MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

Is it Time to Adapt and Move On?

Microstock has seen its day, which is ending.
41 (27.3%)
Its not over yet! Things are just changing :D
109 (72.7%)

Total Members Voted: 130

Author Topic: Shall We Say Goodbye?  (Read 16647 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Leo Blanchette

« on: July 29, 2013, 18:50 »
+1
See attached pole.

[EDIT:] Sorry, somebody said I never attached a pole...



...there's two poles.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2013, 21:38 by Leo »


« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2013, 18:55 »
+2
Its changing thanks to your inspiration

« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2013, 18:58 »
0
It's changing.....for the better I hope.

Leo Blanchette

« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2013, 19:03 »
0
Thats kinda funny. I voted it was ending.

Leo Blanchette

« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2013, 19:04 »
0
BTW - Symbiostock and "Microstock" will probably not be related terminologies in the future. This is just a general "Microstock" thread.

« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2013, 19:18 »
+1
Thats kinda funny. I voted it was ending.

Actually, I couldn't decide which one to choose.  Microstock is hopefully changing and morphing into something better for the artists and at the same time I'm thinking the term "microstock" should just go away.

« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2013, 19:39 »
0
It's definitely not over, but I'm not sure it is changing all that much.

« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2013, 22:46 »
+1
Yuri said it recently, but I have felt for a very long while that I'm sick and tired of subs and wonder what the heck they were thinking when they created them.  I feel the last year has seen a lot of disruption and bitterness toward the agencies and I can feel a change a comin.  I pulled out of 123 then Istock and I honestly don't know why I am still at Fotolia and BigStock as they can both only seem to muster sub sales.  (Funny I don't resent SS... yet.)  Yuri is always a leader, and while I don't think anyone will follow him aboard the good ship Titanic, I believe there will be more moves like his coming. 

« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2013, 13:10 »
+3
You'd rather have fewer credit sales over many sub sales? I don't see the difference. All that matters is how much you have in earnings at the end of the month. Shutterstock -- the subs site -- gets me 10 times what every other site gets me. And it's all 100 percent profit because I have zero overhead. I don't pay models, and all of my equipment has long been paid off and continues to serve its purpose in a tax writeoff.

Leo Blanchette

« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2013, 13:13 »
0
and continues to serve its purpose in a tax writeoff.

?????

EmberMike

« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2013, 13:25 »
+7
You'd rather have fewer credit sales over many sub sales? I don't see the difference. All that matters is how much you have in earnings at the end of the month. Shutterstock -- the subs site -- gets me 10 times what every other site gets me...

Can you grow your earnings at SS? I can't. I can't even sustain previous earnings levels anymore. This month I'm so far short of where I expected to be, it's just downright depressing. And despite uploading a good amount of new work, stuff that I'm pretty proud of and should be selling well.

I don't mind the subs model. It worked well for a while. That said, and although I hate to use a word out of the istock playbook, I also have to say that I think subs are starting to look highly "unsustainable" for contributors. I know I'm not alone in struggling to stay afloat at SS these days. Seems like no matter what we do, it's getting harder and harder to maintain.

On the other side of things, I see growth in single-image sales. I'm on a new site now where I'm getting over $8 per vector sale (I'm not saying where, have to keep a few cards close to the chest, so don't ask). I have a tiny portion of my portfolio there so far and yet I'm still seeing a couple of sales every day. I'm seeing growth at GraphicRiver, which despite their low prices still pays out far better than subscriptions, and at least gives me a chance to grow my earnings.

I guess that's the bottom line for me. I want to work with places that I can grow my income with if I send them more and better work. I don't even care if they're subs companies or not. At SS I feel like I'm just running the treadmill lately, and that treadmill is getting so fast that I can't keep up no matter what I do.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2013, 13:30 by EmberMike »

« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2013, 13:37 »
0
SS is the only site I'm seeing my earnings increase.  Subs are selling less but on demand and SOD's are doing well.  I presume photos do better with SOD's than vectors/illustrations?

farbled

« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2013, 13:38 »
+6
The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that it is in an agency's best interests to have millions upon millions of images available for buyers. Diluting sales to contributors is a winning scenario in that while not having to pay out as often or as much, they get to sit on that big pile of money gaining interest every day. Therefore it makes financial sense to make it harder for photo factories and full time shooters to sell photos. Why pay out that money every week or month when they can have it in the bank for the extra week/month/year it would take for a hobbyist to reach payout?

*, almost out of tinfoil....

« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2013, 13:41 »
+2
I don't know.

But I think that our "agents" should focus on new buyers instead of fighting for current ones by cutting prices. I have - fortunately - few new clients and I would never believe how many people in small business have absolutely no idea about how cheap they can buy images. They are used to steal images because they still live in 1995 macrostock world. I hear "microstock" word so often that I find it more than obvious that everybody knows it. I can see Google ads of different MS sites every second but those who are not interested in photography etc. won't ever see them.
Living in socialist utopia - it would be great to see all agencies united in same goal - educate those who have never heard of "affordable" photos. It's nice to send them DMCA or invoices but it doesn't seem to work. I know there are thieves that want to stay thieves but there are others that would like to pay few dollars and feel safe.

« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2013, 14:06 »
+2
Can you grow your earnings at SS? I can't. I can't even sustain previous earnings levels anymore. This month I'm so far short of where I expected to be, it's just downright depressing. And despite uploading a good amount of new work, stuff that I'm pretty proud of and should be selling well.

I don't mind the subs model. It worked well for a while. That said, and although I hate to use a word out of the istock playbook, I also have to say that I think subs are starting to look highly "unsustainable" for contributors. I know I'm not alone in struggling to stay afloat at SS these days. Seems like no matter what we do, it's getting harder and harder to maintain.

On the other side of things, I see growth in single-image sales. I'm on a new site now where I'm getting over $8 per vector sale (I'm not saying where, have to keep a few cards close to the chest, so don't ask). I have a tiny portion of my portfolio there so far and yet I'm still seeing a couple of sales every day. I'm seeing growth at GraphicRiver, which despite their low prices still pays out far better than subscriptions, and at least gives me a chance to grow my earnings.

I guess that's the bottom line for me. I want to work with places that I can grow my income with if I send them more and better work. I don't even care if they're subs companies or not. At SS I feel like I'm just running the treadmill lately, and that treadmill is getting so fast that I can't keep up no matter what I do.

I made this point before, but I'm not sure it ever got much traction...

I think it is about scalability. If you want to double your earnings at a site, it seems much more feasible to double you sales at a site that sells 100 images a month for $10 a piece than it does to double your sales at a site that sells 1000 images a month for $1 a piece.

EmberMike

« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2013, 14:20 »
+4
I made this point before, but I'm not sure it ever got much traction...

I think it is about scalability. If you want to double your earnings at a site, it seems much more feasible to double you sales at a site that sells 100 images a month for $10 a piece than it does to double your sales at a site that sells 1000 images a month for $1 a piece.

I'm sure I've read something like this from you before, but I wasn't paying enough attention. Probably because at the time I was still seeing that nice steady growth at SS and elsewhere. Now that I've hit that wall (and seemingly bounced off it and am now moving backwards) it resonates a bit more with me. I wanted to believe that I was in control of my own destiny when it came to all earnings, from subs too. But lately that just doesn't seem to be true.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2013, 14:41 »
+1
It is changing, and then it will finish
(it will become crapstock)


marthamarks

« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2013, 15:02 »
+1
SS is the only site I'm seeing my earnings increase.  Subs are selling less but on demand and SOD's are doing well.  I presume photos do better with SOD's than vectors/illustrations?
I'm seeing the same thing. My ELs and ODs have skyrocketed this year, from 0-1 per month throughout last year to 6-10 per month now. Don't know why, because I'm not doing anything different. But my port has grown a lot over the last year, so that's probably the reason. And the subs by themselves add up to more than all my earnings on other sites too. I'm still a fan of SS.

tab62

« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2013, 16:09 »
0
I will be submitting images like a mad dog until I hit the so-called 'Wall'...

« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2013, 18:48 »
+2
i remember when about 3 years ago i started working in microstock. I am creating mostly vectors and some jpeg illustrations, photos. I am not even a designer, so at the begining i remember when i created and uploaded my first illustrations. It was very amateur and very average quality overall. Despite that it was selling pretty good then :) Now i create more and much better quality works but most of them are selling much worse than my very first illustrations. Overall microstock income also currently is slowly going down. I've tried different topics, different tactics -  created several big vector collections of design elements (40-70 design elements in one vector set) - nothing worked.... When i look at current microstock portfolios i think that there's more good artists with very professional works than was several years ago - both quality and quantity in my opinion in microstock industry is increasing. It is already very hard to compete there and will be only harder in future. I'm starting learning adobe flash, later - maybe also video making. Not only for microstock -  it will be i guess my so called "exit plan". Maybe i'll use these skills working as a freelancer or in some design studio... I remember when 3 years ago microstockers were talking that there is already too many woks in microstock agencies. now there are three times more of them than those 3 years ago. I can only imagine how many works there will be after 3-5 more years. It will be great for agencies but not for contributors. Sorry for pessimism :)

« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2013, 21:59 »
0
I made this point before, but I'm not sure it ever got much traction...

I think it is about scalability. If you want to double your earnings at a site, it seems much more feasible to double you sales at a site that sells 100 images a month for $10 a piece than it does to double your sales at a site that sells 1000 images a month for $1 a piece.

YES !

but the moment the agency mess with the search engine your views/zooms/sales can go down up to 80% overnight, that's a realistic scenario i've seen on Alamy for some time and it takes months to adjust.


« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2013, 10:11 »
0
You'd rather have fewer credit sales over many sub sales? I don't see the difference. All that matters is how much you have in earnings at the end of the month. Shutterstock -- the subs site -- gets me 10 times what every other site gets me...

Can you grow your earnings at SS?

So far, yes. May and July were BME in both earnings and total downloads. June was a BME in total downloads. I still get about 1 download for every image in my port each month. I've added roughly the same number of images this summer to other sites, and I haven't seen much improvement except at Bigstock, which started doing subs.

Now I still have a small port at just over 1,500 images, so adding 100 here and there is a big increase. Though I think diminishing returns will start to set in. I would imagine that adding 100 images to a port with 10,000 images wouldn't mean as much growth, unless you get a really good seller or two.

Also, on Shutterstock, more than half of my monthly earnings this month isn't  from subs, but from ODs, ELs and SODs.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 10:37 by robhainer »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #22 on: July 31, 2013, 12:16 »
+1
Thanks you glad to see that someone else sees my site as the future.  ;)

It is changing, and then it will finish
(it will become crapstock)


Simple answer: sales aren't down, the agencies are more profitable than ever. We are making less sales. But why?

February 16, 2009, Shutterstock announced the addition of its 10 millionth image

Four years later:

SHUTTERSTOCK STATS:
28,073,964 royalty-free stock images / 177,752 new stock images added this week

Three times more images, and stricter reviews.

Every six weeks, another 1 million new competing images go online. Every year another new 10 million, new and better images, go live.

The competition has tripled. Think of it this way? (maybe?) You have an image, and it sold once a month. Now it will sell once every three months. Take your whole portfolio and cut your sales 66%, of course it's going to bring in less income. But why haven't things dropped 66%? Because agency overall sales are way UP which is some compensation.

In one message someone complains, "Old images don't sell like they used to." and then turns around and says, "New images don't sell like they used to." Hey old or new, doesn't matter, does it?

Complaint, "reviewers are terrible, they are rejecting 100% of my images." followed by, "Reviews are terrible, they are accepting other peoples low quality and bad images." OK which is it?

Then the favorite, that the search changes at random, and good days are when it's right, the bad, when it's wrong because they are experimenting. Really? Sales are a roll of the dice? Or would sales be when people need something that I have to offer?

Seems like no matter what happens, both sides are covered with some superstitious or mysterious explanation. 


Welcome to the Microstock Zone

Income is down because competition is up.



« Reply #23 on: August 07, 2013, 08:30 »
+1
Thanks you glad to see that someone else sees my site as the future.  ;)

It is changing, and then it will finish
(it will become crapstock)


Simple answer: sales aren't down, the agencies are more profitable than ever. We are making less sales. But why?

February 16, 2009, Shutterstock announced the addition of its 10 millionth image

Four years later:

SHUTTERSTOCK STATS:
28,073,964 royalty-free stock images / 177,752 new stock images added this week

Three times more images, and stricter reviews.

Every six weeks, another 1 million new competing images go online. Every year another new 10 million, new and better images, go live.

The competition has tripled. Think of it this way? (maybe?) You have an image, and it sold once a month. Now it will sell once every three months. Take your whole portfolio and cut your sales 66%, of course it's going to bring in less income. But why haven't things dropped 66%? Because agency overall sales are way UP which is some compensation.

In one message someone complains, "Old images don't sell like they used to." and then turns around and says, "New images don't sell like they used to." Hey old or new, doesn't matter, does it?

Complaint, "reviewers are terrible, they are rejecting 100% of my images." followed by, "Reviews are terrible, they are accepting other peoples low quality and bad images." OK which is it?

Then the favorite, that the search changes at random, and good days are when it's right, the bad, when it's wrong because they are experimenting. Really? Sales are a roll of the dice? Or would sales be when people need something that I have to offer?

Seems like no matter what happens, both sides are covered with some superstitious or mysterious explanation. 


Welcome to the Microstock Zone

Income is down because competition is up.





Exactly right!!!!  The drop in sales for most of us should no longer be a mystery.  Competition has simply diluted our own personal drop in the bucket.

« Reply #24 on: August 07, 2013, 10:33 »
+1
 
Quote

Income is down because competition is up.


Absolutely correct!!!
The magic of crowd sourcing.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
5133 Views
Last post November 21, 2012, 09:18
by enstoker
16 Replies
7287 Views
Last post June 18, 2013, 01:10
by borg
21 Replies
12066 Views
Last post September 18, 2018, 08:47
by nobody
200 Replies
53338 Views
Last post December 17, 2016, 11:20
by spike
2 Replies
4157 Views
Last post March 31, 2017, 00:38
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors