MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Price your own images at BigStock now available but to who?  (Read 7786 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 25, 2009, 09:25 »
0
Price your own images are already on BigStock. I could not find any information on the BigStock site as to how to do it or who can do it. I only found it on one photographers profile. The photographer is Andres an excellent photographer by any standards.

He has several hundred images on his port that he priced.

The photos are identified by a light blue P in a circle on the thumbnails.

Check his Newest Images to see them.

I found the prices up to 90 credits for a 13.7mp image (photo ID# 4328828)

Does anybody know anything about this?

No info on BigStock and nothing on their forum either.

????????????????????? ???

-Larry


« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2009, 09:34 »
0
Interesting.

I've thought for some time that this could the next natural development for microstock __ allowing contributors to price their images according to their production costs or the uniqueness of the images. That would then be a true marketplace.


« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2009, 10:34 »
0
Interesting.

I've thought for some time that this could the next natural development for microstock __ allowing contributors to price their images according to their production costs or the uniqueness of the images. That would then be a true marketplace.



Which, of course, was one of the big features of snapvillage when it launched. I very naively priced all mine at $25 (just got 30c subs). Reduced to $5 months ago (still just 30c subs). Setting your own price is great in theory but the SV experience isn't encouraging. I suppose if you have brilliant and unique photos it might (but sadly mine are neither ;)). Regards, David

Tuilay

« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2009, 11:12 »
0
sounds like Featurepics, Cutcaster, SV,etc...  all very nice to ask your own price, but no sale.  i don't like it. it could mean poor business , which is why they're trying on new ideas.

« Last Edit: January 25, 2009, 11:26 by Tuilay »

« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2009, 11:52 »
0

Which, of course, was one of the big features of snapvillage when it launched. I very naively priced all mine at $25 (just got 30c subs). Reduced to $5 months ago (still just 30c subs). Setting your own price is great in theory but the SV experience isn't encouraging. I suppose if you have brilliant and unique photos it might (but sadly mine are neither ;)). Regards, David

SV are hardly relevant. SV was a half-hearted, too-late and generally piss-poor attempt to enter microstock from a company who have managed to lose money every year that they have been in business. I don't think we can take any lessons from them.

I'm talking about established microstock businesses __ the type that actually have customers and things.

« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2009, 12:12 »
0
I think this will work.  Some other sites have failed selling at higher prices but they never had enough buyers.  That is probably more to do with a lack of marketing than price.

Tuilay

« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2009, 12:22 »
0

SV are hardly relevant. SV was a half-hearted, too-late and generally piss-poor attempt to enter microstock from a company who have managed to lose money every year that they have been in business. I don't think we can take any lessons from them.

I'm talking about established microstock businesses __ the type that actually have customers and things.

Agree. Like so many sites that appear to be serious microstock sites, but behave like operation in a shoe box, so to speak. Half-a#s# operation, merely to get a business grant or tax deduction for their travels, what not. SV ? not quite that way, but could still be tax related for Corbis. No real effort to gain a market foothold, just "boardroom vapour ware".

« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2009, 12:22 »
0
Although I like the idea of setting our prices, I agree this may be confusing for a buyer.  It's much easier if he searched for something and knows that any of those images will cost him the same.  Now "I like this that it costs US$5, but I like this other one that costs US$10, hmm, which one should I buy?".  And BigStock doesn't have a zoom tool so he can check quality, does it?

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2009, 12:37 »
0
I agree with madelaide. I think that buyers go to microstock to buy images for micro prices. The only way I would pay more money for that image is if it's rights managed and exclusive to that site. Assuming that's the way the images are going to be marketed, it makes sense to keep buyers on your site for that exclusive image rather than lose them to go surfing at other rights managed sites.

I think this economy has everyone diversifying and trying to grab as many buyers and keep them on their sites for as long as possible. In that context, it makes sense.

Tuilay

« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2009, 14:46 »
0
if i understand the motives of BigStock, then this is what i think:

It may be OK to charge a price that YOU have decided on.
BUT! It looks as though YOU are not the one to decide this as no information is listed as to how to do it.
Is it decided by the Camera you use? Your image quality? (we know how that works) don't or if your a favorite photographer of the site? Perhaps a reviewer decides. (that's a laugh)
No info and lots of questions unanswered by the BigStock site.
BigStock Forum? Forget it no one uses it including BigStock. It offten goes for several days with zero postings.

(my two bits worth) ;D

DanP68

« Reply #10 on: January 25, 2009, 15:43 »
0
Price your own images are already on BigStock. I could not find any information on the BigStock site as to how to do it or who can do it. I only found it on one photographers profile. The photographer is Andres an excellent photographer by any standards.


There is nothing in Andres' collection to suggest he priced his images.  The "P" is in reference to "Premium Collection."  Although I cannot find any information on a BigStock Premium Collection, apparently they are following the industry trend and starting one.  And it looks obvious that Andres was one of the first invited to have his images in this Premium Collection.



« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2009, 15:50 »
0
Price your own images are already on BigStock. I could not find any information on the BigStock site as to how to do it or who can do it. I only found it on one photographers profile. The photographer is Andres an excellent photographer by any standards.


There is nothing in Andres' collection to suggest he priced his images.  The "P" is in reference to "Premium Collection."  Although I cannot find any information on a BigStock Premium Collection, apparently they are following the industry trend and starting one.  And it looks obvious that Andres was one of the first invited to have his images in this Premium Collection.




Click on one of his images to see image details. You will notice a "P" in a blue circle and a notation Premium Image and next to that is a question mark (?) click on it to get a lesson on how it was priced. (by the photographer) and amounts to less than 1 % of the images on BigStock.

Check it out and come back!

Thanks,
Larry

DanP68

« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2009, 16:05 »
0
I've already read the description Larry.  It's a Premium Collection.  BigStock is not opening up the doors to let anyone start re-pricing their images.  The images in the Premium Collection are priced at the contributor's discretion, but that is the extent of it.  Unless one of your images is selected as "Premium," you will not have the opportunity to re-price anything.  No one will.

The questions to ask (which I just did in their forum) are -

Who will be eligible to submit to the Premium Collection?
Can any submission be marked as "Premium" by an inspector? 
Will existing uploads be eligible to become "Premium"?  I highly doubt that.

It looks to me like they are doing what has already been done at several other sites, and started a special collection.  Nothing else is going on.  I'm a little perplexed as to why they have not mentioned anything about it however.

« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2009, 16:11 »
0
I've already read the description Larry.  It's a Premium Collection.  BigStock is not opening up the doors to let anyone start re-pricing their images.  The images in the Premium Collection are priced at the contributor's discretion, but that is the extent of it.  Unless one of your images is selected as "Premium," you will not have the opportunity to re-price anything.  No one will.

The questions to ask (which I just did in their forum) are -

Who will be eligible to submit to the Premium Collection?
Can any submission be marked as "Premium" by an inspector? 
Will existing uploads be eligible to become "Premium"?  I highly doubt that.

It looks to me like they are doing what has already been done at several other sites, and started a special collection.  Nothing else is going on.  I'm a little perplexed as to why they have not mentioned anything about it however.

Another big question: WHO will decide if the images CAN be sold as premium?

-Larry

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2009, 17:33 »
0
Buyers are looking for the right image, at the right price, and quickly. I think the seller pricing model would drive buyers nuts because it wouldn't give them any more than one of those things. 

Tuilay

« Reply #15 on: January 25, 2009, 18:05 »
0
Another big question: WHO will decide if the images CAN be sold as premium?
Larry
Larry Larry Larry, so many questions. Who decides? Well , that 's for you to find out,
and get that PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. BigStock(vsop), hmm? ;)

« Reply #16 on: January 25, 2009, 20:26 »
0
DT automatically raises prices on images based on demand. I like this. But I do not like the idea of making some contributors superior to others in a hierarchy. That is a lot of what is wrong at IS, I think. Let everyone play on a level playing field and each image be judged on its own merits.

« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2009, 12:13 »
0
DT automatically raises prices on images based on demand. I like this. But I do not like the idea of making some contributors superior to others in a hierarchy. That is a lot of what is wrong at IS, I think. Let everyone play on a level playing field and each image be judged on its own merits.

Can you name the sites "with a level playing field?" ... and I will start uploading to them.

I won't hold my breath. ;D ;D

-Larry

Tuilay

« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2009, 12:22 »
0
DT automatically raises prices on images based on demand. I like this. But I do not like the idea of making some contributors superior to others in a hierarchy. That is a lot of what is wrong at IS, I think. Let everyone play on a level playing field and each image be judged on its own merits.

Can you name the sites "with a level playing field?" ... and I will start uploading to them.

I won't hold my breath. ;D ;D

-Larry

you better not (hold your breath), dude ! i am not going to revive you !  8)

« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2009, 13:02 »
0
DT automatically raises prices on images based on demand. I like this. But I do not like the idea of making some contributors superior to others in a hierarchy. That is a lot of what is wrong at IS, I think. Let everyone play on a level playing field and each image be judged on its own merits.

Can you name the sites "with a level playing field?" ... and I will start uploading to them.

I won't hold my breath. ;D ;D

-Larry
Well I don't know all the policies of all the sites, and maybe none are perfectly level. But some are more level than others. SS has the tiered .25 to .38 payments based on the contributor's earnings, but otherwise it treats contributors pretty equally, doesn't even have exclusivity. And I think DT and StockXpert are relatively 'level' in the way they treat contributors. But the most unlevel is IS, with its exclusivity bonuses, stinkin badges, best match favoritism, invitations offered to some contributors and not to others, and so on.

I understand that sites have to experiment with all kinds of ideas to try to lure the best contributors, but personally I  like the idea of selling images image by image, whoever they were made by.

I would like to see a site where we could contribute by some kind of anonymity scheme, where no one - even the reviewers - could see which image was by which contributor. And all images were reviewed, priced, and sold equally, purely on their merits. What would be wrong with that?

tan510jomast

« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2009, 13:17 »
0
(edited to show response point)
I would like to see a site where we could contribute by some kind of anonymity scheme, where no one - even the reviewers - could see which image was by which contributor. And all images were reviewed, priced, and sold equally, purely on their merits. What would be wrong with that?

Wow, wouldn't it be awesome? A site with only images. No fave, no data for dl, views, ratings. Not even the name of the contributor.   Then when it sells, it sells on merit of the image , as michaeldb.

Not even sure if that's possible. That would be like shangrila, looking for utopia  ;)

lisafx

« Reply #21 on: January 26, 2009, 13:19 »
0
Very interesting development.  I would love to hear more details on this.  

I think it is great that BigStock is rolling out all these initiatives to increase their sales and get a bigger market share.   Wonder if at some point the images that are rated "excellent" will eventually be added to the "premium" collection.  

I agree with Larry, though, that a system similar to what they have at DT where every image has the opportunity to "earn" it's way to higher pricing is very fair and seems to have worked out well for everyone.  

I hope more details will be forthcoming soon....

« Reply #22 on: January 26, 2009, 13:26 »
0

Can you name the sites "with a level playing field?" ... and I will start uploading to them.

-Larry

Largely all of them __ you are as good as you are and your sales reflect your skills, your investment and your endeavour. Don't blame anyone else but yourself for any lack of success.

If some sites give certain privileges or exposure to particular contributors it it because those contributors have earned them, either through the saleability of their work or through the commitment of exclusivity to that agency. Agencies like contributors who make them lots of money more than those who don't __ hardly surprising in a commercial enterprise.

You can now "start uploading to them".

Tuilay

« Reply #23 on: January 26, 2009, 15:07 »
0

Can you name the sites "with a level playing field?" ... and I will start uploading to them.

-Larry

Largely all of them __ you are as good as you are and your sales reflect your skills, your investment and your endeavour. Don't blame anyone else but yourself for any lack of success.

If some sites give certain privileges or exposure to particular contributors it it because those contributors have earned them, either through the saleability of their work or through the commitment of exclusivity to that agency. Agencies like contributors who make them lots of money more than those who don't __ hardly surprising in a commercial enterprise.

You can now "start uploading to them".

ANOTHER REVIEWER IN DISGUISE, ha!ha!

hali

« Reply #24 on: January 26, 2009, 15:15 »
0
Y'know we're all here just playing ping pong and no one is any wiser about what Larry 's asking.  Did you get any answer from BigStock , Lcj?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
5933 Views
Last post November 22, 2008, 06:23
by lebanmax
25 Replies
4726 Views
Last post February 08, 2013, 18:53
by Jo Ann Snover
72 Replies
11874 Views
Last post August 22, 2013, 20:09
by lisafx
9 Replies
1919 Views
Last post May 24, 2014, 08:51
by fotorob
28 Replies
14588 Views
Last post April 02, 2015, 19:00
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results