Author Topic: My first month with Freepik ! (Read 15120 times)

Milleflore · « **Reply #50 on:** April 26, 2022, 02:16 »

Thanks Pacesetter, Ravens & Wilm

Yes, I am actually making more this year than last year, but only by diversifying.

I keep being reminded of a economics model where a new industry with lots of potential starts out and all goes very well for awhile because demand exceeds supply. However, as more and more suppliers start to join in to make a quick buck, or cash in on those profits, eventually supply far exceeds demand. This is where we are at the moment. The bottom far end of the bell curve.

What happens next is that there are usually the same suppliers (both agencies and contributors, in this regard) still trying to hold on, and fighting and squabbling over what profits remain, but unless they diversify or provide a better product (not necessarily a cheaper one), most will eventually be gone in a year or so. The model usually predicts that in the end, the market is finally taken over by only a small number of suppliers who outperform everyone else.

I am just talking off the top of my head at the moment, and I hope that makes sense. But the point I am trying to make is this Freepik thing is one of the symptoms of the end of the cycle, where everyone's trying to clutch at straws within a diminishing market, rather than thinking outside the square and producing a better product. Price cutting, freebies, etc, is definitely not the answer.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #51 on:** April 26, 2022, 02:38 »

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?

Wilm · « **Reply #52 on:** April 26, 2022, 03:50 »

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.

Milleflore · « **Reply #53 on:** April 26, 2022, 04:52 »

Quote from: Wilm on April 26, 2022, 03:50

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 :-)

Wilm · « **Reply #54 on:** April 26, 2022, 05:02 »

Quote from: Annie on April 26, 2022, 04:52

Quote from: Wilm on April 26, 2022, 03:50
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 :-)

Yes! :-)

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #55 on:** April 26, 2022, 05:02 »

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!

Milleflore · « **Reply #56 on:** April 26, 2022, 05:07 »

Quote from: ravens on April 26, 2022, 01:11

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.

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?

Sounds like a great idea.

Brasilnut · « **Reply #57 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

Milleflore · « **Reply #58 on:** April 26, 2022, 06:13 »

Sounds great, Alex. I am looking forward to reading about these other sites.

EmberMike · « **Reply #59 on:** April 26, 2022, 08:55 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on April 26, 2022, 02:15

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.

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on April 26, 2022, 02:15

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.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #60 on:** April 26, 2022, 09:01 »

Founded around 2010 ish, started producing their own images around 2014.

Edit: still run by the same people too.

Also would like to know which other sites strated the same way

Roscoe · « **Reply #61 on:** April 26, 2022, 14:13 »

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.

Milleflore · « **Reply #62 on:** April 26, 2022, 16:01 »

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.

ravens · « **Reply #63 on:** April 27, 2022, 00:18 »

Quote from: Wilm on April 26, 2022, 03:50

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!

ravens · « **Reply #64 on:** April 27, 2022, 00:32 »

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

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

THIS sounds tons better, Alex.

Are there any other agencies for book covers in addition to Arcangel and Trevillion?
Best of luck with the drone shots!

ravens · « **Reply #65 on:** April 27, 2022, 00:58 »

Quote from: Annie on April 26, 2022, 16:01

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.

Brasilnut · « **Reply #66 on:** April 27, 2022, 05:38 »

Quote from: ravens on April 27, 2022, 00:32

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

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

THIS sounds tons better, Alex.
Are there any other agencies for book covers in addition to Arcangel and Trevillion?
Best of luck with the drone shots!

Thanks! Nope, Arcangel and Trevillion have got that segment of the market covered, although on my rounds at bookshops when I'm looking at various book covers, I often photo composites of Shutterstock/Adobe/Getty + Arcangel and Shutterstock/Adobe/Getty + Trevillion.

Generally, Trevillion seems to be more picky about who they take on (without offering much in terms of feedback) and the type of work that goes on there. Seems like they want more of a finished product than Arcangel.

offisapup · « **Reply #67 on:** April 27, 2022, 11:01 »

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.

Bauman · « **Reply #68 on:** April 28, 2022, 07:53 »

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.

Premium sites were there but no one buys high-priced stock photos anymore. You don't make a salary with Getty Images or Offset ...

Read this from Jim Pickerell "Selling Stock":

https://www.selling-stock.com/Article/stock-photography-is-volume-the-answer

"In 2006, the last time Getty Images provided a detailed earnings breakdown to the public, their Creative Images division (RM and RF) generated $634.1 million. The average license fees were $536.25 for an RM image and $242.50 for RF. They licensed a total of 1,767,214 uses of which 973,933 were RM and 787,281 were RF. The average Return per Image in the collection was $327.

In 2018 Getty’s gross revenue for its Creative Collection had dropped to about $280 million and the average price per image licensed was down to about $29. One third of the licenses were for fees under $5.00.

As of the beginning of 2020 Getty stopped selling RM. Photographers tell me that Getty is licensing a significant number of uses for $0.17. Photographers get a 20% royalty share or $0.03 per use."

--------------------------

I have always taken high quality photos. It usually takes me one hour or two for post production.

I upload about 400-500 photos a year and with a portfolio of 4000-5000 photos I was earning 2500/3000 $ a month ... today 2000/2500 $ for the drop in RPD due to SS and Alamy.

I did some testing by sending lower quality photos without post production ... but unfortunately they don't sell or sell very little.

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).

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #69 on:** April 28, 2022, 08:54 »

Quote from: Bauman on April 28, 2022, 07:53

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?

cascoly · « **Reply #70 on:** April 28, 2022, 10:51 »

Quote from: Bauman on April 28, 2022, 07:53

...
In 2018 Getty’s gross revenue for its Creative Collection had dropped to about $280 million and the average price per image licensed was down to about $29. One third of the licenses were for fees under $5.00.
....

which really means the median price is less than $29 (a few $100+ sales distort the mean) [bill gates walks into a bar and the average net worth is millions]

Milleflore · « **Reply #71 on:** April 29, 2022, 02:21 »

Quote from: Bauman on April 28, 2022, 07:53

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.

Milleflore · « **Reply #72 on:** April 29, 2022, 02:50 »

I also want to add that people used to only upload their best 'artistic' work to Fine Art America, hoping to sell these as wall art.

However, since I've paid the annual fee and have access to their Pixels.com site - a lot more commercial work is selling. Yes, they have to be good quality photos, but they don't have to be 'artistic' or just landscapes or similar.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #73 on:** April 29, 2022, 09:21 »

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?

offisapup · « **Reply #74 on:** April 29, 2022, 11:50 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on April 29, 2022, 09:21

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?

Well, flickr was (at one point in time) the most popular photographer's network on the internet. People had no issues putting their high resolutions images up without watermarks for free there. All you had to do was right-click-save to steal those shots. The whole idea of hitting the "Explore" page and getting thousands of likes and comments was too hard to resist for a lot of people.

Most of freestock is just that. People who do photography as a hobby and have a day job who just want to put up their images somewhere for likes and downloads. I don't believe most of them are even aware they can make some money off this. Just like people (like myself) during the earlier days of flickr had no idea you could make money off stock photography. It has very little to do with self respect because if you're a mere hobbyist taking snapshots (or even very good pictures), you don't think of your images as "work" anyway.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: My first month with Freepik ! (Read 15120 times)

Milleflore

Justanotherphotographer

Wilm

Milleflore

Wilm

Justanotherphotographer

Milleflore

Brasilnut

Milleflore

EmberMike

Justanotherphotographer

Roscoe

Milleflore

ravens

ravens

ravens

Brasilnut

offisapup

Bauman

Uncle Pete

cascoly

Milleflore

Milleflore

Uncle Pete

offisapup

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors