MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: NEWS - Fotolia Members Get it All with Premium Subscription Plan  (Read 12499 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2009, 03:56 »
0
RPD this month on IS   1.20
RPD this month on fot  1.37
With over 100 earnt more this month on Fotolia.
I'm another one that doesn't see the problem compared to other sites. The only site that gives me a better RPD is DT but I get less dls there.
larger size subs  SS  38c
Larger size subs Fot 39c
Larger size subs DT 35c
The only one where I get more for larger sized subs is IS but I regularly get subs there for 19, 22 and 24c etc for the smaller ones.
I don't like subs anywhere but don't know why Fot is being singled out for this.

My RPD for IS is fairly consistently the same as yours but at FT it is 90c. It seems surprising that your RPD at FT should be 50% higher (although EL's have dried up there for me).

It occurs to me that you must be at Emerald level or above which, assuming you've re-priced your images to 2 credits minimum, does skew the equation somewhat. For the vast majority of FT contributors that would not apply.


« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2009, 05:42 »
0
oops forgot to mention earlier re istock, that they kept the max size of subs on photos.com that was brought in with StockXpert. But at the time JIunlimited slipped under the radar (I wasnt 100% sure at the time and couldnt be bothered fighting anymore) and allowed "file sizes up to 75mb" for the subs price.

StockXpert & istock deal was your images go on both (& customers can pay at JI for full access to both libraries).  Now IS cut this to $0.25 so istock pay $0.25 for any image up to 75mb

and it is same $0.25 for vectors, wheras FT offers around $1
« Last Edit: July 28, 2009, 07:58 by Phil »

« Reply #27 on: July 28, 2009, 08:46 »
0
oops forgot to mention earlier re istock, that they kept the max size of subs on photos.com that was brought in with StockXpert. But at the time JIunlimited slipped under the radar (I wasnt 100% sure at the time and couldnt be bothered fighting anymore) and allowed "file sizes up to 75mb" for the subs price.

StockXpert & istock deal was your images go on both (& customers can pay at JI for full access to both libraries).  Now IS cut this to $0.25 so istock pay $0.25 for any image up to 75mb

and it is same $0.25 for vectors, wheras FT offers around $1

IStock has an opt out for exclusive and non-exclusive contributors who do not want to sell their photos for so cheap, Fotolia only has an opt out for their exclusives.  That there makes a big difference to me.  Fotolia is forcing their 'Premium Subscription' down their contributors throats. IStock give you the option.

« Reply #28 on: July 28, 2009, 08:58 »
0
The Istock subscription model doesn't compare to the others in the industry at all, since it has size-dependent pricing - and that is the main reason (my guess) why it hasn't reached any significant volume and never will... The only thing subscription buyers really want is huge discounts, and that's what they get at Shutter, Dreamstime, StockXpert, Fotolia...

« Reply #29 on: July 28, 2009, 12:12 »
0
The Istock subscription model doesn't compare to the others in the industry at all, since it has size-dependent pricing - and that is the main reason (my guess) why it hasn't reached any significant volume and never will... The only thing subscription buyers really want is huge discounts, and that's what they get at Shutter, Dreamstime, StockXpert, Fotolia...

I think the istock subscription model can effectively be said to be dead, or at least on life support.  Too bad because it was the most fair in the industry to contributors.  

I would consider the Jupiter/Photos.com deal to be the "new" istock subscription model, and I agree with Phil that .25 for sizes up to 75mb is highway robbery (to contributors).  Of course I am opted out of that, and glad for the option.

As for Fotolia, I can't see how anyone with a footage portfolio would continue to sell through them for those rates.  I don't have footage, so this one doesn't really affect me much, but if I shot mainly video I would definitely consider video exclusivity with istock.

The smartest idea in this thread seems to me to be [email protected]'s idea to start up a lube franchise  :P

« Reply #30 on: July 28, 2009, 17:03 »
0
RPD this month on IS   1.20
RPD this month on fot  1.37
(...)
The only one where I get more for larger sized subs is IS but I regularly get subs there for 19, 22 and 24c etc for the smaller ones.
I don't like subs anywhere but don't know why Fot is being singled out for this.

My numbers are VERY different:
RPD 87c at IS and 63c at FT (40% dlds are subs)
19-24c at IS are XS images, sold at US$0.95-1.20 each - not comparable at all with subs.

I agree with you on DT only, because subs have increased there - 70% of downloads this month - but even there RPD is 70c.

« Reply #31 on: July 28, 2009, 23:41 »
0
oops forgot to mention earlier re istock, that they kept the max size of subs on photos.com that was brought in with StockXpert. But at the time JIunlimited slipped under the radar (I wasnt 100% sure at the time and couldnt be bothered fighting anymore) and allowed "file sizes up to 75mb" for the subs price.

StockXpert & istock deal was your images go on both (& customers can pay at JI for full access to both libraries).  Now IS cut this to $0.25 so istock pay $0.25 for any image up to 75mb

and it is same $0.25 for vectors, wheras FT offers around $1

IStock has an opt out for exclusive and non-exclusive contributors who do not want to sell their photos for so cheap, Fotolia only has an opt out for their exclusives.  That there makes a big difference to me.  Fotolia is forcing their 'Premium Subscription' down their contributors throats. IStock give you the option.

yes that is a very big difference, it is things these sort of things that make a difference when dealing with and perception of sites.

« Reply #32 on: July 29, 2009, 00:18 »
0
Yes, you're right, I am emerald level and hadn't thought about that when I posted.  Obviously for the people that haven't had a chance to double prices their RPD won't be as high.

RPD this month on IS   1.20
RPD this month on fot  1.37
With over 100 earnt more this month on Fotolia.
I'm another one that doesn't see the problem compared to other sites. The only site that gives me a better RPD is DT but I get less dls there.
larger size subs  SS  38c
Larger size subs Fot 39c
Larger size subs DT 35c
The only one where I get more for larger sized subs is IS but I regularly get subs there for 19, 22 and 24c etc for the smaller ones.
I don't like subs anywhere but don't know why Fot is being singled out for this.

My RPD for IS is fairly consistently the same as yours but at FT it is 90c. It seems surprising that your RPD at FT should be 50% higher (although EL's have dried up there for me).

It occurs to me that you must be at Emerald level or above which, assuming you've re-priced your images to 2 credits minimum, does skew the equation somewhat. For the vast majority of FT contributors that would not apply.

« Reply #33 on: July 29, 2009, 04:02 »
0
Yes, you're right, I am emerald level and hadn't thought about that when I posted.  Obviously for the people that haven't had a chance to double prices their RPD won't be as high.

I'm only bronze, no exclusive files, so everything at the minimum price level.
Still my RPD at FT this month is at 1 (big advantage that I'm being payed in Euros).
IS is at $1,49, so slightly above that.
DT is at $0,54 (too many subs)...

« Reply #34 on: July 30, 2009, 20:47 »
0
The problem I see is this.... yeah we can yank all our ports off of FT....
but where's the gaurantee that all our pix will be pulled off of all the so-called 'partners/affilates' of FT?  A partial list of their outfits was posted yesterday on another thread... agencies with names sounding like the 2nd graders at Johnny JoeJoe elementary school made 'em up.... again, why are we all in this handbasket and where are we going..??

Exlcusive.... It's still a maybe/if  IMO.  Problem is in my case, I pull in as much from SS due to pure volume as I do on IS...  not to mention, many of the pix I have on the micros,  I sell free lance at obscene prices.  Does that conflict with 'exclusive' agreements?
   I'm shooting a free lance job for a regional magazine right now (for publication in an early 2010 issue).  Those pix are also already being prepped for upload to IS, SS, BigStock & DT.   A one day free lance shoot earns me 4 digits from the mag's publisher (current standard rate in my area).... exclusive with IS,  how long will it take to make that?  I'm pretty sure that as an exclusive I am not able to sell my own pix... does anyone know if that is factual??  I'd like to know.
    I tell all my local photog friends to get out there and sell themselves. And some have. The work is there, you just have to go out and grab at it. Of course it helps to be based inbetween NYC and Philly, but, the work is there.

And by the way, I DO NOT consider myself a world-class photog, Im just a regular guy with over 40 years exp with SLR's. Please dont take this as bragging or tooting my horn. Im not like that. Everyday I am blown away by work soooooooo much better than mine on the micros.
   I only started selling a little over 4 years ago.  Once you get your foot in the door, it starts to snowball. I reccomend it to everyone.

Heck, pick up any magazine and see the photo credits,  Getty, Alamy, Jupiter and on and on.    It's much nicer and much more profitable and rewarding to see YOUR NAME or YOUR company's name alongside the pic and even better to see your name in the info column as a contributing photographer.  Not to mention the digits on the check you take to the bank.

Get out there and start knocking on some doors, what's to lose? You'll find you may be making a 'few' bucks more than microstock pays. 8)=tom

p.s.  I'd be happy to give tips on how I did it if any want to PM me. It might work for you and it's not rocket science.


     
« Last Edit: July 30, 2009, 20:52 by a.k.a.-tom »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
4038 Views
Last post August 07, 2008, 10:03
by Roadrunner
39 Replies
17107 Views
Last post July 13, 2009, 18:24
by Squat
36 Replies
20232 Views
Last post August 20, 2011, 01:18
by tubed
4 Replies
2691 Views
Last post April 23, 2014, 11:07
by Jo Ann Snover
41 Replies
8423 Views
Last post October 13, 2015, 14:28
by MxR

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results