pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: New to DT, question about sales  (Read 5909 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Phadrea

    This user is banned.
« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2014, 01:18 »
+1
More files added. Still dire. Pointless uploading anymore.


grey1

    This user is banned.
« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2014, 02:03 »
+3
Joined them in 2007 and I have 2500 images on line. Constantly selling well and probably the only agency left that do not turn you over for a simple buck or two.
As said above, patience is the virtue. :)

« Reply #27 on: January 28, 2014, 04:54 »
+2
A few months ago, having not uploaded any new work to DT for over two years, I finally got around to doing so and increased my portfolio by about 25% in the process.

Since then my sales have increase quite dramatically, especially of new files, although naturally my RPD has plummeted at the same time.

This month my sales are likely to be almost 3x the volume of Jan 2012 however my RPD has gone from $2.36 to $1.08 ... so actual earnings will only be up about 25% (about the same amount that I had increased my portfolio by).

I do consider it well worth uploading new content to DT as new files will eventually find their way to the higher levels and older content will not maintain their earnings forever. DT is now firmly established as my second highest earner (after SS) and they are a stable and well run agency. I believe they have a solid customer base and their market-share appears to be slowly increasing (as that of IS and FT appears to be falling away, according to my numbers).

Ron

« Reply #28 on: January 28, 2014, 05:27 »
0
I Am really thinking of starting with DT again, and just suck up the similar policy.

« Reply #29 on: January 28, 2014, 05:38 »
0
I've also had a big surge in DT sales but mostly subs. I wasn't very active there over the last year and had a major push to upload in the last six weeks of 2013, but even so it was only about 5% more files yet my dls are more than double January last year and my RPI is down by more than half, so I just might match last year's earnings but it's not certain yet.

« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2014, 05:46 »
0
I Am really thinking of starting with DT again, and just suck up the similar policy.

The only reason that I started uploading to DT again was that I'd read (on MSG) that they had abandoned the 'similars' policy. I only had one file rejected out of nearly 900 uploaded (it was a fairly boring background image).

« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2014, 05:54 »
+2
I Am really thinking of starting with DT again, and just suck up the similar policy.

The only reason that I started uploading to DT again was that I'd read (on MSG) that they had abandoned the 'similars' policy. I only had one file rejected out of nearly 900 uploaded (it was a fairly boring background image).

Today I got seven out of seven rejections for "we already have this subject well-covered", which seems like a "similars" policy to me.

« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2014, 07:36 »
+3
9 out of 10 of my latest rejections were also for these reasons.  Either "already well covered in our Database" or "Similar image already in your portfolio".  So the policy seems firmly in place.

Overall though, DT is more accepting of my processing style than most so I can't complain about their review policy.  I generally find their review reasons to be more accurate too.   If an image is technically okay, but the reviewer just doesn't like it, they generally tell you it's "not what we are looking for".  I respect that honesty, and find it more helpful than other sites that at times seem to respond with specific technical issues when the real reason is the reviewer just doesn't like it.         

Ron

« Reply #33 on: January 28, 2014, 08:05 »
0
I Am really thinking of starting with DT again, and just suck up the similar policy.

The only reason that I started uploading to DT again was that I'd read (on MSG) that they had abandoned the 'similars' policy. I only had one file rejected out of nearly 900 uploaded (it was a fairly boring background image).

Today I got seven out of seven rejections for "we already have this subject well-covered", which seems like a "similars" policy to me.
They still want me to submit my face images in collages. Thats whats bothering me.

Tone

« Reply #34 on: January 28, 2014, 08:35 »
0
I Am really thinking of starting with DT again, and just suck up the similar policy.

The only reason that I started uploading to DT again was that I'd read (on MSG) that they had abandoned the 'similars' policy. I only had one file rejected out of nearly 900 uploaded (it was a fairly boring background image).

Today I got seven out of seven rejections for "we already have this subject well-covered", which seems like a "similars" policy to me.
They still want me to submit my face images in collages. Thats whats bothering me.

Understandable to be bothered. I've had a similar request in the past, but I refuse to do it for them!

Phadrea

    This user is banned.
« Reply #35 on: January 28, 2014, 11:05 »
+1
Nope, IS is a far better earner than DT for me.

ACS

« Reply #36 on: January 28, 2014, 11:36 »
0
Seemingly they relaxed their similars policy, I don't think they are still searching for the similars within your portfolio when reviewing a new file. But just in case I still prevent sending similar images in one batch, instead I do it the other day.

Phadrea

    This user is banned.
« Reply #37 on: January 30, 2014, 02:50 »
0
I don't get many rejections and yet the same images are selling far more on SS and IS. No way is DT in the top 4 for me. You can go days, even weeks without a sale. In fact I had regular great sales when I first joined them over 2 years ago with a small amount of images. How do you work that out ?

Again, the images are selling well on SS and IS.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #38 on: January 30, 2014, 04:52 »
0
DT is a very bad earner for me.
Every month I upload more photos and every month I get less and less sales
(This January is just ridiculous for me)

stocked

« Reply #39 on: January 30, 2014, 04:58 »
0
If you think with DT is everything alright, then check out their mini-sub-model which gives contributors a maximum of 10% commission.

Chris FSI

  • Nobbly bobblys rule.
« Reply #40 on: January 30, 2014, 06:39 »
+1
I uploaded my first files yesterday and am awaiting review of them (it says the waiting time is 50 hours!). This thread has scared the crap out me  :o

cuppacoffee

« Reply #41 on: January 30, 2014, 09:57 »
+1
If you are submitting to any microsite you can't expect to get rich quick like some did in 2004 - 2006. If you read through the posts here for any of the sites listed on the right you will have contributors who say don't submit  to a particular site while others say make sure and submit to that same site. Every thread about earnings is populated with those who are doing really well and those who say they are not. Every post about images not being accepted at any site are contradicted by those who say that they get all of their images accepted. Without images to view or statistics to wade through all you have are the opinions of a diverse set of members here who shoot a diverse set of subjects. If any thread "scares the crap out of you" keep reading, you will find another that contradicts your fears. It can't hurt to give it a try.

And yes, waiting time is long. DT just upped the limit without, I suspect, adding more reviewers. I also believe that the standards have been lowered judging from some of the newest images. These days it is a game of quantity. DT also says that they delete non-sellers after 4 years but some are saying that they have not done that lately (software glitch?).

« Reply #42 on: January 31, 2014, 07:46 »
+1
Thing that bothers me is the assignments they run.  Although fun for the contributors it seems to me it has people creating RM quality work for RF.

« Reply #43 on: January 31, 2014, 07:49 »
0
At what point do these agencies realize that they have enough images and start looking more closely at getting rid of the trash?  At least DT has a policy to cull non-sellers after four years.

They can't keep growing at millions upon millions of images.  At someone the buyers just can't find anything.

cuppacoffee

« Reply #44 on: January 31, 2014, 10:41 »
0
At what point do these agencies realize that they have enough images and start looking more closely at getting rid of the trash?  At least DT has a policy to cull non-sellers after four years.

They can't keep growing at millions upon millions of images.  At someone the buyers just can't find anything.


Some don't think that is a good idea, for their own images at least.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/is-it-worth-to-remove-images-that-are-not-selling/msg363356/#msg363356


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
2944 Views
Last post March 21, 2008, 05:01
by dbvirago
9 Replies
4613 Views
Last post February 15, 2010, 15:24
by donding
3 Replies
3421 Views
Last post May 03, 2010, 09:38
by Jack Schiffer
3 Replies
1453 Views
Last post October 07, 2010, 21:14
by PaulieWalnuts
3 Replies
1443 Views
Last post April 24, 2013, 13:14
by falstafff

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results