Author Topic: getting worried! (Read 18779 times)

gyllens · « **on:** August 29, 2012, 10:47 »

Yes I am getting worried about the whole microstock buisness. People like Yuri are going sole distributor, Lisa dont seem too happy and Lagereek, is nowhere to be found, Claridge, a name most here havent even heard about is threatening to leave micro.
I am pretty new here but what is actually going on?

I am a buyer, not a contributor.

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** August 29, 2012, 10:49 »

Quote from: gyllens on August 29, 2012, 10:47

[snip]
I am pretty new here but what is actually going on?

I am a buyer, not a contributor.

As a buyer, you might like to tell us!
Where have the buyers gone? Are there just too many agencies nowadays so the buyers can spread themselves thinly, and go for the lowest prices, or ...?

steheap · « **Reply #2 on:** August 29, 2012, 10:50 »

You could always go to Warmpicture.com: http://www.warmpicture.com/ - that is where the happy contributors are these days!!

Steve

PinnacleAnimates · « **Reply #3 on:** August 29, 2012, 10:53 »

Nothing to be negative about. Telling about yuri or other who went for sole business, I will always say that talent is endless. You can still find many top class contributors who are still working seriously with this business.

Yes there is some worry around contributors due to less sales this month but this doesn't means its ending.

lisafx · « **Reply #4 on:** August 29, 2012, 10:55 »

As a buyer, I would be concerned too. Once talented micro artists stop producing or pull out and go to much more expensive traditional stock outlets, the abundance of cheap high quality images will dry up.

My suggestion would be to support fair trade sites like Stockfresh, Warmpicture, and artist's individual websites. The more buyers go to the sites that support artists, the more likely it is that the artists can keep producing top quality imagery.

BTW, Kudos to you, as a buyer, for being aware of the situation and trying to do something positive about it.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #5 on:** August 29, 2012, 11:04 »

"I am a buyer, not a contributor."

What, exactly, are you worried about?

EmberMike · « **Reply #6 on:** August 29, 2012, 11:05 »

I agree with Lisa. If buyers are concerned about the market, the best thing to do is to support companies that are supportive of artists. StockFresh would be top of that list for me. They represent what was great about microstock in the past (simple, fair pricing, no shenanigans) and they do it at rates that are what I consider to be the most fair for the artist and company and helps keep artists in this business.

gyllens, where do you currently buy images? You might even save some money buying from places like SF. They're cheaper than istock and give artists a greater percentage of each sale. Supporting companies like that is a good way to influence the direction of this business in the coming years.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 29, 2012, 11:07 »

Quote from: gyllens on August 29, 2012, 10:47

Yes I am getting worried about the whole microstock buisness. People like Yuri are going sole distributor, Lisa dont seem too happy and Lagereek, is nowhere to be found, Claridge, a name most here havent even heard about is threatening to leave micro.
I am pretty new here but what is actually going on?

I am a buyer, not a contributor.

I'm sorry but why does it matter to you that Yuri has his own site, Lisa isn't happy, Lagereek is nowhere to be found, and someone we haven't even heard of is threatening to leave micro? None of these things seem to have any significant effect on the whole microstock business.

cthoman · « **Reply #8 on:** August 29, 2012, 11:43 »

Quote from: gyllens on August 29, 2012, 10:47

Yes I am getting worried about the whole microstock buisness. People like Yuri are going sole distributor, Lisa dont seem too happy and Lagereek, is nowhere to be found, Claridge, a name most here havent even heard about is threatening to leave micro.
I am pretty new here but what is actually going on?

I am a buyer, not a contributor.

I think most of us have realized the limited potential of microstock, so some of us have branched out into other opportunities like our own sites, macro, etc. It's difficult to make a living doing this and few do, so things will probably change or evolve. I don't see the change being drastic though.

On a side note, I don't consider Stockfresh a fair paying agency. Their prices are too low to have any real earnings potential. Just my opinion though.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 29, 2012, 11:46 »

Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 11:43

On a side note, I don't consider Stockfresh a fair paying agency. Their prices are too low to have any real earnings potential. Just my opinion though.

on the vectors/illustrations?

heywoody · « **Reply #10 on:** August 29, 2012, 11:47 »

Quote from: gyllens on August 29, 2012, 10:47

... Lagereek, is nowhere to be found

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-uchris56.html

Found him

cthoman · « **Reply #11 on:** August 29, 2012, 12:05 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on August 29, 2012, 11:46

Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 11:43
On a side note, I don't consider Stockfresh a fair paying agency. Their prices are too low to have any real earnings potential. Just my opinion though.

on the vectors/illustrations?

Yep. I'm just not satisfied with the images for a buck model. Really, I don't want to sell anything for under $10, but that doesn't seem to be happening very many places.

tab62 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 29, 2012, 12:08 »

interesting...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 29, 2012, 12:11 »

Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 12:05

Quote from: luissantos84 on August 29, 2012, 11:46
Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 11:43
On a side note, I don't consider Stockfresh a fair paying agency. Their prices are too low to have any real earnings potential. Just my opinion though.

on the vectors/illustrations?

Yep. I'm just not satisfied with the images for a buck model. Really, I don't want to sell anything for under $10, but that doesn't seem to be happening very many places.

the vector is at 10$ right? yes, subs for 35 cents, I understand your point based on your business strategy

EmberMike · « **Reply #14 on:** August 29, 2012, 12:34 »

Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 11:43

On a side note, I don't consider Stockfresh a fair paying agency. Their prices are too low to have any real earnings potential. Just my opinion though.

Vector prices are very fair at $10 with the contributor getting half of that.

I don't think someone should have to pay $10 for a 350x350px jpg.

What's your ideal price point for large photos or vectors?

gyllens · « **Reply #15 on:** August 29, 2012, 13:13 »

Quote from: lisafx on August 29, 2012, 10:55

As a buyer, I would be concerned too. Once talented micro artists stop producing or pull out and go to much more expensive traditional stock outlets, the abundance of cheap high quality images will dry up.

My suggestion would be to support fair trade sites like Stockfresh, Warmpicture, and artist's individual websites. The more buyers go to the sites that support artists, the more likely it is that the artists can keep producing top quality imagery.

BTW, Kudos to you, as a buyer, for being aware of the situation and trying to do something positive about it.

Thanks. I was just mentioning some popular names here and by the sound of it some prolific photographers. Small time buyers like myself have got no option but to buy micro.
We have bought from smaller agencies and many times so. The trouble is, many times they just havent got the pictures. Perhaps it would be a good idea if photographers did not lock themselves with the bigger agencies but invested a little in the people of tomorrow.

Digital66 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 29, 2012, 13:20 »

gyllens? A Lagereek's alter ego?

Funny people here. A few months ago many would have recommend Shutterstock. Today they support Warmpicture, tomorrow...

traveler1116 · « **Reply #17 on:** August 29, 2012, 13:23 »

Quote from: Digital66 on August 29, 2012, 13:20

gyllens? A Lagereek's alter ego?

Funny people here. A few months ago many would have recommend Shutterstock. Today they support Warmpicture, tomorrow...

Ha, I thought the same thing. Who else would miss him posting here?

gostwyck · « **Reply #18 on:** August 29, 2012, 13:25 »

From the buyers perspective microstock has never been healthier. Your choice of images has never been greater and you've never had more avenues or price points from which to choose. Agencies like IS, FT and DT have actually been reducing some prices of late, presumeably in reaction to customer resistance.

You mentioned Yuri. Yuri may have his own portal but he still has nearly 60K images on SS, FT and elsewhere. When I joined SS they had half that many images ... in the entire library.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #19 on:** August 29, 2012, 13:44 »

Quote from: gostwyck on August 29, 2012, 13:25

From the buyers perspective microstock has never been healthier. Your choice of images has never been greater and you've never had more avenues or price points from which to choose. Agencies like IS, FT and DT have actually been reducing some prices of late, presumeably in reaction to customer resistance.

Right. So, I'm not seeing what the OP is "worried" about.

cthoman · « **Reply #20 on:** August 29, 2012, 13:54 »

Quote from: EmberMike on August 29, 2012, 12:34

Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 11:43
On a side note, I don't consider Stockfresh a fair paying agency. Their prices are too low to have any real earnings potential. Just my opinion though.

Vector prices are very fair at $10 with the contributor getting half of that.

I don't think someone should have to pay $10 for a 350x350px jpg.

What's your ideal price point for large photos or vectors?

IS and SS are around $20 for high res files, so I'd put that closer to where the market is or should be. But, the market can probably bear higher prices than that. I'm not sure where the sweet spot is, but I'd put $10 at the minimum.

Thinking about it from a contributor perspective, let's say you need to make between $3000 and $5000 a month to put you into the middle class in the US. Sites that sell images in the $1 to $10 range (for vectors and rasters) seem to average around a $1 to $2 RPD. That means you'd need to sell 1500 to 5000 images to hit the goal of a middle class salary. That doesn't seem fair and not overly realistic for most contributors.

By converse, selling at $20 apiece and getting 50% would earn you a $10 RPD. Which would mean you would only need to sell 300-500 files a month. I think most contributors would find that a lot easier and manageable to earn a middle class wage by creating stock.

I'm not sure how people can say something is fair when the bar to be modestly successful (middle class wage) on some of these sites is outrageously high.

ShadySue · « **Reply #21 on:** August 29, 2012, 14:06 »

Quote from: Digital66 on August 29, 2012, 13:20

gyllens? A Lagereek's alter ego?

Possibly, that odd comma positioning is there.
LR isn't gone: he posted on Alamy's forum within the last day or two, and I'm sure I saw a post from him on iStock within the past week.

Newsfocus1 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 29, 2012, 14:21 »

Quote from: heywoody on August 29, 2012, 11:47

Quote from: gyllens on August 29, 2012, 10:47
... Lagereek, is nowhere to be found

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-uchris56.html

Found him

Probaly get told to mind my own business -but that is one stunning portfolio! Regards, David.

EmberMike · « **Reply #23 on:** August 29, 2012, 14:42 »

Quote from: cthoman on August 29, 2012, 13:54

IS and SS are around $20 for high res files, so I'd put that closer to where the market is or should be. But, the market can probably bear higher prices than that. I'm not sure where the sweet spot is, but I'd put $10 at the minimum...

But we're only getting a small percentage for those sales. Higher prices like that discourage some buyers from buying more often, and the contributor walks away with less than they would for a high-res or vector sale at SF. $20 at istock gets someone a large image and puts $3.40 in an independent artist's pocket. $20 at SF buys 2 of the same size image and puts $10 in the artist's pocket. Why would you want $3.40 instead of $10, in a deal where the buyers gets more and is likely happier in the end and will buy more often?

Poncke · « **Reply #24 on:** August 29, 2012, 16:45 »

Quote from: heywoody on August 29, 2012, 11:47

Quote from: gyllens on August 29, 2012, 10:47
... Lagereek, is nowhere to be found

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-uchris56.html

Found him

Chris56 on SS and posting and boasting like mad. He is also posting on Alamy as chris58 telling everyone he is gearing up for RM since RF is dead. So he is around, just not here.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: getting worried! (Read 18779 times)

gyllens

ShadySue

steheap

PinnacleAnimates

lisafx

Sean Locke Photography

EmberMike

traveler1116

cthoman

luissantos84

heywoody

cthoman

tab62

luissantos84

EmberMike

gyllens

Digital66

traveler1116

gostwyck

Sean Locke Photography

cthoman

ShadySue

Newsfocus1

EmberMike

Poncke

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors