Author Topic: Two changes for Fotolia Submitters (Read 12627 times)

Poncke · « **Reply #25 on:** December 01, 2012, 04:35 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 30, 2012, 17:20

Quote from: vannphoto on November 30, 2012, 16:55
Quote from: lisafx on November 30, 2012, 10:21
Quote from: vannphoto on November 30, 2012, 02:44
I've got a message saying I need valid photo ID... is this new? I hate it when businesses feel the need to have a copy of my passport or DL before they'll talk to me. It seems dodgy.

They've been collecting ID for years, once you reach a payout threshold where they have to report you to the IRS.
oh, thanks, didn't think I was even a tiny bit close yet.

I think the threshold is $600. If you aren't there yet, maybe they've changed something and are requiring it from everyone now?

I had to sign up with an ID

heywoody · « **Reply #26 on:** December 01, 2012, 06:39 »

Quote from: dirkr on November 30, 2012, 16:36

Quote from: sharpshot on November 30, 2012, 12:27
Quote from: Mantis on November 30, 2012, 10:22
Wonder who is going to absorb the 50% hit?

I presume it will be us, unless something really has changed with FT.

I'm not a FT fanboy at all, but in this case I would say you're wrong.
FT has always payed out a fixed payout per credit. Essentially they are not paying a fixed royalty percentage on the sales price, but on the number of credits. There have been numerous discussions about that on here (because that means any currency conversions or different priced credit packages will lead to a payout different from the "official" percentage).
In such a case (they are giving away credits) that system means they effectively double our royalties on these sales.
As long as they stick to their current practice, but I haven't seen anything else in the last five years...

Yes, they (& SS) sell paint like a hardware store

http://www.ityt.com/forums/f24/if-the-airlines-sold-paint-2085.html

wordplanet · « **Reply #27 on:** January 04, 2013, 17:31 »

I got the same message and they have all my info so I don't see why I'd need to upload it again. In fact last year they sent me a 1099 for "income" I had "earned" but that they hadn't paid me. I contacted them and they said that it was technically "income" since I could convert it to credits - like I'm going to buy stock photos !!! Nothing like paying taxes on money I haven't received.

It is weird because normally you need to make $600 from a client before they have to send you a 1099 - but all the micros send them out whether you meet that threshold or not. It's not a big deal when it's income that they have actually paid you which you are obligated to report anyway, but none of the others send a 1099 for "earned" but unpaid income.

I've decided to drop fotolia because their extended licenses are so low it makes absolutely no sense to stay with them when I can make many times more for an extended license with shutterstock. Micro pricing is low enough - but with the limited licenses at least you're not giving away as much - but to receive $4 for an extended license is ridiculous. When I tried increasing the price it would always pop back to the default so I deleted most of my photos from the site already and have plans to drop it entirely.

Poncke · « **Reply #28 on:** January 04, 2013, 17:59 »

I get 11,50 for an EL, got one today.

sarah2 · « **Reply #29 on:** January 06, 2013, 07:25 »

OK...dozey question of the day maybe....
but how do you set the price of ANYTHING on FT?
Seems to me if I try to apply anything than the minimum, it won't let me.
Am I missing something?

Smithore · « **Reply #30 on:** January 06, 2013, 07:44 »

I've already also opt out my footages more than 1 year ago, is it a joke

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #31 on:** January 06, 2013, 08:18 »

Whats the point? ELs, this and that, whats the point. FT, have made a clear point of totally crush gold and emerald contributors, pushed back in search and very often giving preferance to inferior and irrelevant material.

Got a few images there with 2000 dls a piece, found them way, way back in search, so I am deleting them.

Poncke · « **Reply #32 on:** January 06, 2013, 10:23 »

Well I am happy then that my inferior images are selling at FT now...

lisafx · « **Reply #33 on:** January 06, 2013, 10:28 »

Quote from: sarah2 on January 06, 2013, 07:25

OK...dozey question of the day maybe....
but how do you set the price of ANYTHING on FT?
Seems to me if I try to apply anything than the minimum, it won't let me.
Am I missing something?

It depends on your rank. If you are anything below emerald then you can't set the prices. If you are emerald or above, you can set the prices on each image, or contact support and have your whole port set to 2 credits base. Also, if you make an image exclusive to FT, you can set the price.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #34 on:** January 06, 2013, 10:40 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 06, 2013, 08:18

Whats the point? ELs, this and that, whats the point. FT, have made a clear point of totally crush gold and emerald contributors, pushed back in search and very often giving preferance to inferior and irrelevant material.

Got a few images there with 2000 dls a piece, found them way, way back in search, so I am deleting them.

don´t tell anybody but I will give you the best advice and for FREE, delete and upload them again, if you are down down not much to lose right? it might work out...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #35 on:** January 06, 2013, 10:52 »

the problem is not JUST emeralds and higher ranking, myself as Silver I am seeing a very low January and why? I would say because of the very few uploading on the latest months, FT is determined to sell new files and help contributors who upload regularly, yes there are some emeralds still uploading a lot and having big decreases, just wanted to tell that all other are feeling it too.. again the ones not uploading regularly

HerMajesty · « **Reply #36 on:** January 06, 2013, 11:34 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 10:52

a very low January and why? I would say because ....

By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on ..

luissantos84 · « **Reply #37 on:** January 06, 2013, 11:43 »

Quote from: HerMajesty on January 06, 2013, 11:34

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 10:52
a very low January and why? I would say because ....

By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on ..

I meant 6 sales in 6 days (only 6 hours left today) and I had 118 sales in January 2012, my usual weekly rank jumped from 1000/1200 to 7500!

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #38 on:** January 06, 2013, 11:55 »

Quote from: Poncke on January 06, 2013, 10:23

Well I am happy then that my inferior images are selling at FT now...

I have to say this. To imagine that everything written, slightest criticism, etc, is a dig and aimed at oneself, well theres a clinical word for that, a sort of condition that has got to do with the mental state.
I do mean well and one of my best friends here in Sweden is actually a world famous brain surgeon who is one of the few that can actually remove small Gliomas, i.e. small imaginative stod cells.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #39 on:** January 06, 2013, 12:00 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 11:43

Quote from: HerMajesty on January 06, 2013, 11:34
Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 10:52
a very low January and why? I would say because ....

By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on ..

I meant 6 sales in 6 days (only 6 hours left today) and I had 118 sales in January 2012, my usual weekly rank jumped from 1000/1200 to 7500!

still considering your port, thats a pittyful result. You mean they will look after the ones uploading regularly? well that sounds like a big suck-in, keeps people uploading forever with minimal results. Well I stood for the 3-card trick during 2012, but no way during 2013. Too busy.

Poncke · « **Reply #40 on:** January 06, 2013, 12:10 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 06, 2013, 11:55

Quote from: Poncke on January 06, 2013, 10:23
Well I am happy then that my inferior images are selling at FT now...

I have to say this. To imagine that everything written, slightest criticism, etc, is a dig and aimed at oneself, well theres a clinical word for that, a sort of condition that has got to do with the mental state.
I do mean well and one of my best friends here in Sweden is actually a world famous brain surgeon who is one of the few that can actually remove small Gliomas, i.e. small imaginative stod cells.

Well you were having a dig, kind of trolling, to get reaction from someone. and that sucker was me, and then you can jab some more. Its typical troll behaviour dude. Why dont you troll like that on SS? Why only here? Because on SS you would get a life time ban, and not just for a week.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #41 on:** January 06, 2013, 12:36 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 06, 2013, 12:00

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 11:43
Quote from: HerMajesty on January 06, 2013, 11:34
Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 10:52
a very low January and why? I would say because ....

By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on ..

I meant 6 sales in 6 days (only 6 hours left today) and I had 118 sales in January 2012, my usual weekly rank jumped from 1000/1200 to 7500!

still considering your port, thats a pittyful result. You mean they will look after the ones uploading regularly? well that sounds like a big suck-in, keeps people uploading forever with minimal results. Well I stood for the 3-card trick during 2012, but no way during 2013. Too busy.

it gotta be an automatic process but I certainly think you have better search placement if you keep uploading regularly, I say that because by default the search type is Revelance (you can change it to Downloads but on the next search it will get back to Revelance) which is pretty much just new uploads, as we all know and keep on saying they are punishing pictures that sold many times before, have a few examples myself actually

searching for man, from the first page (100 results) there are:

id - number of files (from when)

364 - 1 (October 28th 2011)
437 - 1 (September 5th 2012)
459 - 1
463 - 1
466 - 1 (November 9th 2012)
468 - 1 (November 15th 2012)
474 - 3 (December 5th 2012)
475 - 3 (December 10th 2012)
476 - 4
477 - 10
478 - 16 (December 20th 2012)
479 - 20 (December 20th 2012)
480 - 5 (End of December)
481 - 4
482 - 1 (January 5th 2013)

10 files from the infinity collection (10% of the results)

more than 50% of the showing up files are on FT for less than half month

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #42 on:** January 06, 2013, 12:46 »

Quote from: Poncke on January 06, 2013, 12:10

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 06, 2013, 11:55
Quote from: Poncke on January 06, 2013, 10:23
Well I am happy then that my inferior images are selling at FT now...

I have to say this. To imagine that everything written, slightest criticism, etc, is a dig and aimed at oneself, well theres a clinical word for that, a sort of condition that has got to do with the mental state.
I do mean well and one of my best friends here in Sweden is actually a world famous brain surgeon who is one of the few that can actually remove small Gliomas, i.e. small imaginative stod cells.
Well you were having a dig, kind of trolling, to get reaction from someone. and that sucker was me, and then you can jab some more. Its typical troll behaviour dude. Why dont you troll like that on SS? Why only here? Because on SS you would get a life time ban, and not just for a week.

Sigh! sometimes you pretend to be a bit too fragile, too easily hurt and for nothing. Ease up a bit, chill out. Everything isnt aimed at you personally, instead be happy FT is doing well for you. Be humble.

End of discussion.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #43 on:** January 06, 2013, 12:57 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 12:36

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 06, 2013, 12:00
Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 11:43
Quote from: HerMajesty on January 06, 2013, 11:34
Quote from: luissantos84 on January 06, 2013, 10:52
a very low January and why? I would say because ....

By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on ..

I meant 6 sales in 6 days (only 6 hours left today) and I had 118 sales in January 2012, my usual weekly rank jumped from 1000/1200 to 7500!

still considering your port, thats a pittyful result. You mean they will look after the ones uploading regularly? well that sounds like a big suck-in, keeps people uploading forever with minimal results. Well I stood for the 3-card trick during 2012, but no way during 2013. Too busy.

it gotta be an automatic process but I certainly think you have better search placement if you keep uploading regularly, I say that because by default the search type is Revelance (you can change it to Downloads but on the next search it will get back to Revelance) which is pretty much just new uploads, as we all know and keep on saying they are punishing pictures that sold many times before, have a few examples myself actually

searching for man, from the first page (100 results) there are:

id - number of files (from when)

364 - 1 (October 28th 2011)
437 - 1 (September 5th 2012)
459 - 1
463 - 1
466 - 1 (November 9th 2012)
468 - 1 (November 15th 2012)
474 - 3 (December 5th 2012)
475 - 3 (December 10th 2012)
476 - 4
477 - 10
478 - 16 (December 20th 2012)
479 - 20 (December 20th 2012)
480 - 5 (End of December)
481 - 4
482 - 1 (January 5th 2013)

10 files from the infinity collection (10% of the results)

more than 50% of the showing up files are on FT for less than half month

Well what can one say to that? Its strange though. In my personal case, SS, DT, even IS, is doing great, everyone exept FT and this slope pretty much started when I hit the Gold level. When silver like you I had about 20-25, dls per day and at good prices as well.
Its a shame because theres no doubt, FT, can sell, its not as if they are short of buyers thats for sure.

sarah2 · « **Reply #44 on:** January 07, 2013, 02:44 »

Thanks for the info, Lisafx. One of life's little mysteries solved!

gillian vann · « **Reply #45 on:** January 07, 2013, 03:18 »

so, the trick to FT is to upload small amounts, regularly? what is small I wonder.....? I find their whole website tiresome to use, and if it weren't the fact many others like them and they are in the Top 4, i'd think they were were in the canstock region...... I only look in there every other month, when I've got a few hours to waste.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #46 on:** January 07, 2013, 03:39 »

Last shot. I am giving it a last try, uploading some 20 files just to see where in the search they will end up? its going to be interesting actually.
I am not being akward or anything, just that I am so deep involved in commissioned work, RM-stock, etc. I just havent got the time nor the energy to fool around with sites that cant produce.
Wouldnt mind if it was generic run of the mill shots but most of my stuff is bloody hard to come by, releases and everything, so you know, lets hope for the best.

OM · « **Reply #47 on:** January 10, 2013, 20:29 »

The whole problem (as I see it with FT) is their appetite for promoting new work from regular uploaders. Submit 10 shots, a couple become a 'hit', sell 30 times at sub prices and then disappear, replaced by another shot from another regular uploader. The flurry of activity around your new seller(s) encourages further uploading but at the end of the day (say, over 12 months) you discover that each of your successes has only produced $10 in revenue.......divide that by the non-successes and there's no reward for the effort involved.

Have to laugh at the FT forums where the mods and FT acolytes encourage contributors to upload like uploaders possessed with all sorts of contrived arguments to convince you that you're not uploading enough and that the competition is so fierce, whereas, quite simply, FT is having the c*** beaten out of it by SS (and maybe others too).

I started with SS in July, having been solely with FT for 4 years. My SS port is one third of the FT size yet my SS revenue (in 6 months) is twice that of FT in 12 months.....go figure... I do!

luissantos84 · « **Reply #48 on:** January 10, 2013, 20:33 »

Quote from: OM on January 10, 2013, 20:29

The whole problem (as I see it with FT) is their appetite for promoting new work from regular uploaders. Submit 10 shots, a couple become a 'hit', sell 30 times at sub prices and then disappear, replaced by another shot from another regular uploader. The flurry of activity around your new seller(s) encourages further uploading but at the end of the day (say, over 12 months) you discover that each of your successes has only produced $10 in revenue.......divide that by the non-successes and there's no reward for the effort involved.

Have to laugh at the FT forums where the mods and FT acolytes encourage contributors to upload like uploaders possessed with all sorts of contrived arguments to convince you that you're not uploading enough and that the competition is so fierce, whereas, quite simply, FT is having the c*** beaten out of it by SS (and maybe others too).

I started with SS in July, having been solely with FT for 4 years. My SS port is one third of the FT size yet my SS revenue (in 6 months) is twice that of FT in 12 months.....go figure... I do!

JACKPOT!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Two changes for Fotolia Submitters (Read 12627 times)

Poncke

heywoody

wordplanet

Poncke

sarah2

Smithore

ClaridgeJ

Poncke

lisafx

luissantos84

luissantos84

HerMajesty

luissantos84

ClaridgeJ

ClaridgeJ

Poncke

luissantos84

ClaridgeJ

ClaridgeJ

sarah2

gillian vann

ClaridgeJ

OM

luissantos84

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors