:18
Quote from: Pixart on February 17, 2012, 16:12
That is why I downsize for SS

I did that during the first year, but then again, that can bring down your OD/WL sales. Now I downsize only if the photo is not really super sharp (it usually is on a 5D2 coupled with good primes), because they're really nitpicking when it comes to sharpness and focus. I'd say I downsize a third of my images.

Would you mind elaborating why it brings down OD/WL? I always downsize on SS. Shouldn't I?

It may not be big enough for a EL use etc. And buyers that need only small sized photos usually buy the "small" OD. I think you just might miss quite a few non sub sales, I know I'm sorry I did downsize and now quite a few of those files are my best sellers and I can only wonder what would have been...If I may add a bit out of the box/big picture thought, I'd say if you think your photos are worth more (like you think full res are worth more than you get out of subs), you shouldn't sell them as MS at all. They'd be fairly priced in macro

cthoman · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2012, 20:42 »

Quote from: wut on March 12, 2012, 19:20

It's no generalization, it's a fact. You can say whatever you want and you actually are talking about it without doing the math. I've done the math, I did post it already and even if you get payed only 7c/credit at IS (which really happens rarely), you still get 1.61$ and not less than a dollar. But as well all know you usually get over 5$ even if you're getting only 15% royalties. So what good does that 50% cut do for you? Absolutely nothing, it's just something that is comforting you, but in fact only blinding you. And as we all know and you pointed it out, there's no volume, so in fact you don't only get over 5 times less, it's more like 50 times less. That's why ppl are reporting getting only 10% from non-top 4 agencies, even though they contribute to as much as 25 agencies!!! I really don't know what these ppl are thinking, they're so shortsighted, they don't see they're helping in the race to the bottom. And yeah, which top 4 agency has poor prices? I mean compared to the rest. Which is so utterly pathetic to charge only 5 cr for a full sized JPG (and the big uns usually charge more per credit)

I can't say I understand your argument. I typically earned about $4 (17%) a download before I left iStock. My vectors can earn me more or similar per download on Canstock, GL, Clipartof, Drawshop, Veer, Cutcaster, Stockfresh, Bigstock, Yay and 123RF (these are just the ones I contribute to). Prices are higher at some and lower at others.

qwerty · « **Reply #22 on:** March 13, 2012, 05:01 »

It seems that it might be best for you to not worry about microstock and move on to something bigger and better.

Unless of course you enjoy trolling ?

Your posts call everyone involved in the agencies either a Muppet or a puppet. Royalities are pathetic, the list goes on.

Next you'll be talking about how you make more money flipping burgers etc.

wut · « **Reply #23 on:** March 13, 2012, 06:19 »

Quote from: qwerty on March 13, 2012, 05:01

It seems that it might be best for you to not worry about microstock and move on to something bigger and better.

Unless of course you enjoy trolling ?

Your posts call everyone involved in the agencies either a Muppet or a puppet. Royalities are pathetic, the list goes on.

Next you'll be talking about how you make more money flipping burgers etc.

Out of top 4, that's what they are, mostly complete muppets. I'm just trying to make ppl see they're shooting themselves in the foot by contributing there. Where do you see trolling in that?

That being said, ppl are still going to hate IS, for paying them approx 6,5$ for a full sized DL, while they'll love the small agencies for paying them less than a dollar or not much more than that. They're paying 50% royalties, right? They're so fair and good to us!

Well wait a minute, what was that sobering speech from Alex that they're indeed going to cut our royalties, although they said just a month prior to that that the new RC system is for the new contributors only? You see what happens? First, they're selling our files for peanuts, then they think they became big and cut our royalties and we get even less than we're getting. Yes, instead of getting less than 20% of what we get at IS (and I'm not saying they're the good boys all over sudden), we'll get just 15%, Because unlike IS, they're not going to raise prices. They are not that delusional. They're just going to take money out of our pockets, not also out of the buyers and that's the second time they come out as the worst

wut · « **Reply #24 on:** March 13, 2012, 06:21 »

Quote from: cthoman on March 12, 2012, 20:42

Quote from: wut on March 12, 2012, 19:20
It's no generalization, it's a fact. You can say whatever you want and you actually are talking about it without doing the math. I've done the math, I did post it already and even if you get payed only 7c/credit at IS (which really happens rarely), you still get 1.61$ and not less than a dollar. But as well all know you usually get over 5$ even if you're getting only 15% royalties. So what good does that 50% cut do for you? Absolutely nothing, it's just something that is comforting you, but in fact only blinding you. And as we all know and you pointed it out, there's no volume, so in fact you don't only get over 5 times less, it's more like 50 times less. That's why ppl are reporting getting only 10% from non-top 4 agencies, even though they contribute to as much as 25 agencies!!! I really don't know what these ppl are thinking, they're so shortsighted, they don't see they're helping in the race to the bottom. And yeah, which top 4 agency has poor prices? I mean compared to the rest. Which is so utterly pathetic to charge only 5 cr for a full sized JPG (and the big uns usually charge more per credit)

I can't say I understand your argument. I typically earned about $4 (17%) a download before I left iStock. My vectors can earn me more or similar per download on Canstock, GL, Clipartof, Drawshop, Veer, Cutcaster, Stockfresh, Bigstock, Yay and 123RF (these are just the ones I contribute to). Prices are higher at some and lower at others.

But you do realize I'm talking about photos, do you?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: I just realized how pathetic rates for XL files can get; 1,2$ for a 21mpix file (Read 20050 times)

wut

RT

wut

traveler1116

wut

luissantos84

RT

wut

Pixart

wut

wut

RT

wut

wut

click_click

cthoman

wut

cthoman

wut

Fran

wut

cthoman

qwerty

wut

wut

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors