MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Video: which sites are worth it?  (Read 30972 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tror

« on: August 27, 2014, 13:57 »
0
I currently submit to:
- Pond5
- Shutterstock
- 123rf

I dumped:
- Canstock (low royalties)
- Fotolia (sub sales)
- Revostock (payment troubles?)
- istock (what???)
- Clipcanvas (Yeah, I know...)
- Depositphotos (abusive politics)

I refuse to upload to:
- Dissolve (low royalty)
- Envato / Videohive (low royalty)

Do I miss some site which is worthwhile?

Thanks all ;-)


« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2014, 03:16 »
0
I've been thinking of dabbling in video, however considering how bad pond5 is with my images I have little hope for them in Video.

Best of luck

« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2014, 03:19 »
0
As a brand new stock photo/videographer i have around 15-20 videos at SS, DT, 123RF... for 2-3 months but no t any sales yet :(

« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2014, 04:14 »
+3
I've been thinking of dabbling in video, however considering how bad pond5 is with my images I have little hope for them in Video.

Best of luck

Pond5 are new to images, their mainstay has always been video.

If you're getting into video, you should be submitting to P5 and SS at a minimum.

« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2014, 04:23 »
+1
For my case, SS and Pond5 are the best, followed by IS.

« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2014, 08:08 »
0
For my case, SS and Pond5 are the best, followed by IS.

Same here. No sales on Revostock and Motion Elements, yet anyway.  I may give Ultimastock a try but later when they become a bit more established.  Because videos don't carry over keywords it is an absolute pain in the arse to upload them to new sites.

« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2014, 02:39 »
0
What do you mean that "video don't carry over keywords"? I did regularly with Bridge.

« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2014, 03:12 »
+1
many websites don't seem to recognize the video metadata.

my main agencies are pond5 and ss.

Don't judge pond5 by their photo sales, video is their main media, they outsell ss nearly every month, unless there is an extended license on ss.

i submit a selection to fotolia and dreamstime, with dreamstime I still have hope, with fotolia I have nearly given up.

Haven't tried motionelements yet, but might try. Also want to try pixta.

But 90% of my video income is pond5 and ss. since uploading video takes a lot of time, I am glad I can make most of my money from two agencies.

ETA: I really like that I can set my own prices on pond5. I have many testshots, that I am happy to offer at low prices if somebody can find them useful. But I have other files where I paid models and invested in the production where the files can be priced much higher. Not all files are created equal. It is true for photography but even more for video.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 05:29 by cobalt »

« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2014, 07:59 »
-1
many websites don't seem to recognize the video metadata.

my main agencies are pond5 and ss.

Don't judge pond5 by their photo sales, video is their main media, they outsell ss nearly every month, unless there is an extended license on ss.

i submit a selection to fotolia and dreamstime, with dreamstime I still have hope, with fotolia I have nearly given up.

Haven't tried motionelements yet, but might try. Also want to try pixta.

But 90% of my video income is pond5 and ss. since uploading video takes a lot of time, I am glad I can make most of my money from two agencies.

ETA: I really like that I can set my own prices on pond5. I have many testshots, that I am happy to offer at low prices if somebody can find them useful. But I have other files where I paid models and invested in the production where the files can be priced much higher. Not all files are created equal. It is true for photography but even more for video.

I have had far better results on SS than P5. Yesterday I did some pricing comparisons and I was surprised that many of the successful videos were set at $10-$15. Cobalt, how are you proving your clips if you don't mind me asking. Most of mine I price between $40-$60. 

« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2014, 08:07 »
0
From 10-60 dollars. I recently moved a lot of files that havent sold in three years to the lowest price point. When they sell, I move them back up the ladder (20-40) dollars. If a file sells at SS I keep it at 60 dollars. I also dont price all files from a series the same. The best shots gets 60 dollars, the out takes are priced for less.

I change prices frequently, because I am still learning what works best at which price point.

That is why I like the pond5 system. I also upload a lot of test shots, because I want to try something and then price these at 30 dollars.

I am also now trying to do more editorial, because last month it was 30% of my video sales. Maybe just a lucky coincidence, but it is worth trying.

I still have less than 300 videos, so I am far from being a pro. Enthusiastic amateur is probably the best way to describe me.

But 50% is a great motivator and I enjoy video in many way more than photography.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 08:29 by cobalt »

« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2014, 08:08 »
+2
Pond5 is the king of video, and is the best to contributors. How can you beat consistent, solid sales, setting your own price, and taking 50%?!?! (Just don't set your prices at or near the bottom, you'll be shooting yourself in the foot, as well as everyone else!) They're also great with audio. Photos are getting better, but not where anyone wants them to be yet.

Shutterstock is a necessary evil. Unfortunately.

Everywhere else is either a graveyard, or nearly a graveyard that steals the lions share of the money earned.

« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2014, 08:11 »
0
I think sunsets, testshots etc...or files that simply havent sold in several years can be priced cheaper. Not everything deserves 60 dollars. And many files dont even sell when priced at 10 dollars. Some stuff is simply not useful.

But many of my files have been selling for years now at 60 dollars, so i keep them there. I also have a series that I will price at 90-120 dollars, just havent processed it yet. This file will for a year only be available at pond5. If it sells, Ill keep it there, if it doesnt, Ill lower the price and send it to SS as well.

I also price my photos between 5-25 dollars. There is no reason to keep it all at the same price.

Pond5 is a real market place and you get what you pay for. Customers often buy the most expensive clip from a series, because it is the best one.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 08:18 by cobalt »

« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2014, 08:52 »
+1
I, too, am tryi to get that feel for where to price my work.  I think I am going to go in this weekend and dabble a bit on pricing. I only have 200 clips but find that I can produce 10 or so a week and more if I venture into animation. Since I have a day job I am limited in time, but, of course, if I didnthis full time I would be turning out a lot more work.

« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2014, 09:06 »
+2
I agree to a point, although my "bottom" is $30. Which a lot of the more successful, fellow P5 contributors would still consider too low. I think less than that is detrimental to the future hopes of keeping this income respectable and "sustainable". But that's a never ending debate...

« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2014, 09:11 »
-3
Just as an example:

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/8860587/people-walking.html

This file hasnt sold since 2011 and still hasnt even sold since I placed it at 10 dollars. It probably never will, didnt sell elsewhere either.

Some others:

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/8860609/cologne.html

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/10593478/making-pizza.html

If they dont sell even at 10 dollars...there is a reason...


If people believe I am destroying "everybodys income" with 10 dollar files...I cant help them, sorry.

Just because I press a movie button, it doesnt mean it is instantly useful.

If a file sells repeatedly I move it upstream again.

It is not my goal to create 10 dollar files. It is my goal to understand what sells at which price point and what files are useful to the customer. If a file comes to life at 10 dollars, it tells me that the basic concept is useful, but probably the quality wasngood enough to justify a higher price. So maybe I will reshoot it in better quality and price that file higher. This is the way I will learn what the clients need.

When I have 1000 clips I will hopefully have found my way around video.

« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 09:15 by cobalt »

« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2014, 11:00 »
+2
Just as an example:

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/8860587/people-walking.html

This file hasnt sold since 2011 and still hasnt even sold since I placed it at 10 dollars. It probably never will, didnt sell elsewhere either.

Some others:

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/8860609/cologne.html

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/10593478/making-pizza.html

If they dont sell even at 10 dollars...there is a reason...


If people believe I am destroying "everybodys income" with 10 dollar files...I cant help them, sorry.

Just because I press a movie button, it doesnt mean it is instantly useful.

If a file sells repeatedly I move it upstream again.

It is not my goal to create 10 dollar files. It is my goal to understand what sells at which price point and what files are useful to the customer. If a file comes to life at 10 dollars, it tells me that the basic concept is useful, but probably the quality wasngood enough to justify a higher price. So maybe I will reshoot it in better quality and price that file higher. This is the way I will learn what the clients need.

When I have 1000 clips I will hopefully have found my way around video.


Interesting perception, and from a Stocksy member no less! Beautiful work by the way. My understanding is their whole deal is sustainable incomes for creators though, right?

Any of those video files could sell, and I'd be willing to bet that wouldn't change if they were $30. It's reasonable to say some files may not ever be downloaded even if they given away for free, if there was no customer interest in them. The bigger issue here might be with all these $10 non-selling videos clogging up the search results. And the contagious false belief that bottoming out on price will somehow make a "useless" clip sell.

I wish Pond5 would just raise the bottom line price for every clip. Would be such a win-win for everybody.

« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2014, 11:17 »
0
Like I said, I didnt start out with that price. I started at 60 dollars and over the years lowered and lowered them.

I think I waited long enough.

I wouldnt mind if pond5 wants to raise the price, but honestly, not everything has to be "at least" 30 dollars. These clips are not high art or were difficult to make. They are just "press the button for a few seconds" and upload them as is. I have files created this way that are selling well. These didnt.

I also sell photos at sub sites for 30 cents (or 28 cents)  and I spent A LOT MORE time and money on the creation of these photos than I did on most of my videos. I also sell files on stocksy or westend for 500 dollars that probably where just as easy to make as the videos above. But because I have 20 year+ experience with photography I know what is useful for the customer. With video I have no idea.

If I had a crystal ball to predict what is best for each file...I would be outselling everyone. But like this you just try and try again and learn from the experience.

ETA: yes stocksy is fantastic, but unfortunately the number of artists they can take is very limited. That is what makes pond5 so valuable for everyone, because thousands of artists can join and then it is up to each one to find a way to make it work. But they seem to have enough critical mass customers, at least with video, so even a video newbie like me can get sales.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 13:06 by cobalt »

« Reply #17 on: October 04, 2014, 03:57 »
+2
I think sunsets, testshots etc...or files that simply havent sold in several years can be priced cheaper. Not everything deserves 60 dollars. And many files dont even sell when priced at 10 dollars. Some stuff is simply not useful.

But many of my files have been selling for years now at 60 dollars, so i keep them there. I also have a series that I will price at 90-120 dollars, just havent processed it yet. This file will for a year only be available at pond5. If it sells, Ill keep it there, if it doesnt, Ill lower the price and send it to SS as well.

I also price my photos between 5-25 dollars. There is no reason to keep it all at the same price.

Pond5 is a real market place and you get what you pay for. Customers often buy the most expensive clip from a series, because it is the best one.
i liked your strategy jasmin. Specially placing some videos a year in pond5 and after that period reconsidering them whether to upload alre where or lowering price. But dont forget to mention in the description of those videos that they are exclusive to p5 atm. I dont know about lowering price of clinche videos. I almost always keep the price above 100 and they do get sold. Not sure if had been sold more frequently if i had kept their price low. Like i sold a video of simple firework (not very vivid though) for 108$ few months back. Where as there a lot and lot of much better fireworks video there for all price levels.

« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2014, 04:07 »
+1
To add in the description that the video is "currently exclusive to pond5" is very, very good suggestion, thank you. I absolutely want to experiment with content that can be offered at higher prices than on SS. But whatever I do, i need more regular video uploads to attract customers to my port. New files are like breadcrumbs on the floor leading people your way...

There are many artists with very specialized files that they offer for over 1000 dollars. i guess if you were the only one documenting a festival that happens every ten years in a remote region in the world it is great that pond5 gives you the option to set your own price.

Not all files are created equal. With photos you select different agencies for different price points, with video you can do it all in one site with pond5.

Tror

« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2014, 08:17 »
+3
Just as an example:

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/8860587/people-walking.html

This file hasnt sold since 2011 and still hasnt even sold since I placed it at 10 dollars. It probably never will, didnt sell elsewhere either.

Some others:

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/8860609/cologne.html

http://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/10593478/making-pizza.html

If they dont sell even at 10 dollars...there is a reason...


If people believe I am destroying "everybodys income" with 10 dollar files...I cant help them, sorry.

Just because I press a movie button, it doesnt mean it is instantly useful.

If a file sells repeatedly I move it upstream again.

It is not my goal to create 10 dollar files. It is my goal to understand what sells at which price point and what files are useful to the customer. If a file comes to life at 10 dollars, it tells me that the basic concept is useful, but probably the quality wasngood enough to justify a higher price. So maybe I will reshoot it in better quality and price that file higher. This is the way I will learn what the clients need.

When I have 1000 clips I will hopefully have found my way around video.


I think it simply takes a long time to understand the Video market. It seems to be so closely related to the still image stock market since we can use the same tech etc., but the clients and the market are VERY different.

I started too setting different prices etc. on Pond in the beginning, thinking it is a volume market like still images.

But, to give you my conclusion:

1. Volume
-In stock a Client may download (especially in Sub sites) a image just because. They may download 4 images on credit sites until they find out that it is image #5 they need. Images sell in volume. We design them to sell in Volume. Many people use images on blogs, sites, cards, designs, flyers, prints, social media etc.

- In Video clients are mostly professionals. While I do notice sometimes that cheaper priced Videos sell more than others I am quite sure I would have made the same revenue with the same video higher priced, selling maybe 2 less but earning more per download. Video is not such a volume market that stills is. Buyers are different. Sometimes I am soooo baffled how much a client pays for a video of which I thought is nothing special.

2. Stock images stimulate buyers.
- We create nice-candy-shiny-beauty looking images for buyers who sometimes do not even know they want our stuff until they see it - and buy it out of reflex - or because it solves their Design problems. Sometimes a good image  can replace a entire design concept. It is easy for them. We know that and direct buyers accordingly.

- In Video - while there may occur the same phenomenon - buyers usually know what they need and pay for it. It is much more thought through and unpredictable for us what sells. The market has its own opinion and we do not direct it that much.

I do not judge you cobalt. I admire you patience on going back and monitoring old files and adjust the price. But I do not think it will change any sales figure of those files you provided the links. I think one of them might sell next week for 60 as well as for 10. I think you cannot stimulate too much the sales of a video file by adjusting the prices since the market seems to work differently as outlined above.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2014, 08:23 by Tror »

« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2014, 08:27 »
0
Thank you for your insights, it is very helpful.

For the record, from the files I dropped in price a few months ago, around 20% started to sell. The other 80% are dead in the water. I will probably delete them at some point, they are clearly useless.

But for me the experiment is worth it, because I can learn from the files that came to life and try to improve my work next time I approach that theme. If I then have something that has better quality and gets bought at a higher price, I will probably delete the older files as well.

i would like to offer the customer good quality files so they feel they are getting something appropriate for their money. But there is a lot to learn about video. It is much harder than I thought and I have been doing it part time for two years now.

Like you said it is a very different market.

I am not recommending people should try what I did, or put good quality files up for cheap. On the contrary.

But pond5 allows me to work with prices, so I intend to learn all I can from it. And if I can identify a perfect niche for 200 dollar files I will shoot it again and again :)

But then of course, everyone can see my downloads and will undercut me with 190 dollar files..but thats life.

If anything pushes prices down it is that, copy cats looking at your portfolio and pricing their copied work cheaper.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2014, 08:45 by cobalt »

« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2014, 08:46 »
+2
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 ;)

« Reply #22 on: October 04, 2014, 09:11 »
0
Yes, that is what I do. If I have priced a file to low, but it gets a sale on SS, I immediatly raise the price to 60 dollars. It used to be 80 or 69 dollars, but 60 seems to work much better for my portfolio,so this is currently the best price. The customer has the advantage of getting the files a little cheaper than on SS, but I get the same money. I sell more files overall on pond5 and more series. So I guess it is a win win for customer,pond5 and me. SS will survive ;)

But there are differences in what sells on pond5 and SS. Usually the 30 dollar files dont really sell there. So I guess I am already getting better at pricing my work.

I used to have much more variety in prices, 85,69,52,46...etc...but at the moment I am running a test with just three price levels. makes it easier for me to understand.

The next step is a level at 120-200 dollars and keep it at pond5 only for a year. And then see how that goes. By the end of next year I should hopefully have enough experience what really works.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2014, 09:17 by cobalt »

« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2014, 12:31 »
+11
On many occasions I have had video files finally sell once after being online for 5yrs.  They sell because they meet the need the buyer has and they sell for $69 or $79 dollars.  If I had lowered the price to $10 they most likely still would have only sold once in 5yrs as obviously they aren't in high demand clips.  Even if sales picked up a bit, at $10, I'd have to sell it 7 times to equal the one sale at the higher price. Not likely.

In the past, I too tried lowering prices on clips that hadn't sold and in the end determined that clips sold when they found their buyer and price wasn't a factor.  I was just loosing out financially and wasting time trying to decide what price point was best.

On other occasions, I've found my sales increased when I raised the prices on P5.

Here's something else that's been on my mind.  When SS started offering 4K and set the price at $299 a clip, they gave us a gift by allowing video artists to sell at a good rate of return.  I can see by looking at Pond5 and their forum that many producers have already decided that those prices are too high and are offering 4K at much lower price points.

Many people in this industry have been trained by the micros to compete on price.  What a shame.  That's Deposit Photo or 123RF kind of thinking.

« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2014, 12:36 »
0
But what about quality? Dont you believe you should offer the customer a price based on quality?

Because that is what I am trying to do. Be honest with myself and see crap as crap.

I think for the pro videographer keeping all prices the same is not a problem, but for amateurs there is the learning experience.

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.

« Reply #50 on: November 24, 2014, 18:49 »
0
It sounds like people want both of the following:
  • Set your own pricing where you feel it is appropriate for your work
  • Require other artists to set their prices where they don't undercut yours

It seems to me that you have to choose one or the other. I would rather have the ability to set my own prices.

« Reply #51 on: November 24, 2014, 18:53 »
+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.

Yes something like that. Smaller sizes would cost less. I'd say a base of $30 for 1080P full rez. Good point.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
24 Replies
6642 Views
Last post January 17, 2010, 17:35
by Anita Potter
10 Replies
3022 Views
Last post August 02, 2012, 09:09
by tab62
10 Replies
5453 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
51732 Views
Last post March 02, 2015, 12:20
by stocker2011

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results