Author Topic: Microstock vs. Unsplash (Read 4323 times)

rene · « **on:** June 02, 2019, 09:55 »

I have read here (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/december-earnings) a thread about earnings and bad influance of free photos stock sites.
As a phrase
"Those people who gave free photos in unsplash are probably the dumbest person ever appeared on the www. I cannot think of somebody more stupid"
I took a look to Unsplash for the first time.
I found a lot of good images, relevent reserch results and curiously often better descriptions than at SS. For sure this kind of sites is serious competition for regular stock. My first thought was to agree with quotation above but after long reflexion, am I really smarter than they? I am selling for $0,38, it is not so far from free...
With half day commissioned shooting I earn equivalent of 6 months of SS earnings. It seems easy for potential clients to contacts artists at unsplash so maybe with carefully selecting images it is not so bad idea to be there. I have seen a lot of profesionals there.
If microstock leaders continue to treat us as sh*t there is a risk that lot of contributors,earning close to nothing, turn to free sites to have pleasure to hurt microstock business , just for revenge.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #1 on:** June 02, 2019, 10:10 »

Quote from: rene on June 02, 2019, 09:55

With half day commissioned shooting I earn equivalent of 6 months of SS earnings.

Have you sold 1 image at Shutterstock the last 6 months or a million?

Brasilnut · « **Reply #2 on:** June 02, 2019, 12:19 »

Quote from: rene on June 02, 2019, 09:55

I am selling for $0,38, it is not so far from free...

38 cents is a world away from free when considering 100s of downloads.

Plus the average isn't 38cents, more like double that on Micros depending on the port.

Unsplash users overestimate the kindness of strangers and underestimate the value of their work.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 02, 2019, 13:22 »

“I’m not making much at my job, so I think I’ll march into my boss’s office and tell him I’ll work for free. That’ll show him!”

cathyslife · « **Reply #4 on:** June 02, 2019, 15:23 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 02, 2019, 13:22

“I’m not making much at my job, so I think I’ll march into my boss’s office and tell him I’ll work for free. That’ll show him!”

And maybe your boss will help your career by telling all his business friends that you work for free. You will be so busy with work. 😂

mindstorm · « **Reply #5 on:** June 02, 2019, 16:03 »

Quote from: rene on June 02, 2019, 09:55

I am selling for $0,38, it is not so far from free...

If you are getting 38 cents basic per sale on ShutterStock, that means your total sales through that agency are over $10,000 total. A far cry from free...

I only get 36 cents basic from SS, since my total sales are still a bit shy of $5,000. HOWEVER, if I look at my overall sales to SS, I discover that my AVERAGE per download is actually 67 cents. And my RPI is $3.89. (both totals since 2010, though the account lay mostly empty until the late 2017, when I got serious again).

The alternative is free? Might as well stick to pInterest if that is really what you want...

pancaketom · « **Reply #6 on:** June 02, 2019, 16:42 »

I would say that if you are doing microstock to market yourself for contract work you are doing it wrong.

I have no idea if unsplash is a good way to market yourself. I certainly wouldn't suggest sending full or even high resolution images there.

gillian vann · « **Reply #7 on:** June 04, 2019, 00:55 »

Now that there is advertising on the Unsplash site do the photographers realise they've been taken for fools? I'd laugh, but it's not funny.

microstockrank.com · « **Reply #8 on:** June 04, 2019, 07:20 »

Quote from: gillian vann on June 04, 2019, 00:55

Now that there is advertising on the Unsplash site do the photographers realise they've been taken for fools? I'd laugh, but it's not funny.

With the cost of Unsplash, hard to believe that it will stay free for a very long time ...
But, Where did you see advertising?

source : https://medium.com/unsplash/what-does-unsplash-cost-in-2019-f499620a14d0 [nofollow]

charged · « **Reply #9 on:** June 04, 2019, 15:30 »

The ads shown as if they are part of the photo collection. I saw a few from the company Square. It is the same style of ads you see on Pinterest, where they also put ads among the pins you scroll through.

cathyslife · « **Reply #10 on:** June 04, 2019, 15:35 »

Quote from: microstockrank.com on June 04, 2019, 07:20

With the cost of Unsplash, hard to believe that it will stay free for a very long time ...
But, Where did you see advertising?

source : https://medium.com/unsplash/what-does-unsplash-cost-in-2019-f499620a14d0

You have a typo in your tagline.

OM · « **Reply #11 on:** June 05, 2019, 10:21 »

One of the others may not be as big as Unsplash but Pixabay is a tad more blatant in its advertising....their sponsors are our old friends........SS and AS...no doubt using their cut from the proceeds of licensing our images to 'sponsor' the competition.

fotorob · « **Reply #12 on:** June 05, 2019, 11:11 »

Quote from: microstockrank.com on June 04, 2019, 07:20

Quote from: gillian vann on June 04, 2019, 00:55
Now that there is advertising on the Unsplash site do the photographers realise they've been taken for fools? I'd laugh, but it's not funny.

With the cost of Unsplash, hard to believe that it will stay free for a very long time ...
But, Where did you see advertising?

source : https://medium.com/unsplash/what-does-unsplash-cost-in-2019-f499620a14d0

Thanks for the interesting link.
I did some analysis of where the money at Unsplash comes from here, in German though (Google Translate might help):
https://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/2019/01/15/das-geschaeftsmodell-hinter-kostenlosen-bildern-am-beispiel-unsplash/

OM · « **Reply #13 on:** June 05, 2019, 12:11 »

Quote from: fotorob on June 05, 2019, 11:11

Quote from: microstockrank.com on June 04, 2019, 07:20
Quote from: gillian vann on June 04, 2019, 00:55
Now that there is advertising on the Unsplash site do the photographers realise they've been taken for fools? I'd laugh, but it's not funny.

With the cost of Unsplash, hard to believe that it will stay free for a very long time ...
But, Where did you see advertising?

source : https://medium.com/unsplash/what-does-unsplash-cost-in-2019-f499620a14d0

Thanks for the interesting link.
I did some analysis of where the money at Unsplash comes from here, in German though (Google Translate might help):
https://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/2019/01/15/das-geschaeftsmodell-hinter-kostenlosen-bildern-am-beispiel-unsplash/

Most enlightening and the Google translation is good. Thanks.
Interesting that the Unsplash model for monetization is different to that of Pixabay and on that subject there's a link given to another article "The business model of Pixabay and possible consequences" which is also worth a read (Google translate from the original German text).

Edit: Sorry Robert. Didn't realise that you're author of both articles...many thanks.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #14 on:** March 30, 2021, 08:55 »

Well, I guess Getty won’t be able to lower pricing further...
https://www.finanzen.net/nachricht/aktien/getty-images-to-acquire-unsplash-the-preeminent-image-platform-for-global-creators-9967925

everest · « **Reply #15 on:** March 30, 2021, 09:06 »

"The Unsplash team share our values and share our vision of enabling global creativity and communication. We are impressed by what the Unsplash team and community has built and we look forward to supporting their continued development"

They can say it louder but not clearer.

Bad Robot · « **Reply #16 on:** March 30, 2021, 09:54 »

Well thats one way of disrupting the free giveaway model of stupidity.

Buy them, move the images to thinkstock/getty
close it down

Make money

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #17 on:** March 30, 2021, 13:58 »

Quote from: Bad Robot on March 30, 2021, 09:54

Well thats one way of disrupting the free giveaway model of stupidity.

Buy them, move the images to thinkstock/getty
close it down

Make money

Bear in mind my crystal ball is not all that good, but I'd guess they want Unsplash for all the API business so Getty can copy what Shutterstock has been doing with API customers - the fees for the API hookup aren't shared with the people who create the images and there are some small per-asset royalties that get paid when the end user downloads something.

https://unsplash.com/developers

I'm not sure how many of the people who previously uploaded to Unsplash will continue to supply them once they know they're feeding Getty

cobalt · « **Reply #18 on:** March 30, 2021, 14:47 »

I think this is good news.

Getty will create a nice little Unsplash collection, bring in the really good artists and hang the rest of the platform out to dry.

They will use it as a marketing tool, but make sure it stops interfering with the real business.

StanRohrer · « **Reply #19 on:** March 30, 2021, 16:45 »

We can see how far iStock languished when under the control of Getty. Getty didn't understand and continue the Internet community of the site. They didn't well grasp the community influence on the business plan. Getty ran iS just as any of their other collections and in the way they wanted to do the business in an old school way. I'll bet Unsplash will suffer a similar fate - existing, but not at the former level.

offisapup · « **Reply #20 on:** March 30, 2021, 19:03 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on March 30, 2021, 08:55

Well, I guess Getty won’t be able to lower pricing further...
https://www.finanzen.net/nachricht/aktien/getty-images-to-acquire-unsplash-the-preeminent-image-platform-for-global-creators-9967925

Never underestimate greed. I'm sure plans are afoot to make people pay for the privilege of uploading images. The next evolution of stock photography. And guess what, I won't be surprised if people were queuing up to pay to upload. Just like they gave all that great photography away for free to make other people millionaires.

trek · « **Reply #21 on:** March 30, 2021, 19:54 »

Maybe they intend to populate istock's offerings with newly acquired Unsplash content. Then increase their profits by skewing the search results towards said content. Customers need not know the content is also available as creative commons. Contributors need not be paid because they already gave away all rights.

ShadySue · « **Reply #22 on:** March 30, 2021, 20:10 »

Quote from: trek on March 30, 2021, 19:54

Maybe they intend to populate istock's offerings with newly acquired Unsplash content. Then increase their profits by skewing the search results towards said content. Customers need not know the content is also available as creative commons. Contributors need not be paid because they already gave away all rights.

I think that's exactly what they'll do.

wds · « **Reply #23 on:** March 30, 2021, 20:24 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 30, 2021, 20:10

Quote from: trek on March 30, 2021, 19:54
Maybe they intend to populate istock's offerings with newly acquired Unsplash content. Then increase their profits by skewing the search results towards said content. Customers need not know the content is also available as creative commons. Contributors need not be paid because they already gave away all rights.
I think that's exactly what they'll do.

Does unsplash content typically have model or property releases?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #24 on:** March 30, 2021, 21:41 »

If I understand this correctly, Unsplash is inviting companies to provide images with their products and logos in them so that Unsplash users will effectively advertise the product for them when they download and use those images.

In the articles below, they detail both paid ad content by brands as well as just adding branded images to the collection (in the paid case, the brand pays Unsplash to show the brand content in searches where they think it'll work; content is still free)

https://unsplash.com/brands

https://medium.com/unsplash/introducing-unsplash-for-brands-3b60d1b4ad0c

They claim Unsplash is used more than Shutterstock, Adobe Stock and Getty combined (no idea if that's accurate; just noting that they pitch this about themselves)

https://buffer.com/resources/unsplash-for-brands/

Here's a collection of Surface devices as an example of brand linkage

https://unsplash.com/@surface

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #25 on:** March 30, 2021, 21:54 »

Quote from: wds on March 30, 2021, 20:24

Quote from: ShadySue on March 30, 2021, 20:10
Quote from: trek on March 30, 2021, 19:54
Maybe they intend to populate istock's offerings with newly acquired Unsplash content. Then increase their profits by skewing the search results towards said content. Customers need not know the content is also available as creative commons. Contributors need not be paid because they already gave away all rights.
I think that's exactly what they'll do.

Does unsplash content typically have model or property releases?

https://help.unsplash.com/en/articles/4179580-dmca-verification

pics2 · « **Reply #26 on:** March 31, 2021, 04:00 »

It is going in Pinterest business model direction. That is great move by Unsplash to monetize on their success. I don't like them for obvious reasons (stock photographer), as stock market investor I would definitely invest in them, just like I did with Pinterest. Getty sees this potential, Amazon does also by planning to buy Pinterest. Congrats to team behind Unsplash. (in case they had this all projected years ago)

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #27 on:** March 31, 2021, 07:28 »

Who didn't see the acquisition of Unsplash coming? In fact, who thinks the entire purpose of Unsplash was to build a free collection and sell it for a ton of money. Oh the irony.

I love the altruistic messaging of Unsplash. "Unsplash is a platform powered by an amazing community that has gifted hundreds of thousands of their own photos to fuel creativity around the world". And in the end, all of those photographers who felt a sense of philanthropy by "gifting" their work are now getting a lesson in ruthless business. It will be interesting to read reactions from their contributors.

wds · « **Reply #28 on:** March 31, 2021, 08:46 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on March 30, 2021, 21:41

If I understand this correctly, Unsplash is inviting companies to provide images with their products and logos in them so that Unsplash users will effectively advertise the product for them when they download and use those images.

In the articles below, they detail both paid ad content by brands as well as just adding branded images to the collection (in the paid case, the brand pays Unsplash to show the brand content in searches where they think it'll work; content is still free)

https://unsplash.com/brands

https://medium.com/unsplash/introducing-unsplash-for-brands-3b60d1b4ad0c

They claim Unsplash is used more than Shutterstock, Adobe Stock and Getty combined (no idea if that's accurate; just noting that they pitch this about themselves)

https://buffer.com/resources/unsplash-for-brands/

Here's a collection of Surface devices as an example of brand linkage

https://unsplash.com/@surface

Does unsplash say somewhere that these images can be used without any "rights" issues?

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #29 on:** March 31, 2021, 09:27 »

Quote from: cobalt on March 30, 2021, 14:47

They will use it as a marketing tool, but make sure it stops interfering with the real business.

I suspect that's a large part of this, plus bringing in people looking at free images, to do the bait and switch of all the rest of the "Free" sites, where some limited, marginal images are actually free, and then the customers are led to the pay images.

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on March 30, 2021, 21:41

If I understand this correctly, Unsplash is inviting companies to provide images with their products and logos in them so that Unsplash users will effectively advertise the product for them when they download and use those images.

In the articles below, they detail both paid ad content by brands as well as just adding branded images to the collection (in the paid case, the brand pays Unsplash to show the brand content in searches where they think it'll work; content is still free)

https://unsplash.com/brands

https://medium.com/unsplash/introducing-unsplash-for-brands-3b60d1b4ad0c

They claim Unsplash is used more than Shutterstock, Adobe Stock and Getty combined (no idea if that's accurate; just noting that they pitch this about themselves)

https://buffer.com/resources/unsplash-for-brands/

Here's a collection of Surface devices as an example of brand linkage

https://unsplash.com/@surface

Paid Advertising where companies will upload their own images, to be used free by anyone who wants them. Exposure and marketing. I think you have a good idea of where this will be headed.

News my way: Unsplash to be turned into another Getty Zombie division.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #30 on:** March 31, 2021, 11:02 »

Quote from: wds on March 31, 2021, 08:46

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on March 30, 2021, 21:41
If I understand this correctly, Unsplash is inviting companies to provide images with their products and logos in them so that Unsplash users will effectively advertise the product for them when they download and use those images....

Does unsplash say somewhere that these images can be used without any "rights" issues?

Their license applies to all downloads and the Unsplash for Brands images end up on the site just like any other Unsplash images

https://unsplash.com/license

Looking at a few more articles, plus Unsplash's "application" for brands that want to be represented, the selected brands pay Unsplash for this service and in some cases pay Unsplash photographers to produce the images they then make available

https://bettermarketing.pub/the-two-opportunities-for-marketers-and-brands-in-unsplashs-new-service-6ae8a54fa212

https://www.kevel.co/blog/unsplash-interview/

https://murphyconsulting.us/unsplash-visual-marketing-strategy/

https://www.thephoblographer.com/2019/12/13/unsplash-now-working-with-brands-in-a-puzzling-advertising-model/

Tenebroso · « **Reply #31 on:** March 31, 2021, 15:52 »

Quote from: offisapup on March 30, 2021, 19:03

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on March 30, 2021, 08:55
Well, I guess Getty won’t be able to lower pricing further...
https://www.finanzen.net/nachricht/aktien/getty-images-to-acquire-unsplash-the-preeminent-image-platform-for-global-creators-9967925

Never underestimate greed. I'm sure plans are afoot to make people pay for the privilege of uploading images. The next evolution of stock photography. And guess what, I won't be surprised if people were queuing up to pay to upload. Just like they gave all that great photography away for free to make other people millionaires.

I fully agree that you have to pay. The free goes to the agency. And it is a good market. Paying to sell is the way, yes. I call it an investment, sow to reap. It has a huge advantage. The benefit is for the artist, without intermediaries.

Tenebroso · « **Reply #32 on:** March 31, 2021, 16:12 »

For customers come to buy, they need a supply of 5 million files. That was the answer to my question in this forum. 5 million files, if someone gives me the space to store 5 million files, I give my work. Therefore, paying to sell is the present.

The agencies, as the Amazon books comment, will shake and adapt to the market. The professionals too. We will sell, passing through the payment area, credit card and trying to sell. Paying. Yes.

We must already say STOP to not being able to sell our books, our archives, digital, without the infrastructure of trucks and delivery personnel. Not only do I see it simple, it is our obligation. We, the artists, directly to the client. Yes, paying.

Tenebroso · « **Reply #33 on:** March 31, 2021, 16:51 »

Look, an image professional, starting out in microstock. He records the first three videos of him on YouTube. The strength of love is more important than crying around the corners to convince ourselves of something that we all already know, there is a lot of competition.

But those who contribute, those who add, serve me, the crybabies do not serve me. Take photos with your mobile at home and I hope they accept them in the SS. Do something, but try to convince that this is the end, you are not going to convince me.

https://youtu.be/UtSoQPHxaVw

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #34 on:** March 31, 2021, 19:32 »

Quote from: Tenebroso on March 31, 2021, 16:12

For customers come to buy, they need a supply of 5 million files. That was the answer to my question in this forum. 5 million files, if someone gives me the space to store 5 million files, I give my work. Therefore, paying to sell is the present.

I paid to sell in 2004. It was a waste of money.

Tenebroso · « **Reply #35 on:** March 31, 2021, 19:50 »

I already know it.

Your past is not going to determine mine. I understand you. But it is past. Initiative, desire, struggle, energy, union, strength, illusion, ....
There is if you find me.

Storage space costs money. A solo artist doesn't work. Here, some tried it in a group and it ended badly. And what does that mean with current times?

Others pay computer scientists and programmers. Others sell on their own pages. Others sell on generic platforms investing time and effort in adapting it to the images. Each one tries to find their space.

Paying to sell is not crazy. Everything costs something. Work, effort, and perhaps a share of collaboration. Where the artists decide many things, for example, who enters the group and who does not.

Tenebroso · « **Reply #36 on:** March 31, 2021, 20:18 »

Friend, if you think that I only do projects, if you approve it, I confirm it now. No, I don't do things if I have your approval. I learn from everything, every day. I learn from you too. Everything helps. There is no guarantee of success.

But, join the artists, it is a help to solve our problems. And think differently from the current agency system. Artist face to face with the client. Simple and very complicated. But we will try. We will be the first, but not the only ones. Once the can is opened, more groups will emerge than artists. Only the best groups will remain on the market.

Some artists will want to pay, but not all artists will be able to be in the groups. The pay is the present. A very viable alternative.

Not only does the money go to each artist, but it also reaches a market that agencies do not reach. Union make the force. And since everything is money, paying is a reality.

The market stays in Agencies, free archives and groups. Some for free, others for a fee. In a few years, you will see this as something normal on a day-to-day basis.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #37 on:** April 01, 2021, 06:27 »

Quote from: Tenebroso on March 31, 2021, 19:50

Paying to sell is not crazy. Everything costs something.

Thus the percentage of royalty they take.

Maybe it's not clear what you're trying to say.

Tenebroso · « **Reply #38 on:** April 01, 2021, 09:09 »

Thank you for the kindness of your words. Yes, I am not understood. I know.

As far as I can read today. And I am not interested in reading more. I'm going to read as far as I can.

My words focus on the fact that Agencies pay less and less, others offer free, and one user commented that the next step was to pay to upload.

Ironically, the colleague, he meant, that below free, we were a kind of prostitute, who in addition to putting our bodies, we had to pay for the hotel bed.

Then there is the negativity line. We already know that there are problems. Either we approach them with solutions or we will keep trying to hear ourselves to sleep every day with three likes in the comments and time wasted in the forum.

That is why I commented, that paying to upload images is the real road that we have left. This path is the right one.

Agencies have their expenses and problems, Agencies want to sell.

We want to sell. In groups of 500 artists, 1000 artists, 2k or 5k, ..... or 20k artists, we will pay the expenses of selling, together, in equal parts, in installments. Paying the expenses together means earning 100% from the sale of a file.

Earn 50% of the sale of a file, they will be free groups, upload files for free, but the cost of the platform will be paid by 50% of the sale of a file. Since the expense of time to manage the work, is obtained with that 50%.

Either 50% profit or 100% profit for selling files, is the way. Some groups will be free, others will be with all expenses paid between the associates.

There will be groups of artists who pay, others do not. Others will be in groups paying and other groups without paying. Most of us will also continue with the agencies.

Up to here, I can read. For now End of my topic. You can continue with free or microstock of this thread.

Thank you.

The groups of artists arrive to settle in the offer of archives.

The market stays with the Agencies and Groups of Artists. Both sales systems will remain in time from now on.

The artists will be in the agencies and we will also decide in which group or groups, we request entry to sell our files. Some of these groups, the artists, will pay the expenses and will get 100% of what each client pays for their file.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Microstock vs. Unsplash (Read 4323 times)

Tenebroso

Tenebroso

Tenebroso

Tenebroso

Tenebroso

Tenebroso

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors