MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: grsphoto on May 29, 2014, 07:48
-
With all the bad deals happening and the outrage on MGS, I was wondering how much of the supplier market "we" ( readers and users of this forum) actually control.
-
Your top number needs to be much higher. I'm a small fry and I have more files than that (between RF and RM).
-
poll reset... more levels added... Is this better?
-
You asked me "how many images do "we" control "
Believe me or not:
NONE
-
You asked me "how many images do "we" control "
Believe me or not:
NONE
Well, other than we can remove files completely, you have a point.
-
Agree with You ShadySue,
but also after removing files, there are so many Partner program, APi, ...sites which are impossible to control.
And BTW, on some agencies You can deactivate files but will NEVER be deleted.
But participating in this "business" is our free will.
-
Now this is a great poll. I've had lots of thoughts on agency that we contributors could run. This gives idea how many images people on here have. It would be so awesome to put our images together in fair trade agency. It should be run by many contributors, not by one dictator CEO. Symbiostock is great but I'm thinking more of an agency type here.
-
You asked me "how many images do "we" control "
Believe me or not:
NONE
I actually control the majority of my files. There are some files I upload everywhere, but I mostly only upload new images to the partners I trust and want to do business with.
-
Now this is a great poll. I've had lots of thoughts on agency that we contributors could run. This gives idea how many images people on here have. It would be so awesome to put our images together in fair trade agency. It should be run by many contributors, not by one dictator CEO. Symbiostock is great but I'm thinking more of an agency type here.
That is actually a great Idea. Sad thing is most of us do not know how to run a company nor code.
-
Now this is a great poll. I've had lots of thoughts on agency that we contributors could run. This gives idea how many images people on here have. It would be so awesome to put our images together in fair trade agency. It should be run by many contributors, not by one dictator CEO. Symbiostock is great but I'm thinking more of an agency type here.
That is actually a great Idea. Sad thing is most of us do not know how to run a company nor code.
I don't think this is the answer..... Shutter Stock success is due to much more than just putting images on line...
-
Whats "MGS".? And what is this outrage that our refer to?
-
Now this is a great poll. I've had lots of thoughts on agency that we contributors could run. This gives idea how many images people on here have. It would be so awesome to put our images together in fair trade agency. It should be run by many contributors, not by one dictator CEO. Symbiostock is great but I'm thinking more of an agency type here.
That is actually a great Idea. Sad thing is most of us do not know how to run a company nor code.
I don't think this is the answer..... Shutter Stock success is due to much more than just putting images on line...
Yep. It's a lot of work, right pricing and getting exposure. But If we could make it big, like millions of images instantly to new site, I think anything is possible. And think about when our agency would start to fly we could delete our images from scammers and they would get what they deserve. It's all about being unite.
Let's play with this idea: What if we would have all contributors as one, we could destroy any agency and put all images in our new agency. In "real" world workers have these unitys that keeps them safe from bad bosses. We don't, but we defo need one.
-
Great poll and I, myself have often wondered the same thing. Just one question...do we count the total of all images on all agencies, even if they are the same on some? I have a total port of around 1400....some images are on 6 different agencies and some are on only 1. Would I count the one on all of them as one or six? Sorry if this is a stupid question, I've only had one cup o' coffee this morning. ;)
-
Great poll and I, myself have often wondered the same thing. Just one question...do we count the total of all images on all agencies, even if they are the same on some? I have a total port of around 1400....some images are on 6 different agencies and some are on only 1. Would I count the one on all of them as one or six? Sorry if this is a stupid question, I've only had one cup o' coffee this morning. ;)
just individual images...if it is online in several places just count it once please.
-
Whats "MGS".? And what is this outrage that our refer to?
sorry should be MSG ( this forum) typing with one hand due to altercation with a monkey.... ::)
-
But If we could make it big, like millions of images instantly to new site, I think anything is possible.
I'm kind of the opposite point of view. Big agencies always seemed to get muddled. I'd prefer smaller partnerships. It's easier to keep a good focus on the contributors. I think that is the downside to any talk of revolution because you just can't move EVERYBODY to some new awesome place.
-
I can definitely control my video files on Pond5 (including changing the price)
as opposite on Getty the only control I have is to end contract and get _all_ files deleted.
all other agencies are somewhere in between
-
But If we could make it big, like millions of images instantly to new site, I think anything is possible.
I'm kind of the opposite point of view. Big agencies always seemed to get muddled. I'd prefer smaller partnerships. It's easier to keep a good focus on the contributors. I think that is the downside to any talk of revolution because you just can't move EVERYBODY to some new awesome place.
I understand you. If we want to turn microstock upside down we should probably have like 70%+ of images to really do a revolution. I don't think it's ever possible, because people are from so many countries, but a nice thought anyway. I'm just pretty sick with many agencies so it keeps me alive dreaming of better chances :)
-
But If we could make it big, like millions of images instantly to new site, I think anything is possible.
I'm kind of the opposite point of view. Big agencies always seemed to get muddled. I'd prefer smaller partnerships. It's easier to keep a good focus on the contributors. I think that is the downside to any talk of revolution because you just can't move EVERYBODY to some new awesome place.
I totally agree. I'm in the process of gathering a small group of photogs I've dealt with in the past through agencies, art shows, etc with the plan of combining our ports (all nature oriented but with each contributor having a specialty within that genre) into one 'collection' and marketing it through a current photographic e-commerce site. With that site handling SEO, basic marketing, payments, etc we're free to set our own prices, fine tune the marketing to meet our needs, and so forth. There would be a reasonable annual fee from each contributor to keep the site operational; you gotta spend it to make it, so they say.
The small group approach is much more feasible to initiate and control with complete freedom from the corporate agency greed. Whether it will be successful remains to be seen...... ;)
-
The small group approach is much more feasible to initiate and control with complete freedom from the corporate agency greed. Whether is will be successful remains to be seen...... ;)
If nothing else, the idea of trying to come up with ways to insulate yourself from possible damage that an agency might randomly throw your way seems like a good move.
-
The pole is deceiving. Are you referring to portfolio size (in total?)
I was reading someone's bio the other day. She stated she had over 30,000 images online. Then I started looking around. She has a portfolio of about 1,500 images spread out over 30 microstock sites. That's not 30,000 images...that's 1,500 images that she would "control" spread out all over kingdom come.
-
The pole is deceiving. Are you referring to portfolio size (in total?)
I was reading someone's bio the other day. She stated she had over 30,000 images online. Then I started looking around. She has a portfolio of about 1,500 images spread out over 30 microstock sites. That's not 30,000 images...that's 1,500 images that she would "control" spread out all over kingdom come.
The poll isn't deceptive, she is.
-
Here is an idea: Start asking what price images should be sold at. Secondly, start asking what percentage should be paid out to contributors (in opposition to what the "agency" gets to keep for technology, administration, marketing etc.)
If you can come up with a significant amount of contributors being able to agree on both of these points, then you can get an idea how much images you could sell through the new agency.
However, I have the feeling that you will find that a majority of contributors won't be able to agree on both of these basic issues. That's why I don't believe a "democratic agency" could work.
-
over 300k so far, only if it was that simple...
I would say we would need an agency with a subscription plan (inevitable) but more focused on the on demand sales, we could get ride of the subs but then we would need to have exclusive content like Stocksy
a flat rate for sales (one for subs and another for ods) would be interesting thinking of driving a big % into marketing etc
the search algorithm will be a nightmare as well, making everyone happy is impossible
we will need to have a few employees too: site maintenance, customer care
how about the reviewing process? guess we can be responsible for our files, if a buyer is unhappy we need to solve it!
believe we can start making a list about everything...
-
OK so I did the math... and from this poll "we" control about 500,000 to 600,000 image.
-
This is a bit of a loaded question- Technically we control all of the images but in reality industry perception is swayed by a very small number of contributors.
The "Microstock Collective" - www.symbiostock.org/collective/ (http://www.symbiostock.org/collective/) - currently has 89 participants and just over 100k images. The average vote on initiatives and agency ratings is 30 participants. That is roughly about the same amount of people who contribute here on a regular basis. I think many many contributors are content just to create and upload images and come here to find information. I would bet that less than 10% of the people here actually participate at all. It's a shame because if we could convince some of these quiet people how important they are it might go a long way to helping us collectively make a change.
What is even more concerning is that it is becoming apparent that those few contributors with the loudest voices don't necessarily speak for the majority. Yet because they are the loudest and most vocal people assume what they are saying is the mass opinion. I am beginning to think this is anything but the truth.
-
They may be involved, but quietly. For example, I doubt only 89 people removed 7 million images from DPC, so many more people must have quietly opted out without saying anything publicly. An online petition might get lots of votes. It's just a matter of what the petition's about. For that you need some initial consensus.
-
That is what I mean. If all of those contributors would just be vocal enough on a regular basis so we could show our strength it would be amazing. The DPC thing was pretty bad and the outrage was huge. It is a shame that it takes something so incredibly bad to get a reasonable sized response.
-
That is what I mean. If all of those contributors would just be vocal enough on a regular basis so we could show our strength it would be amazing. The DPC thing was pretty bad and the outrage was huge. It is a shame that it takes something so incredibly bad to get a reasonable sized response.
With punishments from agencies and personal attacks on members who do not follow the group it isn't surprising more people don't speak out.
-
OK so I did the math... and from this poll "we" control about 500,000 to 600,000 image.
According to 2013 poll (http://blog.microstockgroup.com/2013-microstock-industry-survey-first-look/) 'we' control 2,045,428 images. 812 respondents * 2519 avg images.
-
OK so I did the math... and from this poll "we" control about 500,000 to 600,000 image.
According to 2013 poll ([url]http://blog.microstockgroup.com/2013-microstock-industry-survey-first-look/[/url]) 'we' control 2,045,428 images. 812 respondents * 2519 avg images.
OK, so this suggests that we "control" about 10% of the images on the agencies, right.
What do we do with this information? To me, it tells me that we don't carry that much weight.
Even if 100% of us agreed to a mass deletion of images from an agency, that would leave said agency about 10% down... and this would quickly be made up by the masses who are happy to fill the void. I know I see blatant copying of my work everywhere I look. I could delete my port from every agency tomorrow and (despite the fact that I sell really well at most agencies) within a few months they wouldn't even know I'm gone.
-
Yet "we" opted out almost 7 million images from DPC. 8)
-
Yet "we" opted out almost 7 million images from DPC. 8)
As sales deteriorate those numbers will go up!
-
Total Members Voted: 106
But the sum of number of votes in the last column is 112
Why?
-
Yet "we" opted out almost 7 million images from DPC. 8)
Only if you believe that all 7 million are because of DPC, not people leaving or being closed. You have no proof for your claim. What is it now?
-
Yet "we" opted out almost 7 million images from DPC. 8)
Only if you believe that all 7 million are because of DPC, not people leaving or being closed. You have no proof for your claim. What is it now?
The evidence is recorded here1: http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/fotolia-d-day-%28deactivation-day%29-may-1/msg385153/#msg385153 (http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/fotolia-d-day-%28deactivation-day%29-may-1/msg385153/#msg385153), being the difference on the date of the post (almost 7 million) between files on Ft and those on DPC, so clearly the people hadn't left or being closed on Fotolia. Of course, others may have left Fotolia too, some because of DPC.
1(Oddly, I can't see the number posted on DPC just now, though I could before.)
-
Yet "we" opted out almost 7 million images from DPC. 8)
Only if you believe that all 7 million are because of DPC, not people leaving or being closed. You have no proof for your claim. What is it now?
The evidence is recorded here1: [url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/fotolia-d-day-%28deactivation-day%29-may-1/msg385153/#msg385153[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/fotolia-d-day-%28deactivation-day%29-may-1/msg385153/#msg385153[/url]), being the difference on the date of the post (almost 7 million) between files on Ft and those on DPC, so clearly the people hadn't left or being closed on Fotolia. Of course, others may have left Fotolia too, some because of DPC.
1(Oddly, I can't see the number posted on DPC just now, though I could before.)
Yes the evidence is there and yet we keep hearing from the fatalist that nothing can be done to protect our interests. If sales continue to drop at SS and other sites I am sure those numbers will continue to rise.