MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Are things going well in microstock?  (Read 90688 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

grp_photo

« Reply #125 on: January 08, 2008, 02:51 »
0
- Educate customers (eg in designer forums) that IS pays only 20% to artists, FP pays 70% which is more than a fair share.


Thinking about this, where are the designer forums?  I have never seen one.  I know some designers hang out in the istock forums but I don't think we will get very far there :)




Yeah i think its a great idea but despite istock i also don't know any Designer-Forum so if you know one please let us know!


« Reply #126 on: January 08, 2008, 02:54 »
0
Of course this is not directed against the sites, and not against subs. As Duncan once pointed out on the CanStockPhoto forum, designers download much more than they need under a sub, try some pics out, then pick one for production. That's very well possible with a 3 or even 2.5 MP version.

As Yuri Arcurs found out on SS, designers even abort the download of a large size, which corroborates this guess. There is no problem with sub only sites like SS, where you can upload downsized versions (personally I always upload 6MP there). The real problem is with the mixed sites.

There could be a solution, a Solomon's verdict that satisfies all: photogs, sites, designers. That is, a mixed site only offers the small size of a shot under a sub license, like up to 3MP.

« Reply #127 on: January 08, 2008, 02:59 »
0
I agree it is not about punishment. The problem with the subscription at StockXpert is that when it started all photographers were automatically opted in. As soon as someone opted out this person was in a very small minority. The competing photographers who were opted in had and still have an advantage, because people have the possibility to download by subscription and so giving the files more popularity and therefore the files apear higher in the search engine (I think thats the way it works). At least I felt a little bit the pressure to do so although in the beginning I was not completely against subscription.
So I think it was kind a pressure to stay opted in as a photographer and so I see nothing wrong in getting together with photographers and agreeing to opt out. We hereby also show the industry that we are worried about the low prices of subscription. I think one reason for StockXpert and DT to start subsription and to fix the price so low  is, because they saw it works on SS.
But now they see the photographers do not agree with it, SS gets lower quality (because they have to interpolate the images to get bigger resolutions) and StockXpert is loosing photographers on the subscription plan. If we get one agency to act on it, we might get more agencies to follow and reconsider the subscription as it is. The motivation for one agency to change the subscription plan is very low right now, because of the competition,
We have to start somewhere. I believe we will never get enough people together if we say we will stop uploading to DT. It will even be hard to get enough people for this list although I think it goes quite well. What we can do though is to start a letter to DT and Crestock with people putting there names on it and appealing to stop or change the subscription as it is. Maybe that will get them to reconsider. When DT introduced subscription there was no organized protest.

« Reply #128 on: January 08, 2008, 03:01 »
0
Yuri,  I believe you're 100% right!  And I wish that all the big players such as Andres, VGStudio, etc... could start doing the same thing!

I hope the big players , Andres, VGStudio, IOFoto don't join this nonsence. If they have a problem with subscriptions then take your photos off all subscription sites that don't offer a choice, if you're so bothered by it. Yeah, let's punish StockXpert for giving us a choice, what a joke.
\

If we took our photos off all the sites that have something we don't like, we wouldn't have anywhere left to upload :)

So what do we do?
Walk away from Microstock?
Let them walk all over us, which is what you seem to be suggesting?
Or try to change the things we don't like?
We small fish can't achieve much if you big fish don't help.

Linda


grp_photo

« Reply #129 on: January 08, 2008, 03:03 »
0
I'm opting in, flame on, but StockXpert has been one of the best agencies to deal with for me, they actually listen to their contributors and have the easiest upload process. If you opt out then you should not contibute to Dreamstime, 123, SV, Crestock (Who pays a measley 25 cents I may add) as a matter of principle if you're so against the subscription model. Opting out will do nothing but drive the subscription customers to a different site, ones that I might add don't give you a choice, and may even pay you LESS (Crestock).

Now if you start a movement against low commission paying sites (ie IStockPhoto, UnLucky Oliver, Crestock) let me know, I'm in.



I totally agree Nruboc. If you read my older posts you will notice that i was the leading force to convince StockXpert to make it optional!
I hate subscription and i want fair commissions!
It's great that contributors finally take some action BUT THIS IS GOING NOW IN THE WRONG DIRECTION its the wrong target StockXpert is one of the most photographerfriendly agencies.
This thread started at DOWNSIZE FOR SS and option out now it's only option out at StockXpert.
I personally don't submit to any subscription or 20% sites. I deleted my portfolio at 123RF and did delete about 150pics at DT at the Moment they introduced subscription and don't contribute to them anymore.
I can understand that this is too radical for many contributors BUT NONETHELESS MORE AND OTHER ACTION is needed.
If all Agencies would treat their contributors like StockXpert (fair commissions, easy upload etc.) the Microstock - world would be perfect.
But the real enemies are iStock and Shutterstock. And then Dreamstime for not listening to their contributors to make it optional.

more and other action is needed! Don't fight the good agencies fight the bad ones

grp_photo

« Reply #130 on: January 08, 2008, 03:29 »
0
Other action list
to be expanded by you ;)

  • promote featurepics and StockXpert
  • don't promote istock and shutterstock (get rid of your banners and referralinks stop your personal greed for a good MS-future)
  • don't stop to complain at DT because of subscription
  • load your new pictures first to the fair agencies (StockXpert, featurepics)
  • complain at Fotolia because of the low prices for highres-pictures
  • support sxc.hu yes it's a free site but a lot of the traffic for StockXpert comes from sxc.hu (look at the Alexa stats) don't upload highres-pic just ten reasonable good 800x600px sized pictures (you will be "diamond" soon ;))
  • of course down-size for SS the lowest size allowed is 2,5mp for older and 4mp for newer contributors it's easy just create a PS-action or droplet
  • give the fair agencies some exklusive content (just a few of your best pictures yeah you will loose a little bit money in the short term but probably you will earn a lot more in the future)
  • option out at snapvillage



« Last Edit: January 08, 2008, 03:31 by grp_photo »

« Reply #131 on: January 08, 2008, 03:32 »
0
I agree totally with this.  What you should be doing is not upload to the sites that don't let you opt out. You are punishing stockxpert for giving you more freedom than the agencies without an opt out and  causing the buyers that want subs to go to one of the other less fair agencies. I also don't mind the subs at DT because sub sales hep you to get into higher catagories much quicker.  My average commision for a dl is about 1.30$ at
DT  even with the subs which is way higher than any other agency.
Quote
Too funny, the only thing this will do is get StockXpert to rethink it's decision to allow an opt out. How is this going to get the other agencies without the opt out to re-think if you're STILL submitting there. You think that they're going to change their policies so you can opt out on them, no way, jose.

The list should be opt out of Stock Xpert, and stop submitting to the ones that give no choice (Dreamstime, 123, Crestock..etc) otherwise subscription customers will jump from one site to another where the most content is.


« Last Edit: January 08, 2008, 03:41 by fotografer »

« Reply #132 on: January 08, 2008, 03:35 »
0
grp_photo I do not see StockXpert as an enemy as well as the other agencies.
But doing this what we do is the savest thing and something we can do and many are willing to do it. I agree that it will be more pressure for the agencies if we will delete our portfolios, but the problem with this is, it is not realistic because most photographers are not willing to do it the radical way, because they need the income. This thread is still about downsizing images at SS as well.

« Reply #133 on: January 08, 2008, 03:51 »
0
I remember Steve from StockXpert mentioned that if the subscrptions didn't catch on, they would scrap them.  Is this going to harm StockXpert?  The biggest site, IS doesn't have subscriptions and they seem to be doing OK.  They can raise their prices, that might be harder to do when you are selling full size images for 30 cents.

I don't think this will harm StockXpert, it might make them more competitive with IS if they scrap subscriptions.

Perhaps if we can find where the designers hang out, we could promote FP.  The other option is to start our own site.  People say it costs too much to get going but I am sure there are thousands of us who would be willing to invest for some shares in our own site.

grp_photo

« Reply #134 on: January 08, 2008, 03:54 »
0
grp_photo I do not see StockXpert as an enemy as well as the other agencies.
But doing this what we do is the savest thing and something we can do and many are willing to do it. I agree that it will be more pressure for the agencies if we will delete our portfolios, but the problem with this is, it is not realistic because most photographers are not willing to do it the radical way, because they need the income. This thread is still about downsizing images at SS as well.

Come on it's easy to get rid of the banners to promote istock and ss.
It's easy to complain.
It's easy to upload first to the good ones
It's easy to promote featurepics
It's easy to support sxc.hu
It's easy to option out at snap village
etc.

« Reply #135 on: January 08, 2008, 04:22 »
0
Updated my image count:.

List for downsize images when submitting to SS and opt out subscription at StockXpert:



Yuri Arcurs
Freezingpictures (558)
GeoPappas
Smithore (596)
rene
sharpshot (2756)
ldambies
epixx
latex
FlemishDreams.
RTimages
Vonkara
helix7
Travelling-light
Mjp (994)
northflyboy
ason
sorsillo (538)
boatman
Alex
Eco
Rozmaryna (68)
Pixelbrat
Read_My_Rights (277)
vphoto
faber (300)
dbvirago
cmcderm1
boryak
HughStoneIan
digiology
moori
pixart
fauxware
rosendo  (313)
Lukasphoto
aremafoto (2147)
IKOphotos (1842)
Kiya
erwinova
Velvia
DanP68
Jorgeinthewater
« Last Edit: January 08, 2008, 04:24 by Freezingpictures »

« Reply #136 on: January 08, 2008, 06:04 »
0
Remember that you can also opt out on sub. on Snapvillage if you are a member there.
Please note that you will have to change every image already uploaded there manually if you uploaded them with subscription on.
If  this list continue to grow I think we have something going on here.

I just looked and I opted out of subscriptions with SV.  I think this applies to all images, as I can't see any options to stop subscriptions on individual images.

« Reply #137 on: January 08, 2008, 06:18 »
0
- Educate customers (eg in designer forums) that IS pays only 20% to artists, FP pays 70% which is more than a fair share.


Thinking about this, where are the designer forums?  I have never seen one.  I know some designers hang out in the istock forums but I don't think we will get very far there :)




Yeah i think its a great idea but despite istock i also don't know any Designer-Forum so if you know one please let us know!

Sorry, not an illustrator/ designer myself. It was more a brainstorming idea / suggestion. I saw a post from a designer on the IS forum some time ago. He was really surprised (not to say shocked) to find out that the artists get only 20%.

- What is the leading Illustrator forum out there?
- What other design software (3D) forums exist?
- What are the popular/ professional magazines for designers? Do they have online representation/ forums?

« Reply #138 on: January 08, 2008, 06:45 »
0
I have found a forum for photoshop creative in the UK.  istock have big adverts in this magazine every month.

http://www.pshopcreative.co.uk/forum/

I joined and here's my post letting them know about FP and this place.

http://www.pshopcreative.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?p=12271#12271

Any other design magazines that the sites advertise in with forums?
« Last Edit: January 08, 2008, 07:06 by sharpshot »

« Reply #139 on: January 08, 2008, 07:52 »
0
Quite an interesting read in general. Here are some comments of points made previously in the thread:

1- I am out on subscriptions at StockXpert, I analized the data and I believe I have also lost money because of that and if I am wrong I am risking a little only since I only make like $5 a day with subs at StockXpert.

2- Crestock being the only one in green ..... I like crestock and their prices, but I think they should include an XS size for designer comps at $1 which is what IStock has done ... buyers don't actually use the images at that size, they download them for layouts to later decide which images work better with their designs. I think this is something that CS has been missing.

3- My earnings in december also went down 20% but from August to November I saw a 60% increase having uploaded 3000-3500 images which cost me $1500 in total.
Another matter about december is that I didnt upload since 28th November as I was 3 weeks in Colombia and then 2 weeks in Egypt and I think subscription sites went down because of that.

4- Downsizing to SS, is extra work, I have the 5D so fiile sizes are not huge and buyers can download lower res images anyway so I won't be doing that. When I get the 1ds MK III I will do but not for now.

5- Macrostock, in 2008 I've made a deal with a company who are going to submit my images to several macro agencies including getty, alamy, comstock etc .... I am submitting my first 300 (exclusive to them) soon and I am hoping to be the beginning of a big career in macro as well.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2008, 07:56 by andresr »

helix7

« Reply #140 on: January 08, 2008, 08:54 »
0
I remember Steve from StockXpert mentioned that if the subscrptions didn't catch on, they would scrap them.  Is this going to harm StockXpert?

I doubt it would hurt them. In fact, I would think that keeping a subscription service would hurt them more in the long run. Subscriptions are not the way to go if you want to raise prices and generate more income. Individual image sales allow that in a way subscriptions never will.

This was never an issue of "Subscriptions are bad for contributors" for me. It has always been a "Subscriptions are bad for the business" idea that includes both contributors and the companies we contribute to. Think about how being subscription-only has crippled Shutterstock. They can't adjust anything in their pricing model because they only have one price. Neither the contributors nor the company will see a raise any time soon, because it would mean puhing pst that $199 price point and pricing themselves out of the bargain subscription business.


« Reply #141 on: January 08, 2008, 10:14 »
0
Remember that you can also opt out on sub. on Snapvillage if you are a member there.
Please note that you will have to change every image already uploaded there manually if you uploaded them with subscription on.
If  this list continue to grow I think we have something going on here.

I just looked and I opted out of subscriptions with SV.  I think this applies to all images, as I can't see any options to stop subscriptions on individual images.

I mailed SV support since one of my images sold as sub. even though I have opted out. They replied that this only affect future uploads.
All previous uploads must be change manually.


« Reply #142 on: January 08, 2008, 10:36 »
0
Have always opted out and will not upload to SS any new.
List for downsize images when submitting to SS and opt out subscription at StockXpert:



Yuri Arcurs
Freezingpictures (558)
GeoPappas
Smithore (596)
rene
sharpshot (2756)
ldambies
epixx
latex
FlemishDreams.
RTimages
Vonkara
helix7
Travelling-light
Mjp (994)
northflyboy
ason
sorsillo (538)
boatman
Alex
Eco
Rozmaryna (68)
Pixelbrat
Read_My_Rights (277)
vphoto
faber (300)
dbvirago
cmcderm1
boryak
HughStoneIan
digiology
moori
pixart
fauxware
rosendo  (313)
Lukasphoto
aremafoto (2147)
IKOphotos (1842)
Kiya
erwinova
Velvia
DanP68
Jorgeinthewater
digitalfood

Yuri_Arcurs

  • One Crazy PhotoManic MadPerson
« Reply #143 on: January 08, 2008, 10:52 »
0
Someone mentioned the DT Subscription. Before getting angry at DT try to look at this article: http://blog.dreamstime.com/2007/10/02/real-dreamstime-royalties_art24631
HOLY! 80% commission! I did not know that...

« Reply #144 on: January 08, 2008, 11:27 »
0
In a way - I'm for subs, it seems like a good business model for the agency.  BUT - I'm against giving anything away.  And if I had the expenses that the big players have it would be outright criminal. 

Is there anyway we can do more than say "I'm not playing this game" and suggest ways to make subs more fair for both of us?

What do designers want?  Do they want 100 high rez photos - I really think not.  I bet they want smaller files to use in brochures, websites, newspaper ads.

Why not sell subscriptions for 4 or 5 mp and less?  Bait and Switch, they find the perfect photo but if they need a 10 or 15 mp this time.  Let them pay for it!    I can't believe a site like Shutterstock does not sell individual photos!  Are they afraid of losing their subscription clients?  Is it too much programming?   They have to lose thousands $ from those customers who are between subscriptions and go to Istock for a month.  What if they stay at Istock and never come back?

OR... instead of having a 15 photo per day download limit - make it a 15 credits downlimit per day.  1 credit for small  - 2 for medium - 3 for large... etc.   At StockXpert we would still only get $.90 for a largish file, but that's better than .30...  It's a compromise for both of us (unless in the end the agency is depending on leftover credits to turn a profit).

LO may not pay the best percentages, but they ONLY sell the largest/original size photo as an EL.  That's $25 to me - and it seems to work for them, they seem to sell a high percentage of large files.


« Reply #145 on: January 08, 2008, 12:16 »
0
I've opted out at StockXpert and SV.


Yuri Arcurs
Freezingpictures (558)
GeoPappas
Smithore (596)
rene
sharpshot (2756)
ldambies
epixx
latex
FlemishDreams.
RTimages
Vonkara
helix7
Travelling-light
Mjp (994)
northflyboy
ason
sorsillo (538)
boatman
Alex
Eco
Rozmaryna (68)
Pixelbrat
Read_My_Rights (277)
vphoto
faber (300)
dbvirago
cmcderm1
boryak
HughStoneIan
digiology
moori
pixart
fauxware
rosendo  (313)
Lukasphoto
aremafoto (2147)
IKOphotos (1842)
Kiya
erwinova
Velvia
DanP68
Jorgeinthewater
digitalfood
nativelight (195-StockXpert & 213-SV)

helix7

« Reply #146 on: January 08, 2008, 13:25 »
0
...I can't believe a site like Shutterstock does not sell individual photos!  Are they afraid of losing their subscription clients?  Is it too much programming?...

Programming definitely has something to do with it. They are terrible with doing any kind of upgrades to the site. They are pretty much the only company who still hasn't integrated vector and jpg versions of an image under one file number, and their reasoning is simply that it would take too much development to do it. And we want them to introduce a whole new buying option and system? Ha!

 ;D


« Reply #147 on: January 08, 2008, 13:53 »
0
Since I started with micro about 14 months ago, I've been amazed at some of the outstanding quality that can be found on micro. As I learned more and more about the stock business in general over these past months, I began to wonder why would these top-notch shooters even bother with micro because of the very low royalties. Well it was because it was the only viable way into the industry.

When micro first began, there were two options to sell stock - micro and macro (trads like Corbis & Getty). These trads are extremely difficult (if not impossible) to get into without having an established portfolio. So amateurs flocked to the micros. Many of these "amateurs" are now pros but the trads are still difficult to get into. In my opinion, they're slitting their own throats by snubbing these new pros.

However, within the past year we've seen a new business model evolve - midstock. Featurepics, Photoshelter Collection, LO's Sideshow are a few that I know of and, of course, Alamy has been an option for a long time. I think we're going to see a big change over the next year or two. These new pros are going to finally get fed up with low royalties and will start migrating enmasse to the midstock model. And I think this is great for the stock industry.

I'll use baseball terms to compare the various stock models. Micro is a farm league where amateurs enter to learn the industry and hone their skills. Midstock agencies are the AAA teams for the pros. They are pros but they're not quite ready for the major leagues. The trads are the MLB teams and should be looking to recruit from the midstock agencies. They should be ACTIVELY recruiting and not waiting for photographers to come to them!

Now this may not bode well for some of the current macro contributors. Many if not most of them are top notch profressionals who contribute professional work. However, take a look at any of the traditional sites and you will find a lot of crap that wouldn't pass the quality standards of the newest micro site. These are the people who should be concerned with their futures. They need to "shape up or ship out." The free ride is over. The micros are developing an ever-growing new group of professional stock photographers who will eventually leave micro and move on to mid and finally macro stock. The quality on those sites (mid and macro) will increase as will prices once again.

Just my 2 cents.

Your thoughts?

« Reply #148 on: January 08, 2008, 14:22 »
0
...I can't believe a site like Shutterstock does not sell individual photos!  Are they afraid of losing their subscription clients?  Is it too much programming?...

Programming definitely has something to do with it. They are terrible with doing any kind of upgrades to the site. They are pretty much the only company who still hasn't integrated vector and jpg versions of an image under one file number, and their reasoning is simply that it would take too much development to do it. And we want them to introduce a whole new buying option and system? Ha!

 ;D



shutterstock has tried a couple of times to sell images individually but it hasn't worked and they stopped.  They had at least one partner company that they were selling through as well as one of their own brands... but as far as I remember reading they have stopped them all and just concentrate on subscription sales.

« Reply #149 on: January 08, 2008, 14:41 »
0
Opted out at StockXpert and will downsize for SS, but I think that this isn't the solution to the problem, I see it as a way to express our dissatisfaction  in regards to the current state of things in microstock


Yuri Arcurs
Freezingpictures (558)
GeoPappas
Smithore (596)
rene
sharpshot (2756)
ldambies
epixx
latex
FlemishDreams.
RTimages
Vonkara
helix7
Travelling-light
Mjp (994)
northflyboy
ason
sorsillo (538)
boatman
Alex
Eco
Rozmaryna (68)
Pixelbrat
Read_My_Rights (277)
vphoto
faber (300)
dbvirago
cmcderm1
boryak
HughStoneIan
digiology
moori
pixart
fauxware
rosendo  (313)
Lukasphoto
aremafoto (2147)
IKOphotos (1842)
Kiya
erwinova
Velvia
DanP68
Jorgeinthewater
digitalfood
nativelight (195-StockXpert & 213-SV)
ljupco (1920)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
4175 Views
Last post June 05, 2008, 14:00
by sharpshot
19 Replies
4241 Views
Last post February 17, 2012, 10:51
by luissantos84
15 Replies
4449 Views
Last post August 14, 2012, 00:30
by Microbius
40 Replies
6373 Views
Last post June 19, 2019, 01:32
by georgep7
17 Replies
1945 Views
Last post June 28, 2019, 00:17
by Clair Voyant

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results