MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Who knows the site like www.microstock.top ?  (Read 7232 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 17, 2016, 10:08 »
+1
I found the site newbielink:http://www.microstock.top [nonactive]
But, it's only Shutterstock authors table. Who knows a similar site about iStock, Bigstock Fotolia and others?


« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2016, 13:28 »
0
That's a cool table, thanks for posting the link. I don't know of similar sites, though.

I see Leaf at 337 out of 12213 photographers, with 23,245 images...very impressive!

« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2016, 02:22 »
0
Now we can make a mailinglist with this names.
Then we have a perfect ss newsletter to inform the members about news from ss bottom race. ;D

« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2016, 05:22 »
0
There used to be one for istock with over 30 000 members, but I think it was closed.

« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2016, 06:05 »
+1
The interesting thing here is that the 12 million of SS's 70 million images are owned by just the top 100 photographers or studios. I cant be bothered to go through more of the list, but I would bet the top 500 own the majority of the library and almost all of the saleable images, much of the rest being garbage from ye olden days from people who no longer upload.


« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2016, 09:13 »
+4
The interesting thing here is that the 12 million of SS's 70 million images are owned by just the top 100 photographers or studios. I cant be bothered to go through more of the list, but I would bet the top 500 own the majority of the library and almost all of the saleable images, much of the rest being garbage from ye olden days from people who no longer upload.

The Microstockworld is smaller than many people think.
A few contributors can make a big change if they united. Maybe 500 could turn SS in a trashcan if they leaving SS.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2016, 09:20 by r2d2 »

« Reply #6 on: March 18, 2016, 10:14 »
0
Interesting list.  It looks like having around 1350 gets you in the top 10,000.  I wonder how many are still active during the past year?   It looks like not many towards the bottom of the list.

« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2016, 12:57 »
0
According to Pareto 80% of the images should be produced by 20% of the contributors whether these are the same 20% who get 80% of the income we can only speculate........

« Reply #8 on: March 18, 2016, 12:59 »
0
The interesting thing here is that the 12 million of SS's 70 million images are owned by just the top 100 photographers or studios. I cant be bothered to go through more of the list, but I would bet the top 500 own the majority of the library and almost all of the saleable images, much of the rest being garbage from ye olden days from people who no longer upload.
Or a lot of those people not in the top 100 are on the way up and a lot of the "top" photographers work is outdated or repetitive trash.....anyone fancy a joint?

« Reply #9 on: March 18, 2016, 15:06 »
+3
It was similar on istock, I think the top 500 contributors created the majority of the sellable content.

People forget that crowd sourcing just means an open platform that allows anyone to enter and the talent to rise to the top without "special connections".

It does not mean some kind of communist work system where everyone produced the same number of images and has the same number of sales, in equal proportion to uploads.

That is why agencies are so extremly vulnerable when people remove their content.

Only active uploaders and relevant portfolios will take part in a boycott.

« Reply #10 on: March 18, 2016, 15:48 »
0
That's a cool table, thanks for posting the link. I don't know of similar sites, though.

I see Leaf at 337 out of 12213 photographers, with 23,245 images...very impressive!

I'm there at 7430 position. Better upload a few more then to catch Tyler up :)

« Reply #11 on: March 18, 2016, 17:42 »
+1
I'm there but their count is WAY off. They have me at 3200 assets and I have over 4600

« Reply #12 on: March 18, 2016, 20:28 »
+2
There used to be one for istock with over 30 000 members, but I think it was closed.

This is nothing like that.. istock list had sales data, thus was more interesting.. this is just about the number of images people have..


« Reply #13 on: March 19, 2016, 13:21 »
0
I'm there but their count is WAY off. They have me at 3200 assets and I have over 4600

Mine is right count kind of, shows new and I haven't sent anything new in weeks. Just over 12,000 people with 1000 or more. Not worth checking the 60,000 other with less.

« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2016, 08:59 »
0
According to Pareto 80% of the images should be produced by 20% of the contributors whether these are the same 20% who get 80% of the income we can only speculate........
Pauws99, you right!
It's easy to load this table in MS EXcell and calculate the amount of images those 12200 contributors - 64,086,726.
It is a 80% of 79,748,055 images of SS.

« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2016, 10:06 »
0
According to Pareto 80% of the images should be produced by 20% of the contributors whether these are the same 20% who get 80% of the income we can only speculate........
Pauws99, you right!
It's easy to load this table in MS EXcell and calculate the amount of images those 12200 contributors - 64,086,726.
It is a 80% of 79,748,055 images of SS.

What about the first 100 how much are they?

« Reply #16 on: March 29, 2016, 02:22 »
+1
What about the first 100 how much are they?
First 100 contributors has 12.5 millions images = it's a 15.6 percent of all shutterstock's 80,000,000 images.


« Reply #17 on: March 29, 2016, 02:24 »
0
According to Pareto 80% of the images should be produced by 20% of the contributors whether these are the same 20% who get 80% of the income we can only speculate........
Pauws99, you right!
It's easy to load this table in MS EXcell and calculate the amount of images those 12200 contributors - 64,086,726.
It is a 80% of 79,748,055 images of SS.
Its Pareto who was the clever guy :-)

« Reply #18 on: March 29, 2016, 03:47 »
0
Sort that list by "% of sales", and see who is at 5th place!

« Reply #19 on: March 29, 2016, 05:33 »
0
W hat this "% of sales" means ?
 ???

« Reply #20 on: March 29, 2016, 06:25 »
0
W hat this "% of sales" means ?
 ???


I think it represents the percentage of images that has been sold at least once.

http://www.microstock.top/index.phtml?sort=percent

« Reply #21 on: March 29, 2016, 06:36 »
0
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3906626p2.html

This guy has a whole world map in his port....

« Reply #22 on: March 29, 2016, 06:38 »
0
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3886493p3.html 25000+ images, sold 0.5% (not 50% 0.5%!)
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-2013506p1.html 173800+ images sold 2.6%

and lots more, the ridiculously low sell through rates are mostly what have been called the "icon spammers" already discussed here.

« Reply #23 on: March 29, 2016, 21:02 »
0
W hat this "% of sales" means ?
 ???


I think it represents the percentage of images that has been sold at least once.

http://www.microstock.top/index.phtml?sort=percent


look at the last page by date joined. People with 3000 images and no sales? Look at page 1 people with over 99% sold? I think there's a problem in the data that the report can get at. No complaint but something doesn't look right.

« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2016, 01:11 »
0


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
3633 Views
Last post June 10, 2006, 21:35
by jjneff
45 Replies
11214 Views
Last post August 18, 2009, 14:48
by clustershot
2 Replies
2495 Views
Last post September 27, 2009, 11:25
by Dreamframer
2 Replies
4531 Views
Last post June 30, 2016, 11:17
by noodle
20 Replies
6547 Views
Last post June 07, 2019, 07:24
by 50%

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results