Love or hate them, just this week we managed to get some exclusive inside-info from their Product Manager via an interview:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2022/04/18/interview-with-esmeralda-banos-product-manager-at-freepik/

Alex & Elijah

There's a reason for new images getting downloads right away, A giant vacuum * every new image and saving them. Next year you will have no new downloads. US members have to pay $85 a year to give away work for free.

Love or hate them, just this week we managed to get some exclusive inside-info from their Product Manager via an interview:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2022/04/18/interview-with-esmeralda-banos-product-manager-at-freepik/

Alex & Elijah

Worth repeating, it's nice to have the reviews and interviews and I don't see this as promoting, but rather as informing us.

There's a reason for new images getting downloads right away, A giant vacuum * every new image and saving them. Next year you will have no new downloads. US members have to pay $85 a year to give away work for free.

Yes the sound of someone draining every image off the site and making their own giant collection. Then we get nothing as they are shared and redistributed and who really monitors illegal uses.

But really? I have to get a new form every year and pay for that? Sounds like a negative expense. I mean, suppose it's a business deduction, but to make a profit, I'd have to make $85 a year on FreePik and then keep in mind that I have to pay taxes on that $85, or itemize on a Schedule C, which means the same thing = zero money earned for the first $85.

Pay to sell stock is coming to a site near you.

Just so many details about this sound wrong as far as income is concerned.

Also I don't see the free people as the same people who would download from a pay site. But anyone who would pay $119 a year, might be the same people who would pay at SS or AS or IS? This is difficult?

$0.07 per download. Cool. 

Yeah, lets see, 10c at SS, 2c at IS, nothing at many others that are dead, 123RF is going negative taking back commissions.  I don't know if 7� is a good alternative or a terrible sign of the times? But you're right with the low number. I still can't see paying to give away my work for free?

Now lets see the AS detractors put down the 36� minimum? Small wonder why people are happy with Adobe.

Quote from: Brasilnut on April 20, 2022, 13:13

Love or hate them, just this week we managed to get some exclusive inside-info from their Product Manager via an interview:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2022/04/18/interview-with-esmeralda-banos-product-manager-at-freepik/

Alex & Elijah

Alex, why do you look into the cheapest of the cheap? Why aren't you investigating premium and boutique agencies that are actually respectable and that actually sell image licenses instead of using images to make money from advertising?
The only useful information about "freepik" and all those similar scumbags is "Stay Away". (And I'm giving it for free)

The article was informative and I learned why I would never pay to upload anything to Freepik.

Look at it as a public service announcement? Or maybe educational for people who are looking at the site and can see that paying $85 a year for a permit or 25% to Spain, is just an unreasonable overhead expense.

Currently, according to contributors who post their numbers, freepik pays 0.075 cents per download.
The monthly fee is 7.50 euros for the buyer if you contract for a whole year.
If they pay 50%, to make it round, let's say the unit price per download must be 0.15 to balance the accounts.
7.50 divided by 0.15 $ is 50 monthly downloads on average, which is what paying users must download to maintain these payments (66 downloads if they pay the monthly fee of 10 Dollars)
If the average number of downloads of the average registered user is higher, I am afraid that Freepik hides downloads or limits them in some way.
It is very easy to download more than 50/66 photos in a month.
Giving life to any agency that is a small supplement to the income of the 3 or 4 big ones favors that the competition is always lowering prices and commissions.
We are selfish and we get what we deserve.

Let's face it. There are no new microstock customers out there, any more. One of the most effective ways for both snatching customers from competitors and stabilizing customer retention is lowering the pricing.

And now those lower paying agencies are viewed as OK. Moreover, contributors even start promoting them. May be to prove their decision right or something. But why they do that are not very important.

The important question is why should AS keep paying the $0.33 minimum when now it can be much, much lower and some contributors will probably come in to defend with comments like "AS is just doing it like other agencies"?

Yeah, we get what we deserve.

...in the spirit of Alex's approach, it will be unbiased ...

In the spirit of Alex's will it also end in a referral link?

EDIT ooof, looked into it, 10% of earnings for a year, no wonder they are suddenly finding it in their hearts to write up these sites. Alex: maybe also let readers know it is a referral link. You even have a "Disclaimer" section, but don't even mention there you will be earning money if people sign up. Journalist lol.

EDIT 2: Holy molly, even the link in this paragraph, the actual "disclaimer", claiming that you aren�t promoting them is a referral link:

"Disclaimer: As someone who has been consistently critical of the free-download model, this interview is an opportunity to try to better-understand the benefits, if any, of such models from someone on the inside the industry. Therefore, my intention is neither to promote or �dis-promote� Freepik."

No hint of irony there? Do you not think this presents a clear conflict of interest and could cause unconscious bias?  Was this not covered in your journalism course? I am assuming you have been on one as you claim authority as a journalist.

You�re not a journalist, you�re a blogger. This referral business neatly illustrates the difference between the two. Journalists are generally held to a much higher standard which your referral links negate.

Strongly agree, I wouldn't have bought this up if he hadn�t very explicitly leant on being a journalist to add authority to the blog:

�... I'm both a contributor and journalist...As a journalist, my aim is to be unbiased and ask the right probing questions to the right people...�

This is no more journalism than a YouTuber review making cash from links.

There are people on here who regularly do what I would consider much, much closer to in depth unbiased journalistic reporting and would never think to call themselves journalists (Jo Ann Snover, looking at you).

Quote from: Elijah on April 23, 2022, 11:53

...in the spirit of Alex's approach, it will be unbiased ...

In the spirit of Alex's will it also end in a referral link?

EDIT ooof, looked into it, 10% of earnings for a year, no wonder they are suddenly finding it in their hearts to write up these sites. Alex: maybe also let readers know it is a referral link. You even have a "Disclaimer" section, but don't even mention there you will be earning money if people sign up. Journalist lol.

EDIT 2: Holy molly, even the link in this paragraph, the actual "disclaimer", claiming that you aren�t promoting them is a referral link:

"Disclaimer: As someone who has been consistently critical of the free-download model, this interview is an opportunity to try to better-understand the benefits, if any, of such models from someone on the inside the industry. Therefore, my intention is neither to promote or �dis-promote� Freepik."

No hint of irony there? Do you not think this presents a clear conflict of interest and could cause unconscious bias?  Was this not covered in your journalism course? I am assuming you have been on one as you claim authority as a journalist.

Exactly. The referral link:
" If you feel the information provided in the interview is helpful enough, you can take the next step and sign up here."
That's just a bait for anyone new to stock to start selling their work for peanuts and start earning you $$$.

Alex, this is sick.

I could understand why people had issues with Freepik a couple of years ago (it never occurred to me to upload there) but at this point of the game, I can't see much of a difference. SS sells videos for 25 cents, IS sells images for 1 cent, EM sells images for 1 cent, * Alamy goes on promotional sales galore and sells images for 3 cents gross - and everyone agrees that this is absolutely bad. Of course, it is. Yet when Freepik sells images for 6 cents... it is unacceptable? Kinda defies the logic.

I don't have a 100% formed opinion about Freepik yet but what I see so far makes them as acceptable earner as any other stock agency.
I made 180USD on 2000 images in the first month; this month I'm on track to make 120-130USD.
I see no problem having this money, especially in my current state where money doesn't come easy at all and I'm generally struggling.

I will be posting a review on https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/ about Freepik- in the spirit of Alex's approach, it will be unbiased and will contain both - negative things that encountered so far that really bug me and positive things.

I also uploaded some files to another unlimited download site - Vecteezy, nothing encouraging so far, but the average sales there is 9 cents. Again, pretty bad, but what's the difference between this and other agencies...

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, if you want to write articles shouldn�t you be a bit less biased? Reports are that RPD is usually around 7c but lets go with your 9c.

I will go with vectors as that seems to be mainly what Freepik has a history in and still mainly trades in. Some of these sites I no longer upload new work to because of poor RPD (BS, DP, IS, SS) but as a comparison all approx based on last year and so far this year:

Bigstock RPD: 45c
Depositphos RPD: 48c
123RF RPD: 90c
DT RPD: 75c
AS RPD: 95c
IS RPD: 70c
SS RPD: 68c

So what�s the difference you ask? The answer is HUGE, VAST, an order of magnitude in some cases. Is this the sort of journalistic integrity we can buy too?

Quote from: thx9000 on April 24, 2022, 04:55

As much as we like to blame corporate greed for the current situation we as a group are much more to blame. The majority of microstockers are ok with any price above zero and don't care about anything other than their bottom line. Nevermind the bigger picture or moral principles or even basic common sense. Agencies are only taking advantage of this. Why wouldn't they?

Not the majority. Just the majority of the ones being paid to write about it. Most of the people on this and other forums, for example, know enough about the history of these sites and the industry not to fall for this stuff.

The majority I'm talking about is the one who didn't even flinch after all the changes the big agencies introduced. The one who eagerly submits to freepik and istock. They are plenty of stockers still submitting to 123rf ! The bloggers are just the face of the all these people, the tip of the iceberg. Trying to claim some moral integrity and pose as a "journalist" is just ridiculous btw

Quote from: Elijah on April 23, 2022, 11:53

I could understand why people had issues with Freepik a couple of years ago (it never occurred to me to upload there) but at this point of the game, I can't see much of a difference. SS sells videos for 25 cents, IS sells images for 1 cent, EM sells images for 1 cent, * Alamy goes on promotional sales galore and sells images for 3 cents gross - and everyone agrees that this is absolutely bad. Of course, it is. Yet when Freepik sells images for 6 cents... it is unacceptable? Kinda defies the logic.

I don't have a 100% formed opinion about Freepik yet but what I see so far makes them as acceptable earner as any other stock agency.
I made 180USD on 2000 images in the first month; this month I'm on track to make 120-130USD.
I see no problem having this money, especially in my current state where money doesn't come easy at all and I'm generally struggling.

I will be posting a review on https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/ about Freepik- in the spirit of Alex's approach, it will be unbiased and will contain both - negative things that encountered so far that really bug me and positive things.

I also uploaded some files to another unlimited download site - Vecteezy, nothing encouraging so far, but the average sales there is 9 cents. Again, pretty bad, but what's the difference between this and other agencies...

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, if you want to write articles shouldn�t you be a bit less biased? Reports are that RPD is usually around 7c but lets go with your 9c.

I will go with vectors as that seems to be mainly what Freepik has a history in and still mainly trades in. Some of these sites I no longer upload new work to because of poor RPD (BS, DP, IS, SS) but as a comparison all approx based on last year and so far this year:

Bigstock RPD: 45c
Depositphos RPD: 48c
123RF RPD: 90c
DT RPD: 75c
AS RPD: 95c
IS RPD: 70c
SS RPD: 68c

So what�s the difference you ask? The answer is HUGE, VAST, an order of magnitude in some cases. Is this the sort of journalistic integrity we can buy too?

We look differently at it. You look at RPD, I look at the bottom line and care only about the bottom line.
As an example:

My 10k+ Alamy port gives me very decent RPD - around 10$ per image. But the sales are minuscule.
My Freepik port gives me crappy RPD but better earnings than Alamy.
The choice here seems pretty obvious to me.

I'm not doing art photography, and as painful as it can sound for some - none of us do - it is microstock. I upload to have an income that helps me. I see no shame in saying 'I'm in it for the money. If your approach is different, it's totally fine.

For all the talk about Alamy, that was the only agency so far I requested my account be closed. Pathetic with not a single sale for over a year.

Anyway, besides that, I am reminded of the time contributors were falling over themselves to sign up for the $5 payment from Adobe (I didn't) for use of selected images for 12 months in whatever capacity it was (I think free offers). I said it then that this exercise was more than just acquiring images for more liberal use by the agency... imo it was a good bit of research and testing contributors' willingness to surrender, and lookie now ┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ the cut to commissions for videos.   

.

...In regards to the referral link(s), further to reading the above valid comments and having a good think about everything, I've decided to remove them from the interview. ...

Just wanted to say that I think you've done the right thing and kudos for acknowledging a mistake. Not easy to do, but we all make them from time to time and being straight about that is important.

Quote from: Pacesetter on April 24, 2022, 07:02

...

Anyway, besides that, I am reminded of the time contributors were falling over themselves to sign up for the $5 payment from Adobe (I didn't) for use of selected images for 12 months in whatever capacity it was (I think free offers). I said it then that this exercise was more than just acquiring images for more liberal use by the agency......

how many of your images (that qualified for AS program) earn $5 from adobe in a year? that's the actual decision artist made when choosing which images they'd submit

Yeh sure, that's probably a similar decision as to why the contributor above uploads to Freepik, not that I would upload there either. I was approached by Vecteezy and similarly didn't respond to their invite to upload.

Just a more general observation, for all the price cuts happening I'm not seeing more sales. Perhaps others are. Just the same sales for less. Actually it is less sales for less earnings.   

I just signed up at freepik. I'm not too concerned with RPD, there are several metrics worth looking at when it comes to choosing which sites to work with. For me it's more about how much money am I making overall, for how much effort, and does contributing to that site devalue my work elsewhere. On the last point, I don't think it does. The freepik audience isn't the same as the SS audience or other typical microstock marketplaces. At least that's my impression of it.

Not everything is so black and white in this business. I can be a contributor at a place that isn't exactly great in terms of RPD and still get something out if it without selling my soul to the company. I can curate what i upload there, send just older work or less popular images. I can drop 100 images there and just see what happens. Don't have to go all-in right away.

At this point, is anything really not worth a try? It's not like things have been trending in a great direction anyway. Freepik isn't going to be the thing that breaks this business. It was being broken years ago by the companies that so many folks here still sing the praises of.

lol...

agencies must be stupid not to further decrease your royalties to zero

and does contributing to that site devalue my work elsewhere.

The problem is it's devaluing the value of photography across the whole market.

Is earning an extra 20 bucks a month worth it? If you were earning $2,000 a month from microstock agencies, would you still be doing this?

But it's not your fault. The whole perception of the value of photography started a while ago. It started with Getty, then free sites started with Unsplash, and so forth. And the latest assets to be hit are now videos.

This whole perception that cheap = more, is not working. It just means cheap = cheap.  Agencies are just trying to grab existing buyers from other agencies.

(And btw, if you are getting a kickback for promoting these sites, can you please state so?)

Quote from: EmberMike on April 25, 2022, 08:45

and does contributing to that site devalue my work elsewhere.

The problem is it's devaluing the value of photography across the whole market.

Is earning an extra 20 bucks a month worth it? If you were earning $2,000 a month from microstock agencies, would you still be doing this?

But it's not your fault. The whole perception of the value of photography started a while ago. It started with Getty, then free sites started with Unsplash, and so forth. And the latest assets to be hit are now videos.

This whole perception that cheap = more, is not working. It just means cheap = cheap.  Agencies are just trying to grab existing buyers from other agencies.

(And btw, if you are getting a kickback for promoting these sites, can you please state so?)

Yes very well said Annie and great to read your thoughts on this.

Quote from: Brasilnut on April 24, 2022, 05:50

Good morning all,

In regards to the referral link(s), further to reading the above valid comments and having a good think about everything, I've decided to remove them from the interview. Should anyone have signed up in the time between publishing the interview and removing the link (and I do eventually earn anything) I'll refuse the payment.

Within the past two months or so, Elijah uploaded a large batch to them. Let's give it a bit of time for those images to mature and start selling and, as mentioned earlier, he'll then be publishing a full comprehensive and unbiased review. Should be interesting to compare average RPI between all the agencies.

Alex

Alex, I'm kind of a bit disappointed that you have taken this route. You have a very interesting and helpful blog and I know you have promoted other avenues for increasing one's income, such as the book covers - which was really interesting and informative. But there are still other ways that do not devalue a person's work.

There are lots of places where creatives can set their own price. POD sites, designer resources agencies, direct selling, etc. (As an example, after putting a bit of time into researching what other type of buyers are out there, and changing what I shoot, I am now earning an additional $500 a month from these places, on top of my microstock earnings. Plus there is potential for even more growth.)

I have even put my prices up recently on some of these sites and increased my buyers. So, it can be done.

Well said, Annie!

Alex, Annie just gave you great ideas for your blog.

Most photographers are ambitious folk. As we shoot more, we learn more and our work becomes better over the years.
As our content improves, we want to earn more. We don't want to earn less.
THIS is where photographers need your help. We don't want to hear about "Stock wizards" who are the blood-suckers of this industry.

How about getting Photographer's Market Guide 2022 for better agencies to review?

...Freepik isn't any worse. They just don't have the history to leverage their reputation. Other companies did the work of devaluing images over many years. Freepik just joined the party.
...

They are over 10 years old though, and played a major part in the devaluation themselves. A lot of the moves by SS etc. have been in response to the growth of sites like Freepik.

Freepik spent years as a warez site search engine selling stolen goods in exchange for a fee to remove their attribution to images they never had the rights to in the first place (including mine and I'm sure yours).

They have a very long history indeed.

I have also seen my rolling 12 month total steadily increase over the last 16 years. The only dips really have been when I have had to take prolonged time off or work less for personal reasons. You do have to work at it and look for other legitimate sources of income in the industry. The same sites wont always be on top. I�m approaching another milestone and thought about posting a thread but I don�t think people would be interested.

I wonder if the people disappointed and dumping work on Freepik etc. bought into the �passive income� shtick from youtubers and bloggers (again, making their living from clicks/ referral programs). It isn�t really passive income so much as deferred payment.

It makes sense to listen to those who have made a success of it (like Annie) more than those who are struggling surely?

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on April 26, 2022, 02:38

I�m approaching another milestone and thought about posting a thread but I don�t think people would be interested.

I would be very interested! Milestones always are interesting.

Yes, we love Milestone threads, don't we, Wilm :-)

Thank you, I will consider it, I am always a bit reluctant to share income details especially as I�m anonymous. At the same time it could help with motivating me to hit the target!

Quote from: Brasilnut on April 24, 2022, 05:50

Good morning all,

In regards to the referral link(s), further to reading the above valid comments and having a good think about everything, I've decided to remove them from the interview. Should anyone have signed up in the time between publishing the interview and removing the link (and I do eventually earn anything) I'll refuse the payment.

Within the past two months or so, Elijah uploaded a large batch to them. Let's give it a bit of time for those images to mature and start selling and, as mentioned earlier, he'll then be publishing a full comprehensive and unbiased review. Should be interesting to compare average RPI between all the agencies.

Alex

Alex, I'm kind of a bit disappointed that you have taken this route. You have a very interesting and helpful blog and I know you have promoted other avenues for increasing one's income, such as the book covers - which was really interesting and informative. But there are still other ways that do not devalue a person's work.

There are lots of places where creatives can set their own price. POD sites, designer resources agencies, direct selling, etc. (As an example, after putting a bit of time into researching what other type of buyers are out there, and changing what I shoot, I am now earning an additional $500 a month from these places, on top of my microstock earnings. Plus there is potential for even more growth.)

I have even put my prices up recently on some of these sites and increased my buyers. So, it can be done.

Hi Annie,

I hear you. I admit that sometimes I get frustrated and instead of looking at different revenue streams I'll just look for more agencies (I will submit a smallish batch to Freepiks and Vecteezy as a trial to later add some insight into the reviews)...my thinking is that if they're already keyworded, what's the harm? But there's not much point in earning an extra $20-30 a month on another 5,000 images. The industry is broken and it's only going to get worse imo in terms of returns for the time/investment put in.

As I've heard many times from those on the inside, many buyers don't mind paying a bit extra for quality work so it makes sense to price our work correct when we have the option to do so. Or, what I'm doing more and more is submitting my work to premium agencies, Arcangel for book covers and recently signed up to Overflightstock for my drone stuff.

One of my yearly goals has been to try to get my (paid) FAA up and running again to add more images / curate the portfolio. I do have sales on there every few months but I want to push it more, plus better ways to promote my work. I've done OK at Photo4me and will keep adding on that. The drone aerial shots add to my arsenal and I'm only getting started.

Alex

They are over 10 years old though, and played a major part in the devaluation themselves. A lot of the moves by SS etc. have been in response to the growth of sites like Freepik...

... They have a very long history indeed.

As I understand it, the version of freepik as we know it today was built in 2016. So to your point, there is some history there. But by 2016 a lot of other companies were already in their own "race to the bottom" in terms of pricing. I don't think that in 2016 any new company was influencing what istock, SS, and others were doing.

Freepik spent years as a warez site search engine selling stolen goods in exchange for a fee to remove their attribution to images they never had the rights to in the first place (including mine and I'm sure yours).

Honestly, I don't care. They're not the only one that started out that way. You might be a contributor at one of them.

Well, at least Alex' post triggered a discussion, and probably informed contributors who were not very familiar with Freepik up to now.
Mission accomplished. And food for follow-up.

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on April 26, 2022, 02:38

I�m approaching another milestone and thought about posting a thread but I don�t think people would be interested.

I would be very interested! Milestones always are interesting.

Justanotherphotographer, I would be very interested too!

Quote from: Brasilnut on April 26, 2022, 06:02

Quote from: Annie on April 25, 2022, 17:38

Quote from: Brasilnut on April 24, 2022, 05:50

Good morning all,

In regards to the referral link(s), further to reading the above valid comments and having a good think about everything, I've decided to remove them from the interview. Should anyone have signed up in the time between publishing the interview and removing the link (and I do eventually earn anything) I'll refuse the payment.

Within the past two months or so, Elijah uploaded a large batch to them. Let's give it a bit of time for those images to mature and start selling and, as mentioned earlier, he'll then be publishing a full comprehensive and unbiased review. Should be interesting to compare average RPI between all the agencies.

Alex

Alex, I'm kind of a bit disappointed that you have taken this route. You have a very interesting and helpful blog and I know you have promoted other avenues for increasing one's income, such as the book covers - which was really interesting and informative. But there are still other ways that do not devalue a person's work.

There are lots of places where creatives can set their own price. POD sites, designer resources agencies, direct selling, etc. (As an example, after putting a bit of time into researching what other type of buyers are out there, and changing what I shoot, I am now earning an additional $500 a month from these places, on top of my microstock earnings. Plus there is potential for even more growth.)

I have even put my prices up recently on some of these sites and increased my buyers. So, it can be done.

Hi Annie,

I hear you. I admit that sometimes I get frustrated and instead of looking at different revenue streams I'll just look for more agencies (I will submit a smallish batch to Freepiks and Vecteezy as a trial to later add some insight into the reviews)...my thinking is that if they're already keyworded, what's the harm? But there's not much point in earning an extra $20-30 a month on another 5,000 images. The industry is broken and it's only going to get worse imo in terms of returns for the time/investment put in.

As I've heard many times from those on the inside, many buyers don't mind paying a bit extra for quality work so it makes sense to price our work correct when we have the option to do so. Or, what I'm doing more and more is submitting my work to premium agencies, Arcangel for book covers and recently signed up to Overflightstock for my drone stuff.

One of my yearly goals has been to try to get my (paid) FAA up and running again to add more images / curate the portfolio. I do have sales on there every few months but I want to push it more, plus better ways to promote my work. I've done OK at Photo4me and will keep adding on that. The drone aerial shots add to my arsenal and I'm only getting started.

Alex

Alex, I forgot to say that if you do have 5,000 pre-keyworded commercial photos then you would do better on FAA. Yes, definitely pay the $30/annum fee. It has lots of advantages.

First of all, if you pay the annual fee, you will receive a free website via their other site, Pixels.com. Its a nice looking website where you can orderly sort your photos in collections (via the FAA site - everything is done on FAA. Pixels just mirrors what you have on FAA). And for those who don't want to pay much for their own website, $30 a year is much cheaper than $30/month. This has the extra advantage then of enabling you to show your work to those asking to see your portfolio.

Once you are on Pixels, you will also have a wider range of print on demand products. Its a lot more commercial than just putting up your best 'artistic' work for prints and wall art. As I said to a friend the other day, I am always surprised what people print on shower curtains. lol

With that in mind, don't curate your work too much. Let the buyers decide. I've had lots of things sell that I wouldn't have thought would - if I curated my own work too much.

I also sell a lot of greeting cards, but also surprised at how often someone will come along and place a bulk order. For example, a recent sale where a buyer purchased 6 packs of 25. Total commission for me = $150. And this was when they were having a statewide sale. So, money can be made from just selling greeting cards, not just large wall prints.

And of course, don't price your work too cheaply! I always add a little extra than their recommended markup.

Uploading (at only 5 at a time) does take a while. I uploaded 4,000 there, a little bit every day while I was working on something else, and noticed all these sales coming through. The algorithm seems to favor new uploads. So, regular uploading seems to help.

Thank you, Annie. This is valuable information.
You are doing great on FAA. Do you promote your images much?
I'm on FAA also, and I'm rather happy with the sales, but my port is still small-ish. Uploading takes some time, but it's not too tedious (like on some other sites, Redbubble for example). The annual fee is small compared to the fact that you get your own site.
There are many POD sites out there, and everyone will surely find the best fit for their work by searching on Google. Different type of images do better on different sites, just like on stock.

I, for one, appreciate the content on freepik and vecteezy, Alex. I'm never going to join freebie sites but it's educational to know what that side of the industry thinks and how they justify doing what they do.

I think most of cheap microstock is headed in that direction. But, like Annie said, if you make great quality content that's unique and useful and refuse to give it away for free, there'll always be takers for it and they likely will have to pay more for that content in the future on the more premium sites than they do now. 3-4 years down the line I see pretty much all of the ordinary microstock being given away for free.

Quote from: offisapup on April 27, 2022, 11:01

But, like Annie said, if you make great quality content that's unique and useful and refuse to give it away for free, there'll always be takers for it and they likely will have to pay more for that content in the future on the more premium sites than they do now. 3-4 years down the line I see pretty much all of the ordinary microstock being given away for free.

And if you want to sell on POD sites or through your website and do well, it takes a lot of marketing, otherwise you have to settle for $ 200-500 per month (if you have an high quality portfolio of 1-2K images).

iStock is 15%, and minimum is 2� also connect use is fractions of a cent, but at 15%. SS Level 1 15% Level 2  20% Level 3  25% Level 4  30% Level 5  35% Level 6  40% - but if they only charge pennies for sub downloads, that mostly means the minimum 10� and into the teens for commissions for most downloads. Since SS is primarily subs and API and other partners, most of our rewards will be sub-20� per image. Adobe is better minimum with few exceptions is 34� and there are many 99� downloads for everyone. That's the big three?

This is for both of you. How do you do marketing? Say FAA or a personal site or Shopify? What sound someone do?

The guy suing SS has thousands of images up on Flickr. That's where they came from. Thieves go to Pexels, copy images for free use or upload them as their own.

I mean, what's the answer? How do I market safely and where?

Quote from: offisapup on April 27, 2022, 11:01

But, like Annie said, if you make great quality content that's unique and useful and refuse to give it away for free, there'll always be takers for it and they likely will have to pay more for that content in the future on the more premium sites than they do now. 3-4 years down the line I see pretty much all of the ordinary microstock being given away for free.

And if you want to sell on POD sites or through your website and do well, it takes a lot of marketing, otherwise you have to settle for $ 200-500 per month (if you have an high quality portfolio of 1-2K images).

I think you just answered the question on everyone's mind, 'how do I make up for losses with microstock price-cutting WITHOUT any marketing'. I believe an additional $500/month is very feasible, and very welcome to most contributors.

Pete and Ravens and others who asked about marketing: I don't do any additional marketing. On FAA, I don't join any groups, or do any of that social stuff. When I get some time - after I finish building my ports on these other sites - I want to develop my marketing through social media, but at the moment, I haven't had the time.

For anyone who knows, or at least have some ideas, because I really don't have any good ones? IF someone wanted to do some marketing for a better exposure and possibly getting noticed by buyers, what would they do? How would someone proceed to get noticed?

Does that cost money, or some investment besides time or posting to social media? I can't see spamming all my friends, who aren't image buyers, with "Here's my latest upload to FAA" or some Twitter announcement that's sent to everyone. Second account, and then how do I get the right kind of friends, the ones who buy things. 

Thanks Annie, interesting from someone who makes some sales on FAA. Mine are fulfillment for sales and that works well. I get an occasional Pixels sale. Last month I sold a tapestry of all things. Someone has one of mine hanging on a wall someplace 51x60 inches.

But this is about Freepik and my answer is, no way. Not just because of the 25% default tax from Spain, or the $85 a year proof from the IRS, but just for the overall value and undermining that they could do.

I don't think my buyers would even look at Freepik, but somewhere I think the value and impression of my work as what I do, would be diminished and degraded into, perceived values dropping to phone snapshot levels. I like to think that I work and make specific images, using higher quality equipment, taking time and effort to edit and produce something of greater value.

The impression of giving away my photos for free is, a sign of desperation and personally degrading. Free? Don't people have any self respect for what they create?

For anyone who knows, or at least have some ideas, because I really don't have any good ones? IF someone wanted to do some marketing for a better exposure and possibly getting noticed by buyers, what would they do? How would someone proceed to get noticed?

Does that cost money, or some investment besides time or posting to social media? I can't see spamming all my friends, who aren't image buyers, with "Here's my latest upload to FAA" or some Twitter announcement that's sent to everyone. Second account, and then how do I get the right kind of friends, the ones who buy things. 

Thanks Annie, interesting from someone who makes some sales on FAA. Mine are fulfillment for sales and that works well. I get an occasional Pixels sale. Last month I sold a tapestry of all things. Someone has one of mine hanging on a wall someplace 51x60 inches.

Start a new thread for this, Pete, and I will add some of my thoughts and hopefully others will too.

I used goigle ads, amazon ads and Facebook ads in the past to sell POD stuff and also to drive traffic to my site (when I sold stock direct). You can pretty much set your own revenue if you spend enough on ads. That's what informs my view of how important search placement is on the micros. If you get enough eyeballs you will sell. The problem is I was spending $12 for every $10 to me. Also don't ever give fb your money, much worse results than the others and exposed as BSing ads customers more than once.

Thanks! Very interesting, especially the part about: "The problem is I was spending $12 for every $10 to me."

...

I've used social media for free marketing before and plan to get back into it, possibly next month, and to answer Pete's questions above, this is what I've learnt:

Does that cost money, or some investment besides time or posting to social media? I can't see spamming all my friends, who aren't image buyers, with "Here's my latest upload to FAA" or some Twitter announcement that's sent to everyone. Second account, and then how do I get the right kind of friends, the ones who buy things. 

Free Social Media Marketing: just requires 15 to 30 minutes a day on the big 4: Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, and Instagram. But my recommendation is to just choose 2 at a time and build those up, otherwise it becomes just too time consuming, and your attention may get too scattered.

There are 2 ways you can do this. The first, the easy way, is just to increase click throughs and therefore views on your products, which will help with their search placement. I've had up to 40 views on a new FAA product from just doing this.  I used to regularly get about 20 to 30 views on products listed on DesignBundles, which really helped with their search placement. Here you just need to regularly post links to your product/website/blog. I recommend that you do this for new listings/uploads especially, because lots of interest on a new product seems to really help with the algorithm.
 
The second is to really go full-on to develop a dedicated audience. And that takes a lot more time and you need to understand how to use hashtags, or write interesting blog posts, create some lead magnets (freebies), or even go as far as developing an email marketing list.

I have separate business social media accounts to my personal ones. It just works much better that way, and yes, you are not then spamming family and friends. Its also best to keep your own political or social views out of your business account. You don�t want to alienate anyone. I was starting to use my business Twitter for personal interests, and then decided to stop.

If you�re starting out and don�t know what to do, then just go on Pinterest and type in a search question for what you need to know. For example: �how to get followers on Instagram?�, and there should be hundreds of blog posts and quick tips. Some are just click-baits, and some actually have some good answers. For example:

https://www.pinterest.com.au/search/pins/?rs=ac&len=2&q=how%20to%20get%20followers%20on%20instagram&eq=how%20to%20get%20followers%20on%20ins&etslf=9447&term_meta[]=how%7Cautocomplete%7C0&term_meta[]=to%7Cautocomplete%7C0&term_meta[]=get%7Cautocomplete%7C0&term_meta[]=followers%7Cautocomplete%7C0&term_meta[]=on%7Cautocomplete%7C0&term_meta[]=instagram%7Cautocomplete%7C0

 
I found that you don�t necessarily need thousands of followers if you use the right hashtags. So, understanding how to best use hashtags is a good place to start. Once again, just type that into Pinterest search and you should get hundreds of blog articles about that.

If you can work out who is your target audience, then you can hone in on those by following these people, and often they will follow you back. The other way is to join social media groups. (People who like vintage postcards? Racing cars? Racing Sports?). For example, my husband joined a FB group who were interested in what he was selling on Shopify and now he gets lots of regular sales and return buyers from there. On Pinterest I found a specific group in my target audience range, and used to just post there because I got far better response than just posting to everyone.

But like anything, just start small and learn as you go. Just post links to your products, and hashtag, hashtag, hashtag. Hashtags will open you up to a greater audience than just your followers. And also perhaps consider joining some groups.

If you start to feel that your account is becoming too �sell/sell/sell� and starting to put people off � then write some interesting (related) blog posts. Maybe something in your area of expertise (vintage racing cars?? Where you find your vintage postcards??) and post those. Or post some interesting articles (from other sources) in that area as well. Think of interesting or helpful things that your audience would like to know more of.

Thanks! Very interesting, especially the part about: "The problem is I was spending $12 for every $10 to me."

...

With the POD sites I could never quite make it work for any length of time. It would look like I was turning a profit for a certain period but a couple of weeks later I would be in the red again. Frustrating when the difference was often small enough that a slightly bigger cut from the agency would put me in the green.

With my own site I was doing okay, like the amount I make at a mid tier agency, but I shut it down when the EU rules regarding getting VAT registered came in. I couldn�t be bothered with the extra paperwork; I like to keep things simple!

Quote from: Annie on April 30, 2022, 15:22

Thanks! Very interesting, especially the part about: "The problem is I was spending $12 for every $10 to me."

...

With the POD sites I could never quite make it work for any length of time. It would look like I was turning a profit for a certain period but a couple of weeks later I would be in the red again. Frustrating when the difference was often small enough that a slightly bigger cut from the agency would put me in the green.

With my own site I was doing okay, like the amount I make at a mid tier agency, but I shut it down when the EU rules regarding getting VAT registered came in. I couldn�t be bothered with the extra paperwork; I like to keep things simple!

With the PODs, I don't think I would bother marketing them anymore, its not really worth my time. Mainly because my target buyers could be anyone. But promoting sites, blogs and targeted products who have a specific audience (like the examples I used for Pete above) can definitely be advantageous. And yes, I too am finding that my non-microstock sites can out-perform the mid-tier agencies.
 

Is there any way, we can move these marketing comments onto its own thread? They are getting lost on here - plus people are still posting some very useful comments about Freepik, which are getting drowned out.


MOVED TO "SOCIAL MEDIA AND OTHER MARKETING' THREAD ....