MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: New Stock Video How To Site for Beginners: stockvideoseller.com  (Read 18954 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tbmpvideo

« on: December 07, 2010, 08:32 »
0
I would like to announce a new website devoted to beginners in the stock video footage industry, www.stockvideoseller.com. The site contains articles and tutorials on key-wording, researching ideas and concepts, the top recommended sites for maximum sales and a "what sells and why" segment and more. Interviews with industry professionals and successful and aspiring stock video sellers - perhaps just like you.

It's a new site, and in development, so your comments and reviews are greatly appreciated!


« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2010, 08:47 »
0
Do you sell stock video?

« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2010, 16:07 »
0
Transparency is everything when writing a blog, and the first thing I want to see before i read anything is your portfolio - i want to see that you do great stuff, so I know that Im listining to someone who knows what he is talking about...you have a link to your videos?

good luck!

« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2010, 16:45 »
0
Istock sell much less than Pond5 and Revostock for me, so I can't agree with "High downloads".  Perhaps the caption should be "15% Royalty, don't bother".  And I don't think they have a referral payment for contributors anymore.

« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2010, 17:33 »
0
"High Downloads" is a crappy rational to submit to a site that only pays 15% and the corporate fat cats walk away with 85% of your work! There is just no upside to that kind of thinking. I strongly encourage people to contribute and build portfolios with business partners that treat contributors fairly.

jbarber873

« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2010, 17:43 »
0
"High Downloads" is a crappy rational to submit to a site that only pays 15% and the corporate fat cats walk away with 85% of your work! There is just no upside to that kind of thinking. I strongly encourage people to contribute and build portfolios with business partners that treat contributors fairly.

  I can understand your point of view, but here's how I look at it right now, ( and that could change). If you go to buy a full resolution video at Istock, the price is pretty high. I may get 15% of that, but the price integrity, that is, what a file costs to the end user, is pretty high. So at this point, they are not damaging the value of the basic product, I'm just not getting a good share. What I am getting is a share of a very high volume website when you compare views to other sites. Istock has a different client from Pond5, I think, although I have no data to back that up. So a more sophisticated buyer might go to Pond5, but a designer or ad agency that is just starting to try video may start at Istock, netting me a client i would not have a shot at with Pond5. That's my logic or what passes for logic with Istock. And I really don't care about corporate fat cats, they are just a fact of life, and they are everywhere.

KB

« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2010, 18:17 »
0
Talking about damaging the value of the basic product, why do so many contributors price their HD videos at such low prices on Pond5? For that matter, why doesn't Pond5 have a higher minimum price for HD videos? I love Pond5, but I do not like the low pricing.

« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2010, 18:19 »
0
jbarber873

That point of view is fair enough. However if serious video contributors would only build their portfolios with better paying agencies the clients would certainly follow. As the microstock video market becomes saturated the price pressure will certainly be downwards. 15% of $90 is very low, 15% of $50 - 30 - 20 would be nuts.

« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2010, 19:09 »
0
Hey, you know what doesn't help?  "websites devoted to beginners in the stock video footage industry" - nothing like the classic "train your competitors website"...

Oh heck, I just checked the site.  It's just a referral grab site.  Sigh.

tbmpvideo

« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2010, 20:54 »
0
I am the author of the original post. Thanks for those who have responded! It's a lively forum, I can see. Lots of the issues you have brought up, are one's I've been involved in for the last few years. I'll respond to the comments one by one.

"Hey, you know what doesn't help?  "websites devoted to beginners in the stock video footage industry" - nothing like the classic "train your competitors websiteOh heck, I just checked the site.  It's just a referral grab site.  Sigh. "..."

I like to think it's more than a referral grab site. I wanted to make the site content intensive - a place where those starting out could come and initiate the process without making the time consuming mistakes I did. I don't think there's much control over the rising tide of contributors or the pressures on downward pricing which a glutted marketplace in most easy to shoot subject areas. The days of point and shoot and sell are rapidly closing. No retreat into a guild mentality or restricted market of any kind is going to be possible. If you can't beat them, help them! For those of us who make a living doing this, as I do, the future - probably the only possible income future - is in finding market niches and increasing production values, not restricting competition.

"That point of view is fair enough. However if serious video contributors would only build their portfolios with better paying agencies the clients would certainly follow. As the microstock video market becomes saturated the price pressure will certainly be downwards. 15% of $90 is very low, 15% of $50 - 30 - 20 would be nuts."

I respectfully disagree. I think most of those agencies paying larger royalties are not worth the contributors time. The market is not wishful thinking, but real. You can track it. And according to the numbers I get back, or most reports of similar sellers it's divided up with only several real players. (The exception being Pond5 with it's 50% payout and freewheeling style). If you explore the site you see the information I provide justifies this statement and you can see it in the stats digging via the links on Blogs like Orlinksi.

"Talking about damaging the value of the basic product, why do so many contributors price their HD videos at such low prices on Pond5? For that matter, why doesn't Pond5 have a higher minimum price for HD videos? I love Pond5, but I do not like the low pricing."

Go into the Pond5 search bar and type in Apple Orchard on default search. See what comes up. 350 apple orchard clips. Some sell on sheer production value, 50 % some on price. Most are redundant with multiple clips of the same scene or subject. The only way any of these glutted clips (besides the ones which are outstanding in some way) is on price. Downward pressure on prices is real and not personal. Welcome to the future!

""High Downloads" is a crappy rational to submit to a site that only pays 15% and the corporate fat cats walk away with 85% of your work! There is just no upside to that kind of thinking. I strongly encourage people to contribute and build portfolios with business partners that treat contributors fairly."

"Istock sell much less than Pond5 and Revostock for me, so I can't agree with "High downloads".  Perhaps the caption should be "15% Royalty, don't bother".  And I don't think they have a referral payment for contributors anymore."

High downloads at iStockphoto translate into half my income stream. Although Pond5 has recently replaced iStock in payouts for me as well. It's number two now (but I doubt that will stay the same, as the low bar to entry on Pond5 ensures every topic will becomes saturated). It's a lot of money every month, month on month, year on year. iStock is a hassle, certainly, but if you play it right, learn to work it and work through it - it makes you a large payout every month. Read the iStockphoto review for more on this. Every site (the viable ones) have different markets - a different buying public. What sells Pond, doesn't sell on iStock for different reasons.

"Transparency is everything when writing a blog, and the first thing I want to see before i read anything is your portfolio - i want to see that you do great stuff, so I know that Im listining to someone who knows what he is talking about...you have a link to your videos?"

"Do you sell stock video?"

I do this for a living. Please read the site for more detailed info. It's all there. You can search any of the sites I list on "about me" with the handle tbmpvideo and find my portfolios. Or you can go to http://www.barksdalemedia.com/stock-footage.html and connect there directly. Or you can see quick and dirty thumbnails on my youtube channel at BarksdaleMedia. As I say in the about me section, I don't pretend to be an expert, but after spending two days attempting to teach my friend how to get started selling and understanding stock video, I realized this information was good, hard to get and valuable. Especially for beginners.  This is the funny nature of the internet. Valuable information wants to be free. I believe in free information and wish I could have read my own website when starting out. I would have reached my goals a lot faster!

In any event, thanks for your comments. Any recommendations, comments and gripes are greatly appreciated. New interviews coming from Bob Davies of PicNiche, the iSyndica replacement and Ellen Boughn, the stock photo guru with a log history in stock, and RM photography.

« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2010, 21:07 »
0
For those of us who make a living doing this, as I do, the future - probably the only possible income future - is in finding market niches and increasing production values, not restricting competition

Hey, you know what doesn't help?  Training your competition.  Yes, it makes your ego feel good and all, but it doesn't make business sense.

tbmpvideo

« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2010, 21:28 »
0
"Hey, you know what doesn't help?  Training your competition.  Yes, it makes your ego feel good and all, but it doesn't make business sense."

None the less, here I am! That's kinda the point actually. These market forces are out of individual sellers control. Restricting information is for lawyers (and they are threatened also by free information). I think the folks in the old stock video and photo agencies felt the same way as you, as they lost their jobs and companies. It's realistic to feel threatened. You are. But not by me, but by increasing competition from every direction. If you make your living doing this, you may want to consider how your going to cope with them. When I say, find a niche and increase production value, I mean it. Most of those stock footage houses are history - except those who adapted and survived  There's not much alternate to planning for the future if you want to have one.

« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2010, 21:36 »
0
@tbmpvideo - Any experience or thoughts with the bigger sites like Corbis Motion or Thought Equity?  Wondered if anyone has gone that route.

jbarber873

« Reply #13 on: December 07, 2010, 22:12 »
0
For those of us who make a living doing this, as I do, the future - probably the only possible income future - is in finding market niches and increasing production values, not restricting competition

Hey, you know what doesn't help?  Training your competition.  Yes, it makes your ego feel good and all, but it doesn't make business sense.

sjlocke-  I always read and respect your viewpoints here. I think for the most part you know a whole lot more about microstock than i do. But I would like to give you my point of view. I think that the stock video market is where still images were 5 or 6 years ago. That is, the crowdsourcing model is just starting to take hold. The technology has finally enabled HD video production of a very close to professional quality that was unavailable until recently. The market for that video is also still in it's infancy. The growth of moving images tied to new devices will create the demand. The thing that makes microstock work is the large pool of talent that makes a client certain that they will find something useful for just about anything they look for. That cannot be said of video at this point. The video space needs more contributors, not less, in order to reach a critical mass where it will be seen as a useful resource, and not as a last resort. If you go back to the early still images at Istock, there was an amateurish quality to the collection that has been replaced by a collection that is the equal, and for the most part, better, than the collections that existed at any traditional agency when Istock was started. I would hope that the same thing happens with video. If you bring in the best ideas and production values, and create a resource that is world class, the market will develop in ways we can't imagine. I've been making a living at photography since i was 17 years old, and I'm 57 now. I'm just as excited by this change as I have been with everything that came before. I welcome anyone to compete, because it can only help us all. Just my opinion, and I don't mean to offend you. As I say, I have a great deal of respect for your viewpoint.

« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2010, 22:54 »
0
Sorry, I don't think video is the same as stills.  Good video requires a larger crew, more lights, better talent to act and more money.  Ask Jonathan.  He doesn't and won't do it all by himself.  It isn't the domain of the weekend hobbyist.  And also, I don't think video has the same end market size as stills.  I know others disagree with that, but that's how I envision it.

Quote
It's realistic to feel threatened. You are.

Uh, no I'm not.  I don't do video to any large extent.  I was thinking you might want to avoid encouraging your sales to fall, but apparently you're a masochist.  ;)  Well, enjoy...

tbmpvideo

« Reply #15 on: December 07, 2010, 23:18 »
0
Uh, no I'm not.  I don't do video to any large extent.  I was thinking you might want to avoid encouraging your sales to fall, but apparently you're a masochist.  ;)  Well, enjoy...

I must be a masochist, having offered myself and as a human target! I don't view up and comers as competition. They are just a fact of life, like the sun coming up. From the blogs, I can see the shake out and declining revenues are very real in the photo side. I do think the barriers to entry are somewhat higher on the video end - just the gear even required to get decent point and shoot offerings is more complex and operates in with other dimensions. But the economics of investment are kinda the same for speculative production value. Better know your shots are going to move before you invest in a model, gear, and all the post production time to bring them up for offer. That may be why the majority of shots offered on the video end are some variation of "opportunity shots" with little production value. But I see from studying the shots on different sites, production value does sell. How to minimize the crap shoot, find a niche and proceed is what I am increasing pondering...

tbmpvideo

« Reply #16 on: December 07, 2010, 23:28 »
0
"Any experience or thoughts with the bigger sites like Corbis Motion or Thought Equity?  Wondered if anyone has gone that route."

Honestly, I haven't explored them. I've just been a little fish swimming up from the bottom. I know you need to be invited to Vetta on iStockphoto. I'll ask Ellen Boughn in my interview questions about these Rights Managed companies and what opportunities they may present. I'll post back on that.

« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2010, 03:12 »
0
What I still don't understand is why people aren't more concerned that if they accept as low as 15% with istock, other sites will cut their commissions?  It's already happened with stills, the other big sites have seen istock get away with low commissions and have cut theirs.

If we all just go along with this, I don't see how making any significant earnings from microstock video will be possible in the future.

Hopefully the rumours about alamy getting in to video are true and there are other sites that have higher prices that I haven't tried yet.  Moving away from istock in January is an easy decision for me, I have a small video portfolio there and it doesn't make much of my earnings.  I can see why other people can't do that but I really wish they thought more about the long term consequences of very small commissions.  Buyers will go wherever they can find the clips they need, I don't believe they will just stick with one site, especially when they charge more and risk making it unsustainable for contributors.

RT


« Reply #18 on: December 08, 2010, 04:44 »
0
If you can't beat them, help them!

Nothing personal but if you can't beat them why would I want your help?

tbmpvideo

« Reply #19 on: December 08, 2010, 23:20 »
0
Nothing personal but if you can't beat them why would I want your help?

Sorry, I don't understand your question.


What I still don't understand is why people aren't more concerned that if they accept as low as 15% with istock, other sites will cut their commissions?  It's already happened with stills, the other big sites have seen istock get away with low commissions and have cut theirs.

If we all just go along with this, I don't see how making any significant earnings from microstock video will be possible in the future.


iStock gets a bad rap, from my perspective. (So much as been said, so this will be my only comment on it.) They deliver a lot to their clients in terms of brand. They advertise, unlike most of the high percentage sites (which are non-earners or marginal earners in for the artist and a waste of time) and deliver good money for the contributor with of lots and lots and lots of happy corporate customers having confidence in the site and its offerings and coming back and buying shots. Clients know the files are vetted in every direction, legal, technical, and they issue a guarantee of $10,000 for clips found defective on rights. This is their share of the market.

If you line-up the agencies in terms of percentages, you can see the level of service, back-up legally, quality control, and general standards decreases as the percentages go up. Pond5 being the winner here by exploiting the "out of control anything goes" model and making it pay for all. (They have that market segment nailed and I doubt well see any serious contesters to that slot. Out of 1500 hundred shots submitted there, I had one rejection!) iStock offers the most backup before sales - and the percentage reflects not just greed, but organizational investment.

For me, it's return on ROI which makes me contribute to a site. iStock still a big winner. And it could be, that as iStock continues to preen its model, discouraging the low end contributors on every level, the volume of downloads will increase and contributors will make MORE money than before. We have yet to see. My guess is I'll come out around the same. I have a lot of respect for iStocks model, even with all the nutty back-end problems over there, an it's still worth it to meet them on their terms. It pays off.

tbmpvideo

« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2010, 00:01 »
0
I did go back, thanks to the comments here, and state the affiliation links. I'll post a side bar with with direct links to my major portfolios as well when I get to it. Thanks!

« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2010, 02:33 »
0
If you could find someone to write an indepth tutorial on how to create stock footage animation that would be very helpful.  I can't find anything doing an internet search and I'm a duck outta water with it.

Thanks :)

« Reply #22 on: December 09, 2010, 04:09 »
0
Don't buyers have to buy an extra EL to get the istock legal guarantee?  In some ways I don't mind lower commission for higher volume of sales but giving them 80% of my earnings was hard to accept.  85% is ridiculous, I just can't take that seriously.  If people accept that it could be 90% next year.

And I am sure there's no need to spend as much on marketing now, are their running cost more than they were a few years ago?  They seem to have the same adverts in the same magazines that I'm sure cant be charging as much as they were before the economic downturn.  Merging with Getty must of cut costs.  I just don't see the justification for taking more and more from contributors.

« Reply #23 on: December 09, 2010, 05:30 »
0
If you could find someone to write an indepth tutorial on how to create stock footage animation that would be very helpful.  I can't find anything doing an internet search and I'm a duck outta water with it.

Step 1: Come up with a concept
Step 2: Create an animation
Step 3: Upload to stock site

« Reply #24 on: December 09, 2010, 05:31 »
0
Don't buyers have to buy an extra EL to get the istock legal guarantee? 

That's for the 250K guarantee.  Every file has 10k of protection.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
4877 Views
Last post June 25, 2008, 08:52
by yuliang11
8 Replies
5772 Views
Last post December 16, 2013, 20:11
by Jo Ann Snover
100 Replies
41765 Views
Last post May 15, 2010, 14:06
by elvinstar
5 Replies
3986 Views
Last post May 13, 2013, 10:13
by jbarber873
4 Replies
1893 Views
Last post October 09, 2018, 02:42
by rushay

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle