MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: Lifeographies.com is a new StartUp in microstock industry  (Read 11603 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 11, 2017, 11:35 »
+1
Hi everyone,

We are very happy and excited to announce a new StartUp in microstock industry, that promises to both contributors and publishers an elegant and fair experience.

www.lifeographies.com - Lifeographies Stock Images is a fresh Swiss StartUp and a reliable supplier of high quality digital stock images, vectors, illustrations, sounds and footage at affordable prices.

Our site uses credits as currency to pay for downloads. You can choose between buying credit packs or you can try our subscription plans that allow you to make a certain number of downloads daily.

Come and experience the true Swiss quality.

Lifeographies Stock Images Team,
www.lifeographies.com
Wabern, Switzerland
Public Relations
+41 79 954 13 24
contact@lifeographies.com
Sales, Billing, and Tech Support
support@lifeographies.com


steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2017, 12:53 »
+1
It seems pretty slow to load any new page for me.

« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2017, 13:15 »
0
The loading time seems longer than it is even normal for videos. Best to hire a better programmer. The photos very nice.
It seems pretty slow to load any new page for me.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2017, 13:45 by photoboxer »

« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2017, 13:26 »
0
Where are the photographer terms? What percentage are you paying?

« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2017, 13:58 »
+1
I checked out some of your pages, this page reminds me about one major topic in this forum: the endless variations of nothing... what for?

http://www.lifeographies.com/index.php?search=spices&items=50&str=1

and you are talking about "Thousands of premium stock images, unique features and dedicated team makes Lifeographies the favorite choice worldwide for photo shoppers."

oh no!

« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2017, 14:14 »
+3
An HD video costs less than a full size image! 5 credits vs 10 credits. Nope, nope, nope.

« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2017, 14:27 »
+6
Are you just advertising your site, or looking for contributors?

Contributors are tired of "credits" and "subscriptions".  They're just a way of hiding how little the photographer gets paid.

I don't see any unique selling point - why people would want to use the site.  It's just another collection of images on a wordpress shop-isle themed site.

« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2017, 15:02 »
0
Hi PhotoBomb,
 
http://www.lifeographies.com/pages/license-agreement.html
Section: 19. CONTRIBUTORS RIGHTS & OBLIGATIONS
Subparagraph : 19.2 Non-exclusive contributors

Thanks.
Lifeographies Team.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2017, 15:39 by Lifeographies »

« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2017, 15:35 »
+14
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?

« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2017, 15:44 »
0
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?
Hi Sean,

Yes it is true.
Thanks for your reply.

Lifeographies Team.


Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2017, 15:58 »
+7
Agree with all of Sean's point and...

terribly, painfully slow website.

Not a good site for contributors.

« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2017, 16:01 »
0
Are you just advertising your site, or looking for contributors?

Contributors are tired of "credits" and "subscriptions".  They're just a way of hiding how little the photographer gets paid.

I don't see any unique selling point - why people would want to use the site.  It's just another collection of images on a wordpress shop-isle themed site.
Hi Sean,

We are actually doing both...and much more. This is the purpose of the stock industry: Upload and Sell.

There is nothing new in traditional stock industry, but you can create new ideas in your content, and for that you must contribute in order to be visibile and sell.

Regarding "how low is the photographer overall income or revenue from one sale" you are just one click away to find that. www.lifeographies.com

We'd love to see how you changed your mind after the first month of working together.

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #12 on: May 11, 2017, 16:01 »
+8
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?

Although the numbers have changed, that paragraph looks copied from Dreamstime's rules, including the mangled english of the final sentence:

"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (70%) percent of their portfolio online with Dreamstime.com for a period of at least six (6) months. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (30%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past six (6) months. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

« Reply #13 on: May 11, 2017, 16:09 »
+18
I think the OP is missing the point. If a new agency wants content, it needs to convince contributors it's worth their time to upload. Having onerous terms - like a lock on uploads for a period of time - makes it an even bigger ask.

Most of us here have been doing this for a number of years and have seen new agencies with no real plans on how to find buyers and make a success of their venture come and go.

Suggesting we should upload files to find out how much we could make is just silly. Borders on the rude. You can't see prices without creating an account apparently.

If you want to get contributors to upload, try making a solid case for why this new business of yours will find buyers and make us all some money.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2017, 16:37 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #14 on: May 11, 2017, 16:10 »
0
Agree with all of Sean's point and...

terribly, painfully slow website.

Not a good site for contributors.
Hi A and n,

Thank you for your feedback.

If you are kind, could you please send us a test screen from your location in a private message?

We'll check why it's loading slow in your area. Our tests show that the loading time of the entire content / page varies between 2 and 4 seconds (without the cache enabled - considering that you are new to this site).

Thanks.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2017, 16:21 »
+5
Why cloak and dagger with the contributer earnings?
I agree with Joann, the more open terms and policies are and the less restrictions on deleting files, etc. the easier it is to generate interest from contributers

« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2017, 16:40 »
0
Why cloak and dagger with the contributer earnings?
I agree with Joann, the more open terms and policies are and the less restrictions on deleting files, etc. the easier it is to generate interest from contributers
Hi Noodle,

Thank you for your feedback.

It is true that the Terms and Conditions can become for contributing the bad bear from the closet. But the only desire of the contributor's is to sell. To sell you must contribute. There is nothing hidden, the percentages are public, visible and clear. But yes, the big issue of stock platforms is the number of sales, that's why they're all upset. But that does not happen to us. Before assuming it is much easier to check for real :). You can do this just by logging in and contribute.

Thanks.
Lifeoraphies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #17 on: May 11, 2017, 16:41 »
+8
"There is nothing new in traditional stock industry, but you can create new ideas in your content, and for that you must contribute in order to be visibile and sell. "

There are new things, actually.  Look at Canva, for instance.  If we 'create new ideas' in our content, there's plenty of places it can already go.

« Reply #18 on: May 11, 2017, 16:43 »
0
I think the OP is missing the point. If a new agency wants content, it needs to convince contributors it's worth their time to upload. Having onerous terms - like a lock on uploads for a period of time - makes it an even bigger ask.

Most of us here have been doing this for a number of years and have seen new agencies with no real plans on how to find buyers and make a success of their venture come and go.

Suggesting we should upload files to find out how much we could make is just silly. Borders on the rude. You can't see prices without creating an account apparently.

If you want to get contributors to upload, try making a solid case for why this new business of yours will find buyers and make us all some money.
Hi Jo Ann Snover,

Thank you for your feedback.

It is true that the Terms and Conditions can become for contributing the bad bear from the closet. But the only desire of the contributor's is to sell. To sell you must contribute. There is nothing hidden, the percentages are public, visible and clear. But yes, the big issue of stock platforms is the number of sales, that's why they're all upset. But that does not happen to us. Before assuming it is much easier to check for real :). You can do this just by logging in and contribute.

Thanks.
Lifeoraphies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #19 on: May 11, 2017, 16:50 »
0
"There is nothing new in traditional stock industry, but you can create new ideas in your content, and for that you must contribute in order to be visibile and sell. "

There are new things, actually.  Look at Canva, for instance.  If we 'create new ideas' in our content, there's plenty of places it can already go.
Hi Sean,

"There's plenty of places it can already go."

Yes, that is right and i totally agree with you. Actually Registration is not compulsoryit's a free choice, and I'm sure that after reading this post you felt the same :).

Thanks.
Lifeographies Team

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2017, 17:27 »
+2
Hi PhotoBomb,
 
http://www.lifeographies.com/pages/license-agreement.html
Section: 19. CONTRIBUTORS RIGHTS & OBLIGATIONS
Subparagraph : 19.2 Non-exclusive contributors

Thanks.
Lifeographies Team.



19.2 Non-exclusive contributors: A non-exclusive contributor is an artist who uploads Media that are also available for sale with other stock agencies. These contributors may upload their Media to Lifeographies.com while selling the same Media through other channels. Non-exclusive contributors shall receive 55-65% for Credit Sales and 19-37% for Subscription Sales of the net sale price received by Lifeographies.com for the Media they have contributed to the site which are subsequently sold by Lifeographies.com.

A percentage of credit?? :-\ :-\
What does 1 credit cost.
You need to be upfront about this.

« Reply #21 on: May 11, 2017, 17:49 »
+7
You're starting up about 12 years too late.  Apart from Pond5 and Depositphotos all of the top nine agencies in the poll results on the right of this page were in business by the end of 2005. Hardly anybody bothers with those lower down on the list, there's scarcely any return to be had.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #22 on: May 11, 2017, 17:57 »
+1
"55-65% for Credit Sales and 19-37% for Subscription Sales of the net sale price"

The net sale price being after any referrals have been paid out. "Revenue Shares are calculated based on net sales amounts after payment of referral fees". Although this bit sounds good...

"...provided Contributor is otherwise in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, Lifeographies will not seek repayment of any overpayments made to the Contributor."

But yes, would like to know the cost of a credit without having to sign up to find out. If it's 5 for a video and 10 for a high resolution image... and they do "images from 35c" then I'm assuming videos are pretty cheap. I don't mind cheap prices with high sales, or low sales with high prices... but not low sales with low prices. 


« Reply #23 on: May 11, 2017, 18:07 »
0
I signed up so I could look at the real numbers - that was 6 hours ago and still haven't gotten the verification email to log-in.
my bad i made and error in the online form
« Last Edit: May 11, 2017, 19:31 by PhotoBomb »

« Reply #24 on: May 11, 2017, 19:43 »
0
I signed up so I could look at the real numbers - that was 6 hours ago and still haven't gotten the verification email to log-in.
my bad i made and error in the online form
Hi Sk...v (I suppose?)

We have received your application request.

You typed a wrong email to the registration procedure. You also received an email from Support in which you have informed that your email was corrected and your account was manually activated by the editor. (See attached picture from your email).

Thanks for registering and we look forward to changing your mind about "newcomers" in the industry.

All the best.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2017, 19:53 »
0
"55-65% for Credit Sales and 19-37% for Subscription Sales of the net sale price"

The net sale price being after any referrals have been paid out. "Revenue Shares are calculated based on net sales amounts after payment of referral fees". Although this bit sounds good...

"...provided Contributor is otherwise in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, Lifeographies will not seek repayment of any overpayments made to the Contributor."

But yes, would like to know the cost of a credit without having to sign up to find out. If it's 5 for a video and 10 for a high resolution image... and they do "images from 35c" then I'm assuming videos are pretty cheap. I don't mind cheap prices with high sales, or low sales with high prices... but not low sales with low prices.
Hi SpaceStockFootage,

It is true, you don't  have to login to see the prices, but for this there must be good will and not a superficial approach, which is somehow understandable considering the invasion of stock platforms that promise much and does less or nothing. The video price has never been 5usd, it is and has always been 25usd (easy to check).

If there are other questions, we are here to answer them.

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2017, 20:00 »
+1
You're starting up about 12 years too late.  Apart from Pond5 and Depositphotos all of the top nine agencies in the poll results on the right of this page were in business by the end of 2005. Hardly anybody bothers with those lower down on the list, there's scarcely any return to be had.
Hi Baldricks,

You can't get anywhere unless you start :).

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #27 on: May 11, 2017, 20:25 »
+1
The video price has never been 5usd, it is and has always been 25usd

I never said it was! Somebody said it was 5 credits for a video, so I was just going off that. I didn't check originally as I got a bit fed up of waiting for the page to load... but just gave it another go. So after 60 seconds for the homepage to load, 140 seconds for the video page, and 25 seconds for an individual video page... you're right! It's 25 credits. So 1 credit equals $1.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #28 on: May 11, 2017, 20:30 »
+6
You're starting up about 12 years too late.  Apart from Pond5 and Depositphotos all of the top nine agencies in the poll results on the right of this page were in business by the end of 2005. Hardly anybody bothers with those lower down on the list, there's scarcely any return to be had.
Hi Baldricks,

You can't get anywhere unless you start :).

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I agree, if you can take just 1% of Shutterstock's business, then you'll still be turning over more than $1m a year... so it could be a profitable little business. Although, as a contributor... if I was to make 1% of what I'm making at Shutterstock, then I'd probably give it a miss. And that could be the issue... getting enough content to be in a position to take that 1% from Shutterstock. 

« Reply #29 on: May 11, 2017, 21:07 »
+3
You are looking for contributors here... what are your plans for getting buyers?
How much money are you investing in marketing? Is this self funded website or any investor.

« Reply #30 on: May 11, 2017, 21:36 »
+7
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?
Hi Sean,

Yes it is true.
Thanks for your reply.

Lifeographies Team.


Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Excellent. I won't be uploading. Thanks for being unrealistic.

« Reply #31 on: May 11, 2017, 22:51 »
+2
This is one slow site, takes ages to load. I think most customers will have left by the time their page request has loaded.

« Reply #32 on: May 12, 2017, 00:21 »
+6
Just to be clear, can you expose point by point why I should spend time to upload my images on your site?

What advantages do you propose compared to competitors like Shutterstock or AdobeStock?

How do you think to emerge in the microstock industry?

Why a customer should buy on your site the same content he can find in Shutterstock or AdobeStock?

« Reply #33 on: May 12, 2017, 01:55 »
+3
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?

Although the numbers have changed, that paragraph looks copied from Dreamstime's rules, including the mangled english of the final sentence:

"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (70%) percent of their portfolio online with Dreamstime.com for a period of at least six (6) months. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (30%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past six (6) months. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."
Love that they changed the figure in numbers to "40%" but missed the "thirty" while copying. Nice.

« Reply #34 on: May 12, 2017, 05:36 »
+6
I'm not sure how many new sites have tried to get going but have been a complete waste of time, must be at least 500 by now?  I used to join many of them but now I'm very wary.  I don't see the point in new sites paying less than 50% because we already have sites paying that and there's no way I want to help increase their competition.

« Reply #35 on: May 12, 2017, 06:09 »
+3
I'm not sure how many new sites have tried to get going but have been a complete waste of time, must be at least 500 by now?  I used to join many of them but now I'm very wary.  I don't see the point in new sites paying less than 50% because we already have sites paying that and there's no way I want to help increase their competition.
I don't hold out much hope here no USP and nothing new in an already saturated market.

« Reply #36 on: May 12, 2017, 06:48 »
0
You're starting up about 12 years too late.  Apart from Pond5 and Depositphotos all of the top nine agencies in the poll results on the right of this page were in business by the end of 2005. Hardly anybody bothers with those lower down on the list, there's scarcely any return to be had.
Hi Baldricks,

You can't get anywhere unless you start :).

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I agree, if you can take just 1% of Shutterstock's business, then you'll still be turning over more than $1m a year... so it could be a profitable little business. Although, as a contributor... if I was to make 1% of what I'm making at Shutterstock, then I'd probably give it a miss. And that could be the issue... getting enough content to be in a position to take that 1% from Shutterstock.
I agree with your point..however they will have a smaller number of contributors so for example IF they only had 1% of the contributors as SS you would make the same. given that ss claim customer retention of 92% then unless you have something game changing to offer you would be looking to take one 1/8 of those customers....very improbable.

« Reply #37 on: May 12, 2017, 11:07 »
0
1.
My browser is of the opinion that the site is unsecure, It connects with http instead of https and there is no certificate that can guarantee that the site is genuine and has secure private transfer. Not suitible for entering login and password, credit cards e tc.

2.
Account registration
I tried to register an account, fill in name and address details, but whatever I do, I will return to the page with the account terms.

3.
It's slow.

4.
I have not figured out my comision rate (minium, maximum, avarage, et c) and how the taxes are handled.

5.
I need to studdy the law of South Africa


6.
If the compensation to the image provider is acceptable, and sales are good, I have a some thousands images to offer for distribution.

« Reply #38 on: May 13, 2017, 13:52 »
+1
You're starting up about 12 years too late.  Apart from Pond5 and Depositphotos all of the top nine agencies in the poll results on the right of this page were in business by the end of 2005. Hardly anybody bothers with those lower down on the list, there's scarcely any return to be had.
Hi Baldricks,

You can't get anywhere unless you start :).

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I agree, if you can take just 1% of Shutterstock's business, then you'll still be turning over more than $1m a year... so it could be a profitable little business. Although, as a contributor... if I was to make 1% of what I'm making at Shutterstock, then I'd probably give it a miss. And that could be the issue... getting enough content to be in a position to take that 1% from Shutterstock.
Yes, that's my point, really.
It's probably not too hard for a new agency to pull in $1,000 a month for its owner, but if there's 20% commission spread between 100 contributors everybody else is making $2 a month. Everybody doing this at all seriously (and non-exclusively) probably has a few hundred files on each of a handful of low earners which hardly ever deliver a payout.
What does a new entrant have to offer buyers that isn't already there 20-times over? And how much effort is it for us to go and add our files to their site? I'm just having a bad experience with Fotoarabia, who don't seem to be there to pay me now that I've got to payout.  I sent hundreds of files to Cutcaster when they came asking us to support their exciting new site, and I've not seen a penny back from that effort. 
So what's the incredible draw to bring buyers in that will mark this out as being different from all the others, rather than just another site looking for a few crumbs from the big boys' table? And what's the attraction for photographers etc to persuade them to waste devote their time to uploading?

RAW

« Reply #39 on: May 13, 2017, 14:23 »
+2
If they really mean business they would speed up their website. Any decent developer can do it.

At the moment is is so slow what customers they may attract will just give up and go elsewhere.

« Reply #40 on: May 14, 2017, 02:42 »
+4
You're starting up about 12 years too late.  Apart from Pond5 and Depositphotos all of the top nine agencies in the poll results on the right of this page were in business by the end of 2005. Hardly anybody bothers with those lower down on the list, there's scarcely any return to be had.
Hi Baldricks,

You can't get anywhere unless you start :).

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I agree, if you can take just 1% of Shutterstock's business, then you'll still be turning over more than $1m a year... so it could be a profitable little business. Although, as a contributor... if I was to make 1% of what I'm making at Shutterstock, then I'd probably give it a miss. And that could be the issue... getting enough content to be in a position to take that 1% from Shutterstock.
Yes, that's my point, really.
It's probably not too hard for a new agency to pull in $1,000 a month for its owner, but if there's 20% commission spread between 100 contributors everybody else is making $2 a month. Everybody doing this at all seriously (and non-exclusively) probably has a few hundred files on each of a handful of low earners which hardly ever deliver a payout.
What does a new entrant have to offer buyers that isn't already there 20-times over? And how much effort is it for us to go and add our files to their site? I'm just having a bad experience with Fotoarabia, who don't seem to be there to pay me now that I've got to payout.  I sent hundreds of files to Cutcaster when they came asking us to support their exciting new site, and I've not seen a penny back from that effort. 
So what's the incredible draw to bring buyers in that will mark this out as being different from all the others, rather than just another site looking for a few crumbs from the big boys' table? And what's the attraction for photographers etc to persuade them to waste devote their time to uploading?
If anything the small players/startups are declining faster for me than the bigger sites. Cutcaster, Yay, Graphic Leftovers, Feature Pics haven't produced sales for months and are so far down my priority list that I doubt I will get round to uploading there ever again but even so I doubt I would prioritize an additional site. It would be great to see a start up break into the market but they need innovation and technical excellence.

« Reply #41 on: May 14, 2017, 13:59 »
+3
Hi Lifeographies: what's your effort to compete with the BIG4 in sales?

We know what WE have to do, but we're not reading about what will you do to sell more and more our content to earn your percentage :)

nazlisart

  • I create therefore I AM
« Reply #42 on: May 14, 2017, 14:18 »
+5
Here we go again!

Blah-Blah-Blah.... AKA "Nothing ground-braking - Nothing exciting... We Just want your pictures to gamble"

Being there - Done that...
« Last Edit: May 15, 2017, 01:02 by nazlisart »

« Reply #43 on: May 14, 2017, 17:03 »
+1
About 16 500 images in the database. I need to reach 100 US dollars before payout is possible and I have not yet figured out if Paypal or bank transfer are availble for payouts.

From Getty and Shutterstock I get payment each month. Payouts seems far away at Lifeographies. My guess is that they dont have many customers, if any.

The uploading process need to be changed by adding a FTP-service. I have lots of pictures in different catogories and need them to be self populated. I don't work with batches.

As a custumer I'm wouldn't by images from this agency because they takes no responsiblity for who the copyright holder is. As a buyer I need an insurance policy for that kind of problems.

The site need https and a valid certificate.


« Reply #44 on: May 14, 2017, 19:22 »
+1
The site shows the how many times individual images are downloaded. Perfect for the copy cats of the world to steal your ideas.

Customers have no benefit from download numbers, because the files could have thousands of downloads on other agencies, even if it shows as zero downloads on your site.

This is why visible download numbers have been removed on most agencies and macrostock never had it anyway.

it just leads to endless copies and duplications in the collection.

I cant see anything interesting or new from a buyers perspective.

Why should I buy from your place?

« Reply #45 on: May 14, 2017, 20:14 »
0
"55-65% for Credit Sales and 19-37% for Subscription Sales of the net sale price"

The net sale price being after any referrals have been paid out. "Revenue Shares are calculated based on net sales amounts after payment of referral fees". Although this bit sounds good...

"...provided Contributor is otherwise in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, Lifeographies will not seek repayment of any overpayments made to the Contributor."

But yes, would like to know the cost of a credit without having to sign up to find out. If it's 5 for a video and 10 for a high resolution image... and they do "images from 35c" then I'm assuming videos are pretty cheap. I don't mind cheap prices with high sales, or low sales with high prices... but not low sales with low prices.
Hi SpaceStockFootage,

It is true, you don't  have to login to see the prices, but for this there must be good will and not a superficial approach, which is somehow understandable considering the invasion of stock platforms that promise much and does less or nothing. The video price has never been 5usd, it is and has always been 25usd (easy to check).

If there are other questions, we are here to answer them.

Thanks for your reply.
Lifeographies Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

25 USD is too cheap for videos. That's the average amount i earn on a HD video on other sites I contribute to.  If i can only get just the half of 25USD then i'm sure i won't contribute

« Reply #46 on: May 15, 2017, 05:52 »
0
I am in for 3 months and by now Lifeographies is on 5th position by monthly revenue, in my 10 top, above 123RF, Bigstock or Depositphotos.

« Reply #47 on: May 15, 2017, 06:01 »
+4
I am in for 3 months and by now Lifeographies is on 5th position by monthly revenue, in my 10 top, above 123RF, Bigstock or Depositphotos.
If you're really making money with them, the worst thing you could do is mention it here.  Seen it happen lots of times, a small site can keep a few contributors happy but when the majority start uploading, almost nobody makes anything.

« Reply #48 on: May 15, 2017, 08:06 »
+2
I am wondering why nobody is mentioning the poor quality of the images... or am I wrong?

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #49 on: May 15, 2017, 09:04 »
0
I am wondering why nobody is mentioning the poor quality of the images... or am I wrong?


Took too long to go through them, so I gave up before I could form an opinion either way!

« Reply #50 on: May 15, 2017, 10:18 »
0
What part of the drug do you want to conquer geographically, the whole world, Europe or Switzerland?

A niche of the market such as public transport and getting the biggest on it?

The idea of ​​conquering the world market at once has been tried before. It could be the vision, but start with the goal of being the best in pictures needed in the local market in Switzerland. If you can conquer 3000 regular subscribers, there is a chance to get this with a small profit. There will be need of at least 3 million images of satisfactory quality with spread on keywords and subjects in the base.

Can you get into nearby markets, for example Austria with another 3000 customers as next step, it can be really good.

My experience is that customers seek partly the customized isolated images on white  for ideas, but also images that appear to be taken from everyday life, local business, streets, buildings, places in the market where the customers are located. Ask the Swiss photographers for local images, by google adds, adds in local photo magazines.

Good clients to market you service for are local newspapers, government agencies, smaller advertising agencies, municipal administrations, political parties, associations and smaller companies. You need to call them, visit them.

Be transparent and fair with customers and contributors. This service will cost you money for at least five years before it make any good profit.

Keep on!

« Reply #51 on: May 15, 2017, 10:54 »
0
I am wondering why nobody is mentioning the poor quality of the images... or am I wrong?

No, the quality is really low. And also not "authentic" enough, to qualify for the "mobile stock trend".

Why should a customer come to them? What is it that they specialize in or makes them more interesting than all the other sites?

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #52 on: May 16, 2017, 05:32 »
0
This would be great, if you got on a time machine back to 2001..seems too difficult to compete now without having a clear niche and offering contributors something special!

« Reply #53 on: May 16, 2017, 07:58 »
+4
Interesting and typical that they have not been back in here posting and answering questions. The humble pie served up, as helpful as it could really be, had too many carbs.

« Reply #54 on: May 16, 2017, 09:50 »
0
Interesting and typical that they have not been back in here posting and answering questions. The humble pie served up, as helpful as it could really be, had too many carbs.
Hi Mantis,

Thank you for your message.
We are also here and we read all your proposals, some of them well-founded. We try to respond punctually only when the issues mentioned by you are resolved. Thank you and keep up your work in uploading content.

All the best.
Lifeographies.com Team.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk


« Reply #55 on: May 16, 2017, 11:10 »
+1
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?

If you think that's bad, look at Canva, for instance,  You cannot delete content from there, ever, and that's a lot longer than twelve months..

« Reply #56 on: May 16, 2017, 12:40 »
0
"Contributors are required to keep at least seventy (60%) percent of their portfolio online with Lifeographies.com for a period of at least one (1) year. You may disable all files older than six months from the date of review at any time. You will be allowed to disable a total of thirty (40%) percent of your total Media submitted within the past one (1) year. Media that was disabled and then enabled again will be counted as new submissions, no matter of their original upload date."

Come on.  Really?

If you think that's bad, look at Canva, for instance,  You cannot delete content from there, ever, and that's a lot longer than twelve months..

Canva's a bit of a different bird though.  As a design tool, it's not really different than a buyer already having licensed it and having it on their desktop.  You certainly can't call that back, so you can't really call back content already licensed through their interface.
"You have the right to remove any of your Stock Media from our Service at any time for any reason. Canva will use reasonable efforts to cause the Stock Media, including any additional versions such as Cut Outs (as defined below), to be removed from the Service and affiliated or partner websites within sixty (60) days of your deactivation of such Stock Media. However, you agree that any licenses issued by Canva in respect of any Stock Media that is removed from the Service will remain in full force and effect under the terms of that license."

« Reply #57 on: May 16, 2017, 12:46 »
0
Out of curiosity, I just checked out the site.

It loaded within 6 seconds - kind of slow but not terrible.

But when I tried some very basic searches, such as "travel " and "people" after trying some locations such as "Italy" that I assumed I could find on a Swiss site, I still ended up with zero images and I made sure I was searching the entire database.

Is the search engine broken?

You seem to have a lot of editorial images. Who is your primary market?

 

« Reply #58 on: May 16, 2017, 14:22 »
0
its a no-go from the very beginning, image spamming from poor images all over, the best thing is to try favorite keywords and see the result, one trial and you will never try it again.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #59 on: May 16, 2017, 15:15 »
0
Quote
its a no-go from the very beginning, image spamming from poor images all over, the best thing is to try favorite keywords and see the result, one trial and you will never try it again.

I used to work with online poker and it reminds me of sites who were way behind the curve try to compete with the big boys at the time (Party or Pokerstars) but they didn't have that many tables going and no incentives for new guys to join.

One way Lifeographies could potentially get more contributors is to start offering minimum 70% commissions to new contributors then I'd probably give it a try, even exclusively.

ShadySue

« Reply #60 on: May 16, 2017, 15:43 »
0
its a no-go from the very beginning, image spamming from poor images all over, the best thing is to try favorite keywords and see the result, one trial and you will never try it again.
I tried some of my favourite keywords (for trying out new websites) and there were no results, tried a slightly broader category and the photos weren't noticeably poor compared to the opposition (but some of the English language captions were almost as bad as mine would be captioning in another language), but there were a lot of 'very similars', like many sites (e.g. iS, SS, Alamy).
It was extremely slow, though. About 12 seconds to open from the link in the OP, but after about three searches gettimng slower each time, the page went black with a white 'rotating timer indicator thingy' for over 1/2 minute and I gave up. Specifically, I had made one search, then deleted that search, wanting to try another. The 30 secs was while the first search was deleting (after I'd done two previously).
« Last Edit: May 16, 2017, 16:14 by ShadySue »

« Reply #61 on: May 16, 2017, 15:55 »
0
I think the only thing that would get my interest would be to get payment up front for images....after all if they are confident of their selling ability they would soon recoup it. Like most of the start ups I see nothing about marketing....who will buy these images?

« Reply #62 on: June 13, 2017, 15:46 »
0
Hello everyone,
We would like to thank you for your feedback. We appreciate your honesty and hope that you will find that it resulted in some positive changes on lifeographies.com.
We are constantly seeking ways to improve your experience on our platform. We can guarantee that any future ideas and feedback will be considered by our team and all feasible ideas will be implemented as soon as possible.
Best regards
Your Lifeographies team.

Tyson Anderson

  • www.openrangestudios.com
« Reply #63 on: June 13, 2017, 17:41 »
+5
Holy crap!  Seems like every other month a new company makes this exact same post.  If a new company wants to learn how to get a positive response in this forum, just read through all the mistakes the past few new companies have made.  How can you not thinking the contributors earning percentage is important information to put in your original post?

« Reply #64 on: June 13, 2017, 18:27 »
+1
Hello everyone,
We would like to thank you for your feedback. We appreciate your honesty and hope that you will find that it resulted in some positive changes on lifeographies.com.
We are constantly seeking ways to improve your experience on our platform. We can guarantee that any future ideas and feedback will be considered by our team and all feasible ideas will be implemented as soon as possible.
Best regards
Your Lifeographies team.

And those are?

namussi

« Reply #65 on: June 15, 2017, 06:09 »
+1
I live in Hong Kong.

Your website assumes that I'm on the mainland of China, and so that I want to use simplified Chinese.

That's a great way to upset Hong Kongers:
1) HK uses traditional Chinese characters;
2) Plenty of HKers don't like being considered part of the People's Republic of China;
3) I use English. So do many businesses in HK. It's very international.

Also, the site is SO SLOW.

These days, if a site takes more than about five seconds to load, I assume there's a problem with the website and give up and do something else -- such as go to a rival site.

Sometimes I come back. Sometimes I don't. Why are you taking the risk of driving away customers and contributors?

It is not a great advert for your competence if you cannot operate a website a normal speed.

namussi

« Reply #66 on: June 15, 2017, 06:13 »
+2
The front page says:

SIGN UP AND SELL YOUR PHOTOS, ILLUSTRATIONS, VECTOR FILES AND VIDEO CLIPS

That will confuse buyers. They will think the site doesn't sell pix.

Very basic stuff.


« Reply #67 on: June 18, 2017, 05:49 »
0
Not interested until video prices are at least $60 per clip.

niktol

« Reply #68 on: June 18, 2017, 09:02 »
0

There is nothing new in traditional stock industry, but you can create new ideas in your content, and for that you must contribute in order to be visibile and sell.



Geez, I wish I could afford saying that: There is nothing new in my product, it's hack job, it's mundane, sub par quality and unoriginal. It's up to buyers to find a good use for it.

Sorry, Team, no sale.

niktol

« Reply #69 on: June 18, 2017, 09:16 »
+1
I think the only thing that would get my interest would be to get payment up front for images....after all if they are confident of their selling ability they would soon recoup it. Like most of the start ups I see nothing about marketing....who will buy these images?

That's an excellent idea, except I would ask to pay for my time to upload and keyword. Sure Lifeographies, pay me 5K upfront and I will upload my port, no problem. That's before royalties, to be perfectly clear.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 09:18 by niktol »

« Reply #70 on: June 18, 2017, 10:10 »
0
I am wondering why nobody is mentioning the poor quality of the images... or am I wrong?

No, the quality is really low.


strange! that was what many SS contributors have been saying, here and on their forum, about the change in ss since they flooded their inventory to bolster numbers for the shareholders carrot,
yet, ss seems to do fine with low quality ... and the departure of many old successful contributors.

« Reply #71 on: June 18, 2017, 11:52 »
0
I think the only thing that would get my interest would be to get payment up front for images....after all if they are confident of their selling ability they would soon recoup it. Like most of the start ups I see nothing about marketing....who will buy these images?

That's an excellent idea, except I would ask to pay for my time to upload and keyword. Sure Lifeographies, pay me 5K upfront and I will upload my port, no problem. That's before royalties, to be perfectly clear.
I'd take $10 an image to be recouped from initial sales....you can bet  review standards would be tight but fair ;-)...otherwise I'm taking all the risk by taking time uploading stuff that in all probability will never sell.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2017, 12:06 by Pauws99 »

niktol

« Reply #72 on: June 18, 2017, 12:26 »
0

 I'd take $10 an image to be recouped from initial sales....you can bet  review standards would be tight but fair ;-)...otherwise I'm taking all the risk by taking time uploading stuff that in all probability will never sell.

Not to mention the risk of having the images and financial information stolen because of inadequate online security protocols. Yippee ki yay, let's sell some hot dogs!

niktol

« Reply #73 on: June 18, 2017, 13:25 »
0
I think the only thing that would get my interest would be to get payment up front for images....after all if they are confident of their selling ability they would soon recoup it. Like most of the start ups I see nothing about marketing....who will buy these images?

That's an excellent idea, except I would ask to pay for my time to upload and keyword. Sure Lifeographies, pay me 5K upfront and I will upload my port, no problem. That's before royalties, to be perfectly clear.
I'd take $10 an image to be recouped from initial sales....you can bet  review standards would be tight but fair ;-)...otherwise I'm taking all the risk by taking time uploading stuff that in all probability will never sell.

On second thought, I already like your way better. There is no guarantee that after using the asset that a portfolio is no sales will be reported, regardless of whether they took place or not. $10 per image/illo sounds pretty fair for a new kid on the block.

Envato ElementsMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
19 Replies
4452 Views
Last post September 28, 2010, 16:43
by RacePhoto
42 Replies
7489 Views
Last post February 26, 2013, 01:09
by Xanox
87 Replies
14211 Views
Last post December 30, 2014, 00:42
by PixelBytes
8 Replies
1991 Views
Last post June 14, 2015, 00:14
by 60D
10 Replies
2602 Views
Last post May 30, 2016, 11:08
by leaf

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements