pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 500px any luck selling there something?  (Read 30979 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 06, 2014, 16:13 »
0
Hey everyone, any luck selling  on 500px prime something till now ?

They got another new licencing model https://prime.500px.com/pricing?utm_source=Prime&utm_medium=email%20A&utm_campaign=Web-Social%20License&utm_content=Top%20left%20CTA

Would be interesting what they actually really sell, if anything.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2014, 16:24 by Toopy »


Ed

« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2014, 17:37 »
+12
I had someone REALLY wanting to use my image



Not surprisingly I haven't heard a word since I wrote my response  ;)

« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2014, 21:19 »
0
I had someone REALLY wanting to use my image



Not surprisingly I haven't heard a word since I wrote my response  ;)


sorry,
but what has this to do with 500px licensing?  unless i missed something here.
you said photoshelter, and OP is asking about 500px licensing.
 pls explain ! :o

« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2014, 22:55 »
+2
Hey everyone, any luck selling  on 500px prime something till now ?

I said in another thread, my friend sold one for $175 net. He doesn't sell much on stock sites so it was really surprising :) Something is moving, but it's not revolution still ;)

« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2014, 00:13 »
0
Hmm interesting. Would love to see some changes.

« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2014, 04:32 »
0
Hey I got that mail from Ignire magazine too, wasn't sure if it would be right to send them an image that I've put up for licensing. Plus not really sure how much the magazine will help me.

Haven't really had a sale at 500px, did get a couple of mails that someone is really interested in your image and you should enable it in the store

Ed

« Reply #6 on: August 07, 2014, 07:40 »
+1
I had someone REALLY wanting to use my image



Not surprisingly I haven't heard a word since I wrote my response  ;)


sorry,
but what has this to do with 500px licensing?  unless i missed something here.
you said photoshelter, and OP is asking about 500px licensing.
 pls explain ! :o


The person wanting to license the image posted the comment on my image at 500px.

I told her to go to my Photoshelter website and license it from me there.

« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2014, 09:13 »
0
Hey everyone, any luck selling  on 500px prime something till now ?

I said in another thread, my friend sold one for $175 net. He doesn't sell much on stock sites so it was really surprising :) Something is moving, but it's not revolution still ;)

good 2 know Ariene. that would be the 75% of $259 framed licensed image sale, i guess?

« Reply #8 on: August 07, 2014, 09:15 »
0
The person wanting to license the image posted the comment on my image at 500px.

I told her to go to my Photoshelter website and license it from me there.

that makes sense, since having it in your 500px Store (receiving 75%) would be less than licensing it from your PS website (100%).  thx 4 clarification Ed

« Reply #9 on: August 07, 2014, 09:29 »
+1
that would be the 75% of $259 framed licensed image sale, i guess?

That's 70% of their standard RF license which costs $250.

I'd love to get a few of these as well, until now nothing.

« Reply #10 on: August 07, 2014, 12:35 »
0
I haven't had any luck there. Can't even get images approved, and I have had no trouble getting stuff approved at any of the regular microstock sites while a lot of people complain.

I also get requests for releases when I already uploaded a release when I first submitted the image. I don't think the reviewers have a clue or their system has problems. I thought I'd try it out, but I don't think it's going anywhere.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #11 on: August 08, 2014, 06:03 »
+4
it must be a fly by night magazine if they can't even pay for photos, they don't even have a .com domain and this is a big red flag.

« Reply #12 on: August 08, 2014, 08:31 »
+2
I haven't had any luck there. Can't even get images approved, and I have had no trouble getting stuff approved at any of the regular microstock sites while a lot of people complain.

I also get requests for releases when I already uploaded a release when I first submitted the image. I don't think the reviewers have a clue or their system has problems. I thought I'd try it out, but I don't think it's going anywhere.

Hey Rob! Could you email prime@500px.com along with links to the photos you have concerns with? Our content researchers will get back to you with more info and answers to any questions you've got.

« Reply #13 on: August 11, 2014, 07:54 »
+1
I have a small port of around 80 images on there, they except more high end stuff that is not always 100% technically correct due to high ISO and so on but gives a broader field. Interestingly I pulled a load of night work off there as I have just launched a calendar and did not want anyone using my images for a similar product.  Within a day I had an agency contact me indicating they had approved one of my images with a client would it still be available.  I made the transaction personally and licensed them the image.  I just find it a little odd that I have no sales reported, but as soon as I remove images, I am contacted with clients willing to purchase.  Is there anyway we are going to be able to receive stats?  Click through's?  Anyone considered a poll?  Also any chance of FTP, I have around 7K images, I think 1K of them would easily suit 500px style but upload is painful.

« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2014, 10:35 »
0
I have a small port of around 80 images on there, they except more high end stuff that is not always 100% technically correct due to high ISO and so on but gives a broader field. Interestingly I pulled a load of night work off there as I have just launched a calendar and did not want anyone using my images for a similar product.  Within a day I had an agency contact me indicating they had approved one of my images with a client would it still be available.  I made the transaction personally and licensed them the image.  I just find it a little odd that I have no sales reported, but as soon as I remove images, I am contacted with clients willing to purchase.  Is there anyway we are going to be able to receive stats?  Click through's?  Anyone considered a poll?  Also any chance of FTP, I have around 7K images, I think 1K of them would easily suit 500px style but upload is painful.

truly interesting.  another site 2 eye-ball.
just looking  at their site moment ago,  and  seems 2 me most ppl there r more interested
in liking your work in exchange for asking u 2 like them in return.
 sort of flickr, or facebook poking .  social-media, ugh !


there r impressive stuff there , as like flickr,
but there r also just as many um, not so good. still, impressive stuff yes.

are they curated??? i read their forum and there is only mention of putting your port in your store
when and if u want to sell through them. but there is no mention of any "approval", nor how long it takes . sort of lots of grey areas.

could explain why some who have been there a long time have still to report a sale.
they were not selected and were not told so  .

or they just did not put their images into their store


i like their style, but  think they should partition off the social-media
and leave 500Prime for the commercial side of things.
 

« Last Edit: August 11, 2014, 11:00 by etudiante_rapide »

« Reply #15 on: August 11, 2014, 18:36 »
+2
@Olliemt
You can see your sales history here:
http://500px.com/settings/store/sales (View Transaction History). We're working on some contributor newsletters which should have some interesting data.  If you have a lot to submit, Alex (@500alexs) has mentioned that you can contact us at help@500px.com and we may be able to help with large collections such as yours.

@etudiante_rapide
Once you submit your content for licensing it's immediately searchable on 500px Prime, and if I a buyer requests to license it before our reviewers have reviewed the file (usually just under 2 weeks now) we'll by-pass the queue and vet the file immediately. 500px Prime (http://prime.500px.com) is much more focused as a commercial licensing marketplace without the community elements of 500px.com that you mentioned.

« Reply #16 on: August 13, 2014, 11:52 »
+1
@Olliemt
You can see your sales history here: http://500px.com/settings/store/sales (View Transaction History). We're working on some contributor newsletters which should have some interesting data.  If you have a lot to submit, Alex (@500alexs) has mentioned that you can contact us at help@500px.com and we may be able to help with large collections such as yours.

@etudiante_rapide
Once you submit your content for licensing it's immediately searchable on 500px Prime, and if I a buyer requests to license it before our reviewers have reviewed the file (usually just under 2 weeks now) we'll by-pass the queue and vet the file immediately. 500px Prime (http://prime.500px.com) is much more focused as a commercial licensing marketplace without the community elements of 500px.com that you mentioned.


thx nuno 4 taking ur time 2 respond .
i checked out your site n truly like the idea, n the earning potentials ie the setting price of framed prints $80-259, and the other 2 options.
most of all, no 35 cents or $1 per dl  ;)

in reading Olliemt 's post, i too wonder how long does it take before an item is "accepted"?
weeks, months, year? or until someone wants to license it?

other point that worries me more too, is the size of unwatermarked images.
right-click warning "this is xxx image " does not curtail a Ctrl C, and this size is pretty much enough
for most "thief" to print a decent 8 by 10, by xxx-mart standard, if  u know what i mean .

the larger 9 by 6 is impressive to look at, on a tablet. when u consider majority of the web users
think their smartphone images look "perfect already better than what your DSLR can take".
this concerns me, as it could put 500 into the same category as Flickr and fbook.
ie. tons of love and affection, not many sales .

as already pointed out by many here, re facebook,etc... tons of love and affection don't pay for
the equipment, expenses to create those images for us to upload to 500, etc.

reiterate, i like to participate with your agency, but the watermark and what Ollient points out
need to be address first.
thx



« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2014, 15:20 »
0
If someone requests to license the file, our editors review the file within hours (often faster) and if it's good to go (releases, quality, etc.) we'll complete the sale right away. Otherwise we're looking at about a 2 week backlog of photos in our queue and now that our team here has ramped up, we're able to review files much faster so that wait time is steadily decreasing.

If you're concerned about the unwatermarked previews on 500px (photos on 500px Prime are watermarked) you can upload a low-res watermarked version of your photo to 500px and then a full-res unwatermarked version to your store (Prime).  There are some details on that in our "How to Submit Guide" here: http://bit.ly/Submit2Prime

We're looking at ways to implement automatic watermarking on 500px as well, but not sure on those timelines. In the meantime, there is the above work around which allows you to create your own watermarks as well for the social community side of 500px.

Not sure what you mean by 9 by 6?


wonderful, thx nuno.
yes, i think the self-watermarked lo-res sounds good enough  4 me.
2 wks turnaround for review, that's reasonable considering your backlog as u say.

btw, 9by6 , i was referring to the dimensions of the larger  unwatermarked photos u get when u click the 2 by 2 thumbnails ... (inches).

« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2014, 06:10 »
0
Thanks Nuno, I have sent an email, awaiting reply..

« Reply #20 on: September 12, 2014, 04:59 »
+2
Do you remember as I wrote about my friend that sold picture for $175 one month ago? Well... he sold another one for $175 :) He's more than surprised! :D

« Reply #21 on: September 12, 2014, 13:00 »
0
Anyone know what type of images are selling there? Landscape, people, or other thing? Curious. I have had food stuff up there a while but nothing selling. I don't think that is their strong suite though.

« Reply #22 on: September 12, 2014, 15:55 »
+2
There is actually a discussion forum on 500px now devoted to prime and some have posted examples or their sold images. That may help.

-gl

« Reply #23 on: September 14, 2014, 02:02 »
0
for Sure, I've uploaded a good number of images but no luck 'till now, I'm starting to loose faith

« Reply #24 on: September 14, 2014, 11:18 »
0
I have sales there, looks like 500px have a good future :)

« Reply #25 on: September 15, 2014, 06:40 »
0
Seems like it's worth uploading to 500px prime. I'd almost given up hope

ultimagina

« Reply #26 on: November 14, 2014, 13:51 »
+5
Nice surprise the other day: $175 from 500px for a photo sale! That's what I'm talking about!
 8)

I have started to upload again, despite the risks of more illegal screen grabs or uncontrolled and unwanted shares on social media, etc. (It will be great if I could disable these FB, Twitter, Pinterest, etc shares, somehow)

Anyway, all these comments saying nothing else but "Great", "Awesome", "Fantastic"
"Please visit my port" are sooo annoying! Begging for the same comments in return leads nowhere and are such a waste of energy

For me the real appreciation comes from photos sold in the real economy therefore appreciated by real paying customers and not from this "exclusive photographer's club" praise, where "likes" and "faves" are for free.

Maybe 500px should think about a solid boost in popularity when sales happen, a boost that should trump all those pointless likes and faves!
« Last Edit: November 14, 2014, 14:03 by ultimagaina »


« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2014, 16:23 »
0
So here it is, another sale of mine :)
One thing I don't know is why $122,50? (bought a License) How does the calculating work here?

However, many thanks and good luck to you 500px, keep it going! :)

Btw, the friend I've talked before... he sold third file. It's growing nice :)
« Last Edit: November 29, 2014, 16:39 by Ariene »

ultimagina

« Reply #28 on: November 30, 2014, 09:41 »
0
I just had my second sale last night. But it is "only" $122.50, this time.
Is it 50% of % $250 instead of 70%? Have they dropped the photographer's share and I missed the memo? I hope not and this is only a "Black Friday" discount.

Anyway, this is not bad at all, since it means more than I get  from 123RF or DT.
Nice surprise! I'll definitely keep on uploading as much as my free account allows me to.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2014, 09:57 by ultimagaina »

« Reply #29 on: November 30, 2014, 10:10 »
0
I think this are sales from the black friday with 30% discount. It's normal to me.

« Reply #30 on: November 30, 2014, 13:17 »
+1
Do they have automatic watermarks now? My images are shared, then stolen. If I send them all DMCAs it would take months.

« Reply #31 on: November 30, 2014, 13:28 »
0
Epsi, do you mean that page or others? http://subscribe.ru/group/na-zavalinke/7738098/

I just wrote second email to 500px about this all sharing. Found my images twice in few days...   >:(    >:(

« Reply #32 on: November 30, 2014, 13:31 »
0
Epsi, do you mean that page or others? http://subscribe.ru/group/na-zavalinke/7738098/

I just wrote second email to 500px about this all sharing. Found my images twice in few days...   >:(    >:(


I have all images uploaded watermarked, no way to be stolen.

« Reply #33 on: November 30, 2014, 13:48 »
+1
I have all images uploaded watermarked, no way to be stolen.

They can be stolen easily. I can screen grab anything on 500px. The watermarks in the upper corner are very weak.

« Reply #34 on: November 30, 2014, 14:12 »
0
I have all images uploaded watermarked, no way to be stolen.

They can be stolen easily. I can screen grab anything on 500px. The watermarks in the upper corner are very weak.

I mean in 500px.com
You are right about this in prime.500px.com, there is almost without watermark.  :(

ShadySue

« Reply #35 on: November 30, 2014, 14:13 »
0
I have all images uploaded watermarked, no way to be stolen.


They can be stolen easily. I can screen grab anything on 500px. The watermarks in the upper corner are very weak.

And indeed some thieves, even in the commercial world, don't seem to mind watermarks, e.g. this porn site full of SS watermarked thums: http://anglerz.com/sign-become-vip-member-with-the-art-cuisine.html

« Reply #36 on: November 30, 2014, 14:53 »
+3
Epsi, do you mean that page or others? http://subscribe.ru/group/na-zavalinke/7738098/

I just wrote second email to 500px about this all sharing. Found my images twice in few days...   >:(    >:(


I have all images uploaded watermarked, no way to be stolen.


Just tried. You've to manually watermark on the main 500px. On prime, there's really weak watermark on top left corner.

Thieves will steal but it's easier to make lawsuits if watermarks are not easily removed i.e. many big one in the middle! definitely not corners.


« Reply #37 on: November 30, 2014, 16:19 »
0
ShadySue, and now we know what sites you are looking at!  ;D :P

ShadySue

« Reply #38 on: November 30, 2014, 16:27 »
0
ShadySue, and now we know what sites you are looking at!  ;D :P
Ha!
I found one of my iS editorial files there via a Google reverse image search. I contacted iS and they seem to have had my pic removed.
I posted the link to the SS watermarked thums on here ages ago, but I guess no msg-ers images were used, so SS might not do anything unless contacted by an actual author.
BTW, I have found some of my FAA and Flickr watermarked wildlife files used in an identical manner on another porn site. Very weird (just normal wildlife portraits, not copulating animals, even).

ultimagina

« Reply #39 on: November 30, 2014, 19:18 »
0
If I get $175 for one photo I don't care about thieves. The photo I just got $122.50 for, only made a couple of bucks on SS in 1 year.
Moreover, my photos, published only on SS, FT, IS and DT so far, can be found as a full free package on torrents anyway. But I would appreciate if an option to disable sharing will be made available.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2014, 19:23 by ultimagaina »

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #40 on: December 01, 2014, 02:19 »
+2
Anyway, all these comments saying nothing else but "Great", "Awesome", "Fantastic"
"Please visit my port" are sooo annoying! Begging for the same comments in return leads nowhere and are such a waste of energy

For me the real appreciation comes from photos sold in the real economy therefore appreciated by real paying customers and not from this "exclusive photographer's club" praise, where "likes" and "faves" are for free.

same sh-it on the many FB photography groups, on Flickr, on Instagram, these places are just for "vanity photographers" and attention who-res, it's ridicolous because apart for a few cases it doesn't translate in any sales !

by the way, while we can see so many places where post their own images i can't remember a single FB group devoted to image buyers, guess because it would be spammed to death by people linking their portfolios ?



« Reply #41 on: December 01, 2014, 03:04 »
+2
If I get $175 for one photo I don't care about thieves.
That's sad to read. People expect respect from others when they don't respect themselfs... Weird thinking...  ???

Quote
But I would appreciate if an option to disable sharing will be made available.
Alex, please consider this one. It's huge point for me and maybe others, who care about using their images everywhere...

Btw, read my email and meybe you'll see why it's not good for our business... People can share our images with no limits if you accept no controled sharing. I find my images everyday in other places, without my permission, and I don't like it at all.


Edit,

looks like we can forget about our dreaming...
"social sharing will always be a feature of 500px. "

Thank you Alex for fast reply. Now I know clearly what I am standing on, uploading to 500px :|
« Last Edit: December 01, 2014, 11:05 by Ariene »

ultimagina

« Reply #42 on: December 01, 2014, 10:42 »
0
-
« Last Edit: December 01, 2014, 10:54 by ultimagaina »

ultimagina

« Reply #43 on: December 01, 2014, 10:46 »
+2
If I get $175 for one photo I don't care about thieves.
That's sad to read. People expect respect from others when they don't respect themselfs... Weird thinking...  ???

Quote
But I would appreciate if an option to disable sharing will be made available.
Alex, please consider this one. It's huge point for me and maybe others, who care about using their images everywhere...

Btw, read my email and meybe you'll see why it's not good for our business... People can share our images with no limits if you accept no controled sharing. I find my images everyday in other places, without my permission, and I don't like it at all.
What I mean is that, when the contributor gets one of best commissions ($175) and commission rates out-there (70%), some thieves grabbing occasionally a screenshot can be considered "collateral damage". Despite all the watermarking and small size pictures on the "regular" stock sites, the thieves still exist, as they also exist in real life. As I mentioned above, just check the pirate sites or the torrents, and you will be amazed to see how many outstanding full size stock photos are offered for free.  So, if someone wants to break the law, they have easy ways to get full size photos anyway, instead of a low resolution screenshot.

Besides, a lot of pictures look much better when viewed at a decent size. This might trigger sales that will never be triggered when only a thumbnail size is presented.
Of course I want to minimize the losses (i.e. disable sharing), but the initiative from 500px should not be discouraged for a few pennies lost here and there. And it doesn't have anything to do with the lack of respect, I'm just trying to be realistic.

You said: "I find my images everyday in other places, without my permission, and I don't like it at all."
Is this because you are already on 500px, despite being negative about it (?), or because you are not and your photos are stolen anyway (proving the point I want to make)?
« Last Edit: December 01, 2014, 10:52 by ultimagaina »

« Reply #44 on: December 01, 2014, 17:22 »
+3
So really no way to watermark your images? That blows. I just uploaded a few test shots but I don't want to make them so easy to steal.


« Reply #46 on: December 01, 2014, 22:30 »
+2
the earning potential is attractive. what? 250 bucks for a framed pix or smthg like that.
but i am not sure if it wants to be a stock agency or a social media . and i hate the social media as all it does is attract ppl to coming to you saying stuff like "great work, check out my work". (sounds familiar? fb, flickr,etc)
also, i was just following some of the ports there and i am amazed how a newly uploaded image can suddenly get so many likes and views in the first moment it is available.
sort of reminds me of the other single digit earners to the right of this page, where you see 500 views 0 dl. not quite what i call earning potential,
... oops , i did at the beginning of my comment ;D


« Reply #47 on: December 02, 2014, 17:11 »
+3
You can upload a low-res watermarked version to 500px and then a high-res unwatermarked version to the store for licensing on Prime. So if you're concerned about what shows on 500px that's the best way to do it. On Prime we use the high-res version and downsize it and apply a 500px Prime watermark to that.

That's a lot of extra work. It would be really nice if you either automatically place a watermark on our uploaded images or have a system that allows us to apply it where we want. Sharing an un-watermarked image via social media effectively relinquishes any protections I have. And like others have stated you can just do a screen grab. That being said how do I upload separately to the store vs. 500px?
« Last Edit: December 02, 2014, 17:22 by Mantis »

« Reply #48 on: December 02, 2014, 17:25 »
+8
You can upload a low-res watermarked version to 500px and then a high-res unwatermarked version to the store for licensing on Prime. So if you're concerned about what shows on 500px that's the best way to do it. On Prime we use the high-res version and downsize it and apply a 500px Prime watermark to that.


Here's an example of the 500px Prime watermark. You can see how ridiculous it is.


« Reply #49 on: December 02, 2014, 20:02 »
+1
You can upload a low-res watermarked version to 500px and then a high-res unwatermarked version to the store for licensing on Prime. So if you're concerned about what shows on 500px that's the best way to do it. On Prime we use the high-res version and downsize it and apply a 500px Prime watermark to that.


Here's an example of the 500px Prime watermark. You can see how ridiculous it is.




That's horrible. Come on 500px, toss the dog a bone here, please?

« Reply #50 on: December 03, 2014, 01:59 »
0
You can upload a low-res watermarked version to 500px and then a high-res unwatermarked version to the store for licensing on Prime. So if you're concerned about what shows on 500px that's the best way to do it. On Prime we use the high-res version and downsize it and apply a 500px Prime watermark to that.


Here's an example of the 500px Prime watermark. You can see how ridiculous it is.




That's horrible. Come on 500px, toss the dog a bone here, please?


even I could photoshop that out. :)

« Reply #51 on: December 03, 2014, 02:59 »
+4
even I could photoshop that out. :)
You see?! :D

Lol, this watermark is even worse than I thought. It takes two seconds - one move to remove it! So poor protection is no protection. Watermark is for protection, right?

500px, with full respect, you are great in contact and have professional talk, but there are some things you can improve... I think it would lure more photographers (and give you more chance to earn on it). Why beeing so stubborn if people offer you their work?

As said above, good option would be to choose if someone wants (better) watermark or not.

« Reply #52 on: December 03, 2014, 03:03 »
+1
You can upload a low-res watermarked version to 500px and then a high-res unwatermarked version to the store for licensing on Prime. So if you're concerned about what shows on 500px that's the best way to do it. On Prime we use the high-res version and downsize it and apply a 500px Prime watermark to that.


Here's an example of the 500px Prime watermark. You can see how ridiculous it is.




JOKE OF THE DAY!

« Reply #53 on: December 03, 2014, 04:22 »
+3
500px and Prime need better watermarking, a lot better. That`s my reason to hold most of my images to their platform.
It would be great, at least to have an option where to place the watermark on the images - in the center, on the top or in the bottom... for example. Why don`t you test something like that.

« Reply #54 on: December 03, 2014, 13:29 »
0

Here's an example of the 500px Prime watermark. You can see how ridiculous it is.




Do you really expect to sell isolated strawberries for $250 in 2014?
I don't understand why they accepted it into Prime in the first place.
Yes, technically it is a very good image but to my mind there is nothing "premium" about it.
This is very good microstock work.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2014, 15:06 by Realist »

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #55 on: December 04, 2014, 01:31 »
+3
considering all things discussed here and elsewhere, 500px is a bad joke as much as FAA and all the other fly by night PODs.

i like the idea and concept behind PODs, and indeed it's never been easier to sell online like nowadays but where are the buyers ? where are the sales ?

istock started in a similar fashion but there's a catch : their core group of initial users was made of both designers and buyers ! the PODs instead are mostly made of photographers and they expect us to bring clients for free on their platform !

their product is good but guess what, it needs investors to put a few millions $ on the table for aggressive advertising and this is not gonna happen so far.

of course they pay higher royalties, nobody is buying !


« Reply #56 on: December 04, 2014, 02:05 »
0
considering all things discussed here and elsewhere, 500px is a bad joke as much as FAA and all the other fly by night PODs.

i like the idea and concept behind PODs, and indeed it's never been easier to sell online like nowadays but where are the buyers ? where are the sales ?

istock started in a similar fashion but there's a catch : their core group of initial users was made of both designers and buyers ! the PODs instead are mostly made of photographers and they expect us to bring clients for free on their platform !

their product is good but guess what, it needs investors to put a few millions $ on the table for aggressive advertising and this is not gonna happen so far.

of course they pay higher royalties, nobody is buying !

I have sales there and I'm pleased with prime.500px.com


« Reply #57 on: December 04, 2014, 08:42 »
+1
considering all things discussed here and elsewhere, 500px is a bad joke as much as FAA and all the other fly by night PODs.

i like the idea and concept behind PODs, and indeed it's never been easier to sell online like nowadays but where are the buyers ? where are the sales ?

istock started in a similar fashion but there's a catch : their core group of initial users was made of both designers and buyers ! the PODs instead are mostly made of photographers and they expect us to bring clients for free on their platform !

their product is good but guess what, it needs investors to put a few millions $ on the table for aggressive advertising and this is not gonna happen so far.

of course they pay higher royalties, nobody is buying !

I have sales there and I'm pleased with prime.500px.com

I am giving them a try but I immediately got tired of all the "I love your work" emails. It's like they have a group specifically dedicated to giving accolades. I wonder if there is a theory that the more you give thumbs up the more you are likely to sell one of your own images.  I mean, until I figured out how to uncheck all the email notification boxes, I was getting 500-600 of these (in different combinations) with only 90 images. That was annoying and not motivating at all for me. But I paid the $17 and will give it a year.

« Reply #58 on: December 04, 2014, 11:37 »
0
  Yes, I had my first "Fine Art" sale with 500px Prime recently.  An old image closeup texture.  Very easy people to 'talk' to and they are quick to respond. 

Just like to say how much I appreciate all the helpful comments from the 'regulars' like Shade Sue and others - and to wish everyone a very happy Christmas/festive season and lots of successful uploads next year.




« Reply #59 on: December 04, 2014, 12:43 »
0
This year 500px launched prints option. When did they abandone the option? Will that come back again?

Uncle Pete

« Reply #60 on: December 04, 2014, 13:04 »
+1
Has anyone with a free account ever had a sale? Wondering if it's like FAA where pay people get better placement.

« Reply #61 on: December 04, 2014, 14:09 »
0
Yes, two people here are selling with free accounts.

« Reply #62 on: December 04, 2014, 15:06 »
0
I have a free account with them and I already sell 5 images 175$ each. Two weeks ago I ask to get paid by check and 2 days after I received the check in the mail.

« Reply #63 on: December 04, 2014, 15:57 »
0
Wow Gabriela - 5 sales. That's terrific! I have sold one so far with a paid account. Love the royalty rate!

ultimagina

« Reply #64 on: December 04, 2014, 16:21 »
+1
Has anyone with a free account ever had a sale? Wondering if it's like FAA where pay people get better placement.
I have a free account and I had 2 sales in the past month.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #65 on: December 04, 2014, 19:28 »
0
Thanks Gabriela and ultimagaina. And photos are exclusive or how were they listed?

I looked and there's some really nice work up there. The 70% is interesting...

Has anyone with a free account ever had a sale? Wondering if it's like FAA where pay people get better placement.
I have a free account and I had 2 sales in the past month.

« Reply #66 on: December 05, 2014, 06:59 »
0
I opened an account there, uploaded first 10 pictures, and discovered that the pictures shown in the Store section show the tiny watermark in the left upper corner, but when the same pictures are shown on other pages, the watermark is absent.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2014, 08:23 by LesPalenik »


« Reply #67 on: December 05, 2014, 08:42 »
0
How large is your portfolio there? When do you start seeing sales?

« Reply #68 on: December 05, 2014, 09:04 »
+2
How large is your portfolio there? When do you start seeing sales?

Usually around 9:30am

ultimagina

« Reply #69 on: December 05, 2014, 09:29 »
0
And photos are exclusive or how were they listed?
No, those photos are also for sale on several microstock agencies.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #70 on: December 05, 2014, 19:54 »
0
Nope, any time people DL them...  ;)

How large is your portfolio there? When do you start seeing sales?

Usually around 9:30am

« Reply #71 on: December 08, 2014, 12:07 »
0
Thanks Gabriela and ultimagaina. And photos are exclusive or how were they listed?

They are not exclusive ;)

Uncle Pete

« Reply #72 on: December 08, 2014, 13:25 »
+1
Oh I get it, my mistake, (confused with some other place?) Thanks for the correction:

Section 5 asks you if youd like to license this photo Exclusively through 500px
Prime. Choose this option if you have never licensed this photo commercially
through any other agency and if you wish to continue to have 500px Prime as the
sole licensor. This will allow the Sales team at 500px Prime to negotiate
exclusive use and other high priced licenses since we know the publication
and licensing history of the file.


Thanks Gabriela and ultimagaina. And photos are exclusive or how were they listed?

They are not exclusive ;)

« Reply #73 on: December 11, 2014, 05:33 »
0
Hi!

I have 2000 files to watermark for 500px. Do you know any easy to use action for Photoshop to do that for me ? I want my watermark to be centered in the images.

Thanks!

« Reply #74 on: December 11, 2014, 09:29 »
0
Hi!

I have 2000 files to watermark for 500px. Do you know any easy to use action for Photoshop to do that for me ? I want my watermark to be centered in the images.

Thanks!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NRtn-BFMP0

Uncle Pete

« Reply #75 on: December 11, 2014, 10:00 »
+3
If you don't use Photoshop, Irfanview - FREE - will do it in the Batch Edit function.

Open file (any file)
B (batch)
Alt+C (advanced)
Alt+W (Add Watermark)



Set location, watermark image and transparency.

This can be done as a batch to a group of images. You just need to add images to the batch, before you hit "Start Batch" It will run through all files selected and you're done.

Also part of the batch function is saving these files to a different folder you can also resize at the same time. (and rename if you wish) So if the objective is create Watermarked Thumbnails, it's all one batch process for all 400 files.

« Reply #76 on: December 11, 2014, 14:24 »
0
Thank you!

By the way, what size of the watermarked images do you upload to 500px ? I mean do you downsize them ? Eventually the full resolution is needed only for 500px Prime.

Cheers


« Reply #77 on: December 12, 2014, 07:30 »
0
I'm also hesitating to put my photos there without any watermark, or that small funny one  - but on the other hand, I've taken a look at some famous photographers web sites - and realized - you can catch their photos even with right button click and 'copy image'... So, no need even to capture screen.

If the resolution on 500px on portfolio is really 500px (or 800px as I heard somewhere), then no big harm - that small photos are free anyway, or am I wrong?


« Reply #78 on: December 12, 2014, 18:47 »
+1
1. Small photos are not free
2. The market for 500 pixel images for blogs and online magazines is large enough not to be ignored

« Reply #79 on: December 13, 2014, 09:45 »
+1
Has anyone had upload problems with their system not reading metadata? I have unlimited uploads and can only upload about 10-20 at a time for their system to pull in the metadata.  I've had to go in two times and delete each image manually then scale back my uploads to get their system to read the metadata.  They have a glitch and need to acknowledge it.  When I upload, say, 50 images all 50 have pulled in one keyword and no title.  The title ends up pulling in the image file name, not the title in the metadata. They suggested I use the Mac uploader so I did. Same issue, so I have concluded that their system has some technical hiccups. Now I have to manually go in and delete hundreds of images manually and reup them 10 at a time. That won't take long, maybe a few months with all the spare time I have (my attempt at humor).

« Reply #80 on: December 13, 2014, 23:24 »
0
I'm also hesitating to put my photos there without any watermark, or that small funny one  - but on the other hand, I've taken a look at some famous photographers web sites - and realized - you can catch their photos even with right button click and 'copy image'... So, no need even to capture screen.

If the resolution on 500px on portfolio is really 500px (or 800px as I heard somewhere), then no big harm - that small photos are free anyway, or am I wrong?

ctrl c or prt scr or screen capture are not the only way to "steal" our images. all one needs to do is save the webpage and all the images will go into your folder for that web page including source code.
i am surprised no one here even mentioned this.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #81 on: December 14, 2014, 00:04 »
0
ctrl c or prt scr or screen capture are not the only way to "steal" our images. all one needs to do is save the webpage and all the images will go into your folder for that web page including source code.
i am surprised no one here even mentioned this.

this method doesn't work in all cases if they use javascript to protect the browser from saving remote images and they can also avoid hotlinking server-side.

instead in Firefox just right-click on "View Page Info", click on the Media tab, sort the images by size, and voila', the last ones are usually the image you see on screen, no matter if they used javascript or CSS embedding or other cheap tricks.

so, click the image and save and you're done, this works also on iSTock with images up to 1280px if you zoom the image.

you will need to disable javascript in some cases if they block the right-clicking as in 1x.com
i can download any 1x.com image and some of the pics are 4000px !


« Reply #82 on: December 14, 2014, 15:50 »
+1
ctrl c or prt scr or screen capture are not the only way to "steal" our images. all one needs to do is save the webpage and all the images will go into your folder for that web page including source code.
i am surprised no one here even mentioned this.

this method doesn't work in all cases if they use javascript to protect the browser from saving remote images and they can also avoid hotlinking server-side.

instead in Firefox just right-click on "View Page Info", click on the Media tab, sort the images by size, and voila', the last ones are usually the image you see on screen, no matter if they used javascript or CSS embedding or other cheap tricks.

so, click the image and save and you're done, this works also on iSTock with images up to 1280px if you zoom the image.

you will need to disable javascript in some cases if they block the right-clicking as in 1x.com
i can download any 1x.com image and some of the pics are 4000px !

there u go ! as we both pointed out, even if the right-click is disabled, there is always a way to steal images from the web. therefore, any sites that is foolish enough to think the unimportance of a good watermark is really not worth risking uploading to, no matter how much money they promise us.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #83 on: December 14, 2014, 22:08 »
0
there u go ! as we both pointed out, even if the right-click is disabled, there is always a way to steal images from the web. therefore, any sites that is foolish enough to think the unimportance of a good watermark is really not worth risking uploading to, no matter how much money they promise us.

exactly, and if all else fails you can still search the image in the browser's cache or using many other addons that let you manage firefox's cache, it can be automated too.

browsers and addons are merely the tip of the iceberg, if you're serious you could write custom code to grab images on the server with a few lines of PHP or a custom firefox addon.

but you don't even need it, the new Firefox Developer Edition has all you need to inspect any element you see on screen, it embeds Firebug and all the other popular dev tools.

moral of the story, once an image is displayed on screen you can no longer do anything to protect your image.

« Reply #84 on: December 15, 2014, 01:04 »
+1
Has anyone had upload problems with their system not reading metadata? I have unlimited uploads and can only upload about 10-20 at a time for their system to pull in the metadata.  I've had to go in two times and delete each image manually then scale back my uploads to get their system to read the metadata.  They have a glitch and need to acknowledge it.  When I upload, say, 50 images all 50 have pulled in one keyword and no title.  The title ends up pulling in the image file name, not the title in the metadata. They suggested I use the Mac uploader so I did. Same issue, so I have concluded that their system has some technical hiccups. Now I have to manually go in and delete hundreds of images manually and reup them 10 at a time. That won't take long, maybe a few months with all the spare time I have (my attempt at humor).

Had similar problems uploading with metadata fallout. I went along the same path with 10-20 images a batch. I noticed the success/failure of uploads timed with the busy periods, so would guess its to do with overloads. I ended up removing my folio as i found all my non-micro images that scattered all over the web. Would be cautious with these guys as they never paid out my account ($170 odd) for a sale in late September. Edit: Payment has been gratefully received.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2014, 20:24 by jorgophotography »

« Reply #85 on: December 15, 2014, 02:13 »
+1
Has anyone had upload problems with their system not reading metadata? I have unlimited uploads and can only upload about 10-20 at a time for their system to pull in the metadata.  I've had to go in two times and delete each image manually then scale back my uploads to get their system to read the metadata.  They have a glitch and need to acknowledge it.  When I upload, say, 50 images all 50 have pulled in one keyword and no title.  The title ends up pulling in the image file name, not the title in the metadata. They suggested I use the Mac uploader so I did. Same issue, so I have concluded that their system has some technical hiccups. Now I have to manually go in and delete hundreds of images manually and reup them 10 at a time. That won't take long, maybe a few months with all the spare time I have (my attempt at humor).

Had similar problems uploading with metadata fallout. I went along the same path with 10-20 images a batch. I noticed the success/failure of uploads timed with the busy periods, so would guess its to do with overloads. I ended up removing my folio as i found all my non-micro images that scattered all over the web. Would be cautious with these guys as they never paid out my account ($170 odd) for a sale in late September.

I always receive the payments exactly on the date 45 days after the sale. They are very correct by my experience!

« Reply #86 on: December 15, 2014, 09:15 »
+1
Has anyone had upload problems with their system not reading metadata? I have unlimited uploads and can only upload about 10-20 at a time for their system to pull in the metadata.  I've had to go in two times and delete each image manually then scale back my uploads to get their system to read the metadata.  They have a glitch and need to acknowledge it.  When I upload, say, 50 images all 50 have pulled in one keyword and no title.  The title ends up pulling in the image file name, not the title in the metadata. They suggested I use the Mac uploader so I did. Same issue, so I have concluded that their system has some technical hiccups. Now I have to manually go in and delete hundreds of images manually and reup them 10 at a time. That won't take long, maybe a few months with all the spare time I have (my attempt at humor).

Had similar problems uploading with metadata fallout. I went along the same path with 10-20 images a batch. I noticed the success/failure of uploads timed with the busy periods, so would guess its to do with overloads. I ended up removing my folio as i found all my non-micro images that scattered all over the web. Would be cautious with these guys as they never paid out my account ($170 odd) for a sale in late September.

You have some beautiful work. I'd be concerned, too, about finding my work all over the place.


« Reply #87 on: December 15, 2014, 10:19 »
0

You have some beautiful work. I'd be concerned, too, about finding my work all over the place.

Cheers Mantis

« Reply #88 on: December 15, 2014, 10:20 »
0
Has anyone had upload problems with their system not reading metadata? I have unlimited uploads and can only upload about 10-20 at a time for their system to pull in the metadata.  I've had to go in two times and delete each image manually then scale back my uploads to get their system to read the metadata.  They have a glitch and need to acknowledge it.  When I upload, say, 50 images all 50 have pulled in one keyword and no title.  The title ends up pulling in the image file name, not the title in the metadata. They suggested I use the Mac uploader so I did. Same issue, so I have concluded that their system has some technical hiccups. Now I have to manually go in and delete hundreds of images manually and reup them 10 at a time. That won't take long, maybe a few months with all the spare time I have (my attempt at humor).

Had similar problems uploading with metadata fallout. I went along the same path with 10-20 images a batch. I noticed the success/failure of uploads timed with the busy periods, so would guess its to do with overloads. I ended up removing my folio as i found all my non-micro images that scattered all over the web. Would be cautious with these guys as they never paid out my account ($170 odd) for a sale in late September.

Hearing about the the uploader bug is a bit of a concern so I'll be looking into it. We have some plans on updating that portion of the site very soon as well as addressing some watermarking concerns.

What worries me a bit more is that you never got paid out? Can you email us at help@500px.com and mention this forum. I'd like to get to the bottom of it right away.

« Reply #89 on: December 15, 2014, 20:53 »
0

What worries me a bit more is that you never got paid out? Can you email us at help@500px.com and mention this forum. I'd like to get to the bottom of it right away.

Sure thing Nuno, email now sent. Appreciate you would look into this.

StefC

  • www.royaltyfreevault.com
« Reply #90 on: July 05, 2015, 06:58 »
+10
So, any news about the watermark issue?

I have uploaded a few hundreds photos some months ago for test and the other day I sold my first for 35 dollars (not on Prime though, but from the "social network" side of 500px). But seeing my photos on Prime ready to be stolen at 900 pixels width, with that ridiculous watermark on top is just unacceptable (they're not even right-click protected, you just save them and on most removing the watermark takes 10 seconds!)

It's like they do all they can to push us away!

In response to the person saying that you can easily steal photos from personal sites anyway (or Flickr etc...), that is true but you don't put ALL of your portfolio there, do you? They are used to showcase your work, so they contain a tiny fraction of your production.
The idea here on 500px, on the other hand, is: "Upload all your portfolio here, we'll give you good money for each sale but we'll do next to nothing to protect it. People wanting to use your photos on the web will flock in and easily steal them! What are you waiting for?"

How hard is it to remove the watermark on the attached file?
« Last Edit: July 05, 2015, 07:31 by StefC »

« Reply #91 on: July 05, 2015, 07:11 »
+3
I would love to try 500pix, but the upload system and tiny watermark put me off. At least give us the option to use a larger, good looking watermark if we want to. Nobody has to be forced to use it, but there are many tasteful options in the market, I am sure they can come up with a design that is very professional looking.

And will the upload process be improved, so we can upload full size in one step instead of two files?

StefC

  • www.royaltyfreevault.com
« Reply #92 on: July 05, 2015, 07:29 »
+3
I've just removed 700 photos out of 730 I had on my public profile, I'll keep just a handful of landscapes, because.... yes I did earn something, but how many people stole my photos in the meantime? Unless we can protect them, it's not worth it!

ShadySue

« Reply #93 on: July 05, 2015, 08:01 »
+1
In response to the person saying that you can easily steal photos from personal sites anyway (or Flickr etc...), that is true but you don't put ALL of your portfolio there, do you?
And you can put as big a watermark as you like on your personal/social sites (probably not Instagram?)

« Reply #94 on: July 05, 2015, 08:13 »
+2
When i had a full screen slide show on my site, i saw huge amount of downloads of some images included in this slideshow. When noticed this, i changed to another layout, it was quick with photodeck. That was useless traffic - those people come to take, not to buy. To social sites all images which i sell go with watermark.

« Reply #95 on: July 05, 2015, 08:35 »
+1
I used to have a simple watermark in the middle on my website, then I started to find my files in many places.

Then I changed to a really ugly full frame layout, and these files are no longer interesting for thieves ;)

But of course I am not selling from my website, so an agency needs a balanced solution to keep the buyers happy.

the current watermark really does nothing to protect files.

« Reply #96 on: July 05, 2015, 08:48 »
+2
I've just removed 700 photos out of 730 I had on my public profile, I'll keep just a handful of landscapes, because.... yes I did earn something, but how many people stole my photos in the meantime? Unless we can protect them, it's not worth it!

Mainly why I canceled my account there. I uploaded around 1,500 images and the traffic to say, "thank you, I've nabbed your image" was more than I could bear (I am paraphrasing here). This and the upload challenges concluded that they could keep my $17 membership fee and I would get to close my account in return.  If they can resolve those two issues (watermark across the board and upload bandwidth) I may reconsider. But for now, they are one of the many sites I've killed in the last few years.
 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
3150 Views
Last post March 04, 2007, 17:22
by a.k.a.-tom
10 Replies
5339 Views
Last post October 09, 2007, 18:52
by admart01
27 Replies
49106 Views
Last post June 25, 2015, 10:42
by KnowYourOnions
11 Replies
3629 Views
Last post May 30, 2017, 06:48
by PaulieWalnuts
7 Replies
4455 Views
Last post September 01, 2017, 20:43
by Zero Talent

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results