pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Video: which sites are worth it?  (Read 30951 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tror

« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2014, 13:06 »
0
Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

How do you define crap? Maybe you are a little harsh on yourself with this?

 


« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2014, 13:19 »
-2
I think it is more than obvious what is a nice organized studio or model shot or a test shot. Testing effects of angles,depth of field, how to move the camera movement test, a general camera test. testing software, lighting effects...I still need a few hundred more of those. How to move the camera is probably the most difficult for me.

I dont process those files at all, just upload as is. I doubt they are useful and they usually dont sell, so the customers agree. These clips are not designed to be useful or have a "story" for them or anything like them.

Just test shots, like you do test shots with a new camera. Snapping around while you walk whatever you see. Throw the camera in the air, see what happens, drag it around on rollers etc...I do test shots all the time. That is why my portfolio isnt really interesting at the moment.

But I can learn from them.

And later they will be deleted.

So, no, I really dont think it is right to even try to overcharge the customer. They are not stupid, they will remember. I know I would.

But at least now after two years if I try to do something that I think of as a real stock clip, it does sell.

It is the same process like with photos. I would never ever, price all my work at the same price. Some stuff can be offered at 500 dollars, others are just dollar bin level.

At some point I can hopefully also offer video at 500 dollars (and sell it). But it will take a few years.

shudderstok

« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2014, 15:53 »
0
Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

How do you define crap? Maybe you are a little harsh on yourself with this?

why post crap online at all? it hurts us all in the long run, just look at every micro site out there today. quality images diluted by crap.
personally i edit my own work tough and only submit good quality work - stills or video. i see absolutely no point uploading crap and trying to sell it as crap for $10.
of all people cobalt, i would expect a little more integrity from you.

« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2014, 16:00 »
+3
Contributors selling clips at $10 OR $20 are shooting themselves and everyone else in the foot. It's an amateur approach. Clips on P5 should be priced at a minimum of $40 IMO. My cheapest clips are $49 and the majority are $59.

shudderstok

« Reply #29 on: October 04, 2014, 16:18 »
0
Contributors selling clips at $10 OR $20 are shooting themselves and everyone else in the foot. It's an amateur approach. Clips on P5 should be priced at a minimum of $40 IMO. My cheapest clips are $49 and the majority are $59.

Exactly my point!!!


« Reply #30 on: October 04, 2014, 16:39 »
+1
Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

How do you define crap? Maybe you are a little harsh on yourself with this?

why post crap online at all? it hurts us all in the long run, just look at every micro site out there today. quality images diluted by crap.
personally i edit my own work tough and only submit good quality work - stills or video. i see absolutely no point uploading crap and trying to sell it as crap for $10.
of all people cobalt, i would expect a little more integrity from you.

I am very happy with my own integrity, thank you very much. Seriously, do you feel scared by my test shots?

Why are you even working with pond5? They have a huge part of their collection between 10-15 dollars. You looked closely at the agency and the collection before sending files there, right? Pond5 has been around for years, I am sure you understand how their system works??

And you can also see that you get what you pay for. As the price goes up, the quality goes up.

I dont believe in overcharging customers or lying to myself. I offer my test files for a very appropriate price point, in case somebody wants to use them. If they can use them fine, if not, they just dont sell and I can delete them in a year.

istock had a dollar bin system and that worked well for years. It is the exact same approach.

If you personally believe every time you press the movie button out comes a 40 dollar file, you are entirely welcome to do that. I have no problem with it and dont judge you or anyone badly for it. Even if I see many files in video that are worse than even my test shots. But its a free market.

I place certain images for 500 dollars, I see other people place excellent work for 28 cents. Or for free on flickr.

Its their images, people can do what they want with them.

Copying other peoples work, that gets me upset. But some people believe it is "clever" to work that way.

Or agencies that take my files that I have set at a certain price point and then suddenly change the business model that I signed up for and suddenly my work is distributed by ... for free without metadata. That gets me upset as well.

But I applaud pond5 for allowing the artists to make their own decisions. A free market place is a wonderful alternative to the normal agencies.

Dont like pond5? Just send everything to SS and you get a streamlined one price fits all experience. Or send it to istock, they have a wonderful new and very simple system...

If pond5 want to raise the base price, it is up to them. But with the 50% being paid it is a very good deal for the artists and the customers.


To complain that a free marketplace is not working like a streamlined site, that is very difficult to understand for me(and looks very amateurish) but to each his own...
« Last Edit: October 04, 2014, 16:51 by cobalt »

shudderstok

« Reply #31 on: October 04, 2014, 18:23 »
0
Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

How do you define crap? Maybe you are a little harsh on yourself with this?

why post crap online at all? it hurts us all in the long run, just look at every micro site out there today. quality images diluted by crap.
personally i edit my own work tough and only submit good quality work - stills or video. i see absolutely no point uploading crap and trying to sell it as crap for $10.
of all people cobalt, i would expect a little more integrity from you.

I am very happy with my own integrity, thank you very much. Seriously, do you feel scared by my test shots?

Why are you even working with pond5? They have a huge part of their collection between 10-15 dollars. You looked closely at the agency and the collection before sending files there, right? Pond5 has been around for years, I am sure you understand how their system works??

And you can also see that you get what you pay for. As the price goes up, the quality goes up.

I dont believe in overcharging customers or lying to myself. I offer my test files for a very appropriate price point, in case somebody wants to use them. If they can use them fine, if not, they just dont sell and I can delete them in a year.

istock had a dollar bin system and that worked well for years. It is the exact same approach.

If you personally believe every time you press the movie button out comes a 40 dollar file, you are entirely welcome to do that. I have no problem with it and dont judge you or anyone badly for it. Even if I see many files in video that are worse than even my test shots. But its a free market.

I place certain images for 500 dollars, I see other people place excellent work for 28 cents. Or for free on flickr.

Its their images, people can do what they want with them.

Copying other peoples work, that gets me upset. But some people believe it is "clever" to work that way.

Or agencies that take my files that I have set at a certain price point and then suddenly change the business model that I signed up for and suddenly my work is distributed by ... for free without metadata. That gets me upset as well.

But I applaud pond5 for allowing the artists to make their own decisions. A free market place is a wonderful alternative to the normal agencies.

Dont like pond5? Just send everything to SS and you get a streamlined one price fits all experience. Or send it to istock, they have a wonderful new and very simple system...

If pond5 want to raise the base price, it is up to them. But with the 50% being paid it is a very good deal for the artists and the customers.


To complain that a free marketplace is not working like a streamlined site, that is very difficult to understand for me(and looks very amateurish) but to each his own...

no i am not scared of your test shots in the least. just saying that one should only put quality up, but your free market theory cancels that one out and justifies mediocrity - to each his own. i am merely suggesting that some photos/videos belong on the editing room floor, not online clogging up the system and diluting the buying experience. i take thousands upon thousands of photos and videos each year, and if i upload 20 - 25% of my work, then i consider that to be a good rate. if it's not good enough, it gets deleted - simple as that. and what i meant about your integrity... you are in general a much better image maker than the three samples you showed us, and for that i am quite surprised you would even upload them. not your usual standard.


« Reply #32 on: October 04, 2014, 18:24 »
+3
The thing I find interesting is that I emulated some of my best still shots into video. They do sell so I can reasonable conclude that in-demand stills will also have, to a degree, in-demand videos.  I'll admit that not all of my videos that replicate the subject of still have sold, but most of my sales are from similar still themes from my most popular. 

I am really enjoying this particular thread. It's what I like about forums, exchanging ideas, theories and ideas. One of the things that Cobalt targets is pricing.  If a video is listed on P5 at $30 and it sells on SS for $90, isn't it wise to go into P5 and change your pricing to somewhere in that range? What I am trying to avoid is as video gains popularity (and I hope this is the case) that my files are priced consistently across micros if shoppers are shopping on price. I do agree with Tror in that customers don't seem as price sensitive when purchasing video.  It's really a game of content price, subject, messaging....and key wording. I am enjoying video, honestly, more that photos....except for my underwater work ;)

I like to price Pond5 below Shutterstock if for nothing else but to encourage customers to buy there, in some small way. I'm much happier selling a clip for $50 on Pond5 and making $25, than a $79.99 clip on SS and making $23.70 (at most, with the exception of those random $90+ sub sales). I always make sure my clips on Pond5 are less, and if I decide to price above $80 on P5, I don't sell that clip on SS (with the exception of 4K, of course). When Revostock mattered, at 45% to us, I priced just above P5 but below SS.

For me, the $30-$40 range is purely for over-saturated content, the ship has sailed on some themes that already have an abundance of $10-$20 bottom feeding priced clips. I just can't personally stomach selling lower. I sell those $30-$40 clips a lot, but my most common selling price is $50.


« Reply #33 on: October 04, 2014, 18:48 »
+3
If you personally believe every time you press the movie button out comes a 40 dollar file, you are entirely welcome to do that. I have no problem with it and dont judge you or anyone badly for it. Even if I see many files in video that are worse than even my test shots. But its a free market.

To be honest, most of what any of us are doing in photo and video is just pointing a piece of glass attached to plastic and pressing a button. Some people like to pretend they're performing magic, a few even kinda can, but the simplicity of how the shot came to you or me is irrelevant.

If I spend $1000+ on a set, models, and the whole crew to pull off an elaborate shoot, and that final product looks like 200,000 other shots out there, that clip might only be "worth" $30.

If I point my camera at a bridge in the middle of nowhere and record 10 static, motionless seconds during the worst part of the day, and that clip is the ONLY shot of that bridge, that might be a $100+ shot. If a customer is looking for a video of THAT bridge 8 months from now and mine is the only one, or among very few, they most likely will not scoff at a higher price.

I don't think garbage should be uploaded in the first place, and I believe all video clips should carry a base value that's fair and sustainable to those who produce them for a living. Just because the stock photo boom and those who should have been ensuring it's sustainability failed, and destroyed the perception of an images' value,  stock video should not be forced down the same road.

« Reply #34 on: October 04, 2014, 20:03 »
+3
If you personally believe every time you press the movie button out comes a 40 dollar file, you are entirely welcome to do that. I have no problem with it and dont judge you or anyone badly for it. Even if I see many files in video that are worse than even my test shots. But its a free market.

To be honest, most of what any of us are doing in photo and video is just pointing a piece of glass attached to plastic and pressing a button. Some people like to pretend they're performing magic, a few even kinda can, but the simplicity of how the shot came to you or me is irrelevant.

If I spend $1000+ on a set, models, and the whole crew to pull off an elaborate shoot, and that final product looks like 200,000 other shots out there, that clip might only be "worth" $30.

If I point my camera at a bridge in the middle of nowhere and record 10 static, motionless seconds during the worst part of the day, and that clip is the ONLY shot of that bridge, that might be a $100+ shot. If a customer is looking for a video of THAT bridge 8 months from now and mine is the only one, or among very few, they most likely will not scoff at a higher price.

I don't think garbage should be uploaded in the first place, and I believe all video clips should carry a base value that's fair and sustainable to those who produce them for a living. Just because the stock photo boom and those who should have been ensuring it's sustainability failed, and destroyed the perception of an images' value,  stock video should not be forced down the same road.

Totally agree with Daryl Ray. In fact I don't think bottom feeding prices are particularly attractive to buyers. To me those bottom prices signify desperation to make a dollar. If you take a very popular subject where there are dozens of clips priced at $10 or $20, I think it's still possible to get sales of the same subject at $50 simply by doing the same shots either better or slightly different. And because people who price their clips at $10 or $20 don't believe in the quality or worth of their work, I don't think it's very hard to do a better job. If they were to price higher and take a more professional approach, I'm sure they'd find their work would also improve.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2014, 20:11 by pkphotos »

« Reply #35 on: October 04, 2014, 22:55 »
+1
     I have approx. 500 clips with P5. My portfolio is a vast array of subject matter ranging from simple "snapshot clips" to highly unique subject matter. P5 is, in my opinion, the unsung hero of the micro stock agencies because they allow you to assess the true value of your work.
     If I have a clip originally priced at $49 sitting unsold for more than six months - I drop the price $10 regardless of quality and subject matter. Nothing in my P5 portfolio is less than $29.
     That same portfolio can be found with SS. If one of my clips with P5 sells for more than $120, I remove that same clip from SS. It indicates to me that the clip has more value than SS is willing to pay me. However, if that same clip is selling exclusively with SS, both agencies will have the opportunity to offer it to potential buyers.
     


« Reply #36 on: October 05, 2014, 02:08 »
0
and what i meant about your integrity... you are in general a much better image maker than the three samples you showed us, and for that i am quite surprised you would even upload them. not your usual standard.

I didnt start out with 500 dollar stock photos. I started by throwing up everything I could shoot, learned from the experience and then deleting many files. I will do the same with video. And I also had to learn the difference between the agencies and that 50 cent files can outsell expensive files at getty and give much,much better and more reliable  returns.

And looking at pond5 there are thousands of people following the same approach.

Those 10-15 dollar files that you dont like, are probably the main reason that pond5 has so many customers. How else did they achieve critical mass and outsell all the other sites?

Basically all higher priced clips are riding on the wind provided by the cheaper entry price files.

And it is the  same customer that also buys the 500 dollar clips, they just buy clips according to their needs and projects. They know they have to sift through more crap while going through pond5, but if they wanted a slick experience and only the best choices, there are other libraries for that.

I sincerly hope they dont change their system and prefer to keep their buyers, including all the small time buyers who want simple files for blogs,schools or youtube projects. They also buy a lot more series than on other places.

Otherwise they will just become like istock that snubs their nose at all "cheapskates" and voluntarily just kicked thousands of loyal customers out.

They dont see that designers need content of many types on many levels.

So, I will keep doing what I do and keep changing my prices regularly, sometimes every week. Up and down, like selling apples and oranges on the free market.

And of course I will also experiment with much higher prices as well.

Most of all I dont disrespect my customers, including those that are looking for clips at 10 dollars. They are very welcome to my portfolio and to see them buy several files at once gives good balance and more regular income.

Pond5 is probably not the right agency for people who dont want to do the research on the site. Obviously if I have a clip of a bridge and I know I am the only one, i will not offer it for 10 dollars. I look at all the files I compete with before I set a price. Everytime, before I even upload.

So, yes, i definetly like giving buyers choices and I will not disrespect them or think badly of them if they are looking for cheaper clips.

Anyway, back to shooting...





« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 02:24 by cobalt »

« Reply #37 on: October 05, 2014, 12:39 »
+5
and what i meant about your integrity... you are in general a much better image maker than the three samples you showed us, and for that i am quite surprised you would even upload them. not your usual standard.

I didnt start out with 500 dollar stock photos. I started by throwing up everything I could shoot, learned from the experience and then deleting many files. I will do the same with video. And I also had to learn the difference between the agencies and that 50 cent files can outsell expensive files at getty and give much,much better and more reliable  returns.

And looking at pond5 there are thousands of people following the same approach.

Those 10-15 dollar files that you dont like, are probably the main reason that pond5 has so many customers. How else did they achieve critical mass and outsell all the other sites?

Basically all higher priced clips are riding on the wind provided by the cheaper entry price files.

And it is the  same customer that also buys the 500 dollar clips, they just buy clips according to their needs and projects. They know they have to sift through more crap while going through pond5, but if they wanted a slick experience and only the best choices, there are other libraries for that.

I sincerly hope they dont change their system and prefer to keep their buyers, including all the small time buyers who want simple files for blogs,schools or youtube projects. They also buy a lot more series than on other places.

Otherwise they will just become like istock that snubs their nose at all "cheapskates" and voluntarily just kicked thousands of loyal customers out.

They dont see that designers need content of many types on many levels.

So, I will keep doing what I do and keep changing my prices regularly, sometimes every week. Up and down, like selling apples and oranges on the free market.

And of course I will also experiment with much higher prices as well.

Most of all I dont disrespect my customers, including those that are looking for clips at 10 dollars. They are very welcome to my portfolio and to see them buy several files at once gives good balance and more regular income.

Pond5 is probably not the right agency for people who dont want to do the research on the site. Obviously if I have a clip of a bridge and I know I am the only one, i will not offer it for 10 dollars. I look at all the files I compete with before I set a price. Everytime, before I even upload.

So, yes, i definetly like giving buyers choices and I will not disrespect them or think badly of them if they are looking for cheaper clips.

Anyway, back to shooting...

Pricing video clips at $10-20 is a defeatist approach and just helps to bring down our industry. Instead of taking the philosophy of 'if you can't beat them join them', just price your clips higher than other people. Buyers will respond to this and you'll end up doing better overall. If everyone did it buyers expectations would be forced to change. Keep your standards and pricing at a professional level.

« Reply #38 on: October 05, 2014, 13:43 »
+2
Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

How do you define crap? Maybe you are a little harsh on yourself with this?

why post crap online at all? it hurts us all in the long run, just look at every micro site out there today. quality images diluted by crap.
personally i edit my own work tough and only submit good quality work - stills or video. i see absolutely no point uploading crap and trying to sell it as crap for $10.
of all people cobalt, i would expect a little more integrity from you.

Wow.  She does things different than you so she have no integrity?  Perfect example of the kinds of comment that drives people away from this site.

« Reply #39 on: October 05, 2014, 15:35 »
+3
Pricing video clips at $10-20 is a defeatist approach and just helps to bring down our industry. Instead of taking the philosophy of 'if you can't beat them join them', just price your clips higher than other people. Buyers will respond to this and you'll end up doing better overall. If everyone did it buyers expectations would be forced to change. Keep your standards and pricing at a professional level.


Overpricing low quality work is an insult to the intelligence of customers. I guess you guys are choosing not to read what I write. My "real" stock clips are currently priced at 60 dollars. I also have other work that will be priced higher. But keep focussing on the test shots if you want. I really dont understand why you work with pond5 or act like you are just discovering now that it is a crowd sourced marketplace.

I suggest you take up your grievances with the pond5 crowd:

http://www.pond5.com/community?forum=622&thread=37084231&lp=1

Or start your own thread that pond5 should set their base price at 40 dollars or whatever you deem appropriate.

If you dont believe in crowdsourcing then there are plenty of curated collections to work with. Also there is very little creative content in video, only 483 000 hd videos have model releases on pond5. The whole library only has 2.8 million clips and that includes all editorial content.

Basically creative video is in its infancy, it will be years before the market shows any signs of saturation. Ok, sunsets, seagulls, grass in the wind...I guess the easy money is gone...but otherwise it is a completely open field.

This thread also suggest that pond5 has a self curating best match, i.e. if you have a huge port with things that dont sell you get ranked down. If true, this would mean, that removing old files might help visibility. But it is too early for me to think about culling, Ill start when i have 1000 files.

I am having a lot of fun with video. And in the end that is the most important, or I wont be able to learn.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 15:41 by cobalt »

shudderstok

« Reply #40 on: October 05, 2014, 16:15 »
+1
Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

How do you define crap? Maybe you are a little harsh on yourself with this?

why post crap online at all? it hurts us all in the long run, just look at every micro site out there today. quality images diluted by crap.
personally i edit my own work tough and only submit good quality work - stills or video. i see absolutely no point uploading crap and trying to sell it as crap for $10.
of all people cobalt, i would expect a little more integrity from you.

Wow.  She does things different than you so she have no integrity?  Perfect example of the kinds of comment that drives people away from this site.

I already explained what I meant "and what i meant about your integrity... you are in general a much better image maker than the three samples you showed us, and for that i am quite surprised you would even upload them. not your usual standard." and I stand by that.

And also of note, I quoted her as saying she posted crap.

I just don't see the point in posting crap and trying to get $10 for it. She does. So be it.

to quote pkphotos "Pricing video clips at $10-20 is a defeatist approach and just helps to bring down our industry. Keep your standards and pricing at a professional level."



« Reply #41 on: October 05, 2014, 16:56 »
+3

Overpricing low quality work is an insult to the intelligence of customers. I guess you guys are choosing not to read what I write. My "real" stock clips are currently priced at 60 dollars. I also have other work that will be priced higher. But keep focussing on the test shots if you want. I really dont understand why you work with pond5 or act like you are just discovering now that it is a crowd sourced marketplace.

Huh? What someone is willing to pay for something has no correlation to their intelligence. Smart buyers understand they need to keep their suppliers in business and therefore pay appropriately. Smart buyers know that paying $10 for a clip makes them look stupid and cheap to their clients. Smart buyers think 60 bucks is a bit too cheap for "real" clips. I think it comes down to how we look at ourselves as and our own personal worth.

« Reply #42 on: October 05, 2014, 17:34 »
+1
As a small shop, many of my clients balk at $100+ video pricing. Is that because they don't see the value of the work? No, it's because they don't have the money. Pond 5 is great because you can find something for every budget.

I've made many purchases for clients that would not have happened if all files were more expensive. Please don't forget us little guys!

« Reply #43 on: October 05, 2014, 17:36 »
0
Hi shudderstock,

I understand what you mean, no problem. I appreciate that you like my photos.

@Zeus I am surprised you think of 60 dollars as underpriced. The average on pond5 is 43-59 dollars.

You must be investing a lot of time and money in your production. I am not trying to compete with people who run video production studios.

I am perfectly happy with my prices, I get an adequate return for time and money invested.

Maybe when I have work on your quality level, Ill sell them at 200 dollars or whatever you consider an appropriate level.

In general, if you truly believe that the pond5 marketplace is destroying the video world, why not talk to them or the artists there and see what response you get.

Or just encourage artists to submit to other agencies that you believe have an approach you believe in.

In the end that is all you can do. Focus on the agencies that "do things right" and encourage others to do the same. I have asked pond5 many times for a privacy option to hide individual download numbers. But the people on pond5 dont seem to mind.

But I like pond5 the way it is, I have even gotten used to their quirky upload system.

Pond5 is fair to the customers and the artists.

It is crowdsourcing in a very pure form. And I love the freedom.

« Reply #44 on: October 05, 2014, 18:24 »
+2
I don't invest that much in my productions at all. I price between $40 and $150. Mostly I sell at around $75. If the clip is reasonably unique, then quality doesn't matter. I'm thinking now that $50 rock bottom for simplest bare bones clips in HD is about right.

And I don't think the market should bend to the bottom feeders at all. If they can't afford it, too bad.

« Reply #45 on: October 05, 2014, 18:32 »
-2
Well, everyone has their own strategy. Some people love the niche, I like to work with the whole market.

Customers who want to give me money - you are very welcome :).

I offer images from 28 cents to 500 dollars, so I really see no problem in providing video in a wide range of price points as well.

« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 18:42 by cobalt »

« Reply #46 on: October 06, 2014, 05:03 »
+7
I don't see any point in pricing as low as $10.  I never know if someone wants to buy a clip, all sorts of low quality clips still sell and buyers don't seem to have any problem paying at least x3 more than $10.  You have to sell a lot more of those $10 clips to make up for a few lost sales at higher prices.  Why price video clips at similar prices to stills when they cost more to produce?  I think that just the time it takes to edit and upload them means they need to sell for more than a photo that could take less than a minutes work.  Otherwise, you might as well stick to stills.

foxtrotcommando

« Reply #47 on: November 24, 2014, 12:22 »
+1
Agreed. Too many people are undercutting the rest of us. I price my clips around 30-70 depending on the effort on my part. Clips in the $30 range are generally just b-roll shots from my short films that I found on an old hard drive.

« Reply #48 on: November 24, 2014, 13:55 »
+1
I don't see any point in pricing as low as $10.  I never know if someone wants to buy a clip, all sorts of low quality clips still sell and buyers don't seem to have any problem paying at least x3 more than $10.  You have to sell a lot more of those $10 clips to make up for a few lost sales at higher prices.  Why price video clips at similar prices to stills when they cost more to produce?  I think that just the time it takes to edit and upload them means they need to sell for more than a photo that could take less than a minutes work.  Otherwise, you might as well stick to stills.

P5 might be doing us all a favor if they put a floor on the cost of videos, say $30.

« Reply #49 on: November 24, 2014, 13:59 »
+1
If they do that, how many customers will  they lose? On SS and other places you have smaller sizes available and regular discounts so that customers have options for 10-20 dollar files. If pond5 wants to raise the base price by 300% it would make sense to offer multiple sizes.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
24 Replies
6641 Views
Last post January 17, 2010, 17:35
by Anita Potter
10 Replies
3019 Views
Last post August 02, 2012, 09:09
by tab62
10 Replies
5451 Views
Last post January 15, 2014, 21:57
by Mantis
6 Replies
4611 Views
Last post August 05, 2014, 21:21
by imagesbykenny
16 Replies
51684 Views
Last post March 02, 2015, 12:20
by stocker2011

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results