MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What's your weekly ranking on Fotolia? Mine is around 1,000 usually.  (Read 8074 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 02, 2015, 09:18 »
0
I haven't been able to move up in a year or two now.  LOL.


« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2015, 13:28 »
0
Anybody?




« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2015, 22:48 »
0
2220

300 was my record

« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2015, 23:13 »
0
2220

300 was my record


That's a wide spread!  My best was in 700s or so. 

« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2015, 23:28 »
0
I have nearly 2,000 photos.

« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2015, 02:57 »
0
can we also tell our earning based on rating? I am about 4000-5000 weekly rank end earn about 50-70 credits monthly.

Hongover

« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2015, 03:42 »
+1
2979 with 162 images.

I need to get off my lazy ass and start uploading again.

« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2015, 04:06 »
+3
2979 with 162 images.

I need to get off my lazy ass and start uploading again.

Thats interesting, when you say 2979. Because last number is rounded up, or down.

« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2015, 09:29 »
0
can we also tell our earning based on rating? I am about 4000-5000 weekly rank end earn about 50-70 credits monthly.

I'm around 1,000 weekly rank and 250 or so monthly credits.

« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2015, 09:30 »
0
I hope Adobestock will cultivate new stock photo buyers without taking share from other agency.

Hongover

« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2015, 11:14 »
0
2979 with 162 images.

I need to get off my lazy ass and start uploading again.

Thats interesting, when you say 2979. Because last number is rounded up, or down.

Oops, typed the last digit wrong. It was 2970.

« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2015, 11:52 »
+2
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.


« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2015, 12:01 »
+3
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Mantis, once again you are proving that you have no clue what you are talking about (despite being oh so experienced)...
This topic is about the weekly ranl which is a simple ranking by the number of sales during the last week. It has nothing to do with number of uploads or contributor level.

« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2015, 12:17 »
0
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Mantis, once again you are proving that you have no clue what you are talking about (despite being oh so experienced)...
This topic is about the weekly ranl which is a simple ranking by the number of sales during the last week. It has nothing to do with number of uploads or contributor level.

Yes it does.  The more images you have, theoretically, the more sales. When more sales happen, your rank goes up. When your rank goes up, your rating goes up. When your rating goes up, your commissions go up. Get it now? Sounds like you haven't a clue about how to assess a business tacit from end to end.

And I forgot to mention that when they control the rank it really doesn't matter a discussion revolves around weekly, monthly, yearly ranks. Look at FT's shady history of misleading contributors. This ranking system is one of them. It's one of control. FT's control.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2015, 12:23 by Mantis »

« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2015, 12:53 »
+3
Yeah, Fotolia is so bad, that I get more money with less sales, compared to SS.

« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2015, 13:21 »
+5
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Mantis!  now youre a serious player. Listen to this. This new Adobe/FT is a completely different avenue. I been criticizing micro for years and years, since good old Bruce sold Istock and thats many. many years back,  not here but openly and in bloggs, God only knows.
Adobe/FT right now is brilliant! can not fault it in any way. Mat is only doing his job and one of the very few that actually looks in here more then anybody from another agency.

Whatever beef you had with the old FT, forget it and let bygones be bygones. With your material you ain't going to regret it.

Start uploading instead, pointless letting yourself get irritated over cuts, royalties and percentages, this, that. I mean if we are sitting getting uptight with that, well might as well leave any form of stock alone.

just a friendly thought!

« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2015, 15:03 »
0
2220

300 was my record


That's a wide spread!  My best was in 700s or so.

Yes, it was one time only week of amazing sales.
I hope more will come in the future.

Portfolio size about 1600

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2015, 15:14 »
0
Weekly position: 884

Overall position:1,510

Hongover

« Reply #18 on: October 03, 2015, 16:08 »
+5
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Nothing personal, but please stop with the negativity and conspiracy theories. Others are starting to believe it without any evidence. Maybe that's your plan after all, to get others to stop uploading so you can have less competition. Other people are nicer with their comments and I'm a bit more honest.

This kind of self-defeatist attitude is what's preventing people from being more successful. I see it all the time and it's often the #1 reason why they don't break into the next level. When you expect to lose the battle, you already lost.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #19 on: October 03, 2015, 17:44 »
+6
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Mantis, once again you are proving that you have no clue what you are talking about (despite being oh so experienced)...
This topic is about the weekly ranl which is a simple ranking by the number of sales during the last week. It has nothing to do with number of uploads or contributor level.

Yes it does.  The more images you have, theoretically, the more sales. When more sales happen, your rank goes up. When your rank goes up, your rating goes up. When your rating goes up, your commissions go up. Get it now? Sounds like you haven't a clue about how to assess a business tacit from end to end.

And I forgot to mention that when they control the rank it really doesn't matter a discussion revolves around weekly, monthly, yearly ranks. Look at FT's shady history of misleading contributors. This ranking system is one of them. It's one of control. FT's control.

The weekly position/overall position is something entirely different than White/Bronze/Silver/Gold/Emerald tier system.

PZF

« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2015, 03:05 »
0
Until recently weekly rating hovered 4-5000. Last few weeks down to 6500. Oh dear.......

« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2015, 03:13 »
+1
Until recently weekly rating hovered 4-5000. Last few weeks down to 6500. Oh dear.......

As long as my weekly rank is higher than my all time rank I'm happy as it seems like progress. But its sales that really matter  ::)

« Reply #22 on: October 04, 2015, 05:39 »
+5
... I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.

Same here. I am also happy you are no longer with them ;)

« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2015, 09:21 »
+3
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Nothing personal, but please stop with the negativity and conspiracy theories. Others are starting to believe it without any evidence. Maybe that's your plan after all, to get others to stop uploading so you can have less competition. Other people are nicer with their comments and I'm a bit more honest.

This kind of self-defeatist attitude is what's preventing people from being more successful. I see it all the time and it's often the #1 reason why they don't break into the next level. When you expect to lose the battle, you already lost.


I agree. 

If everybody is having a problem with an agency, such as Dissolve and Revostock, it's usually their problem.  If you are the only one having a problem, it's probably you who is causing the problem.  Matt just works for Fotolia and does his job communicating with contributors on this board.  He is a fellow contributor too.  We are all in this together benefiting from each other. 

Rose Tinted Glasses

« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2015, 09:40 »
+5
Their ranking system is a joke. It is INTENDED to control YOUR commissions. Think of the payouts they would have to make to people who keep uploading content if their ranking system were honest.  I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.  This system was adopted by Istock and 123 as ways to control commissions.  By pushing new contributors they would pay less because they are in the base tier and lucky if they ever hit silver.  With all the other scum bag moves FOTOLIA has done I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.  It is also hilarious that Mat is in here inferring that you sell your EL's at a lower price to get more sales. That is every agencie's go to logic when they want you to accept less so they can enjoy more.

Nothing personal, but please stop with the negativity and conspiracy theories. Others are starting to believe it without any evidence. Maybe that's your plan after all, to get others to stop uploading so you can have less competition. Other people are nicer with their comments and I'm a bit more honest.

This kind of self-defeatist attitude is what's preventing people from being more successful. I see it all the time and it's often the #1 reason why they don't break into the next level. When you expect to lose the battle, you already lost.


I agree. 

If everybody is having a problem with an agency, such as Dissolve and Revostock, it's usually their problem.  If you are the only one having a problem, it's probably you who is causing the problem.  Matt just works for Fotolia and does his job communicating with contributors on this board.  He is a fellow contributor too.  We are all in this together benefiting from each other.

when i am feeling positive and upbeat about being exclusive at the evil IS i tend to log in to MSG to get my weekly dose of everything bad and negative and how it's everyone's fault that i can't make it as a photographer. it's a reality check for me to feel negative. i won't mention any names, but there are more than one "people" on this forum that live a negative view of everything on this MSG. i think they wake up and feel the need to  share the negativity. thank goodness i don't live with them, that would be a real drag to deal with such negativity on a daily basis. oh my ranking sucks, so does fotolia, so does Istock, so does Getty Images, and so do you.

« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2015, 09:58 »
+8
What I can't understand is why some people stay in the business if it is so bad for them.

« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2015, 11:00 »
0
I guess that every stock media producer is or should be happy as hell.
Cheerful energetic and positive no matter what.We dont want negativity here, oh if only the internet could transfer real smiles and high fives how awesome would that be.
That's a nice philosophy on life -for some-.
For me personally, negativity works best,that's the reason i have done ok in life and i dont want more, what can i say.

Still, some people are, or should have been mature enough to understand the difference between a real "person" and an internetic "persona",or to simply put it ,the difference between a discussion at a pub and a discussion inside a virtual, public, group/forum.

I hate it when people start calling each other by their real names to the point that every post starts with -Hey Mike,-Oh thats right Craig, etc
That's consent and there's enough of that already.
At least negativity is direct and most of the times honest.

« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2015, 11:24 »
0
I am trying to ignore all negative features of microstock agencies. Otherwise, it's really better to quit.

Fotolia ..
Money wise I like FT. It was really under performing for me for years, then, suddenly, during 2014 year, my monthly earnings increased 4 times without any obvious reasons. It is still growing and, now, FT is my #2 after SS.
OK, I have much more than 1000 pictures in my portfolio and my FT ranking is well below 1000 ...

What really upsets me in this business is if I see a nice full page picture in a book and it's credited to Shutterstock without my name. I was just looking for inspiration in a bookstore yesterday.

« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2015, 12:05 »
+1
Same here^^  I have thousands of pictures at both FT and SS. Adobe/FT is on fire right now, Emerald ranking and well below 400 but I have always been lucky with FT. Don't know why but maybe they have the right type of buyers for my shots.

SS, is as always a great money spinner but sadly something happened after the IPO and it changed. The earnings are still the same but one gets the feeling its not all that happy a company anymore. They seem to have painted themselves into some corner and quite happy remaining there. Its become edgy, shakey.

Since the very beginning of my micro I have only bothered with the big four, GI and one more and can quite happily survive on the incomes from these, as far as incomes are concerned, no problem.

There is no doubt that sooner or later the shareholders of SS will without doubt put the thumbscrews on and it will without doubt derail the company, it always does, no matter what business.
Big question is, whats left after that, something? or plain nothing? :)

« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2015, 02:21 »
0
My FT port is less than 400 and my overall rating which started at 60,000 two years ago has now reached 28,000. My weekly rating moves between 10,000 and 20,000. What I find surprising is that to move from 20,000 to 10,000, I require only about 4-5 sales in that week (and most of the time, it does not happen) :)

« Reply #30 on: October 05, 2015, 02:30 »
0
Same here^^  I have thousands of pictures at both FT and SS. Adobe/FT is on fire right now, Emerald ranking and well below 400 but I have always been lucky with FT. Don't know why but maybe they have the right type of buyers for my shots.

Do you sort keywords of your images when you submit them?

« Reply #31 on: October 05, 2015, 03:12 »
+2
Same here^^  I have thousands of pictures at both FT and SS. Adobe/FT is on fire right now, Emerald ranking and well below 400 but I have always been lucky with FT. Don't know why but maybe they have the right type of buyers for my shots.

Do you sort keywords of your images when you submit them?

Sort of. I do make sure that the first 10 keywords are exactly what the image is all about. The most important ones. Trying to imagine the keywords a buyer would use.

Its worked so far. :)

« Reply #32 on: October 05, 2015, 03:38 »
0
Same here^^  I have thousands of pictures at both FT and SS. Adobe/FT is on fire right now, Emerald ranking and well below 400 but I have always been lucky with FT. Don't know why but maybe they have the right type of buyers for my shots.

Do you sort keywords of your images when you submit them?

Sort of. I do make sure that the first 10 keywords are exactly what the image is all about. The most important ones. Trying to imagine the keywords a buyer would use.

Its worked so far. :)

Thanks, I have to focus more on keywording in FT.

« Reply #33 on: October 05, 2015, 04:09 »
+1
Same here^^  I have thousands of pictures at both FT and SS. Adobe/FT is on fire right now, Emerald ranking and well below 400 but I have always been lucky with FT. Don't know why but maybe they have the right type of buyers for my shots.

Do you sort keywords of your images when you submit them?

Sort of. I do make sure that the first 10 keywords are exactly what the image is all about. The most important ones. Trying to imagine the keywords a buyer would use.

Its worked so far. :)

Thanks, I have to focus more on keywording in FT.
[/quote

first ten:  stick to single keywords. Further down you can use phrases. Thats what I do.


« Reply #34 on: October 05, 2015, 07:36 »
+1
Weekly rank goes between 1000-2000 during a month....150 credits.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

« Reply #35 on: October 05, 2015, 09:28 »
+1
... I am SOOOOOO HAPPY I am no longer with them.

Same here. I am also happy you are no longer with them ;)


LOL!

This is the best post!!


« Reply #36 on: October 05, 2015, 09:33 »
+1
I could never get a high ranking there even when uploading 3,000 images.


With that kind of mentality, you'll never get a high ranking. 

You need to focus on quality and what's in demand instead.

« Reply #37 on: October 20, 2015, 18:22 »
0
My FT port is less than 400 and my overall rating which started at 60,000 two years ago has now reached 28,000. My weekly rating moves between 10,000 and 20,000. What I find surprising is that to move from 20,000 to 10,000, I require only about 4-5 sales in that week (and most of the time, it does not happen) :)

Pretty new to FT, so I thought I would see how I'm doing.  A few sales here and there. SSSSSLLLLLOOOOOWWWWLLLLYYYYY building my port. Yes, I know it's important to build, but I work full time and don't want to take too much time away from the site/s that do the best for me, so I have pretty limited time.

But based on your rating, I guess being at a weekly rating of 14,650 with just over 100 images isn't too bad? My overall is 52,000.

I have no earthly idea what the rating system is all about and how it affects sales, but it's nice to be able to find something to compare it to.

« Reply #38 on: October 20, 2015, 18:45 »
0
Weekly Rank- 3190
768 photos online

« Reply #39 on: October 21, 2015, 01:56 »
0
I have no earthly idea what the rating system is all about and how it affects sales, but it's nice to be able to find something to compare it to.

It doesnt affect sales - it represents your sales. There are 14650 people who had more sales than you during the last week and 52000 people who had more sales overall.

« Reply #40 on: October 21, 2015, 03:35 »
0
14,750 off 48 files.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
7368 Views
Last post December 18, 2006, 02:23
by beisea
3 Replies
3633 Views
Last post April 11, 2011, 06:32
by Lizard
4 Replies
2416 Views
Last post February 08, 2013, 20:28
by OM
25 Replies
9620 Views
Last post June 17, 2015, 19:47
by SLStudios
2 Replies
2124 Views
Last post July 09, 2015, 12:04
by Johnski2015

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results