MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Wirestock news  (Read 1803 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: June 28, 2019, 08:31 »
0
Hey everyone,

I am not sure if you remember my earlier post but we are still doing microstock, though something completely different. Our team realized that the market is not ready for tokenization and blockchain yet and instead we decided to build something that actually solves a lot of major microstock problems. The platform we ended up building gives photographers one-door access to all stock agencies from a single website. So, instead of uploading and submitting content on multiple websites, you do it on Wirestock and we automatically submit it to Shutterstock, istock, Alamy, Dreamstime and Adobe. You dont need to have an account on stock agency sites, everything is done through an aggregated Wirestock account in every single agency. So you get paid from Wirestock instead of getting paid separately from each agency. Our system also provides a real time dashboard showing your aggregated sales and other relevant stats. 

In addition, for inexperienced contributors (or the lazy ones) we provide a free service (called Easy Submission) for filling out the submission form (description, keywords, title, category).

We currently have about 200 contributors with little or no experience in microstock. I wanted to share this with you guys to see what you think as exxperienced microstock photographers.

Let me know if you have any feedback or suggestions. BTW, Wirestock is free and we only charge 15% of total royalties paid, so feel free to check it out. Here is the website.

Mike


« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2019, 09:52 »
+2
Interesting, but that sort of setup would seem to be against the agency terms.

SS "You must own or control the copyright to all content you submit to Shutterstock. This means that you cannot submit work obtained from other sources (e.g., online image search results or websites), or incorporate such work into your content submissions, unless you have permission to do so."

DT "Each Contributor that contributes to our site and community is entirely responsible for the materials he/she uploads. By uploading files you agree to hold all copyrights for the image and to have previously obtained a model release from each person included in your picture."

etc.

« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2019, 09:57 »
+2
They might have an agreement with them directly, it's basically the same concept as Blackbox.

How much does the lazy service of description, keywords, title, category cost? I'm interested  :P
is that to pay upfront or deducted from sales?

« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2019, 10:05 »
0
They might have an agreement with them directly, it's basically the same concept as Blackbox.

How much does the lazy service of description, keywords, title, category cost? I'm interested  :P
is that to pay upfront or deducted from sales?

Yeah, I guess.

"In addition, for inexperienced contributors (or the lazy ones) we provide a free service"

« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2019, 10:08 »
+1
They might have an agreement with them directly, it's basically the same concept as Blackbox.

How much does the lazy service of description, keywords, title, category cost? I'm interested  :P
is that to pay upfront or deducted from sales?

Yeah, I guess.

"In addition, for inexperienced contributors (or the lazy ones) we provide a free service"

whoops my bad. I've missed this word  ::) Thanks

Not used to see anything free in this world

« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2019, 10:34 »
+1
Blackbox has a feature that allows contributors to split or assign royalty percentages among multiple parties on a per shot basis.  An interesting concept for productions involving (short term) photo/film making teams.  Will that be possible at Wirestock? 

Also, the FAQ says Wirestock will add video.. (and become a competitor to Blackbox).  Other than having photos, what will make Wirestock better than Blackbox for video contributors?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2019, 10:43 by trek »

« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2019, 10:42 »
0
.

« Reply #7 on: June 28, 2019, 11:40 »
+5
It isn't free if you charge 15% of royalties paid, so I'm not sure you should be describing your service as free. Perhaps saying no upfront charges, but we collect...

You need to check spellings in your FAQ - lots of typos

Then you have fudged some details about payouts. You have a threshold of $30 for payout, but agencies - Dreamstime is a $100 minimum, for example - may have higher ones. I'm sure you're assuming you'll be over the threshold in aggregate, but are you really promising to pay contributors even if you don't get paid by the agencies? What about refunds - do you have a policy for those? Dreamstime holds money for 7 days for EL sales; what's your policy for paying contributors? iStock pays ages in arrears, do you just follow their payments to you with payments to the Wirestock contributors?

I know this all sounds like quibbling, but you need to be clear to what extent you are offering clear and universal terms, and to what extent contributors are still bound by the various agency rules, not your rules.

Another big thing for contributors to consider IMO is to what extent the search position of their content will be affected by submitting under one account with a bunch of other contributors' work. It's probably impossible to know for sure, but search position is a large factor in decent images selling (or not). Especially if you are openly appealing to people who are new and can't even be bothered to accurately keyword their images, I'd be worried that my images might be dragged down by poor quality overall. Would you ever turn contributors down if their images were heavily rejected by agencies?

At one time, Dreasmtime used to set your upload limits on the basis of your acceptance percentage. I stopped uploading there so I don't know if they're still doing that, but all agencies have rules about accounts and what will you do to make sure your aggregated account doesn't get closed down because someone is submitting rubbish, or stolen content, or too many similars, or...

I've previously talked about the problems with turning over keywording for anything but the simplest of images, but even if you leave out editorial, there's a lot of specialist content where you need to know the details of what and where for accurate, useful and sales-producing keywords.

Given the small number of agencies that represent the bulk of the sales, I honestly don't think there's enough time saving to make it sane to turn over 15% of our earnings to a third party, for photos at least.

ShadySue

« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2019, 14:28 »
+4
Nothing of interest of me.

I suspect you'll find this to be pretty much unsustainable on 15%, what with different keywording standards for the different agencies. I'm only on iS and Alamy and they're totally different: iS has its controlled vocabulary which doesn't apply elsewhere and takes up time on uploading; Alamy doesn't stem, so you have to make individual decisions on whether to stem or not on many keywords on virtually every file. Then on Alamy you optimally have to go back into the image manager after acceptance and 'manage' the files to indicate supertags, and it's probably best to complete the 'optional' fields too.

Even the standards for editorial are different on the two sites, the captioning has to follow a specific format on iS (maybe the same on SS, I don't know), what's allowed on Alamy isn't often allowed on iS (which isn't allowed to compete with Getty togs on news, sport or celebrities), Alamy is stricter on what needs releases so must be editorial, iS often needs 'permission' for certain editorial shots (even if in a public place).
A blanket approach wouldn't work for these two alone of the agencies you suggest, and presumably the others have quirks of their own.

Keywording: Again, you'll be doing a lot of research for your 15%, unless you just leave out things you're not sure of, which is hardly good practice.

Plus everything Jo Ann said.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2019, 14:54 by ShadySue »

« Reply #9 on: June 28, 2019, 15:03 »
0
True I also dont find it very sustainable for their business, theyll get really busy very fast unless they plan on using one of these automatic keywording tool which is terrible.

After looking at their website faq, it seems they dont do it for editorial, only for commercial photos. Contributors will have to do their own editorials.

ShadySue

« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2019, 15:34 »
0
True I also dont find it very sustainable for their business, theyll get really busy very fast unless they plan on using one of these automatic keywording tool which is terrible.

After looking at their website faq, it seems they dont do it for editorial, only for commercial photos. Contributors will have to do their own editorials.

I didn't look at their site: that's even less attractive, then, if that were possible.

« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2019, 15:35 »
0
Well, it is another entry to the market and I can see it as very appealing for the occasional stock artist, who just cant be bothered learning the way around every different site.

I have good experiences with blackbox, although I still upload to my own portfolios as well.

It might also work if you have a good, strong theme that you want to upload yourself, but also do a little bit of everything on the side and want to keep that out of your main portfolios.

Like every new place it will take time to develop trust.

Are you really commited to be around the next 30-50 years?

How many people in leadership positions have long and experienced stock portfolios?

Can you convince good professionals with established reputations to commit to you?

And what happens when in two years you realize you need at least 40% to break even and pay your running costs?

Blackbox works in video that still has much higher sales and they have sharing tools that allow post processors and keyworders to have an additional income. Also the stock part is just one of the many things they are working on, the place is more than a simple upload system.

I wish you good luck and maybe I will try your system at some point. But unless you can negotiate excellent rankings, I am not sure what kind of content I would commit.

« Reply #12 on: June 28, 2019, 15:44 »
0
Questions:

Can I delete individual photos after submitting? Or would I need to deactivate the entire account?

Can I submit my images to agencies you dont have contracts with, like eyeem, twenty20, picasa etc...

Can I still sell directly from my own website or photoshelter account?

Can I spread a series over time, or must I submit the entire batch in one go (this is usually bad for sales, you get much better results if you spread out a series over time)

Do you edit submissions, i.e. do other people make artistic decisions over my content?

Is there any kind of technical inspection or quality control or does that always happen at the agencies?

Are you connected to stockperformer? I am not the only one literally addicted to their statistic options and I always strongly favor places that do.

Any plans to sell direct or offer the option of artist webshops?

etc...

:)

« Reply #13 on: June 28, 2019, 15:48 »
0
And who exactly are you? I cant find any info about your team, the owners, financial strength. Which country is your legal home base.

Just a website that wants content.

ShadySue

« Reply #14 on: June 28, 2019, 15:55 »
+2
And who exactly are you?
From 2017 (I can't believe it's that long ago!):
"My name is Mike and I am new to the community. I am a fan of photography and been involved with numerous art/photo tech projects in the past. Currently, I and my friend are thinking about creating a new peer-to-peer stock platform where artists will have the ability to sell images/videos directly to buyers with very low transaction fees (5-10%). We are doing research in the space and would really appreciate your feedback. Would you be kind to fill out the short survey below:"
https://www.microstockgroup.com/selling-direct/peer-to-peer-direct-stock-selling-platform/msg499156/#msg499156

« Reply #15 on: June 28, 2019, 16:56 »
+1
I remember that, but that really tells us nothing to make an educated business decision.

Invisible people with no stock photography portfolios making all kinds of invisible claims.

If they are genuinly interested in running a business, they have to prove professional practice.

Pat Gowan is a real person with depth and background, so are other people from the team. They didnt come out of nowhere, blackbox was very well prepared. Took them years.


ShadySue

« Reply #16 on: June 28, 2019, 17:21 »
+2
I remember that, but that really tells us nothing to make an educated business decision.
I think that, and the lack of information you alluded to above, tells us all we need to know.


« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2019, 03:46 »
+1
As other commented, more work needed, best wishes for you to succeed.

Offtopic.

May I ask, tokenizaion and blockchain are connected? Can blockchain work without tokens? Sorry for naive question.

Quote
Our team realized that the market is not ready for tokenization and blockchain yet

What crossed my mind was that "free" stock services might evolve to this path?


« Reply #18 on: June 29, 2019, 03:59 »
0
Blackbox has a feature that allows contributors to split or assign royalty percentages among multiple parties on a per shot basis.  An interesting concept for productions involving (short term) photo/film making teams.  Will that be possible at Wirestock? 

Also, the FAQ says Wirestock will add video.. (and become a competitor to Blackbox).  Other than having photos, what will make Wirestock better than Blackbox for video contributors?

Possibly. We are considering adding revenue sharing options between models and photographers or video producers in the future. Do you think it will help in incentivizing models to take part in stock photo shoots?

« Reply #19 on: June 29, 2019, 04:10 »
0
It isn't free if you charge 15% of royalties paid, so I'm not sure you should be describing your service as free. Perhaps saying no upfront charges, but we collect...

You need to check spellings in your FAQ - lots of typos

Then you have fudged some details about payouts. You have a threshold of $30 for payout, but agencies - Dreamstime is a $100 minimum, for example - may have higher ones. I'm sure you're assuming you'll be over the threshold in aggregate, but are you really promising to pay contributors even if you don't get paid by the agencies? What about refunds - do you have a policy for those? Dreamstime holds money for 7 days for EL sales; what's your policy for paying contributors? iStock pays ages in arrears, do you just follow their payments to you with payments to the Wirestock contributors?

I know this all sounds like quibbling, but you need to be clear to what extent you are offering clear and universal terms, and to what extent contributors are still bound by the various agency rules, not your rules.

Another big thing for contributors to consider IMO is to what extent the search position of their content will be affected by submitting under one account with a bunch of other contributors' work. It's probably impossible to know for sure, but search position is a large factor in decent images selling (or not). Especially if you are openly appealing to people who are new and can't even be bothered to accurately keyword their images, I'd be worried that my images might be dragged down by poor quality overall. Would you ever turn contributors down if their images were heavily rejected by agencies?

At one time, Dreasmtime used to set your upload limits on the basis of your acceptance percentage. I stopped uploading there so I don't know if they're still doing that, but all agencies have rules about accounts and what will you do to make sure your aggregated account doesn't get closed down because someone is submitting rubbish, or stolen content, or too many similars, or...

I've previously talked about the problems with turning over keywording for anything but the simplest of images, but even if you leave out editorial, there's a lot of specialist content where you need to know the details of what and where for accurate, useful and sales-producing keywords.

Given the small number of agencies that represent the bulk of the sales, I honestly don't think there's enough time saving to make it sane to turn over 15% of our earnings to a third party, for photos at least.

Thanks for your questions. No, we follow our own payment schedule. You set up a minimum payout amount, once it is reached, the funds will be disbursed to your selected payment account regardless of partner agency payments and schedules.

We have our own review process which may reject certain images or block certain contributors if they continuously submit unsuitable content.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2019, 04:12 by mike_snaps »

« Reply #20 on: June 29, 2019, 04:20 »
+1
As other commented, more work needed, best wishes for you to succeed.

Offtopic.

May I ask, tokenizaion and blockchain are connected? Can blockchain work without tokens? Sorry for naive question.

Quote
Our team realized that the market is not ready for tokenization and blockchain yet

What crossed my mind was that "free" stock services might evolve to this path?

Yes, you may have blockchain solutions that do not involve tokens or cryptocurrencies. The cool thing about blockchain with regards to image copyrights or intellectual property in general is that you can store copyright information on a blockchain ledger which is immutable. However, we are not focusing on this currently.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2019, 09:45 by mike_snaps »

« Reply #21 on: June 29, 2019, 04:40 »
+1
Thanks for your questions  :)

Questions:

Can I delete individual photos after submitting? Or would I need to deactivate the entire account?


Currently, we do not have a "delete" functionality on the website yet. However, you can request deletion via email. You will not have to close your account. However, we plan on adding a deletion after submission feature in the near future.

Quote
Can I submit my images to agencies you dont have contracts with, like eyeem, twenty20, picasa etc...

The only requirement is that you can't submit the same content to the same agencies with your individual and Wirestock accounts to avoid duplicates. However, you are free to submit your images to all other agencies not supported by us.

Quote
Can I still sell directly from my own website or photoshelter account?

Of course, you can.

Quote
Can I spread a series over time, or must I submit the entire batch in one go (this is usually bad for sales, you get much better results if you spread out a series over time)

You can submit all your content at once.

Quote
Do you edit submissions, i.e. do other people make artistic decisions over my content?

No, we do not edit any of the content submitted by our contributors.

Quote
Is there any kind of technical inspection or quality control or does that always happen at the agencies?

Yes, we have a review process which also includes technical inspection and duplicate check.

Quote
Are you connected to stockperformer? I am not the only one literally addicted to their statistic options and I always strongly favor places that do.

No we are not affiliated at all. We have built a cool dashboard that shows your earnings broken down by agencies for different timeframes.

Quote
Any plans to sell direct or offer the option of artist webshops?

Maybe in the future.



« Reply #22 on: June 29, 2019, 05:24 »
0
Blackbox has a feature that allows contributors to split or assign royalty percentages among multiple parties on a per shot basis.  An interesting concept for productions involving (short term) photo/film making teams.  Will that be possible at Wirestock? 

Also, the FAQ says Wirestock will add video.. (and become a competitor to Blackbox).  Other than having photos, what will make Wirestock better than Blackbox for video contributors?

This is not just for models.

If you can add multiple sharers, you can also share with your post processor, somebody who offers a cool location etc...

However you need a legal contract for sharing to determine if you are also sharing copyright. On Blackbox a sharer becomes a true coowner of the content and thus as a videographer you cannot withdraw any content from blackbox unless those you share with agree.

This is to protect the actors, the keyworders, the cameraman or woman so that their income is always provided.

You could set your system up differently that it is just a revenue granted by the artist and that the artist can change that anytime they want. You would then explicitly insist that artist and model or processors do their own contracts outside of your agency and with their own lawyers.

Do you want to get involved in the legal contracts between the artist and their team, or not?

You should discuss that with a lawyer before you offer the option of revenue sharing.


« Last Edit: June 29, 2019, 05:26 by cobalt »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #23 on: June 29, 2019, 09:06 »
+1

Even the standards for editorial are different on the two sites, the captioning has to follow a specific format on iS (maybe the same on SS, I don't know), what's allowed on Alamy isn't often allowed on iS (which isn't allowed to compete with Getty togs on news, sport or celebrities), Alamy is stricter on what needs releases so must be editorial, iS often needs 'permission' for certain editorial shots (even if in a public place).
A blanket approach wouldn't work for these two alone of the agencies you suggest, and presumably the others have quirks of their own.


SS and IS and every Microstock site I've contributed to in the past, and the ones I do at the current time, accept the standard Dateline format. Some are more picky, but if someone uses the SS format, it will also be accepted at IS and Alamy. That's from experience, not guessing. That wasn't true when these places started accepting Editorial. I think they may have agreed to make uploading less trouble.

Location, State Country, June 29 2019: Who is doing what, in present tense, description, other informational details.

Difficult to believe considering how Getty has made iStock complicated, non-standard, and time tortured.

No up front fees, they do the extra work, and take 15% of whatever. I could see dumping my extras, in case something makes a sale and keep the best for my own uploads.  ;) I wouldn't use this as my primary way of uploading or working. But I could see as a time savings, which would free me up to do something more productive, like take or manage my better images.


« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2019, 08:13 »
0
Blackbox has a feature that allows contributors to split or assign royalty percentages among multiple parties on a per shot basis.  An interesting concept for productions involving (short term) photo/film making teams.  Will that be possible at Wirestock? 

Also, the FAQ says Wirestock will add video.. (and become a competitor to Blackbox).  Other than having photos, what will make Wirestock better than Blackbox for video contributors?

Possibly. We are considering adding revenue sharing options between models and photographers or video producers in the future. Do you think it will help in incentivizing models to take part in stock photo shoots?

That would definitely speed up my workflow to share revenue with a retoucher or someone doing metadata, or both. At the moment that would be my only reason to upload, unless you can negotiate better commissions from agencies and be transparent about it all.

Any ETA on the sharing model?  ;D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2199 Views
Last post September 05, 2008, 19:30
by News Feed
6 Replies
4696 Views
Last post September 29, 2008, 03:16
by Adeptris
0 Replies
1935 Views
Last post February 05, 2009, 11:30
by News Feed
0 Replies
2077 Views
Last post February 06, 2009, 03:00
by News Feed
281 Replies
59918 Views
Last post August 12, 2018, 13:54
by Shooterguy

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results