Author Topic: thinkstockphotos.com - Getty New Family (Read 100368 times)

mwp1969 · « **Reply #375 on:** February 17, 2010, 17:23 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 17, 2010, 14:29

Quote from: lisafx on February 17, 2010, 13:51
Quote from: helix7 on February 15, 2010, 19:02

Companies that I think are currently doing well by contributors are Cutcaster (we all know John's work ethic and how involved in the microstock community he is), Graphic Leftovers (Daniel and team are very responsive, very helpful, and actually asked my opinion on some new site design features), and Dreamstime is fair and responsive to member concerns. All three of these companies also pay fairly, Cutcaster paying 40%, GL paying 52%, and DT paying the tiered royalty scale that is certainly more fair than what many other companies offer.

Thanks for the info Mike. Of those three I am only on DT. I will agree, though, that of the big sites they offer the fairest deal to contributors.

I have never heard of Graphic leftovers. Are there any sales there?

I have been contemplating adding Cutcaster to my lineup to replace StockXpert or Crestock, but what I have been reading about sales volume has me holding back. Not to mention that the smaller sites seem to be folding like cheap suits all over the place.

Just started uploading to Graphic Leftovers and I have 3 sales already. I see there are others here with over 100 sales, so it looks like they have something going for them. If you do sign up, make sure to ask for an FTP account, it is the easiest upload, no categories, just upload and they appear in your portfolio. Suppose I had better leave my referral

Graphic Leftovers

Thanks for the referral link to GL Sharpshot. I'm going to try and give them a shot.

-Mark
http://markwpayne.wordpress.com

Suljo · « **Reply #376 on:** February 17, 2010, 19:03 »

SoooOoo
is there any dl from this weak or is same Getty scheme on the end of the month?
(when they decide your half sales and pay you 20%)

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #377 on:** February 17, 2010, 19:36 »

Quote from: Ploink on February 17, 2010, 15:54

In my view they "just work": I don't have troubles logging in or uploading to, I can't remember an alien octopus, their stats are up to date within an hour, they pay promptly around the 7th or 8th each month, they are very easy to upload to, they have a decent concept of "editorial", they don't move the goalposts during the game, they handled the tax-withholding-thing decently - have I missed anything? I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy here, but these days I'm already content if I'm not "cared about" but if I'm at least not being f*cked around with - like at some other agencies I could name...

That fact that nothing goes wrong may have to do with the fact they never seem to change anything.

They're still the king of subs but that can't last forever. At some point they'll need to change to survive or they'll fail.

Maybe they don't want to change because they're waiting for a buyer before the SHTF.

elvinstar · « **Reply #378 on:** February 17, 2010, 20:19 »

Shutterstock is my best performer by far. Upload process is fast and painless and review times are great. I'm also loving the ODD's! I think that it will be more than a bit difficult to dethrone SS as the sub king for quite some time to come. Maybe they just subscribe to the philosophy "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

gostwyck · « **Reply #379 on:** February 17, 2010, 21:08 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on February 17, 2010, 19:36

That fact that nothing goes wrong may have to do with the fact they never seem to change anything.

They're still the king of subs but that can't last forever. At some point they'll need to change to survive or they'll fail.

Maybe they don't want to change because they're waiting for a buyer before the SHTF.

Not necessarily __ I haven't noticed much change at places like McDonald's, Ikea, etc over the years. From a buyer's perspective they're providing a great service. If I were looking to buy a sub then the vast choice, sort order engine and the speed/reliability of the site would almost certainly put them at the top of my list.

If Jon were looking to sell he'd already have done so by now __ instead he's been on the acquisition trail. Frankly I doubt that anyone other than Getty could afford to buy them anyway, they're a much bigger operation than most people realise, probably about one third the size if IS.

Suljo · « **Reply #380 on:** February 17, 2010, 22:10 »

In fact that is nottt gggoooinnggg wrrrrrooongggggggggggg??!!!?!?

!?
Ecept that I must make tricky xx No-s attempts to just sign up on my acc.
I Just figure how they will pay me if some kind of simple LogIn is so difficult.
OK I will wait next 1st of month to see if some 0.20$ will bee added on my acc thru StockXpert acc but I dont belive them nothing al all.
I give them 2 months and if they dont made same ammount that they steal from us from StockXpert they will hear my final curse...

helix7 · « **Reply #381 on:** February 17, 2010, 22:56 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on February 17, 2010, 19:36

That fact that nothing goes wrong may have to do with the fact they never seem to change anything...

You nailed it. SS never upgrades the site, never fixes anything, the site is pretty much on autopilot except for reviews. The site design is dated. I am still amazed that after all these years they can't seem to get the JPG and vector versions of an image on one page under one file number. No one stays successful by resting on their laurels and not making any forward progress.

helix7 · « **Reply #382 on:** February 17, 2010, 23:00 »

Quote from: lisafx on February 17, 2010, 13:51

...I have never heard of Graphic leftovers. Are there any sales there?...

I do well there. It is definitely more of a graphics/vectors type of site, but they pay well and price most images at $5, so a typical sale gets you $2.60. I usually get 1 sale per day on weekdays, sometimes 2, typically averaging around 25 per month. Although I managed to get 7 sales on Monday alone. Uploading is dirt simple, too. Drop the EPS and JPG via FTP, and that's it. Highly recommended.

Suljo · « **Reply #383 on:** February 17, 2010, 23:12 »

Khm Khm
But this post is about something about ThingStoka which wanabe from strach bee major player in subs and screw us ALL....

iclick · « **Reply #384 on:** February 18, 2010, 03:54 »

Quote from: Artemis on February 17, 2010, 16:38

Quote from: cclapper on February 17, 2010, 16:03
Quote
In my view they "just work": I don't have troubles logging in or uploading to, I can't remember an alien octopus, their stats are up to date within an hour, they pay promptly around the 7th or 8th each month, they are very easy to upload to, they have a decent concept of "editorial", they don't move the goalposts during the game, they handled the tax-withholding-thing decently - have I missed anything? I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy here, but these days I'm already content if I'm not "cared about" but if I'm at least not being f*cked around with - like at some other agencies I could name...

+1

Agree very much so! (well, apart from the tax thing which they blew up nicely at first). Another nice detail about them is they absorb refund costs, and the recent EL action where they payed EL's to the contributors after they found a license infringement. They also don't get rich on "sleeping" accounts which makes them come across as less greedy than some of the other big players out there.
It's a relief getting treated correct, nothing more nothing less, some of the other biggies ought to take an exemple.
Just another reason for me not to go for Getty's TS crumbles, SS is doing it in a far more "fair-trade" manner.

Yes I agree with the above two posts sums up why I chose not to support Gettys latest sibling TS, why assist in attempting to bring something this good down with something that offers so little in return

macrosaur · « **Reply #385 on:** February 18, 2010, 11:41 »

Hello i'm back.

FD · « **Reply #386 on:** February 18, 2010, 11:55 »

Quote from: macrosaur on February 18, 2010, 11:41

Hello i'm back.

Where have you been?

sharpshot · « **Reply #387 on:** February 18, 2010, 12:38 »

Quote from: FD-amateur on February 18, 2010, 11:55

Quote from: macrosaur on February 18, 2010, 11:41
Hello i'm back.
Where have you been?

He's been busy uploading his portfolio to the micros

macrosaur · « **Reply #388 on:** February 18, 2010, 14:36 »

I got banned but today i tried logging in and it works ...

macrosaur · « **Reply #389 on:** February 18, 2010, 14:37 »

They also banned me in the Alamy forum, such a pain in the ass.

Can i stay here ?
I promise i'm a good boy now but you know it already.

madelaide · « **Reply #390 on:** February 18, 2010, 15:20 »

Quote from: macrosaur on February 18, 2010, 14:37

They also banned me in the Alamy forum, such a pain in the ass.

What did you do wrong at Alamy forum? Criticized the macrostock agencies?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #391 on:** February 18, 2010, 15:22 »

marcos, is that you?

macrosaur · « **Reply #392 on:** February 18, 2010, 15:42 »

Quote from: sjlocke on February 18, 2010, 15:22

marcos, is that you?

Yes, it's me, and Franz as well.

macrosaur · « **Reply #393 on:** February 18, 2010, 15:43 »

Quote from: madelaide on February 18, 2010, 15:20

Quote from: macrosaur on February 18, 2010, 14:37
They also banned me in the Alamy forum, such a pain in the ass.

What did you do wrong at Alamy forum? Criticized the macrostock agencies?

I don't know exactly, today i argued that Nikon was better than Canon and their admin
closed the thread and banned me.

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #394 on:** March 07, 2010, 15:24 »

Hi Lisa FX and All,

Please remember that there are several very good Macro third party companies that support and guide their contributors with a great deal of kindness and effort. They make themselves a community to grow and build as a team. Agencies like Rubberball, Blend, Cultura, Tetra. These are all strong Macro third party smaller agencies that truly support the investment of their contributors. This is something I think is overlooked a lot.
It is not just Getty to choose from when entering Macro. I just got back from a big gathering of one agency that included speakers and information for two days that was very valuable. They want to make their shooters better at what they do, it makes sense for both sides. I am off to another one this month for creative briefs and to share information with and learn from some really talented friendly people.
I think everyone should consider third party agencies in Macro as an option, I don't here them mentioned here very often. I make far more money at third party agencies per image than I do at Micro. It doesn't make it better and might not be to some peoples liking but as far as supporting their contributors they could not do a better job in my opinion. I only named 4 of them, there are more.

Best,
Jonathan

lisafx · « **Reply #395 on:** March 07, 2010, 16:27 »

Thanks for the info Jonathan

Personally, I am all for submitting to macro agencies in theory. In practice, I don't know where to begin. Not to mention I still haven't managed the workflow of shooting for different markets.

somethingpretentious · « **Reply #396 on:** March 07, 2010, 17:33 »

Hi all

My first post here...

If you are still considering wether to opt in or out on Thinkstock consider this (if you don't like calculations then skip to the last line):

A buyer wants 7 of your XXXL pictures on iS and nothing more. You are non-exclusive so the buyer needs 7 x 25 = 175 credits. He sees that the cheapest way to get this amount of credit would be to buy the following combination of credit packages: 120 credits for 170 $, 50 credits for 73 $ and 12 credits for 18,25 $. This will give the buyer 182 credits and cost him 261,25. You make 20% x 1,44$/credit (the average credit price for his purchase) x 175 credit = 50,24 $ and Getty makes 261,25 – 50,24 = 211,01$. Weirdly enough this 20 % (actually: 19,2%) commission scenario is what you are hoping for, but it ain't gonna happen! Because, just before he clicks ”buy” he notices the link to Thinkstock and decides to see if your pictures are there - And they are, cause you want those extra nuts don't you?! He buys the subscription plan as he can save 261,25 – 249 = 12,25$ dollars this way. He downloads the 7 pictures he wants and nothing more. You get 7 x 0,25 = 1,75 $ and Getty gets 249 – 1,75 = 247,25 $. Getty makes 247,25 – 211,01 = 36,24 $ MORE than if the pictures had been bought on iS, whereas you get a pay cut from 50,24 to 1,75 $ (3% of your usual pay).

The commission you have received is 1,75 $ / 249 $ = 0,7%

This is an extreme example, but the point is, that there are many reasons for Getty to push the business towards more subscriptions...

ShadySue · « **Reply #397 on:** March 07, 2010, 17:48 »

Quote from: somethingpretentious on March 07, 2010, 17:33

Hi all

A buyer wants 7 of your XXXL pictures on iS and nothing more. You are non-exclusive so the buyer needs 7 x 25 = 175 credits. He sees that the cheapest way to get this amount of credit would be to buy the following combination of credit packages: 120 credits for 170 $, 50 credits for 73 $ and 12 credits for 18,25 $. This will give the buyer 182 credits and cost him 261,25. You make 20% x 1,44$/credit (the average credit price for his purchase) x 175 credit = 50,24 $ and Getty makes 261,25 – 50,24 = 211,01$. Weirdly enough this 20 % (actually: 19,2%) commission scenario is what you are hoping for, but it ain't gonna happen! Because, just before he clicks ”buy” he notices the link to Thinkstock and decides to see if your pictures are there - And they are,

Hi -
Can you post a link to the 'link to Thinkstock' the buyer can see in your scenario? Thanks!

Kone · « **Reply #398 on:** March 07, 2010, 18:18 »

Quote from: Jonathan Ross on March 07, 2010, 15:24

Hi Lisa FX and All,

Please remember that there are several very good Macro third party companies that support and guide their contributors with a great deal of kindness and effort. They make themselves a community to grow and build as a team. Agencies like Rubberball, Blend, Cultura, Tetra. These are all strong Macro third party smaller agencies that truly support the investment of their contributors. This is something I think is overlooked a lot.
It is not just Getty to choose from when entering Macro. I just got back from a big gathering of one agency that included speakers and information for two days that was very valuable. They want to make their shooters better at what they do, it makes sense for both sides. I am off to another one this month for creative briefs and to share information with and learn from some really talented friendly people.
I think everyone should consider third party agencies in Macro as an option, I don't here them mentioned here very often. I make far more money at third party agencies per image than I do at Micro. It doesn't make it better and might not be to some peoples liking but as far as supporting their contributors they could not do a better job in my opinion. I only named 4 of them, there are more.

Best,
Jonathan

Hi Jonathan,
Thanks for all of your input in this forum. They have been more than helpful.
I was just wondering how some people can do all of this and does your day have more than 24 hours?
I see you're active at this forum and you are doing macro stock, mid stock and microstock, and also you are in the video productions business, family stuff and .... .
My days are much shorter and I hardly have the time for this forum, trying to keep sales at the same level. Is there a formula or is that just how you organize yourself?
I apologize to all other helpful people here, there are more, but I picked Jonathan because I like to read his posts and he looks to be an honest guy.

Kone

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #399 on:** March 11, 2010, 17:37 »

Hi Lisa FX,

If you ever want any introductions into third party Macro agencies just drop me a PM and I'll connect you with some good people.

Best,
Jonathan

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: thinkstockphotos.com - Getty New Family (Read 100368 times)

mwp1969

Suljo

PaulieWalnuts

elvinstar

gostwyck

Suljo

helix7

helix7

Suljo

iclick

macrosaur

FD

sharpshot

macrosaur

macrosaur

madelaide

Sean Locke Photography

macrosaur

macrosaur

Jonathan Ross

lisafx

somethingpretentious

ShadySue

Kone

Jonathan Ross

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors