For me that shows level 0 after 6 months, for you or if I logged out probably 2 years.  Serban has confirmed that they are "experimenting" again so better than average chance this is coming for everyone.  Maybe going on for a while as I had previous got a lower than expected price on a sale.

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_32179

At least IS, FT and 123 give you advance notice of a shafting!!

At least IS, FT and 123 give you advance notice of a shafting!!

I'll give you 123RF, but IS and FT have both shafted us without notice.

It gets better - check the comparison that was posted - price cuts on the way across the board - mightn't affect most of you now but be * sure it will.

That's not good. They seem to be very confused over there. I think they change their pricing schemes more than anybody else. I'm sure there is a purpose to it all, but it looks very random. The whole tiered pricing thing is kind of a mess. I feel sorry for their customers. I'm surprised they put up with it.

If iStock stopped being a total mess or SS figured out how to make Big Stock an effective PAYG arm, I think DT might feel the real effects of this jumble of prices.

I agree. I think their slogan should be... We're Dreamstime and we are OK. Not terrible. I'd say DT's problem is they seem to lack an identity. They just don't have anything they can hang their hat on. They used to pay 50% and had some bragging rights about being a good paying agency. Not anymore though. The tiered pricing model really doesn't allow them to say they are the cheapest, priciest or even the simplest. Their collection isn't the best curated (their weird similar rules), but it also isn't the worst.

If I were them, I'd move back to 50% or at least close to it. Normalize my pricing. I might even move to a one or two sku pricing model and just sell the high res files and maybe a web size. I think if you get the RPD up high enough and earnings up enough, then you could start trying to lure exclusives away from iStock into your own exclusive program.

That's probably too many changes to make it feasible, but they definitely need to try establish some differentiating factor.

Seems a little wishy washy.  Somebody needs to make a decision.  Stop screwing around an "do business."

If you leave, you will be replaced by 100 other small contributors in a matter of only a few days (not you in particular, but as a general statement).

My thought is that the majority of contributors (at DT at least) have small ports. According to their stats the 15th largest contributor has 13,895 images. Many of those above this level have quit uploading or have large ports on all sites and already have their own sites. With 16 million images and 141,660 photographers total the bulk of their database is populated with small time photogs and illustrators which works to their advantage. New people come and go, may have ports of 50 to 1,000 images (average is 106 images). If those people got mad and left, they would be replaced the next minute with new people finding these sites and unloading photos their friends and family told them were great (and some are). If accepted they make a few bucks but don't take this seriously. These members never read the forums, do no research, probably don't really know what they are being paid per download and will continue to be added to or replaced by newer members.

My opinion has always been that the major sites need to get rid of old, lousy images to make their collections more relevant. If a buyer knows they can find only the best images at one place they will choose that agency over another but now all of them house the same stuff. DT has tried to do that by getting rid of non-sellers but more has to be done. It's also time to eliminate good images that are keyworded improperly. No matter how good they are if no one can find them they are useless. DT tried to allow non-sellers to be rekeyworded by their keymasters but even that didn't work. They've stopped that. A soccer ball isolated on white that hasn't sold in 3 years will not be sold with new keywords when there are 10,000 other soccer balls isolated on white in the database.

The criteria for "best images" will always be controversial and if implemented will make most contributors mad because some of their images will be eliminated. But, bottom line, there are just too many useless images that have to be waded through when looking for something relevant so the only way the agencies can continue to make money, in their minds, is to cut prices. Something else has to be tried, but I have no answers.

I think trying to be more selective and have a higher quality collection doesn't work because its so subjective.  Also, for every buyer that wants higher quality, there must be lots that want as much choice as possible.  If that wasn't true, the sites wouldn't need such big collections to attract buyers.

They could try rating all images and letting the buyers decide if they want to look at all images or just the higher rated ones.

As for thinking of other ways to make more money other than taking it from us, Getty opened Thinkstock to compete with the micros, why don't they go for some of the higher priced RF and RM market that Getty are making lots of money from?  The big advantage that the microstock sites have is that a lot of their contributors aren't in Getty and would find it hard to get in to their main collection.  So they have a chance to get a higher priced RF and RM collection that's could interest buyers.

Quote from: sharpshot on October 21, 2012, 08:05

I wonder when sites will understand that as they keep cutting my commission percentages, I'll spend less time working with them and they'll make less money?  If they did the opposite and raised commission percentages, it would be a big incentive to spend more time working with microstock. 

This is so very true.  I was having this exact conversation with my husband just this morning. 

A year and a half ago I was making plans to expand my studio and increase the complexity and production value of my images.  Now I see absolutely no point in doing that.   

I've hit the wall and income is stagnant or dropping, no matter what or how often I upload.  Other top sellers, many quite a bit more successful than me, are reporting the same thing.

Some of that drop is due to competition, no doubt, but a significant amount of it is due to agencies dropping our royalty percentages - some of them repeatedly. 

It is a huge struggle to find motivation to plan and execute and finance good shoots when there is no chance for growth or progress, but rather an effort to simply slow the decline.

^^^ So true Lisa. About the only positive thing is that customers are increasingly choosing SS over the agencies that keep cutting our commissions. Maybe there's a cause/effect thing going on there?

Yes, I know, but is 3 years too long? Perhaps it should be a shorter time. Yes, I know that a non-seller is sometimes purchased after a few years but how many non-sellers are purchased more than once or twice after 3 years? DT also allows images to be re-keyworded without any review so if a non-seller sits for 2-1/2 years then the photog pays to have it re-keyworded it can sit for another 3 years. New keywords don't improve image quality and some older images are just not up to snuff.

It looks to me like a way to move more images into the 20% commission category and to drop prices - a double whammy for the artist.

As far as "bad" images gumming up the search - they need to seriously combat spam and work on the search engine - instead of showing 20 or more images from the same artist in a row.

It looks to me like a way to move more images into the 20% commission category and to drop prices - a double whammy for the artist.

As far as "bad" images gumming up the search - they need to seriously combat spam and work on the search engine - instead of showing 20 or more images from the same artist in a row.

Exactly. That's been their real problem for years. Why they don't recognise that and do something about it is beyond me.

I've got a Level 0 image on DT that was downloaded as an EL on SS last week.
On DT's scale its SS sales add up to a Level 3 image. I've got quite a few images that are selling
elsewhere but are dead at DT. Could be search placement or buyer demographics?

"fill her up and check that oil you know it could be the distributor and it could be your coil"
Tom Waits