MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: level 0 is so sweet  (Read 17596 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 04, 2011, 11:28 »
0
 I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  DT just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.


TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2011, 11:34 »
0
I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  Dreamstime just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.

A little tip for you that I learnt early on at DT...

Don't submit sizes that large.  Maximum size should be about 12MP.  Any larger and you're doing yourself out of TIFF sales that sell for extra credits. 

Cheers!

« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2011, 11:41 »
0
And I thought of starting a thread this morning about how happy I was to get $5.29 for a Level 5 XS small sale.

Those subscription sales at DT annoy me as well.

I never submit anything over 5000px unless it's panoramic.

« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2011, 11:45 »
0
I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  Dreamstime just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.

A little tip for you that I learnt early on at Dreamstime...

Don't submit sizes that large.  Maximum size should be about 12MP.  Any larger and you're doing yourself out of TIFF sales that sell for extra credits.  

Cheers!

Are you saying I should have submitted this to Dreamstime as a TIFF and not a JPG?

The problem is, if you don't submit it at full size initially, it won't climb the price tiers and eventually bring some money at full size. 
« Last Edit: May 04, 2011, 11:47 by stockastic »

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2011, 12:12 »
0
I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  Dreamstime just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.

A little tip for you that I learnt early on at Dreamstime...

Don't submit sizes that large.  Maximum size should be about 12MP.  Any larger and you're doing yourself out of TIFF sales that sell for extra credits.  

Cheers!

Are you saying I should have submitted this to Dreamstime as a TIFF and not a JPG?

The problem is, if you don't submit it at full size initially, it won't climb the price tiers and eventually bring some money at full size. 

No no, what I'm saying is that if you submit a really large file to DT as you have, DT will not convert it and offer it as a TIFF file, which usually gives us more credits than the maximum.  They don't do it if your maximum is already as large as a TIFF.  When I uplodaded my first 60 files or so, I was submitting large files like you.  Then I realised my files couldn't be bought as TIFFs and I questioned DT.  Carmen then told me that they don't convert large files to TIFFs.  I asked her what the maximum should be and she said about 12MPs. 

If you're with Stockfresh however, upload the file at 7500x7500 because there you get 20 credits for files up to 20MP (I think from memory).

« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2011, 12:19 »
0
I was thinking about this today. You notice the level 0 sales, but it's hard to tell whether the other level sales are at the new or old prices. I guess the proof will be in the final tally at the end of the month.

« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2011, 12:23 »
0
I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  Dreamstime just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.

Please explain to me why then are you so happy with SS which sell your photos for even less ??

« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2011, 12:27 »
0
I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  Dreamstime just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.

Please explain to me why then are you so happy with Shutterstock which sell your photos for even less ??

I don't recall posting anything recently about Shutterstock.  I regard their subscription model as the main reason this business is folding up.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2011, 12:29 by stockastic »

« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2011, 12:29 »
0

No no, what I'm saying is that if you submit a really large file to Dreamstime as you have, Dreamstime will not convert it and offer it as a TIFF file, which usually gives us more credits than the maximum.  They don't do it if your maximum is already as large as a TIFF.  When I uplodaded my first 60 files or so, I was submitting large files like you.  Then I realised my files couldn't be bought as TIFFs and I questioned Dreamstime.  Carmen then told me that they don't convert large files to TIFFs.  I asked her what the maximum should be and she said about 12MPs.  

If you're with Stockfresh however, upload the file at 7500x7500 because there you get 20 credits for files up to 20MP (I think from memory).

Thanks for the tip.  I have to laugh though at how little sense that policy makes from the buyer's point of view.  I could give Dreamstime a high quality full size TIFF, but they'd rather upsize a much smaller JPG and sell that instead.   The buyer gets no additional value for purchasing the maximum size.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2011, 12:38 by stockastic »

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2011, 12:39 »
0

No no, what I'm saying is that if you submit a really large file to Dreamstime as you have, Dreamstime will not convert it and offer it as a TIFF file, which usually gives us more credits than the maximum.  They don't do it if your maximum is already as large as a TIFF.  When I uplodaded my first 60 files or so, I was submitting large files like you.  Then I realised my files couldn't be bought as TIFFs and I questioned Dreamstime.  Carmen then told me that they don't convert large files to TIFFs.  I asked her what the maximum should be and she said about 12MPs. 

If you're with Stockfresh however, upload the file at 7500x7500 because there you get 20 credits for files up to 20MP (I think from memory).

Thanks for the tip.  I have to laugh though at how little sense that policy makes from the buyer's point of view.  I could give Dreamstime a high quality full size TIFF, but they'd rather upsize a much smaller JPG and sell that instead. 

No worries and yes!  I had a chuckle and a cringe over it last year as well.  It made no sense to me that I was being punished for uploading the larger file.  You would think it would work the other way around but oh well, live and learn lol.

« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2011, 12:53 »
0
I'd submitted an image that was 7500 x 7500 and represented a lot of work.  Dreamstime just sold it at 'maximum' size via subscription and paid me 35 cents.

I think 'free' can't be far behind, and we can finally all just give up and go home.  It will be a relief.
I just don't understand why you bother with microstock at all.  Almost all your posts are complaining about something.  If you don't want to sell subs, why upload to sites that sell subs?  And I don't know how many times it has been mentioned that we started with free.  Subs commissions were usually a lot less a few years ago than they are now.  It gets tedious seeing all this heading towards free nonsense over and over again, looks like I better hit the ignore button.

« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2011, 14:54 »
0
To each his own. 

Personally I never 'ignore' anyone, I like getting all points of view.  Some people like to read things that they agree with, or that reinforce what they already believe.   It's up to you.



 

« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2011, 15:30 »
0
I would never ignore anyone either. I don't see the point.
But I have to agree with Sharpshot. You're becoming very negative and it seems to me, especially so with Dreamstime.

No site is perfect. Full stop. But Dreamstime is one of the best, hands down. (My most favourite).

A level 0 subscription for 0.35 is bad, but not that bad.
At Dreamstime, thanks to their levels, your image will soon climb up and so will your commission. It's not much, but it's something.
But of course, you already knew all that.

I'm thinking, you're not submitting to Thinkstock, are you? After all they only pay 0.28 cent with no chance for an increase...

Keep positive Stockastic, not everything micro is as bad as it looks and sometimes it's even a bit of fun :)

« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2011, 15:50 »
0
No site is perfect. Full stop. But Dreamstime is one of the best, hands down. (My most favourite).

On a list of favorite places I sell, I'd rank them 9th (just below iStock). That said, they are still one of my top earners. I just like other sites' pricing and royalty structures better.

« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2011, 16:06 »
0
I find it hard to be enthusiastic about Dreamstime.  They have a painful submission process, the only one (since I stopped uploading to iStock and Fotolia) that requires me to submit each image individually.  Their policy about similar images is ridiculous and makes it more difficult to justify model shoots.  And their upload limits are the absolute lowest around.  All of which may explain how they moved from third in revenue (behind Shutterstock and iStock) to sixth (also behind Fotolia, 123RF and Veer).

« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2011, 16:10 »
0
Just got my first level 0 sale today for a whole .75! drinks on me!  ;D

« Reply #16 on: May 04, 2011, 16:49 »
0
Carmen then told me that they don't convert large files to TIFFs.  I asked her what the maximum should be and she said about 12MPs. 

I currently do see my newest 16 MP Uploads being offered as TIFFs, so maybe that maximum value has changed over time.

« Reply #17 on: May 04, 2011, 16:53 »
0
Yeah, my 24MP illustrations are also upconverted to roughly 48MP for TIFF download.

« Reply #18 on: May 04, 2011, 16:54 »
0
I frequently employ humor and sarcasm, for which I do not apologize.

Actually, just once and for the record (sorry you're not seeing this, SharpShot), I like microstock, have had fun with it and have been very pleasantly surprised by the demand for my images and the money I've made with my tiny portfolio.  I'm retiring from my day job as an engineer and had been thinking about spending some serious time on microstock.  

What frustrates me though is that for the last 2 years I've seen it go steadily downhill to the point where it's hard to get motivated and tell yourself that images you do today will pay off in years to come.   You could say that's just due to free market forces, which is true in a sense, but a 'race to the bottom' is a well documented phenomenon which benefits no one in the long run.   The market may correct itself, but that may take a very long time.

« Reply #19 on: May 04, 2011, 17:36 »
0
CThoman,
sorry, we're not seeing things in the same way :)
We're looking at different sets of values.
Dreamstime below Istock? On a list of favourites?
Everything about IStock (from my point of view) is worse, or a lot worse than Dreamstime.
This is what I'm looking for in a site.
Uploading.
Reviewing.
Commission.
Customer service.
Search engine.
Site stability.
Buyer friendly.
Accessability, open policy, contact with HQ.
A happy, friendly community is a bonus.

Generosiy is also much appreciated (remember the 100% day? and 110 for exclusives? They paid their exclusives from their own pockets. And they paid us, indies too. That's generous in my view, and I'm grateful).

On every single one of those points IStock fails.

Regarding sales, mine are much higher at Dreamstime - has always been the case.
But I know that in your case things are a lot different and I understand that you might be feeling differently.

As Stockastic put it - to each his own :)

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #20 on: May 04, 2011, 17:37 »
0
To each his own. 

Personally I never 'ignore' anyone, I like getting all points of view.  Some people like to read things that they agree with, or that reinforce what they already believe.   It's up to you.

I don't see the purspose of ignoring either.  It's usually the posts with complaints that are the ones that are going to make me think about something.

lisafx

« Reply #21 on: May 04, 2011, 17:47 »
0

I don't see the purspose of ignoring either.  It's usually the posts with complaints that are the ones that are going to make me think about something.

I don't mind reading posts that disagree with mine, and I am fine with some back and forth, even if it gets heated. 

I will ignore someone if they are just plain crazy or an obvious troll, though.  The one guy awhile back who had multiple identities and was posting rants and arguing with himself accounts for the majority of the "people" I have on ignore. 

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #22 on: May 04, 2011, 17:48 »
0
Carmen then told me that they don't convert large files to TIFFs.  I asked her what the maximum should be and she said about 12MPs.  

I currently do see my newest 16 MP Uploads being offered as TIFFs, so maybe that maximum value has changed over time.


Yeah, my 24MP illustrations are also upconverted to roughly 48MP for TIFF download.

That's interesting.

This is what I wrote:
>> Hello again Carmen,
>> Thanks for your all your help.  Just one last question if I may...  What's
>> the maximum size I can upload in order to get the Tiff?  I'd like to
>> benefit from the tiff but at the same time, I'd like to achieve the best
>> quality image for the rest of the sizes.

This is what she wrote:
The size recommended is around 12 megapixels. We also recommend you upload
the additional format as this format sells for the highest price
- double the price of the highest size available online for jpg. This
is valid for credit based sales.

So it's the size she "recommends", not necessarily a cutoff but a safe size which sort of suggests that it's up to the discretion of the reviewer? hmmm.  It would be interesting to see if all 24MP sizes have TIFFS.  

TheSmilingAssassin

    This user is banned.
« Reply #23 on: May 04, 2011, 17:51 »
0

I don't see the purspose of ignoring either.  It's usually the posts with complaints that are the ones that are going to make me think about something.

I don't mind reading posts that disagree with mine, and I am fine with some back and forth, even if it gets heated. 

I will ignore someone if they are just plain crazy or an obvious troll, though.  The one guy awhile back who had multiple identities and was posting rants and arguing with himself accounts for the majority of the "people" I have on ignore. 

LOL I saw leaf mentioning on another thread that sort of thing happens a lot here.  I haven't seen it yet but I'd probably find it entertaining to watch at first. 

lisafx

« Reply #24 on: May 04, 2011, 18:04 »
0

LOL I saw leaf mentioning on another thread that sort of thing happens a lot here.  I haven't seen it yet but I'd probably find it entertaining to watch at first. 

Yeah, it was at first.  ;D

I used to live next to a paranoid schizophrenic years ago.  I would hear huge screaming arguments between several people coming from his window on almost a daily basis.  Then one day I heard one of these arguments coming from his back yard and looked out to discover they were ALL him!  It was kind of like that.  Creepy! 

Eventually some guys in white suits (literally!) came and took him away in an ambulance.

**ETA BTW, I know that mental illness is nothing to laugh about, but this guy told the cops that aliens were telling him - via his television - to kill my husband and me with machetes, so my sympathy sort of went out the window at that point.  That was a few days before the ambulance showed up. **


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
38 Replies
10848 Views
Last post March 10, 2008, 20:09
by madelaide
3 Replies
4974 Views
Last post May 12, 2008, 13:03
by Whiz
15 Replies
8207 Views
Last post November 28, 2009, 11:30
by PeterChigmaroff
4 Replies
3821 Views
Last post January 03, 2010, 20:18
by icefront
16 Replies
7008 Views
Last post July 28, 2010, 23:03
by PaulieWalnuts

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle