MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Why I love Fotolia!  (Read 30862 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: January 27, 2011, 17:31 »
0
If there was a way to opt out of subs, I could see making an image exclusive with FT, but the numbers are just not there for me. Sub after sub. 

At FT you can opt out of subs your exclusive images (and only those).

But then all those sub sales count just the same as a regular sale for the purpose of sort order placement (at least as far as we know).


« Reply #76 on: January 27, 2011, 18:07 »
0

But then all those sub sales count just the same as a regular sale for the purpose of sort order placement (at least as far as we know).

Right. How much that impacts sales is another question. I have no way of knowing since I do not have any exclusive files...

jbarber873

« Reply #77 on: January 27, 2011, 20:50 »
0

But then all those sub sales count just the same as a regular sale for the purpose of sort order placement (at least as far as we know).

Right. How much that impacts sales is another question. I have no way of knowing since I do not have any exclusive files...

   I didn't know you could opt out exclusive images. Following Karimala's point about making those files that sell well at FT only as the exclusive files, and then taking them out of subs, would maybe be a good way to go. I don't know about sort order- that's too much granularity for me :)

« Reply #78 on: January 29, 2011, 05:09 »
0
I believe the low prices and the low commissions are a direct reflection of the lack of any loyalty by photographers with the desire to spam the market with images everywhere that will take them.  If photogs picked their horse and stuck with it then the sites would be competing to get the best photographers.  As it is, they all have most of you and as a result buyers have the luxury of choosing a site based on price structure rather than the quality of the images.  They can get the exact same images pretty much everywhere!  As a result, the sites then must cannibalize each other to attract the buyers along with an increase in spending to recruit buyers they have to squeeze more out of contributors while charging less.  It's logical but it sucks none the less.  I don't foresee any drastic changes to the mindset of the masses here any time soon to change that so I can't help but think it's only going to get worse in the industry :(  Especially for non-exclusives. 

That's an interesting thought but the fact is that iStock has scr*wed most of its leading exclusives harder than anybody else. Exclusive benefits have become a weapon to use against them, because they have invested so much in iStock that they can't afford to change horses.

« Reply #79 on: January 30, 2011, 21:46 »
0
I believe the low prices and the low commissions are a direct reflection of the lack of any loyalty by photographers with the desire to spam the market with images everywhere that will take them.  If photogs picked their horse and stuck with it then the sites would be competing to get the best photographers.  As it is, they all have most of you and as a result buyers have the luxury of choosing a site based on price structure rather than the quality of the images.  They can get the exact same images pretty much everywhere!  As a result, the sites then must cannibalize each other to attract the buyers along with an increase in spending to recruit buyers they have to squeeze more out of contributors while charging less.  It's logical but it sucks none the less.  I don't foresee any drastic changes to the mindset of the masses here any time soon to change that so I can't help but think it's only going to get worse in the industry :(  Especially for non-exclusives.  

That's an interesting thought but the fact is that iStock has scr*wed most of its leading exclusives harder than anybody else. Exclusive benefits have become a weapon to use against them, because they have invested so much in iStock that they can't afford to change horses.

Yes I agree. What's with all of these Stockholm Syndrome - Patty-Hearst-type exclusives?  Actually sticking up for, and protecting your captor can not be healthy.  Yes, I see, it is my own fault my husband hits me, give me a break, as stated above being loyal didn't help anyone from getting screwed (with the exception of a few at the very top).  You can't seriously blame the photographers for these sites lowering commissions when exclusives are seeing cuts too.  Do you really think when sites have millions of images there is anyway for a particular agency to have unique images! There are so many photographers all clamoring to take photos of the same things, it makes good business sense to focus your energy on proven sellers Unless you are a small niche site with less than 100,000 images you are not going to have unique content ever.  I would go exclusive if any site offered better pay than I get by being with ten sites its very simple to run the numbers not an emotional decision purely numbers I do what makes me the most money. No agency has stepped up to the plate yet with a high enough percent to actually come out better by going exclusive.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 21:50 by lightscribe »


Noodles

« Reply #81 on: January 31, 2011, 01:03 »
0
You can't seriously blame the photographers for these sites lowering commissions when exclusives are seeing cuts too.

Yes I can.  Buyers aren't stupid.  They know they can get the same pics at all the sites.  They have the luxury of shopping for the lowest prices.  That is what they make their buying decision on so the sites must fight to be the cheapest.

Can't speak for every buyer but as a typical Freelance Designer I couldn't care less if I paid $1 or $50. It would probably cost me $50 in time just to look elsewhere - if I find the right image I just buy it regardless of where or how much it cost (within reason). The only factor which would make me think twice is if I required a whole bunch of images - that rarely happens though!

« Reply #82 on: January 31, 2011, 05:36 »
0
You can't seriously blame the photographers for these sites lowering commissions when exclusives are seeing cuts too.

Yes I can.  Buyers aren't stupid.  They know they can get the same pics at all the sites.  They have the luxury of shopping for the lowest prices.  That is what they make their buying decision on so the sites must fight to be the cheapest.

Can't speak for every buyer but as a typical Freelance Designer I couldn't care less if I paid $1 or $50. It would probably cost me $50 in time just to look elsewhere - if I find the right image I just buy it regardless of where or how much it cost (within reason). The only factor which would make me think twice is if I required a whole bunch of images - that rarely happens though!

I agree

If majority of buyers were price sensitive why would they buy any of Yuri's photos on Istock when you can get them much cheaper elsewhere.
he's sold like 1 million downloads.
Some customers are but I'd say a lot aren't.

OM

« Reply #83 on: January 31, 2011, 10:41 »
0

But then all those sub sales count just the same as a regular sale for the purpose of sort order placement (at least as far as we know).

Right. How much that impacts sales is another question. I have no way of knowing since I do not have any exclusive files...

Bin there tried that! After 3 weeks of cancelled subs and virtually no sales, I returned to the fold. Don't have a lot of images there but I do have a couple of good sellers (both in subs as DL's). The DL's seemed to drop off sharply too. Subs may only count as one quarter download for canister level but I think they count one for one in sort order placement.

From Fotolia for contributors:

"Visibility
By following the rules above, you will achieve a better visibility. But there are further tips to increase your visibility:

1. By allowing the sales in subscription you will improve the ratio sold/views for each one of your contents. When a subscription customer wants to buy your image and you dont allow the sale in subscription, your content will be marked at 0 sold for 1 view. The ratio sold/view is an important criteria within our search engine. Images that are sold each time they are viewed receive a better visibility in the results page.
"

« Reply #84 on: January 31, 2011, 16:08 »
0
being loyal didn't help anyone from getting screwed (with the exception of a few at the very top).

I'm still getting 54% commissions on sales ranging from $3 to $30.  If you think I'm at the very top you have a skewed vision of where the top is.

You can't seriously blame the photographers for these sites lowering commissions when exclusives are seeing cuts too.

Yes I can.  Buyers aren't stupid.  They know they can get the same pics at all the sites.  They have the luxury of shopping for the lowest prices.  That is what they make their buying decision on so the sites must fight to be the cheapest.

Do you really think when sites have millions of images there is anyway for a particular agency to have unique images!

That's my point exactly.  They don't have unique images.  They have the exact same images because 99% of the photographers in the Microstock industry uploaded all the same pics to every site that would accept them.

Didn't Fotolia and Dreamstime put the price of credits up at the same time as each commission cut? I would think (possibly in error) that would invalidate the arguments of all they can do is compete on is price?


« Reply #86 on: February 12, 2011, 17:31 »
0
Yesterday I sold one EL on Fotolia! 50 credits but my part is 8$...
Maybe buyer has paid the 75 euros for this pic but my part is only cca 5-6 ...

What injustice because of triple conversion from buyers money to my credits ... Where is love here?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2011, 17:37 by borg »

« Reply #87 on: February 12, 2011, 17:35 »
0
Yesterday I sold one EL on Fotolia!
Maybe buyer has paid the 75 euros for this pic but my part is only cca 5-6 ...

What injustice because of triple conversion from buyers money to my credits ... Where is love here?


how is that possible? what do you mena by triple?

beside the royalties cut I got US account and I am european.. another 25% taken!

« Reply #88 on: February 12, 2011, 17:47 »
0
50 credits, my part is 8$

1. Cost of buyers credits, probably more than 1 or $
2. My part is now less in percentage
3. 1$=1 only for Fotolia
« Last Edit: February 12, 2011, 17:50 by borg »

« Reply #89 on: February 12, 2011, 17:51 »
0
you arent alone..  >:(

I have mine set to 30 and have like 7 or 8 in almost two years
« Last Edit: February 12, 2011, 17:53 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #90 on: February 12, 2011, 17:54 »
0
Yep! I knew it all before, but I can't help myself in misery when I see that, again and again.... :-[ :'( >:(
« Last Edit: February 12, 2011, 17:56 by borg »


« Reply #92 on: February 13, 2011, 13:44 »
0


1. Cost of buyers credits, probably more than 1 or $


Never mind my last post, I see now that you are speculating.

Good luck,

Mat

« Reply #93 on: February 13, 2011, 13:55 »
0
US$8 for a 50 credit sale is not speculation.

lagereek

« Reply #94 on: February 13, 2011, 14:02 »
0
I didnt know you could have image-only exclusivity at FT???-------- is that right?

« Reply #95 on: February 13, 2011, 14:02 »
0
US$8 for a 50 credit sale is not speculation.

right :)

« Reply #96 on: February 13, 2011, 14:07 »
0
US$8 for a 50 credit sale is not speculation.

How are you learning what currency the credits are purchased with? 

« Reply #97 on: February 13, 2011, 14:11 »
0
US$8 for a 50 credit sale is not speculation.

right :)

If you are a non-exclusive Bronze ranked photographer dealing in American Dollars and you sell an EL for 50 credits you should receive $11.50. 

What am I missing here?

« Reply #98 on: February 13, 2011, 14:12 »
0
I receive $54 on my $100 EL sales fyi and it doesn't deviate so maybe there is a glitch with your account. 

No you don't __ you receive 54 credits on a 100 credit sale. There can be a very big difference.

If the credits used to purchase the license were originally paid for in Euros (and Europe is supposedly FT's biggest market) then they'd have cost about $130 with an average bundle. Your $54 commission therefore represents only about 41% of the purchase price.

« Reply #99 on: February 13, 2011, 14:21 »
0
US$8 for a 50 credit sale is not speculation.

right :)

If you are a non-exclusive Bronze ranked photographer dealing in American Dollars and you sell an EL for 50 credits you should receive $11.50. 

What am I missing here?

if it is a US sale.. :P

and then there the US account I have instead of european, another ridiculous and lot of advantageous to FT.. (cant understand why they cannot change it without getting a new account, absurd..)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Love

Started by Dreamstime News Microstock News

0 Replies
2023 Views
Last post February 12, 2007, 10:10
by Dreamstime News
12 Replies
4907 Views
Last post June 25, 2007, 01:06
by ianhlnd
8 Replies
4695 Views
Last post August 04, 2008, 03:53
by Dreamframer
20 Replies
6276 Views
Last post May 29, 2009, 06:54
by Squat
I love Lucy!

Started by georgep7 Off Topic

5 Replies
2571 Views
Last post October 05, 2019, 10:52
by Artist

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle