MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: melking on October 10, 2012, 21:31
-
Is Fotolia Tanking for anyone else?
I was making like $800 a month there, then it dropped to $600 and now I have made $18.00 so far this month! What is going on?
Anyone else finding the same thing? Help!!
Melissa
-
I am down this month as well. About 60% down to be exact from last month! Now I am wondering why as well?
-
Stable for me, but I think Lisa has had a 90% drop last month as well.
-
Nop... FT is strong here, very good sales so far this month... ::)
-
Brillant last few days at FT. No complaints.
-
On my way to worst month year to date as well. Not a big seller there but also on route for a drop of 80% from last month. Enough people experiencing a sharp decline to raise one's eyebrows about I think :o
-
Fotolia is in a slow decline for a long time for me. But I didn't experienced a significant drop it's a slow and steady decline about a few percents every month.
May I ask if you have any exclusive files? They may changed the sort order/ranking for these ones.
-
Is Fotolia Tanking for anyone else?
I was making like $800 a month there, then it dropped to $600 and now I have made $18.00 so far this month! What is going on?
Anyone else finding the same thing? Help!!
Melissa
Nice to see you back Melissa :) ... for those who don't know, check out her user ID# .. the 12th user on the site.
Anyhow, there have been a few people discussion a drop in fotolia income. It seems Fotolia has taken some people for a real roller coaster ride. My earnings have been pretty stable luckily, I've been uploading a lot as well however (if that helps at all).
-
Up for me this month!!! But I am a minnow
-
quite stable for me for last couple of months, but my overall rank is around 2000, so not that big performer for me...uploading regularly on the other hand...
-
Yes. Since January 2011.
However, new files are selling again lately.
That may partly explain lower sales on older files.
-
I was thinking about starting a thread for the opposite reason, to ask if the emeralds that experienced a drop have gone back up a bit. I'm about 70% up from the first 10 days of September. It's been too consistant now to be just good luck so with what you are all are saying I'm guessing that there has been another seach change.
It's great to finally be one of the lucky ones.
Will be interested to see what Lisa has to say as her trend seems to have mirrored mine.
-
My earnings have been in a steep decline for months now. Still can't work out why some people are being hit so hard by them while others are doing OK.
I can think of a few conspiracy theories but it would be nice to know why some of us have been so severely punished by them. Did I miss the email that they are selectively destroying some contributors earnings :)
-
$800 a per month??? :o I found your Dreamstime profile. Do you have the same amount of images on Fotolia or more? $800 is amazing for just one site! And I can understand the disappointment with a drop like that! Hope it gets back to normal for you soon.
-
Is Fotolia Tanking for anyone else?
I was making like $800 a month there, then it dropped to $600 and now I have made $18.00 so far this month! What is going on?
Anyone else finding the same thing? Help!!
Melissa
wow.. yeah.. that's only 10% of what it once was. Take a look at last month's earnings thread and I think you'll find some company
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/september-2012-earnings-thread/ (http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/september-2012-earnings-thread/)
Particularly this post from sharpshot (http://www.microstockgroup.com/17024/17024/msg274586/#msg274586)
this one from LisaFX (http://www.microstockgroup.com/17024/17024/msg274286/#msg274286)
and this one from OM (http://www.microstockgroup.com/17024/17024/msg274562/#msg274562)
-
Nice to see you back Melissa :) ... for those who don't know, check out her user ID# .. the 12th user on the site.
Anyhow, there have been a few people discussion a drop in fotolia income. It seems Fotolia has taken some people for a real roller coaster ride. My earnings have been pretty stable luckily, I've been uploading a lot as well however (if that helps at all).
Thanks Leaf! I am always around here I just don't post much :)
Here is my port on Fotolia: http://us.fotolia.com/p/4364 (http://us.fotolia.com/p/4364)
I think I may have to start uploading to Fotolia again to see if that helps out.
Melissa
-
$800 a per month??? :o I found your Dreamstime profile. Do you have the same amount of images on Fotolia or more? $800 is amazing for just one site! And I can understand the disappointment with a drop like that! Hope it gets back to normal for you soon.
My Fotolia Port has 2048 images in it and my Dreamstime Port has 2136 images in it. So not that big of a difference! My Shutterstock on the hand has 3896 images in it! :)
Shutterstock portfolio: http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?gallery_id=85 (http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?gallery_id=85)
Melissa
-
Thanks for portfolio-link, really no offense but I think you have been pretty lucky to make 800,- with a non-exclusive portfolio of this size and content at Fotolia. Hope you will get back to your old figures pretty soon!
-
$800 a per month??? :o I found your Dreamstime profile. Do you have the same amount of images on Fotolia or more? $800 is amazing for just one site! And I can understand the disappointment with a drop like that! Hope it gets back to normal for you soon.
My Fotolia Port has 2048 images in it and my Dreamstime Port has 2136 images in it. So not that big of a difference! My Shutterstock on the hand has 3896 images in it! :)
Shutterstock portfolio: [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?gallery_id=85[/url] ([url]http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?gallery_id=85[/url])
Melissa
Good isolations and a commercial port I would say.
-
Thanks for portfolio-link, really no offense but I think you have been pretty lucky to make 800,- with a non-exclusive portfolio of this size and content at Fotolia. Hope you will get back to your old figures pretty soon!
No thing as constant luck in stock sales. With her sales I will rather say, learn from someone who clearly knows what the market wants. Think your remark is rather arrogant in the face is what clearly is superior market knowledge.
Melissa's port differs 120% from mine. That is what makes stock so great. The spectrum is so enormously wide that there are space with thousands of different styles. Great job Melissa, hope your images will get there place back in your market industry sector soon.
PS How about a link to your port grp?
-
PS How about a link to your port grp?
she has tons of port links in her signature ::)
-
PS How about a link to your port grp?
she has tons of port links in her signature ::)
Where do you see these links in grp_photo's signature Luis? :o ::)
-
PS How about a link to your port grp?
she has tons of port links in her signature ::)
Where do you see these links in grp_photo's signature Luis? :o ::)
my bad, sorry! leaf can clean them
-
Thanks for portfolio-link, really no offense but I think you have been pretty lucky to make 800,- with a non-exclusive portfolio of this size and content at Fotolia. Hope you will get back to your old figures pretty soon!
No thing as constant luck in stock sales. With her sales I will rather say, learn from someone who clearly knows what the market wants. Think your remark is rather arrogant in the face is what clearly is superior market knowledge.
Melissa's port differs 120% from mine. That is what makes stock so great. The spectrum is so enormously wide that there are space with thousands of different styles. Great job Melissa, hope your images will get there place back in your market industry sector soon.
PS How about a link to your port grp?
Didn't want offend anyone that is a matter of fact maybe it's a language problem I'm not a native speaker.
Dreamstime perfomance is in line what I would expect, Fotolia isn't from my knowledge I would say this the other way around too ( If I would expect more).
It's a great portfolio but it's not the only one!
An exclusive portfolio on Fotolia like this would make much much more than 800,- , but for a non-exclusive the performance was much more than I would expect that's all.
-
Thanks for portfolio-link, really no offense but I think you have been pretty lucky to make 800,- with a non-exclusive portfolio of this size and content at Fotolia. Hope you will get back to your old figures pretty soon!
No thing as constant luck in stock sales. With her sales I will rather say, learn from someone who clearly knows what the market wants. Think your remark is rather arrogant in the face is what clearly is superior market knowledge.
Melissa's port differs 120% from mine. That is what makes stock so great. The spectrum is so enormously wide that there are space with thousands of different styles. Great job Melissa, hope your images will get there place back in your market industry sector soon.
PS How about a link to your port grp?
Didn't want offend anyone that is a matter of fact maybe it's a language problem I'm not a native speaker.
Dreamstime perfomance is in line what I would expect, Fotolia isn't from my knowledge I would say this the other way around too ( If I would expect more).
It's a great portfolio but it's not the only one!
An exclusive portfolio on Fotolia like this would make much much more than 800,- , but for a non-exclusive the performance was much more than I would expect that's all.
Just shows you don't know what you're talking about. No offence :)
-
Thanks for portfolio-link, really no offense but I think you have been pretty lucky to make 800,- with a non-exclusive portfolio of this size and content at Fotolia. Hope you will get back to your old figures pretty soon!
No thing as constant luck in stock sales. With her sales I will rather say, learn from someone who clearly knows what the market wants. Think your remark is rather arrogant in the face is what clearly is superior market knowledge.
Melissa's port differs 120% from mine. That is what makes stock so great. The spectrum is so enormously wide that there are space with thousands of different styles. Great job Melissa, hope your images will get there place back in your market industry sector soon.
PS How about a link to your port grp?
Didn't want offend anyone that is a matter of fact maybe it's a language problem I'm not a native speaker.
Dreamstime perfomance is in line what I would expect, Fotolia isn't from my knowledge I would say this the other way around too ( If I would expect more).
It's a great portfolio but it's not the only one!
An exclusive portfolio on Fotolia like this would make much much more than 800,- , but for a non-exclusive the performance was much more than I would expect that's all.
Just shows you don't know what you're talking about. No offence :)
ok whatever
-
Stable for me, but I think Lisa has had a 90% drop last month as well.
Oh boy, another chance to complain about my FT sales ;D.
Yes, I had a 91% drop in sales there over the last year. Shocking, really, as I have continued to be active and upload.
A very nice contributor did a search for my images on FT. When she searched by downloads, my pictures came up near the top of the searches. When she searched by default search (relevancy?) they were nowhere to be found. Not sure what's going on with their default search, but it is certainly not in my favor!!
-
Stable for me, but I think Lisa has had a 90% drop last month as well.
Oh boy, another chance to complain about my FT sales ;D.
Yes, I had a 91% drop in sales there over the last year. Shocking, really, as I have continued to be active and upload.
A very nice contributor did a search for my images on FT. When she searched by downloads, my pictures came up near the top of the searches. When she searched by default search (relevancy?) they were nowhere to be found. Not sure what's going on with their default search, but it is certainly not in my favor!!
Well Lisa looks like this might be happening to me as well.... Fotolia is Dead for me! It was one of my best sites! Is there anything we can do about this?
Melissa
-
When I check see Alexa stats I see a slow decline in Traffic for them, but nothing dramatic and well in line with most of the others...so it might be a matter of their search result tweaking / best match. Looks like they are starting to mess things up the istock way (Bestmatch).
-
I am a Emerald member.
Sales down 80%.
7 day rank from 120 down to 1600.
Fotolia is Dead for me!
-
Same here, I'm a gold contributor and it's been a slow steady decline in monthly earnings for me, too. At one time my ranking was in the 100 - 200 range. Now I'm at 1600. Depressing.
-
I am a Emerald member.
Sales down 80%.
7 day rank from 120 down to 1600.
Fotolia is Dead for me!
Maybe we have something here. Im a small fish but my rank has gone up from ca 3000 to 2000, or even 1200 at some weeks.
-
i think grp_photo just share his view, i was expecting a portfolio that with a lot of lifestyle or business studio shots, so i am quite surprise it is a different kind of portfolio.
it is strange a lot of people want to defend their opinion and if people had different opinions then it is arrogant blah blah..it will actually just stop people from telling what they think.
basically if drop from $800 to $18 in 3 month.. it can't be normal.
Thanks for portfolio-link, really no offense but I think you have been pretty lucky to make 800,- with a non-exclusive portfolio of this size and content at Fotolia. Hope you will get back to your old figures pretty soon!
No thing as constant luck in stock sales. With her sales I will rather say, learn from someone who clearly knows what the market wants. Think your remark is rather arrogant in the face is what clearly is superior market knowledge.
Melissa's port differs 120% from mine. That is what makes stock so great. The spectrum is so enormously wide that there are space with thousands of different styles. Great job Melissa, hope your images will get there place back in your market industry sector soon.
PS How about a link to your port grp?
Didn't want offend anyone that is a matter of fact maybe it's a language problem I'm not a native speaker.
Dreamstime perfomance is in line what I would expect, Fotolia isn't from my knowledge I would say this the other way around too ( If I would expect more).
It's a great portfolio but it's not the only one!
An exclusive portfolio on Fotolia like this would make much much more than 800,- , but for a non-exclusive the performance was much more than I would expect that's all.
Just shows you don't know what you're talking about. No offence :)
ok whatever
-
To the OP, your SS link in your signature is broken.
As for FT, my sales are up, but I am a small small fish, but I am seeing a bit of an increase in sales. Only 325 photos accepted. But since my promotion to the 2nd tier, I see more 5 and 7 credit sales.
But my presence on FT is of no significance.
-
i think grp_photo just share his view, i was expecting a portfolio that with a lot of lifestyle or business studio shots, so i am quite surprise it is a different kind of portfolio.
it is strange a lot of people want to defend their opinion and if people had different opinions then it is arrogant blah blah..it will actually just stop people from telling what they think.
basically if drop from $800 to $18 in 3 month.. it can't be normal.
There is a big difference between offering one's opinion and telling another (successful) contributor, "no insult intended", but I think your sales are pure luck. I am also not a "native English speaker" but I think in even most other languages that statement means, "ek dink jou fotos is kak en jy is net donners gelukkig". http://translate.google.com/#af/en/ek%20dink%20jou%20fotos%20is%20kak%20en%20jy%20is%20net%20donners%20gelukkig (http://translate.google.com/#af/en/ek%20dink%20jou%20fotos%20is%20kak%20en%20jy%20is%20net%20donners%20gelukkig)
-
To the OP, your SS link in your signature is broken.
As for FT, my sales are up, but I am a small small fish, but I am seeing a bit of an increase in sales. Only 325 photos accepted. But since my promotion to the 2nd tier, I see more 5 and 7 credit sales.
But my presence on FT is of no significance.
Actually it is of significance, as it seems many of the small fish (unfortunately not me) are benefiting from the drought of the big players. Looks like a more even spread to the bottom. Is there financial benefit in it for FT (selling more images of lower ranked contributors and less of the high ones)? Surely they save on commission payouts? If so, it might not be a blunder on their side, but rather a "clever" business / financial strategy.
-
grp_photo has left the building!!
-
To the OP, your SS link in your signature is broken.
As for FT, my sales are up, but I am a small small fish, but I am seeing a bit of an increase in sales. Only 325 photos accepted. But since my promotion to the 2nd tier, I see more 5 and 7 credit sales.
But my presence on FT is of no significance.
Actually it is of significance, as it seems many of the small fish (unfortunately not me) are benefiting from the drought of the big players. Looks like a more even spread to the bottom. Is there financial benefit in it for FT (selling more images of lower ranked contributors and less of the high ones)? Surely they save on commission payouts? If so, it might not be a blunder on their side, but rather a "clever" business / financial strategy.
I see how that would work for FT but it feels bad to know that I am doing better at the expense of the big players.
-
Actually it is of significance, as it seems many of the small fish (unfortunately not me) are benefiting from the drought of the big players. Looks like a more even spread to the bottom. Is there financial benefit in it for FT (selling more images of lower ranked contributors and less of the high ones)? Surely they save on commission payouts? If so, it might not be a blunder on their side, but rather a "clever" business / financial strategy.
You've summed it up very well. I like the quotes around "clever" because I do wonder about the long term viability of such a strategy.
-
You've summed it up very well. I like the quotes around "clever" because I do wonder about the long term viability of such a strategy.
Short term cash flow strategy I will assume. No one can be so silly to think by hiding your best products (which yours must be based on sales) you are going to sustain your business (or can they?). Penny wise, pound foolish (and I am not even a native English speaker). ;)
-
Maybe it is an evening up for the "small fry" after all no one forces customers to buy inferior products do they?
-
Actually it is of significance, as it seems many of the small fish (unfortunately not me) are benefiting from the drought of the big players. Looks like a more even spread to the bottom. Is there financial benefit in it for FT (selling more images of lower ranked contributors and less of the high ones)? Surely they save on commission payouts? If so, it might not be a blunder on their side, but rather a "clever" business / financial strategy.
You've summed it up very well. I like the quotes around "clever" because I do wonder about the long term viability of such a strategy.
Lisa, haven't you improved at all since the begining of the month? I was sort of hoping that you had then my good month might not be just random but actually a push for emeralds.
-
Maybe it is an evening up for the "small fry" after all no one forces customers to buy inferior products do they?
No, not inferior products, just new more unproven ones, belonging to lower ranked contributors. No, not inferior contributors, just newer, more unproven ones (costing the company less).
-
Maybe it is an evening up for the "small fry" after all no one forces customers to buy inferior products do they?
Woh woh, who says small ports means inferior products??
-
Ja, I was about to ask that question also...
-
"hort term cash flow strategy I will assume. No one can be so silly to think by hiding your best products (which yours must be based on sales) you are going to sustain your business (or can they?)."
-
"hort term cash flow strategy I will assume. No one can be so silly to think by hiding your best products (which yours must be based on sales) you are going to sustain your business (or can they?)."
:o and your hoint is..? If it is not their best (sellers proven by sales records) it is inferior (quality)? Did I say that?
-
Gold member : 70% drop over the year :o
Patrick.
-
My Fotolia sales is down 15 to 18% compared to last year, but only in August, September and October. Before that, I still had monthly growth of about 5%. I am Emerald. So the theory of Emeralds being punished severely does not apply to me, unless you call 18% "severely" (and if you do, how would you call Lisa's -90%?). Of course, -18% does not make me happy, as Fotolia is my n°2 seller!!
I do notice that 90% of my Fotolia sales happen during my (European) working hours, so I suppose the main % of their buyers are European, and so am I.
-
Sorry if I am misunderstanding but if you "hide" your best products than less excellent products will be nearer the front - inferior meaning less good not necessarily "rubbish."
-
My Fotolia sales is down 15 to 18% compared to last year, but only in August, September and October. Before that, I still had monthly growth of about 5%. I am Emerald. So the theory of Emeralds being punished severely does not apply to me, unless you call 18% "severely" (and if you do, how would you call Lisa's -90%?). Of course, -18% does not make me happy, as Fotolia is my n°2 seller!!
I do notice that 90% of my Fotolia sales happen during my (European) working hours, so I suppose the main % of their buyers are European, and so am I.
Anyka I'm european and emerald and mine dropped by 70%. My sales are also european working hours. Rarely sell much during the european night .
-
Anyka I'm european and emerald and mine dropped by 70%. My sales are also european working hours. Rarely sell much during the european night .
Wow 70% ! In that case I really don't know why my sales went down "only 18%" compared to the other Emeralds. I cannot see your portfolio, but I assume it's not totally US-oriented.
-
Close to gold, 80% drop since January. :o
-
Sorry if I am misunderstanding but if you "hide" your best products than less excellent products will be nearer the front - inferior meaning less good not necessarily "rubbish."
Within the context of the discussion I was referring to "best" as their top sellers from a business perspective and did not refer to quality at all. That is the reason why the other posters took you on about your "inference", which therefore seemed like a statement. Let us move on.
-
Anyka I'm european and emerald and mine dropped by 70%. My sales are also european working hours. Rarely sell much during the european night .
Wow 70% ! In that case I really don't know why my sales went down "only 18%" compared to the other Emeralds. I cannot see your portfolio, but I assume it's not totally US-oriented.
I often make images with the idea of appealing to the US. I just don't think that fotolia sell a lot more in Europe.
-
The real reason why a diverse and large well selling port is suddently going on ground is usually competition.
The port is being replaced, by better and cheaper content.
Mechanisms that apply to single pictures also applies to whole portefolios. Or even to agencies.
So you who are hit, take a look at the competition, are your pictures being replaced? Are whole big portefolios with the same content as yours being uploaded?
-
The real reason why a diverse and large well selling port is suddently going on ground is usually competition.
The port is being replaced, by better and cheaper content.
Mechanisms that apply to single pictures also applies to whole portefolios. Or even to agencies.
So you who are hit, take a look at the competition, are your pictures being replaced? Are whole big portefolios with the same content as yours being uploaded?
Doesn't apply in this case. It wasn't a gradual process of better content being uploaded it was a sudden death of all different type of images suddenly not selling and it happened to quite a few of us at the same time.
-
If it was competition, it would be the same on all sites. FT is by far the biggest decline I have ever seen on any site. I'm sure they've pushed some portfolios back in the search and promoted others. They could be doing that to give their site a different look to the competition, to encourage newbies or just to punish people that sell on lower priced sites. There's lots of reasons why they could be doing this but what would be really nice to know is, how can we get our portfolios back up the search rank?
As they don't seem to communicate and they obviously don't care if some of their big contributors (not me) have had their earnings decimated, I doubt we will ever get an answer to that question.
-
My Fotolia sales is down 15 to 18% compared to last year, but only in August, September and October. Before that, I still had monthly growth of about 5%. I am Emerald. So the theory of Emeralds being punished severely does not apply to me, unless you call 18% "severely" (and if you do, how would you call Lisa's -90%?). Of course, -18% does not make me happy, as Fotolia is my n°2 seller!!
I do notice that 90% of my Fotolia sales happen during my (European) working hours, so I suppose the main % of their buyers are European, and so am I.
Up until a month ago, I did a fair bit of poking around at FT search and I agree with your observation that FT has not been specifically targeting the higher ranked contributors for exclusion from the first pages. On the first pages of most searches (mostly food related) there was a liberal sprinkling of emerald and gold contributors' images. However, I got the impression then that most of the images to come up on the first pages were recently uploaded, to the exclusion of best-selling images from the past (which can be found under 'downloads' filter which very few customers appear to look at). Hence the loss of many long-time contributors images from the 'relevance' search and their drop in income as a result.
Looking at the search now, it does seem to have become more 'balanced' in that more images with actual sales are amongst the predominantly new images on the first pages. However, there are some weird anomalies with the search. It's almost as if the algorithm hones in on particular images and brings them up on the first pages of search time and time again for many of the keywords associated with that image.
Here's what I just looked at at FT UK site: Entered 'bread' as search word and this brings up the first page:
http://en.fotolia.com/search?k=bread&filters (http://en.fotolia.com/search?k=bread&filters)[content_type%3Aall]=1&submit.x=22&submit.y=7
Now about halfway down that page there's this picture of a woman with a bag of shopping but no bread in sight (there's another shot by the same contributor also on that page where, in close-up, the bananas have been exchanged for a baguette so the contributor has just used the same keywords...anyway....):
http://en.fotolia.com/id/44897352 (http://en.fotolia.com/id/44897352)
Viewed 15 times sold once but on page one of my search 'bread' ??????? Bizarre!
There's lots of keywords and I've pulled out 'full', 'shirt', 'salad' and 'bear' as not especially relevant to the photo and entered them each separately in search........now each of these keywords produces that same photo on either the first or second page of the search:
http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters (http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters)[content_type%3Aall]=1&k=full&offset=50
http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters (http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters)[content_type%3Aall]=1&k=shirt&offset=50
http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters (http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters)[content_type%3Aall]=1&k=salad&offset=50
http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters (http://en.fotolia.com/search?filters)[content_type%3Aall]=1&k=bear&filters[content_type%3Aall]=1&submit.x=18&submit.y=14
I have no explanation but I have tried this with other searches and get similar results. Often there's an image which is totally incongruous to the search and yet these images keep popping up on numerous first few pages of search.
Methinks FT should change its name to Serendipity #13...........lucky for some, unlucky for others!
-
You are correct when you say that newer images are still selling from Emeralds ports. Some of my newer files are selling very well but virtually nothing of more than 6 months old is selling. Everything older than that is nowhere to be found in the searches. If I stopped uploading for 6 months I would barely have any sales at all.
-
The real reason why a diverse and large well selling port is suddently going on ground is usually competition.
The port is being replaced, by better and cheaper content.
Sorry, but I don't buy this. If it were truly only competition then sales should be dropping by roughly the same % across all sites. They have held up well at DT, and are excellent at SS, including some recent BMEs. Even at Istock, with all their problems, sales have dropped only a fraction of what they have on FT. Competition would account for a gradual drop, not a drop off a cliff.
From the posts in this thread, it seems I am far from alone. There is some specific phenomenon going on at FT, hitting a large number of people who shoot a variety of subjects. Simplistic explanations about "competition" and "aging portfolios" don't cut it.
-
I just keyed in "football fan" thinking I might get Lisa's model on the first page. No. But every photo on first page was either silver or infinity. I also noticed if you hit F5 the first page changes order - it appears to the the same photos, but it changes where they fall on the page.
I did the same for "ballet legs" and ballerina. The photos that came back were extremely artsy, almost to the point of being useless as a stock photo, and more than half same silver photographer.
-
You are correct when you say that newer images are still selling from Emeralds ports. Some of my newer files are selling very well but virtually nothing of more than 6 months old is selling. Everything older than that is nowhere to be found in the searches. If I stopped uploading for 6 months I would barely have any sales at all.
Absolutely. I'm a tiny player in this big world but I had a couple of very good, regular sellers at FT (both subs and dl's). Suddenly (around March this year) they all stopped selling completely. Now that I'm no longer exclusive there (whadda fool I was), those couple of ex-best sellers at FT are once again my best sellers at SS (both subs and dl's).
-
My fotolia earnings dropped down a lot in August this year. Last month I made the same $$ than in 2007 with 300 pictures on line (1800 now...)....
I put some data on my blog: http://microstockexperiment.blogspot.com/ (http://microstockexperiment.blogspot.com/)
-
it would be nice to have an explanation/opinion from Mat :)
-
My sales on Fotolia are 60% down compared to last year (emerald). We even emailed them asking what's happening and if there is something we should be aware of.... no reply! But I think the suggestion expressed here that images of the contributors with lower commissions are getting priority in searches rings true - decreasing payouts would be a way of increasing profit. I actually think they should drop the "hierarchy" for contributors - I know I would sell way more if my images were given a chance to be displayed in searches! Right now it looks like I am being punished for having a lot of sales in the past.... ???
My newly uploaded images also sell for a while after being accepted, as other contributors reported here, but given the size of my portfolio the ratio between new and old is very small, so basically my payout depends on how many new images I upload a month, and that's a pretty constant amount... this is starting to look like we're working for salary, not for royalties. Many people left Fotolia already, but this kind of deal will push out talented and hard working photographers with big portfolios... well I guess Fotolia is not afraid to lose them.
-
My sales on Fotolia are 60% down compared to last year (emerald). We even emailed them asking what's happening and if there is something we should be aware of.... no reply! But I think the suggestion expressed here that images of the contributors with lower commissions are getting priority in searches rings true - decreasing payouts would be a way of increasing profit.
Surely adopting that policy would actually reduce profit as images from lower-ranked contributors sell for fewer credits? It would increase the percentage profit (on lower sales) but they'd be making less profit in total.
I don't think it is true anyway. Try a couple of searches for yourself and check how many of the first 100 images, when sorted by 'Relevance', are 1-credit images.
I tried 'business team' and 53 of the images were priced at 1-credit (so 47% of the images were 2 credits or above).
I also tried 'food' and 67% of the first 100 images were priced at 1-credit. If I then changed the 'food' search to sort by 'Newest' (which should effectively be random) the number of 1-credit images goes up to 84%.
Try a few searches yourself but from what I've seen it would suggest that higher-priced images are actually being favoured by the default search mode. Maybe higher-priced images are simply being favoured rather less than in the past, as FT has taken note of the price-sensitivity of their customers.
I'm Emerald and I'm usually about 10% down on last year (when I wasn't Emerald). Some months I have been down 20% but thankfully nothing like the drops that some have experienced.
-
My sales have been very bad since the beginning of this year. I don't know what percentage but all I know things are not going well for me with them.
Edit:BTW they used to be my second best earner now probably the least earner now even lower then 123rf etc
-
What's revealing about Fotolia is that we know many of the other agencies read these forums and some even post to clarify situations or deliver bad news (or good news). I am pretty sure FT reads these forums and then turns, chuckles and says....suckers.... >:(
-
Reached a middle of 1K$ in 2011, dropping since Februar 2012 over 60% in income. Sales also drop, but only 40%. This phenomenon only happens at FT. My overall ranking as shown is nearly stable (lost 4 places). All the numbers make no sense to me.
- i lost more income than sales
- i lost more sales than ranking places
- i lost extremly more at FT than on the second bad agency, what is called Istockphoto (at Deposit btw. i gained over 100%)
I stopped to upload at FT and started to shift my portfolio from FT to all others. But it takes time.
Meanwhile i'm looking at the SS Shares, looks like if i put all my Microstock income in SS-Shares i maybe able to gain more income than by upload anymore.
-
My sales on Fotolia are 60% down compared to last year (emerald). We even emailed them asking what's happening and if there is something we should be aware of.... no reply! But I think the suggestion expressed here that images of the contributors with lower commissions are getting priority in searches rings true - decreasing payouts would be a way of increasing profit.
Surely adopting that policy would actually reduce profit as images from lower-ranked contributors sell for fewer credits? It would increase the percentage profit (on lower sales) but they'd be making less profit in total.
It would not reduce the profit if you're aiming to sell more cheaper images, and that's what they seem to be heading for - including subscription sales. Most of my sales are sub 0.33 sales, with occasional credit sale here and there. They seem to think that dropping prices is the only thing that can keep them competitive.
-
My sales on Fotolia are 60% down compared to last year (emerald). We even emailed them asking what's happening and if there is something we should be aware of.... no reply! But I think the suggestion expressed here that images of the contributors with lower commissions are getting priority in searches rings true - decreasing payouts would be a way of increasing profit.
Surely adopting that policy would actually reduce profit as images from lower-ranked contributors sell for fewer credits? It would increase the percentage profit (on lower sales) but they'd be making less profit in total.
It would not reduce the profit if you're aiming to sell more cheaper images, and that's what they seem to be heading for - including subscription sales. Most of my sales are sub 0.33 sales, with occasional credit sale here and there. They seem to think that dropping prices is the only thing that can keep them competitive.
Like I said, if you actually do some research, it appears that higher-priced images are still favoured in the default sort-order when compared to random results. For a supposed PhD in physics I'd have thought you could have worked that one out for yourself rather than jump to illogical conclusions based on your own prejudices.
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason. Their search engine is painfully unsophisticated and that is compounded by their relaxed attitude to keyword spamming. They are also making the same mistake as IS in trying to push high-priced 'collections' down customers' throats except that FT's pretentious 'Infinity' offerings are generally of a lower standard than the 'uninifity collection'. Ridiculous.
As a potential customer where would you do your shopping, FT or SS, either for single images or for a subscription? For me it wouldn't even be close and the gap between them is widening on a daily basis. End of.
-
I have a small port, but only newest images sell very well. If i upload good images, sales go up for 2/3 months and then stop ...
-
I have a small port, but only newest images sell very well. If i upload good images, sales go up for 2/3 months and then stop ...
Well, given Gostwyck's research, perhaps it is an emphasis on newer images that is hurting older, more established ports, rather than a bias against Emeralds, per se.
As Elena pointed out, no matter how regularly you upload, if you have a port of many thousands of images uploaded over 6 or 7 years, no amount of new uploads can compensate for a heavy preference toward new files in the searches. I rely on older and newer files selling to keep my numbers up.
My sales on Fotolia are 60% down compared to last year (emerald). We even emailed them asking what's happening and if there is something we should be aware of.... no reply! But I think the suggestion expressed here that images of the contributors with lower commissions are getting priority in searches rings true - decreasing payouts would be a way of increasing profit.
Surely adopting that policy would actually reduce profit as images from lower-ranked contributors sell for fewer credits? It would increase the percentage profit (on lower sales) but they'd be making less profit in total.
It would not reduce the profit if you're aiming to sell more cheaper images, and that's what they seem to be heading for - including subscription sales. Most of my sales are sub 0.33 sales, with occasional credit sale here and there. They seem to think that dropping prices is the only thing that can keep them competitive.
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason.
^^ This is certainly true, for the reasons you mentioned and others, like upsetting so many contributors. SS sales are booming, for sure, but unfortunately, they are not booming enough to compensate for the loss of sales on FT and IS. Those of us who relied on a balance between the top 4 sites for our incomes are hurting when two of the top 4 have nosedived.
-
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason. Their search engine is painfully unsophisticated and that is compounded by their relaxed attitude to keyword spamming. They are also making the same mistake as IS in trying to push high-priced 'collections' down customers' throats except that FT's pretentious 'Infinity' offerings are generally of a lower standard than the 'uninifity collection'. Ridiculous.
As opposed to ShutterStock? Keyword spamming on SS is horrific and certainly no better than on FT. The only site doing anything about that is iS and their DA approach doesn't work effectively. This is a huge problem on all the sites not just FT. I agree with the rest of what you're saying, although for me as a small timer FT is doing better lately.
-
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason. Their search engine is painfully unsophisticated and that is compounded by their relaxed attitude to keyword spamming. They are also making the same mistake as IS in trying to push high-priced 'collections' down customers' throats except that FT's pretentious 'Infinity' offerings are generally of a lower standard than the 'uninifity collection'. Ridiculous.
As opposed to ShutterStock? Keyword spamming on SS is horrific and certainly no better than on FT. The only site doing anything about that is iS and their DA approach doesn't work effectively. This is a huge problem on all the sites not just FT. I agree with the rest of what you're saying, although for me as a small timer FT is doing better lately.
Yes indeed __ as opposed to Shutterstock. The contributors at SS might be just as bad keywood spammers (as at FT and anywhere else) however, and most importantly, SS's default search mode promotes the keywords used when the image is bought. That ensures that the buyers are presented with relevant images on the Popular seach results as all the cr*p gets filtered to the back pages. As you say IS have a similiar system but it relies on their ridiculous CV. FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).
-
FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).
So ur saying putting the 7 most important keywords on top doesn't help?
-
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason. Their search engine is painfully unsophisticated and that is compounded by their relaxed attitude to keyword spamming. They are also making the same mistake as IS in trying to push high-priced 'collections' down customers' throats except that FT's pretentious 'Infinity' offerings are generally of a lower standard than the 'uninifity collection'. Ridiculous.
As opposed to ShutterStock? Keyword spamming on SS is horrific and certainly no better than on FT. The only site doing anything about that is iS and their DA approach doesn't work effectively. This is a huge problem on all the sites not just FT. I agree with the rest of what you're saying, although for me as a small timer FT is doing better lately.
Yes indeed __ as opposed to Shutterstock. The contributors at SS might be just as bad keywood spammers (as at FT and anywhere else) however, and most importantly, SS's default search mode promotes the keywords used when the image is bought. That ensures that the buyers are presented with relevant images on the Popular seach results as all the cr*p gets filtered to the back pages. As you say IS have a similiar system but it relies on their ridiculous CV. FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).
I didn't realize that - thanks. Learned something new today. That certainly is an improvement and good to know. It isn't perfect - a lot of totally irrelevant images still come up in searches - but would definitely make it better.
-
FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).
So ur saying putting the 7 most important keywords on top doesn't help?
It doesn't appear to have any effect whatsoever. Experiment with it yourself, with images from the same series, and test if it makes a difference from where the images appear within the default sort order
-
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?
-
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?
Wonder if that is what the infamous Crestock is trying with their 30 keyword limit?
-
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?
This idea has been floated periodically over the last few years. While it might appear to be a solution, it tends to penalize contributors who shoot more complex concepts.
For example, ten keywords would more than adequately describe an isolated apple, or a handshake on white. It would be impossible to to describe an image of lets say 5-10 people, of varying professions, together in a group, even isolated, much less in some sort of location.
Not to mention that the subject of this discussion, Fotolia, does not have a search engine that includes plural versions of words automatically (even though it is so simple to program that my own tiny Ktools site can do it). So for example, you can't keyword "girl" and expect it to also turn up "girls". Both plural and singular versions of keywords have to be included on FT, when applicable.
-
Not to mention that the subject of this discussion, Fotolia, does not have a search engine that includes plural versions of words automatically (even though it is so simple to program that my own tiny Ktools site can do it). So for example, you can't keyword "girl" and expect it to also turn up "girls". Both plural and singular versions of keywords have to be included on FT, when applicable.
Same with DT __ you need to include plurals if appropriate. I suspect that is a deliberate policy though, intended to help with the relevancy of search results.
-
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?
This idea has been floated periodically over the last few years. While it might appear to be a solution, it tends to penalize contributors who shoot more complex concepts.
Interesting idea. And interesting objection.
Different levels of keywords as Alamy uses may be a solution (2 levels instead of 3 are probably enough), but it's too time consuming. If we could agree upon a common IPTC extension...
-
Different levels of keywords as Alamy uses may be a solution (2 levels instead of 3 are probably enough), but it's too time consuming. If we could agree upon a common IPTC extension...
This would be a good solution, I agree.
Still think Shutterstock's solution of giving heavier weight to the words actually used to buy the images is the simplest and best solution though. Nothing else addresses the problem of deliberate keyword spam as well. There's no foolproof way to eliminate intentional spam but SS's search engine simply makes it irrelevant.
-
Unlike SS where plurals are unnecessary, entering a singular or plural at FT brings up a different set of results on the first page. On FT UK try entering eg. golf ball or golf balls.
Another peculiarity of FT (UK) is that some images come up on page 1 of search with every single keyword entered. Have some time on your hands and want to try entering these 17 keywords separately? I started with 'cheese' but found that one image appeared somewhere on P1 for each of its keywords entered.........not even spammed keywords for this one!
alcohol, appetizer, beverage, camembert , cheese, dairy, dairy products, dinner, drink, food, fresh, freshness, glass, red, wine, wine, wineglass
-
Unlike SS where plurals are unnecessary, entering a singular or plural at FT brings up a different set of results on the first page. On FT UK try entering eg. golf ball or golf balls.
Another peculiarity of FT (UK) is that some images come up on page 1 of search with every single keyword entered. Have some time on your hands and want to try entering these 17 keywords separately? I started with 'cheese' but found that one image appeared somewhere on P1 for each of its keywords entered.........not even spammed keywords for this one!
alcohol, appetizer, beverage, camembert , cheese, dairy, dairy products, dinner, drink, food, fresh, freshness, glass, red, wine, wine, wineglass
This is what makes me suspect that some people are favoured in the searches and some of us are purposely put back. Maybe I'm just being paranoid though. Is the particular image a new image? If it isn't then definitely something very strange is going on.
-
Unlike SS where plurals are unnecessary, entering a singular or plural at FT brings up a different set of results on the first page. On FT UK try entering eg. golf ball or golf balls.
Another peculiarity of FT (UK) is that some images come up on page 1 of search with every single keyword entered. Have some time on your hands and want to try entering these 17 keywords separately? I started with 'cheese' but found that one image appeared somewhere on P1 for each of its keywords entered.........not even spammed keywords for this one!
alcohol, appetizer, beverage, camembert , cheese, dairy, dairy products, dinner, drink, food, fresh, freshness, glass, red, wine, wine, wineglass
This is what makes me suspect that some people are favoured in the searches and some of us are purposely put back. Maybe I'm just being paranoid though. Is the particular image a new image? If it isn't then definitely something very strange is going on.
I must be one of the people at the back. For me Fotolia earns 1/8th what it does at shutterstock.
-
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now??? $17.70 Like WHAT!!! I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!
I think I might just delete all my images!
:(
-
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now??? $17.70 Like WHAT!!! I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!
I think I might just delete all my images!
:(
thats shocking, the only explanation is really in the searches that is connected to the regular uploading which for them isnīt enough in your case, I donīt think that 150 images in a year is low but I believe FT is really wanting a few files every week even if those donīt sell much, pretty much that will somehow get you a better placement in terms of searches...
your latest file is from the end of January 2012
-
I am doing on FT quite fine!
Last several days have been very good on Depositphoto...
But, DT is tanking for me, every day more and more!
-
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now??? $17.70 Like WHAT!!! I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!
I think I might just delete all my images!
:(
thats shocking, the only explanation is really in the searches that is connected to the regular uploading which for them isnīt enough in your case, I donīt think that 150 images in a year is low but I believe FT is really wanting a few files every week even if those donīt sell much, pretty much that will somehow get you a better placement in terms of searches...
your latest file is from the end of January 2012
It may indeed be the number of recent uploads that helps get you pole position in searches. In the example I quoted above where every keyword produced a position on p1 for that one image, I noticed that the contributor uploaded/had approved 290 images in the last week and 1,300 in the last month. Wow! Seems to work for them too. I counted 1,000+ downloads for those 1,300 images submitted in the last month. Per ardua ad astra an all that stuff but I'm afraid I'm not joining in that sort of competition........I prefer my own pace.
-
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now??? $17.70 Like WHAT!!! I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!
I think I might just delete all my images!
:(
thats shocking, the only explanation is really in the searches that is connected to the regular uploading which for them isnīt enough in your case, I donīt think that 150 images in a year is low but I believe FT is really wanting a few files every week even if those donīt sell much, pretty much that will somehow get you a better placement in terms of searches...
your latest file is from the end of January 2012
My observation too. And beyond that I do think that 150 images a year is vey little. Nowadays we compete with lots of volume suppliers. Its not like in the old days anymore where you could comfortably produce a handfull of good quality images and get the income to fly with that...
-
I am doing on FT quite fine!
Last several days have been very good on Depositphoto...
But, DT is tanking for me, every day more and more!
This was the way earlier in the year for me also (relatively speaking of course) but FT have died back a lot and DT has come back to the sort of levels I'd expect and a clear #2 after SS.
-
Down almost 40% in 8 months. Increase in portfolio size is proportionally as always. I get a lot of 404 and 504's. (Error pages). Fotolia needs a new platform. I just don't understand it. I track error pages on peopleimages.com like a maniac and google reported 3 out of 80000 doing the last couple of months, which basically means "never". I just don't get why this is not a concern to them. :(
-
I am doing on FT quite fine!
Last several days have been very good on Depositphoto...
But, DT is tanking for me, every day more and more!
This was the way earlier in the year for me also (relatively speaking of course) but FT have died back a lot and DT has come back to the sort of levels I'd expect and a clear #2 after SS.
Maybe they are all connected! ::)
-
The first sale I ever had in microstock came from FT. Oh the joy of that moment! I had tears in my eyes and everything....
It's pretty much been downhill at FT ever since (LOL)
-
The first sale I ever had in microstock came from FT. Oh the joy of that moment! I had tears in my eyes and everything....
Same here... I started at FT in early 2007, uploaded a few pictures and almost forgot about it. When I came back in mid 2007 and found 56 pence in my account, all of a sudden stock photography looked like a real job opportunity for me.
-
Oposite here: sales this month are 150% of the sales for september. Acceptance of new files seems fair to me.
-
Oposite here: sales this month are 150% of the sales for september. Acceptance of new files seems fair to me.
+1
BME there for me so far this month, 10% better than last BME with 13 days still to go. Monthly average sales this year are twice last year and four times the year before that - better growth than any other agency. Of course I was starting from a very low point and even this month they are still only about 33% of what I'm making on SS. Currently #3 this month and might beat iS for #2 if sales keep up (I've probably just jinxed it).
-
Oposite here: sales this month are 150% of the sales for september. Acceptance of new files seems fair to me.
+1
BME there for me so far this month, 10% better than last BME with 13 days still to go. Monthly average sales this year are twice last year and four times the year before that - better growth than any other agency. Of course I was starting from a very low point and even this month they are still only about 33% of what I'm making on SS. Currently #3 this month and might beat iS for #2 if sales keep up (I've probably just jinxed it).
why donīt you guys think before posting? this topic was open by a person having 800$ per month at FT right? are you guys close to that or anything?
no point in answering really... sure you can give an opinion but please down to earth ;D
-
This is my sales statistic. But i'm a small fish and i increased my port from around 400 pics to 700 in the last 2 months.
-
Clearly uploading works..........hope it keeps up for you in sales.
I've sorta given up on FT. :)
Started at the beginning of 2008 (I think). Uploaded regularly in the first couple of years to (gasp!) 200 images but success spurred me on to increasing that to 300 before the rot set in.....ie upload more for same reward or less reward. Now, I upload occasionally and also delete some never sold stuff so that the 300 stays the same! This Pilgrim's (lack of)Progress can be seen vividly in the charts:
Interestingly, dl's held fairly stable until recently but also took a big hit in the last couple of months. Earnings up to start 2012 were influenced by the fact that I used to be exclusive there.
-
I've been Emerald since March, 2010, and have a portfolio of 4,700+ images. Current overall rank 66 (was up to about 45), 7 day rank 696. My sales graph speaks for itself:
(http://www.robynmackenzie.com/Private/Feb-10/i-rgh7B2L/0/O/Fotolia-falling-off-cliff.jpg)
If current trends continue, my earnings will shortly drop back to what they were in early 2008. Last month my Fotolia earnings represented only 7% of my total, down from a high of 28% in 2010.
I've had some correspondence with Fotolia about the precipitous fall in sales. Responses were along the lines of: there's lots more competition/not same business as 2 years ago/"if you want to stay in the game you need to upload amazing images every day." Didn't address the issue at all, really, or acknowledge any specific problems with their search. It's all my own fault, apparently. But I know that's not the case, because my sales on other sites have generally held up well (particularly SS and DT and until very recently IS).
This is what I think FT really meant to say: "Yes, we know we changed our search algorithm and that this has ^%*&&d a lot of higher-ranked contributors who have generated the most revenue for us over many years. But our bottom line is fine, so we don't really care. It's easier to just shove the blame on the contributors rather than do anything to rectify the problem. We have plenty of other contributors coming on board who we can milk until it's their turn to be tossed aside."
So, I'm very happy for all Fotolia contributors who are experiencing increasing sales - you must be the ones uploading "amazing images every day..." :) Just a word of warning: Make the most of it, but don't expect it to last! Unless of course you manage to stay "in the club", which I obviously haven't.
-
I was thinking of dropping them all together. I have a small portfolio there and it's smaller now because I've taken off a bunch that were zoomed on Alamy and purchased on Fotolia for 25 cents - I've got a couple of photos that sell often but @ 25 cent a pop it's ridiculous. I hate the fact that subscription sales let people use them for the same uses as an extended license elsewhere. And all I've had for months on end is subscription sales.
I haven't uploaded anything new there because they cut into my Alamy RF and SS Extended license sales. I've stopped putting the same RF on micros and Alamy (even though they allow it). Thinking my best bet may be to stick with SS, iS and DT and not waste my time on the smaller sites.
I've got a very tiny port so I know my sales are not really representative - but it's been a year since I've had anything other than subscription sales there. I have a few exclusives there and they haven't sold in ages. They were trending up for me last year but this year they tanked. I'm not uploading new images so I'm sure that makes things worse. :'(
-
Robyn, thanks for posting. Your sales trajectory on FT exactly mirrors my experience. I hadn't bothered contacting them about it because I assumed they wouldn't give a rats a$$. Sorry to hear that's the case.
-
Robyn, thanks for posting. Your sales trajectory on FT exactly mirrors my experience. I hadn't bothered contacting them about it because I assumed they wouldn't give a rats a$$. Sorry to hear that's the case.
Very sad...
-
Robyn, thanks for posting. Your sales trajectory on FT exactly mirrors my experience. I hadn't bothered contacting them about it because I assumed they wouldn't give a rats a$$. Sorry to hear that's the case.
Lisa,
I contacted them and I confirmed...DEFINITIVELY...that what they care about is indeed the rats ass. What I mean in laymen terms is they never responded. I've said this before, I went from roughly from $200 a month to $60-$75 a month. No improvement with new uploads either.
-
I'm making more with BigStock than FT now. Never thought that would happen. FT seem to of lost a lot of pay per download buyers. Not sure if they've gone to other sites or switched to FT subs. It's hard to believe that this hasn't hit the FT profits. Perhaps they're doing OK but I think they could be doing much better. As money seems to be their only interest, it's strange to see them treating their biggest asset with such contempt. I'm sure they could replace their big earners with others but it looks like the price is a loss of quality that has sent buyers to the other sites.
Just look how far istock and FT have fallen behind SS in the earnings poll now. Perhaps one day in the future we will have a "big 1" and lots of "Low Earners"? That's happened in lots of business sectors and I can see how the process happens now.
-
Lisa,
I contacted them and I confirmed...DEFINITIVELY...that what they care about is indeed the rats ass. What I mean in laymen terms is they never responded. I've said this before, I went from roughly from $200 a month to $60-$75 a month. No improvement with new uploads either.
Thanks for that info Mantis. I guess I'm glad I didn't bother, then.
I'm making more with BigStock than FT now. Never thought that would happen.
Yep. Same here. It's a shame. They used to be a strong #2 earner. Seems pretty obvious their glory days are behind them.
-
I'm making more with BigStock than FT now. Never thought that would happen.
Yep. Same here. It's a shame. They used to be a strong #2 earner. Seems pretty obvious their glory days are behind them.
That's incredible. For me FT earnings have roughly halved since their peak but they are still 3-4x more than BigStock. It does seem that Emeralds have been absolutely hammered in the sort-order. I wonder what happened to the '$200M investment' FT had a couple of years ago?
-
Oh, I misread the above. I thought Sharpshot was saying that DT is making more than FT. I am not making more on BigStock than Fotolia, but I am making nearly double on DT what I make on FT.
And this is entirely due to drops at FT. DT is holding fairly steady but has not gained.
Sorry for the confusion! :-[
-
I'm making more with BigStock than FT now. Never thought that would happen.
Yep. Same here. It's a shame. They used to be a strong #2 earner. Seems pretty obvious their glory days are behind them.
That's incredible. For me FT earnings have roughly halved since their peak but they are still 3-4x more than BigStock. ...
+1 except that FT generates 7 times as much as Bigstock does.
Either FT has crashed "too much" for most people or Bigstock is not doing a lot for me... :o
-
Not exactly tanking but it should be better. Used to be such a good earner before this sort order.
-
Very interesting data.... in my case FT is the 2nd earner ( after SS) and way over DT. what can i say.... i doing good there :P
In my case the ''problem'' is 123RF vs Depositphotos
I earn 10 times more on 123RF than DP. For me DP is near the bottom list of Low Earners agencies.
-
Silver rank here, with 7 day rank, drop from a consistent 800ish to 1300
-
Very interesting data.... in my case FT is the 2nd earner ( after SS) and way over DT. what can i say.... i doing good there :P
In my case the ''problem'' is 123RF vs Depositphotos
I earn 10 times more on 123RF than DP. For me DP is near the bottom list of Low Earners agencies.
Deposit has almost caught up with 123rf for me.
ETA - just checked this months figures and deposit has gone into the lead.
-
Very interesting data.... in my case FT is the 2nd earner ( after SS) and way over DT. what can i say.... i doing good there :P
In my case the ''problem'' is 123RF vs Depositphotos
I earn 10 times more on 123RF than DP. For me DP is near the bottom list of Low Earners agencies.
Deposit has almost caught up with 123rf for me.
ETA - just checked this months figures and deposit has gone into the lead.
This month DP has passed BS, PD, & FT. Bigstock is really down for me this month and PD is consistent from month to month but not growing. DP is up enough to surpass other sites.
-
So basically, some do well, some do average and some do poor. There is no way to call it. As there never is.
-
So basically, some do well, some do average and some do poor. There is no way to call it. As there never is.
wow, thanks for sharing!!!!
-
EARNINGS
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BbX_eUzyvU4/UIwCB2vGxNI/AAAAAAAABUI/xUcNijpvV34/s1600/credits.PNG)
DOWNLOADS
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VFGc29SUKsE/UIwCCrom1FI/AAAAAAAABUQ/H2qJTCSpBls/s1600/downloads.PNG)
only 137 pictures uploaded in the last year (99 downloads from them)
-
EARNINGS
([url]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BbX_eUzyvU4/UIwCB2vGxNI/AAAAAAAABUI/xUcNijpvV34/s1600/credits.PNG[/url])
DOWNLOADS
([url]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VFGc29SUKsE/UIwCCrom1FI/AAAAAAAABUQ/H2qJTCSpBls/s1600/downloads.PNG[/url])
only 137 pictures uploaded in the last year (99 downloads from them)
WOW thanks for sharing !!!!!!
-
WOW thanks for sharing !!!!!!
no worries Yuri
-
I am not worried, Mr. Ishooteverythingisolated
-
I am not worried, Mr. Ishooteverythingisolated
are you racist?