Stock Syndicate

[techno]

I propose the establishment of union stock contributors. ( Stock Syndicate )

With the following requirements :

1. minimum 50 percent on  sales paid to contributors

2. Price structure  similar price structure at Istockphoto .

3. Stop of sales by the system of subscription ( Shutterstock mode )


sorry for my english  :-)

[sharpshot]

This comes up regularly and never gets anywhere.

I don't have a big problem with the subscription model.  I would like to see it changed, so that we get a fixed percentage of the sites earnings from subscription packages.  It would be good if the prices were closer to pay per download prices but it's clear that buyers purchase more images with subscriptions, so they can't be directly compared.

[cthoman]

I propose the establishment of union stock contributors. ( Stock Syndicate )

With the following requirements :

1. minimum 50 percent on  sales paid to contributors

2. Price structure  similar price structure at Istockphoto .

3. Stop of sales by the system of subscription ( Shutterstock mode )


sorry for my english  :-)

Those are similar to my goals. I'm looking to get my average RPD in the $5-$10 range. I guess the question is the level of devotion. I couldn't afford to just delete my portfolio from those sites that don't live up to those standards. I assume most contributors couldn't or wouldn't.

I could stop uploading (and I have) to sites that don't meet those standards. But again, you might be hard pressed to get other contributors to do that as well.

That really only leaves you with the promotion aspect or which sites do you recommend. Which is nice, but can only really take you so far.

These union concepts are nice, but they really have to have some teeth to work. And, I haven't seen any commitment or desire from many contributors to take steps towards having that level of power.

[stockastic]

This comes up regularly and never gets anywhere.

I don't have a big problem with the subscription model.  I would like to see it changed, so that we get a fixed percentage of the sites earnings from subscription packages.

The real problem with subscriptions is this: how do you know what a buyer paid for your image?  He paid some big up-front fee for some number of downloads, at some rate, in some combinations, with some right of return, yada yada yada.  There never is any point at which a sale takes place at a specific price.  Therefore, the photographer has no basis for even asking for a specific percentage or "commission on a sale".   

Subscriptions destroy the commission model and replace it with what is basically an arbitrary, token payment.     

[sharpshot]

Some sites have come up with a much better way to pay us for subscriptions.  Unfortunately, contributors usually can't comprehend that the average subs buyer only uses a fraction of their quota each month.  So they think that it's better to get $0.25 to $0.38 per download than a share of the fee the buyer paid for their monthly subscription.  So thanks to us, were stuck with what we have now.

[stockastic]

I don't think we even know what the subscriptions cost.   No doubt there are all sorts of "plans" and deals cut with big buyers, and the agencies won't want contributors to know any of it.  So the actual price of the subscription could actually go up without contributors even knowing, much less getting a corresponding increase in payments.   In the end, the payment to contributors  is determined by exactly one factor: what's the lowest amount they'll accept without actually pulling their content?

[Milinz]

I propose the establishment of union stock contributors. ( Stock Syndicate )

With the following requirements :

1. minimum 50 percent on  sales paid to contributors

2. Price structure  similar price structure at Istockphoto .

3. Stop of sales by the system of subscription ( Shutterstock mode )


sorry for my english  :-)

Those are similar to my goals. I'm looking to get my average RPD in the $5-$10 range. I guess the question is the level of devotion. I couldn't afford to just delete my portfolio from those sites that don't live up to those standards. I assume most contributors couldn't or wouldn't.

I could stop uploading (and I have) to sites that don't meet those standards. But again, you might be hard pressed to get other contributors to do that as well.

That really only leaves you with the promotion aspect or which sites do you recommend. Which is nice, but can only really take you so far.

These union concepts are nice, but they really have to have some teeth to work. And, I haven't seen any commitment or desire from many contributors to take steps towards having that level of power.

April Fool you almost caught me on the $5-$10 RPD range. No microstock site pays that. Your support plan for Pond5 is making the poll fake. How does site go from 9 to 17 in 1 month. Nobody believes Deposit numbers now I think Pond5 is faked to. Makes the poll no good.

[chromaco]

March 2013
GL  - RPD $6.36
ToonVectors - RPD $19.11
CAO - RPD $9.25
My own site - $13.82 RPD

All four sites earned me more $ each than, IS, DP, FT or BS

Cthoman wasn't joking, they are out there. We just need to support them. Granted both of us are illustrators but at the same time both of us have stopped uploading new images (at least our good ones) to sub sites.

[cthoman]

March 2013
GL  - RPD $6.36
ToonVectors - RPD $19.11
CAO - RPD $9.25
My own site - $13.82 RPD

All four sites earned me more $ each than, IS, DP, FT or BS

Cthoman wasn't joking, they are out there. We just need to support them. Granted both of us are illustrators but at the same time both of us have stopped uploading new images (at least our good ones) to sub sites.

Yep, no joke. My numbers are similar. It would be nice if there were more sites in that range, but I'm glad to have the ones that I do.

Your support plan for Pond5 is making the poll fake. How does site go from 9 to 17 in 1 month. Nobody believes Deposit numbers now I think Pond5 is faked to. Makes the poll no good.

I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but I don't have files at either of those. Pond5 sounds interesting. When they get their vector uploading up and running, I'll probably test it out.

[RacePhoto]

There's a guy on one of the media sites for photographers and he's saying we need a photographers union. I thought that was funny. And his first argument was, look what it did for the musicians.

I was tempted to reply but didn't. Apparently he was never a musician or a member of the musicians union, as I was for about 40 years. It wasn't by choice. Places I played and groups I subbed in or was a member, it was required. Music festivals and even some benefit concerts, required union rules and membership.

I think the catch to the photographers union, association, Syndicate or whatever name someone wants to put on it, is this. We are independent contractors for the most part. Where the electricians and plumbers and other trades have good solid unions for good reason, establishing safety for the people hiring them as well as the training and standards, for photography, it's a little different.

Unless of course everyone who wants to belong to the Union and go through an apprenticeship, pass a proficiency test and be licensed and regulated. Than maybe, sure we could have a union. I think the idea of a photographers union runs up against a wall when it comes to regulation and licensing. People want the union power, protection and benefits, but when they find out it's going to cost money, meeting the required standards and schooling, they change their mind? And monthly or annual membership dues.

[fotografer]

Nobody believes Deposit numbers now I think Pond5 is faked to. Makes the poll no good.

I'm guessing that the results are skewed by people that don't sell much.  They could have 50 images on deposit that take just about anything and have a couple of sales and only a couple of images at the better sites and no sales.  Obviously they would then vote deposit as the better site.

[Poncke]

.

[Poncke]

Nobody believes Deposit numbers now I think Pond5 is faked to. Makes the poll no good.

I'm guessing that the results are skewed by people that don't sell much.  They could have 50 images on deposit that take just about anything and have a couple of sales and only a couple of images at the better sites and no sales.  Obviously they would then vote deposit as the better site.

I think you have  a different poll in mind. I think he talks about the earnings poll on the right. You can fake that by putting in false figures to skew the results.

[sharpshot]

Pond5 sell more video clips than all the other microstock sites for some people.  So its not a surprise to see them higher in the poll.  If it was just for stills, I don't think they would be doing very well.

[RacePhoto]

Pond5 sell more video clips than all the other microstock sites for some people.  So its not a surprise to see them higher in the poll.  If it was just for stills, I don't think they would be doing very well.

And I think you are correct! But maybe the illustrations are doing better too?

That whole "I don't want less than $5 RPD" seemed a little bit high to me, but after I read the source and the reasons and the sites, it's not out of line. Illustrations - sure that makes sense. Video - I can see that. Microstock Photos, might be a difficult price to negotiate anywhere.

When Pond5 passes DT I'll be questioning how that happened in one month.  Someone had PMed me about the jump otherwise I wouldn't have noticed. The poll on the right is for information, not business future decisions. I glance at the top four or five each month.

So if DT goes up to 18.5 does it move back into Top Earner, or is that bracket the top four.  Is 8.5 the Middle Tier? (calling Leaf)

And maybe someone who remembers things knows how many votes it takes to appear in the poll. The ones with no numbers have less than that many votes. Was it 25 or 50? (I should take notes...)

Video and Vectors take much more work and deserve much more pay. Not that people who take photos aren't investing time and have expenses for equipment, lighting, models, and props. But there are many more good photographers competing, which will drive the pay down. I might as well add audio which I have some and I'm planning on more. They seem to run about $1-2 a download and it's also tough market.

When I get through making a SymbioStock site, I'll be making $5 a download? 

[Poncke]

Sorry but I can work on a 13 raw image HDR panorama for 4 hours. Include the shoot and the cost for travel and time shooting and I think I deserve to get the same money if not more as for a vector image.

[RacePhoto]

Sorry but I can work on a 13 raw image HDR panorama for 4 hours. Include the shoot and the cost for travel and time shooting and I think I deserve to get the same money if not more as for a vector image.

You and I may think so, but the agencies and buyers don't. It wasn't personal, it was about supply and demand. Less vectors and even less really good vectors. Prices higher. Same for video.

I can work on one image for an hour, making it perfect, buyers say "hey it's a photo, they punched a button and took a picture." Some people here claim they can make, keyword and upload a photo in 5 minutes. (ha ha, but they do say that from time to time) This is microstock, we're supposed to be little picture factories and uploading demons. 

Try this: Shutterstock. 25,166,312 royalty-free stock images / 66,200 new stock images added this week. How many of those 66,000 new images are vectors? A million new images every four months. It's like trying to sell buckets of sand at the beach, or a bag of ice to an Eskimo. Market location, supply and demand are very important to pricing.

The Internet market is potentially everywhere and everyone in the world. So is the source of competition. There are less video people and less vector artists. Facts of life.

[cthoman]

Sorry but I can work on a 13 raw image HDR panorama for 4 hours. Include the shoot and the cost for travel and time shooting and I think I deserve to get the same money if not more as for a vector image.

Me too, but you don't have to convince me. You have to convince the agencies. I'm all for it though. I think photos are dragging down the cost of illustration. That's probably why I'm finding the best contributor deals on mostly illustration only sites.