Author Topic: Grass is NOT greener at the others!! (Read 30282 times)

caspixel · « **Reply #100 on:** January 02, 2011, 11:15 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on January 02, 2011, 11:01

Quote
Your memory is faulty. I challenge you to prove what you say by providing my "endless" complaints. You won't though. Because you can't.

You are a serial moaner. Others have mentioned it. Negativity breeds negativity and I have better things to do than trawl endless forums to prove a point.

Haha. Knew it. You think I am a "serial moaner" because negativity is all YOU focus on. And funny that about the negativity thing, because you seem to attract quite a bit yourself. Pot meet kettle.

BTW, here is one of my "negative" comments about the logo program:

This is how I see it being used too. I think they should just ditch having text in the "logos" and just sell the illustrations. That would also make the inspecton process easier, too. And then there wouldn't have to be any revisions on the part of the contributor. I can see that getting messy. Like Buy Request.

Then many of us designers who struggle with illustration will have a library to shop through for our clients. And if iStock isn't selling complete "logos" but only logo elements, then there is still a place for the designer to work on and modify the logo for the client.

Everyone wins.

That was just one of the 11 posts I made when they announced the logo program. None of which complained about it. So get your facts straight, mmmkay?

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #101 on:** January 02, 2011, 12:03 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 02, 2011, 10:56

Quote from: azurelaroux on January 02, 2011, 08:42
(Fotolia) percentages work out to 25% - 46% (non-exclusive) across 8 levels for regular downloads. Subscribtions are .30 cents to .46 cents depending on your color level.

Neither of those statements is accurate. As I stated above, the percentages at Fotolia are not based on the purchase costs of credits, so they mean absolutely nothing.

Also, I have plenty of recent subscription sales there for 22c, so the minimum is not 30c.

Numbers are according to FT's stated chart of percentages in the contributors section. http://us.fotolia.com/Info/Contributors (scroll down for charts)

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #102 on:** January 02, 2011, 13:05 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on January 02, 2011, 12:03

Numbers are according to FT's stated chart of percentages in the contributors section. http://us.fotolia.com/Info/Contributors (scroll down for charts)

Interesting.

leaf · « **Reply #103 on:** January 02, 2011, 14:16 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on January 02, 2011, 12:03

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 02, 2011, 10:56
Quote from: azurelaroux on January 02, 2011, 08:42
(Fotolia) percentages work out to 25% - 46% (non-exclusive) across 8 levels for regular downloads. Subscribtions are .30 cents to .46 cents depending on your color level.

Neither of those statements is accurate. As I stated above, the percentages at Fotolia are not based on the purchase costs of credits, so they mean absolutely nothing.

Also, I have plenty of recent subscription sales there for 22c, so the minimum is not 30c.

Numbers are according to FT's stated chart of percentages in the contributors section. http://us.fotolia.com/Info/Contributors (scroll down for charts)

here is a link to the blog post again showing Fotolia's breakdown of photographers commissions. A white ranked photographer who is supposed to get 25% of a commission actually gets 16%-46% depending on which currency the buyer buys credits with, the exchange rate, how many credits they buy and which currency the photographer get's paid in.

SNP · « **Reply #104 on:** January 02, 2011, 14:31 »

even though it doesn't apply to me, that breakdown was helpful for comparison. I don't know that I would say any system is better than any of the others with all factors considered. at least on iStock we're (relatively) free to discuss our reactions to changes. but it seems there is more opportunity for large payout on a regular download with a system like Fotolia's....though it can work the other way too and garner you a much lower payout based on the package used to purchase. am I understanding that correctly?

nruboc · « **Reply #105 on:** January 02, 2011, 14:39 »

Quote from: cclapper on January 02, 2011, 10:17

Two things I just wanted to throw in here, after reading through Stacey's posts:

First, being independent and uploading to multiple sites, for me, doesn't take twice the work as being exclusive and uploading to one. IPTC data is entered in Photoshop and it's done for all the sites. As far as actual uploading, IS has always been, for me, the biggest pain in the a*s. I had to actually download extra software (deepMeta) in order to upload there, where as all the other sites have easy to use, on-site uploading capabilities. And if one has a lot to upload, they can easily use FileZilla, Fetch or some such other FTP to do it. I would say it takes me an extra 5 to 10 minutes to upload to the other sites. I don't consider that double the work. The work is the post-processing, which has to be done for ALL the sites.

Second, watching sales at IS drop over the past six months, the site imploding, and my drop in commission, it is getting to the point where uploading to IS is a waste of my time, compared to the return I am getting. To some people, the money is more important than the principles, and no matter what it dished out, they think pennies are ok. I have never been that type of person. I have enough self-respect to say that if I am going to do a job, I want to get paid what I deserve. Others don't get to use me. If that means I miss out on a few pennies, I'm ok with that. I will just find another way to make up those few pennies. And over my lifetime, I have found that that usually works out for me. I am fairly certain, that by working a little harder at one of the other sites, I can make up what I will lose from IS.

For me it's about the money AND the principle. There is more than one source for the money. IS is not the master of my domain, despite what they think.

Excellent points, exactly my feelings as well

nruboc · « **Reply #106 on:** January 02, 2011, 15:07 »

Quote from: SNP on January 01, 2011, 20:24

Marisa - I don't need you to paraphrase for me. thank you though. I meant what I said. I don't wish any ill will on any contributor. despite disagreements, we all work for our sales and we're all different people with different frames of reference. so please don't speak for me when it's just a thinly veiled insinuation anyways. I'm not surprised your dropped your crown and all the best to you, sincerely.

@nrubroc: I'm not about to discuss the details of my income so make whatever determinations you want from my 'stats'....lol. I don't know who you think I am, but I'm not sure what you're talking about nor does it matter.

My understanding was that you are Stacey Newman at IStockPhoto, >19,000 downloads, 6059 files, contribuing since Feb 2007? If that's you then, yes, I still find it funny you implying Yuri has some golden key, that he alone can benefit from independence, everyone else much depend on the catastrophe, that is IStockphoto to get by. lol.... If I am wrong on who you are, please correct me....

SNP · « **Reply #107 on:** January 02, 2011, 15:35 »

I still have no idea what you're talking about. you have a lot to say about a site you don't even contribute to as far as I can see. if you think it's insignificant that I make my full-time income via iStock, then you and I have very different ideas regarding income and success. Yuri is a great example of 'the' most successful independent. But I could have used Lisafx as a great example too of success in independence. they have both achieved levels as independence that frankly required way more work than many of those seeking independence will probably put in. I think in order to be really successful as an independent, you have to be willing to work even harder. Yuri and Lisa have clearly done that based on performance and numbers alone. no disrespect to other indies. they are just obvious examples.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #108 on:** January 02, 2011, 15:49 »

Quote from: aeonf on January 02, 2011, 08:28

So from what I understand some of the other sites not only pay less then IS but also have no transparency what so ever...
Why does everybody flame IS night and day but not the others

That is a good question with no answers what do SS pay people can't or won't answer but 25 cents must be under 15% for the sub donwloads

nruboc · « **Reply #109 on:** January 02, 2011, 16:11 »

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 15:35

I still have no idea what you're talking about. you have a lot to say about a site you don't even contribute to as far as I can see. if you think it's insignificant that I make my full-time income via iStock, then you and I have very different ideas regarding income and success. Yuri is a great example of 'the' most successful independent. But I could have used Lisafx as a great example too of success in independence. they have both achieved levels as independence that frankly required way more work than many of those seeking independence will probably put in. I think in order to be really successful as an independent, you have to be willing to work even harder. Yuri and Lisa have clearly done that based on performance and numbers alone. no disrespect to other indies. they are just obvious examples.

So I can't comment on your ridiculousness if I don't submit to IStockphoto? I'm glad that you have such a low cost of living. Why use such extreme examples when making your comparisons? You take the most successful independents and then say others aren't going to put in as much work as they do. Maybe not, do you put in as much work as they do? If you do, then prospects at IStockphoto are even sadder than I thought.

If you're so happy with your income, why not use an independent that has similar results to yourself as an example, and see how much "work" they put in. My guess is it would only require a few hours a day as an independent to get the same income as you are getting from IStockphoto.

pancaketom · « **Reply #110 on:** January 02, 2011, 16:11 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 02, 2011, 15:49

Quote from: aeonf on January 02, 2011, 08:28
So from what I understand some of the other sites not only pay less then IS but also have no transparency what so ever...
Why does everybody flame IS night and day but not the others

That is a good question with no answers what do SS pay people can't or won't answer but 25 cents must be under 15% for the sub donwloads

I don't know what % SS pays its contributors (and it is a bit messy to determine with subs in any case), but it is more than Thinkstock pays, and anyone serious at SS will not stay at .25 for long, after $500 in earnings you go up to .33 . The next 2 jumps take longer.

lisafx · « **Reply #111 on:** January 02, 2011, 16:33 »

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 15:35

I still have no idea what you're talking about. you have a lot to say about a site you don't even contribute to as far as I can see. if you think it's insignificant that I make my full-time income via iStock, then you and I have very different ideas regarding income and success. Yuri is a great example of 'the' most successful independent. But I could have used Lisafx as a great example too of success in independence. they have both achieved levels as independence that frankly required way more work than many of those seeking independence will probably put in. I think in order to be really successful as an independent, you have to be willing to work even harder. Yuri and Lisa have clearly done that based on performance and numbers alone. no disrespect to other indies. they are just obvious examples.

Thanks for comparing me to Yuri... Just wanted to say that although both of us make a full time living in microstock, I would estimate he makes between 20 and 50 times what I do. He's in some rarefied air up there, and I am down here slogging in the trenches

But definitely, I agree with your point that it takes a lot of hard work to be successful FT in microstock, whether exclusive or non. In addition to working hard, though, it takes working smart. Managing to keep costs low in relation to what a shoot is likely to make you. And to be fair, I think SNP should be counted as one of the successful microstockers. Making it to a FT income in micro, as she has done, is a very small club.

SNP · « **Reply #112 on:** January 02, 2011, 16:38 »

At nruboc: but I never said I'm unhappy with my income (which you seem to be convinced is well below what it is, so I suspect you're extrapolating quite inaccurately on my dls:files ratio). I'm not comparing myself to Lisa or yuri-that wasn't remotely my point. I will never complain about my work. I get to make a living doing what I love. I don't know why you're suggesting I complained about my income. YOU complained about my income.

And dude, we live in a major urban centre in Canada. Cost of living isn't low.

aeonf · « **Reply #113 on:** January 02, 2011, 16:57 »

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 16:38

At nruboc: but I never said I'm unhappy with my income (which you seem to be convinced is well below what it is, so I suspect you're extrapolating quite inaccurately on my dls:files ratio). I'm not comparing myself to Lisa or yuri-that wasn't remotely my point. I will never complain about my work. I get to make a living doing what I love. I don't know why you're suggesting I complained about my income. YOU complained about my income.

And dude, we live in a major urban centre in Canada. Cost of living isn't low.

Again, everything is relative.
Where I live 2 (1 bedroom) room appt would cost you over 1,200$ . cost of living in Canada IS low...

nruboc · « **Reply #114 on:** January 02, 2011, 17:07 »

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 16:38

At nruboc: but I never said I'm unhappy with my income (which you seem to be convinced is well below what it is, so I suspect you're extrapolating quite inaccurately on my dls:files ratio). I'm not comparing myself to Lisa or yuri-that wasn't remotely my point. I will never complain about my work. I get to make a living doing what I love. I don't know why you're suggesting I complained about my income. YOU complained about my income.

And dude, we live in a major urban centre in Canada. Cost of living isn't low.

I'm not complaining about your income, I'm using it as a point of reference to illustrate the ridiculousness of your argument to others that they are going to have to work so much harder to maintain their income as an independent. Your stats bolster my contention that you have no clue what your talking about. Simple as that.

SNP · « **Reply #115 on:** January 02, 2011, 17:18 »

Ok...good sleuthing Sherlock

not

Thanks Lisa. Like your point, my success is certainly not comparable to the bigwigs...but I'm keeping my nose to the grindstone and i think the truest measure of success is happiness and satisfaction. Despite the uncertain times for all of us at istock, I love my work. I think we all do or we wouldn't care so much.

Risamay · « **Reply #116 on:** January 02, 2011, 18:51 »

Quote from: aeonf on January 02, 2011, 16:57

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 16:38
At nruboc: but I never said I'm unhappy with my income (which you seem to be convinced is well below what it is, so I suspect you're extrapolating quite inaccurately on my dls:files ratio). I'm not comparing myself to Lisa or yuri-that wasn't remotely my point. I will never complain about my work. I get to make a living doing what I love. I don't know why you're suggesting I complained about my income. YOU complained about my income.

And dude, we live in a major urban centre in Canada. Cost of living isn't low.

Again, everything is relative.
Where I live 2 (1 bedroom) room appt would cost you over 1,200$ . cost of living in Canada IS low...

Yes. Without specific numbers on income and location-specific cost of living, it's just poppytalk.

Further, are we talking singles or a two-income household? And do both people contribute the same or is one income really the main support and the other just the wife's fun money that got serious, but if she lost her job it wouldn't matter because hubby could/would still support her?

SNP · « **Reply #117 on:** January 02, 2011, 19:26 »

Marisa - what right do you and nruboc have to discuss my income openly? this is crossing a line guys and it has nothing to do with this thread. can we move on?

gostwyck · « **Reply #118 on:** January 02, 2011, 19:35 »

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 19:26

Marisa - what right do you and nruboc have to discuss my income openly? this is crossing a line guys and it has nothing to do with this thread. can we move on?

I thought it was you dismissing the idea that any independent other than Yuri could earn a living from microstock that brought the attention on you. You reap what you sow.

Risamay · « **Reply #119 on:** January 02, 2011, 21:20 »

Quote from: SNP on January 02, 2011, 19:26

Marisa - what right do you and nruboc have to discuss my income openly? this is crossing a line guys and it has nothing to do with this thread. can we move on?

I wasn't discussing your income. I was providing further (general) instances as to why any discussion of income without the specifics is useless.

As to people here crossing a line and feeling like they have the right to discuss openly the income of folks by name, I think you were the initial violator of said line when you used Yuri (by name) in just such a discussion of income?

Therefore, it wouldn't be a stretch to see how other people might feel like they have a similar right to discuss your income openly. Again though, I wasn't discussing your income. Openly or otherwise. I was but highlighting the fact that without specific numbers and details of cost of living, marital status, etc. that such talk is pointless. So yes. By all means. Let's move on from such pointless prattle altogether. Shall we?

lagereek · « **Reply #120 on:** January 03, 2011, 02:39 »

Working hard or not is pretty irrelevant really, I would say getting the right material is more important. I know a couple of fellas ( not Micro) who maybe produce no more then 300 pics/month, for the last 15 years and BOY! they earn far more then anybody else here, were talking almost a 7-figure amount and in dollars, per year. They hit the magic formula!

Skill, hard work, etc, is not enough, you gotta be lucky, right place right time and so on.
Lisa! is a tremendous example of where you DO get with plain hard-work and graft, combined with skill ofcourse. However she will probably agree with me that if we started off today in Micro, it would be a hell of a lot tougher. Everything is virtually covered plus the fact that agencies are beeing destroyed and ruined.

Ive said it before, you get your 10 years in any creative business, thats it! whats happening today with agencies is only a natural progression of bad/good/clever/greedy, business management, so we either put up with it or get out of it.

SNP · « **Reply #121 on:** January 03, 2011, 11:50 »

^ I'd agree with most of that. though I don't think it's luck. I know a contributor too who just seemed to upload the perfect material and wham...sales like crazy. that contributor's work is pure stock. something I've always had trouble mastering. I've had a tough time separating the art from the stock. some people research . out of what sells and know what to produce and attack it like marketing job. I guess I've always approached it more from an artistic perspective--shooting what I love and hoping it sells. my morph into stockier images has been gradual, and definitely slower than the 7-figure people. lol.

luck might put your files in a good best match position. but unless they're good files, they don't sell enough and fall back anyways.

lagereek · « **Reply #122 on:** January 03, 2011, 12:10 »

Quote from: SNP on January 03, 2011, 11:50

^ I'd agree with most of that. though I don't think it's luck. I know a contributor too who just seemed to upload the perfect material and wham...sales like crazy. that contributor's work is pure stock. something I've always had trouble mastering. I've had a tough time separating the art from the stock. some people research . out of what sells and know what to produce and attack it like marketing job. I guess I've always approached it more from an artistic perspective--shooting what I love and hoping it sells. my morph into stockier images has been gradual, and definitely slower than the 7-figure people. lol.

luck might put your files in a good best match position. but unless they're good files, they don't sell enough and fall back anyways.

Luck, as when being at the right place, right time, luck as in best match position, yes! a mediocre picture on page 2, will constantly outsell a brillant picture on page 25, specially since the buyer wont bother to go any further then page 7 or 8.

pancaketom · « **Reply #123 on:** January 03, 2011, 12:44 »

Quote from: lagereek on January 03, 2011, 02:39

...

Skill, hard work, etc, is not enough, you gotta be lucky, right place right time and so on.
Lisa! is a tremendous example of where you DO get with plain hard-work and graft, combined with skill ofcourse. However she will probably agree with me that if we started off today in Micro, it would be a hell of a lot tougher. Everything is virtually covered plus the fact that agencies are beeing destroyed and ruined.
...

I am guessing this was a typo - did you mean perhaps "craft"?

I think the graft these days is mostly on the agency side.

lisafx · « **Reply #124 on:** January 03, 2011, 12:59 »

Quote from: pancaketom on January 03, 2011, 12:44

I am guessing this was a typo - did you mean perhaps "craft"?

I think the graft these days is mostly on the agency side.

I wondered about that too...

Or perhaps it was meant to be "draft". As in, some of the best pictures were taken when all involved were drinking beer

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Grass is NOT greener at the others!! (Read 30282 times)

caspixel

NancyCWalker

BaldricksTrousers

leaf

SNP

nruboc

nruboc

SNP

YadaYadaYada

nruboc

pancaketom

lisafx

SNP

aeonf

nruboc

SNP

Risamay

SNP

gostwyck

Risamay

lagereek

SNP

lagereek

pancaketom

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors