It just isn't worth the time wading through my portfolio there.  They either need to change this or I'll delete most of my images to make it more manageable.  My earnings there are pathetic compared to how they used to be.  It might be easier just to leave but I don't like doing that.  The way things are going, SS might pick them up cheap one day.

Quote from: lisafx on July 25, 2013, 00:31
To be honest, I can't see why anyone would want to go the artist exclusive route anymore.  We've all seen what stock sites will do if they feel they have contributors over a barrel. 

If SS did indeed wind up with a large number of exclusives and managed to get a monopoly or even close to it, who's so say they won't start pulling the same sh*t? 

it woud make sense if the whole agency was exclusive but they all mixed up exclusives and random shooters so that buyers are just confused and maybe many dont even know the difference.

I could probably live with it if a) period would be two years  b) it is not fotolia.
My earnings on FT differ from other sites - thanks to their best match or whaterver we call it - 5% of my images make 90% of earnings.
I suppose that 75% of my portfolio belongs / sooner or later will belong to "six months unsold" category.
I will consider deleting images that sell well on other sites but are not sold on FT so far.

Quote from: Xanox on July 25, 2013, 08:03

Quote from: lisafx on July 25, 2013, 00:31
To be honest, I can't see why anyone would want to go the artist exclusive route anymore.  We've all seen what stock sites will do if they feel they have contributors over a barrel. 

If SS did indeed wind up with a large number of exclusives and managed to get a monopoly or even close to it, who's so say they won't start pulling the same sh*t? 

it woud make sense if the whole agency was exclusive but they all mixed up exclusives and random shooters so that buyers are just confused and maybe many dont even know the difference.

yes - no indies - whole agency has to be exclusive - SS should not reject this option - at least because of  tactical reason - never let your competition to sleep peacefully - and - then - one day ....

The more I think of it the less I understand the reductions of prices. I don't know what research "agencies" made to come to this decision.  They lose money as well.
Maybe I'm surrounded by weirdos but no client (and I don't work for rich corporations) has ever wanted to know price of image in advance. Sure, we have initial discussion: "I have to buy this image - this is only comp preview" "But I cannot afford to spend hundreds for image". "Don't be afraid, it's only few dollars." Period. Nobody wants to know how many dollars - one, three, seven - no one cares.
Those who need lot of images are subscribers, those who need few images a month really don't care if it's one or five dollars and the rest just steal images. At least in my personal experience.

Quote from: jm on July 25, 2013, 09:37
The more I think of it the less I understand the reductions of prices. I don't know what research made "agencies" to come to this decision.  They lose money as well.
Maybe I'm surrounded by weirdos but no client (and I don't work for rich corporations) has ever wanted to know price of image in advance. Sure, we have initial discussion: "I have to buy this image - this is only comp preview" "But I cannot afford to spend hundreds for image". "Don't be afraid, it's only few dollars." Period. Nobody wants to know how many dollars - one, three, seven - no one cares.
Those who need lot of images are subscribers, those who need few images a month really don't care if it's one or five dollars and the rest just steal images. At least in my personal experience.

As an occasional buyer for small businesses, I agree that the client doesn't care much what the image costs with the proviso that once the price rises above the high teens and when they need a few images, they would prefer a cheaper alternative. If I had to acquire, say, 20 images and the majority were priced at emerald contributor rate of 3X credits for an XL (18+ credits), then I would give serious consideration to a subscription package.
Now, with this new policy, I might delve into the portfolios of selected contributors to see whether that contributor hadn't uploaded many near duplicates of the desired file. ( Everyone experiences this......if you upload say 10 similar from a series, one may become a good seller but the other 9 vanish into the pit, never to be seen again). If you can find an acceptable alternative the chances are that it will be priced at 3 for an XL instead of 18+. Maybe that's the thought behind the change but I'm probably over-thinking this as I'm 98% contributor and 2% buyer. I doubt that major buyers have the time for this sort of time-wasting!

However, as a contributor to FT, these changes are simply further justification for a radical scorched port policy in my already limited portfolio. Remove everything that sells elsewhere but not at FT and remove any non-selling near duplicates of any good sellers. Performed  sans mercy I could decimate my portfolio there by 90-95%. 

Apparently, my 4th best seller with over 500 downloads hasn't had one for 6 months (it's an old file) so...I have deleted it and started deleting the other reduced files.

Or maybe I should close my account totally. A few months ago they started selling my vectors for less than an 'M' size jpeg so I already stopped uploading vectors to Fotolia.

As long as so many of us spread our work across the board then the competition between microstock sites is just for customers, driving prices lower and lower. If we were more selective where we submitted then the sites would have to compete for both customers AND contributors.

In the Fotolia forums I read that prices have changed to 1 - 6 credits instead of 1-3. Can anyone confirm that?

yes - that's right ... confusion!

Quote from: cobalt on July 25, 2013, 11:14
In the Fotolia forums I read that prices have changed to 1 - 6 credits instead of 1-3. Can anyone confirm that?

Yes. No. Not necessarily.
I checked few files. Photos are priced 1 - 6. But it seems that vectors (incl. S - XXL raster versions) are still sold for original price.

Quote from: cobalt on July 25, 2013, 11:14
In the Fotolia forums I read that prices have changed to 1 - 6 credits instead of 1-3. Can anyone confirm that?

It is not the contrary?

I checked this morning around 9 o'cl belgium time and then unsold photo's were set 1-3
I just checked again and now they are at 1-6

Quote from: cobalt on July 25, 2013, 11:14
In the Fotolia forums I read that prices have changed to 1 - 6 credits instead of 1-3. Can anyone confirm that?

can you link us? haven't found that!

pretty much I see no respect from FT not even replying on forum or explain the "bugs" mellimagine found yesterday

a link to one of my unsold pictures
http://www.fotolia.com/id/47921686
This morning price range was only 1-3

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 25, 2013, 13:38

Quote from: cobalt on July 25, 2013, 11:14
In the Fotolia forums I read that prices have changed to 1 - 6 credits instead of 1-3. Can anyone confirm that?

can you link us? haven't found that!

pretty much I see no respect from FT not even replying on forum or explain the "bugs" mellimagine found yesterday

so now it's 1-6 LOL wonder what will be tomorrow, have they at least told people deleting their accounts?

how about the bug mellimagine found out?

It´s in the thread of the German fotolia forum:

http://de.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=43451&p=6

Lots of confused people there and apparently not everyone gets the newsletter.

Quote from: cobalt on July 25, 2013, 14:09
It´s in the thread of the German fotolia forum:

http://de.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=43451&p=6

Lots of confused people there and apparently not everyone gets the newsletter.

looks like I can´t see that, it redirects to the US forum

sorry.

It has people posting examples of files that sold for 3 credits yesterday and higher credits today.

But apparently also files that are bestsellers with over 500 downloads, that didn´t have a sale in the last 6 month, have been lowered in price.

No official communication from fotolia, the moderators don´t know more than the contributors (where did I hear that before...)

OK, let's suppose that they have figured out overnight that they went too far with prices reduction.

yep total joke! I have tons having those issues too

Well at least they don´t stubbornly ignore all critique for 6 months because the people at the agency need to convince people outside when things don´t work.

Reacting overnight at least gives you hope...but yes, why not think it through first or discuss it openly with the community before going through with it.

Now let´s see what they do with the 6 month time frame...and otherwise it is back to work...

people closing accounts while they were still making up their minds, this is crazy, what a lovely way to run business

On the German fotolia home page they now have this text:

http://de.fotolia.com/Info/Contributors/ImagesPricing

Bitte beachten Sie, dass bei Werken, die sich innerhalb von 6 Monaten nicht verkauft haben, der Verkaufspreis automatisch auf 1 Credit (XS), 2 Credits (S), 3 Credits (M), 4 Credits (L), 5 Credits (XL) sowie 6 Credits (XXL) gesetzt wird. Wenn sich ein solches Werk anschließend 3 Mal verkauft hat, wird die Preis automatisch auf den minmalen Verkaufspreis gesetzt.

Diese Staffelung ist Gegenstand der Regelung zur Anpassung der Preisgestaltung.

i.e. prices drop von 1-6 credits if there are no sales after 6 months. When the file sells 3 times, it gets moved to the lowest price level.

Now do the 3 sales have to be in a certain time frame?

Well, thats no so bad then IMHO.

Quote from: Xanox on July 25, 2013, 08:03

Quote from: lisafx on July 25, 2013, 00:31
To be honest, I can't see why anyone would want to go the artist exclusive route anymore.  We've all seen what stock sites will do if they feel they have contributors over a barrel. 

If SS did indeed wind up with a large number of exclusives and managed to get a monopoly or even close to it, who's so say they won't start pulling the same sh*t? 

it woud make sense if the whole agency was exclusive but they all mixed up exclusives and random shooters so that buyers are just confused and maybe many dont even know the difference.

What is the difference? Oh, yes, I remember, exclusive files are more expensive.