pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 6.93$ for HD Footage what a shame  (Read 3987 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 28, 2013, 21:05 »
+1
I dont believe it when I saw this today. Only 6.93$ for HD video?!? Seams I will remove my video port from there.  >:(



« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2013, 04:33 »
+7
I only uploaded a few, they wont get any more until they pay us more.  I'd much rather buyers went to Pond5, as they pay 50% and I can set my own prices.

Don't think DT will be successful with footage.  They left it too late and have obviously misunderstood the fact that most footage buyers are happy paying much more than their price range.  Undercutting a site that pays 50% and has a lot of buyers makes no sense for contributors.  It takes time to upload a large footage portfolio and DT have given me no reason to.

Goofy

« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2013, 04:40 »
0
I fear this the trend for 2014....

« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2013, 06:22 »
+6
I dont believe it when I saw this today. Only 6.93$ for HD video?!? Seams I will remove my video port from there.  >:(
I don't believe you don't believe.
There were long topics here and at DT about, this low commission is not surprising. Many people, included me, decided not to participate . You have chosen the opposite option and now taking about a shame.


« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2013, 15:24 »
+2
I fear this the trend for 2014....
I don't.  DT aren't going to get many footage sales going.  The other sites that have tried cheap prices haven't stopped Pond5 being my best selling site.  I don't think one more cheap site that doesn't have my portfolio will make much difference.  I've read buyers say that they avoid sites that price HD footage too low, as they know people can't afford to supply decent clips for such low prices.  This is different to stills, as there isn't the over supply yet.

« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2013, 18:51 »
+9
I have avoided this problem by simply not uploading my video to Dreamstime.  There is no point supporting a start up (in regards to Video, Dreamstime is still a start up) that has lower prices and lower commissions than the industry leader (Pond5).


« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2013, 20:42 »
+2
Dreamstime certainly won't get any of my videos, either.

« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2013, 10:32 »
+1
There is only one person to blame for this - and it ain't the agency.

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2013, 10:42 »
0
Upload footage only to P5 and SS.Too time consuming to spread them but if I decide to upl somewhere else DT and FT will be the last agencies on the list.

« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2014, 12:26 »
0
not a footage sale but still very very poor (photo sale from today)


ACS

« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2014, 12:46 »
-2
They are too picky btw. Rejected several of my videos which were accepted at SS and P5. They say that the audio is too loud for an original audio. Audio can easily be removed if the buyer don't like it. Discouraging..
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 12:53 by ACS »

« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2014, 13:19 »
+1
not a footage sale but still very very poor (photo sale from today)



You are still very lucky. Most of my sales on Dreamstime are subscription downloads...

« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2014, 14:10 »
0
I have avoided this problem by simply not uploading my video to Dreamstime.  There is no point supporting a start up (in regards to Video, Dreamstime is still a start up) that has lower prices and lower commissions than the industry leader (Pond5).

Too Right!

« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2014, 14:19 »
0
I have avoided this problem by simply not uploading my video to Dreamstime.  There is no point supporting a start up (in regards to Video, Dreamstime is still a start up) that has lower prices and lower commissions than the industry leader (Pond5).

Can't argue with that logic!

« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2014, 14:58 »
0
not a footage sale but still very very poor (photo sale from today)



Why there is such a big difference?
Few days ago:
13 credits    $4.14    maximum
Image was DL second time, RF, not Exclusive...

1,66 < > 4,14 ??

« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2014, 16:00 »
0
yeah, no idea Ariene, some buyer that purchased a massive plan with a massive discount

« Reply #16 on: January 24, 2014, 19:42 »
+3
not a footage sale but still very very poor (photo sale from today)



Why there is such a big difference?
Few days ago:
13 credits    $4.14    maximum
Image was DL second time, RF, not Exclusive...

1,66 < > 4,14 ??

This is why I would never upload my video to DT. They are simply contributing to the problem, trying to beat the other sites through pricing ....cheapen cheapen cheapen.

« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2014, 18:01 »
0
believe this last one will cover other lose


« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2014, 07:42 »
+1
DT told us for years that there was no market for video.  Not only do they offer low royalties but they seem to only accept very specific codecs.  I tried experimenting with uploading a clip I have on Pond 5 and SS and it didn't work.

Sad thing is they'll get contributors.  Too many people these days are willing to work for nothing more than "likes".   How does someone feed themselves in a economy based on "likes" once their parents kick them out of the house?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
1874 Views
Last post March 02, 2009, 11:36
by Magnum
17 Replies
10300 Views
Last post January 18, 2011, 00:01
by lightscribe
10 Replies
2999 Views
Last post December 20, 2014, 00:29
by Pixart
17 Replies
4439 Views
Last post April 23, 2015, 14:07
by heywoody
1 Replies
1373 Views
Last post March 13, 2017, 21:45
by PixelBytes

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results