|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - falantus
1
« on: January 27, 2024, 19:44 »
it wont let us see it. 
2
« on: June 13, 2023, 07:43 »
I checked it out, it seems super. Congrats.
3
« on: January 11, 2023, 08:37 »
If it's not the main subject, some companies might ignore if you have it or not (except Getty, they are very sensitive of any human being on images). However, if you don't have a release form, it will always be a slippery field for you 
4
« on: January 06, 2023, 13:42 »
Technically it might be, I personally did never have any after a year with a portfolio of 1 thousand, image and footage included.  Are they really paying 22% royalties for Photos/Illustrations & 40% royalties for videos ??
are you aware that they are paying less than mentioned, by cheating when converting credits to JPY ?
5
« on: January 06, 2023, 13:37 »
I had a relatively good porftolio there with more than a thousand imagery, and after 1 year I deleted (and had to wait for 6 months to be deleted completely) because of low income (1,34 dollar for a year ). So my humble suggestion would be to stay away from them. Does it make sense to upload a video there? Is there any income?
6
« on: December 23, 2022, 11:01 »
You need to manually copy the necessary files to new file, even then you won't find the exact info screen on deepmeta. After the latest deepmeta upgrade, users can't see the daily change anyway so it wont be a big deal.
7
« on: December 21, 2022, 15:43 »
they might be for ai training. 
8
« on: December 09, 2022, 11:15 »
The google survey at the bottom of page seems like this, asking to the contributors of "What would you like to see on your Contributor Dashboard?" and "What motivates you to log in?"
Maybe that might help to get daily sales info back, as Pacessetter stated.
9
« on: December 01, 2022, 10:31 »
Hi Miro,
This month seems ok for you compared to previous months I think. How many producsts do you have on prominents stock websites?
It was from 2000 up to over 10000
Shutter, adobe and alamy especially?
10
« on: December 01, 2022, 06:04 »
Hi Miro,
This month seems ok for you compared to previous months I think. How many producsts do you have on prominents stock websites?
11
« on: November 29, 2022, 06:40 »
I think DT has always done better in Europe, so maybe that is Yuri's thinking? You have to have so many baskets for your eggs these days as earnings wax and wane ... look at how far ss has fallen while Adobe has taken over the top spot. I'm surprised he's not with Adobe, especially since they have their higher end collections. But I assume those require real exclusivity.
I haven't uploaded to dreamstime in ages, but uploaded 11 files today and the first 7 were accepted while I was finishing checking the keywords on the last 3, which they also took - really fast. And no "similars" issues despite all being the same theme.
Dreamstime is weird for me, I once made $325 on a $750 one-year EL of an image that is one of the highest amounts I've earned on a single license, but usually with my small portfolio of 365 images, I'm lucky to get one payout a year. It's generally my lowest earner. But I don't shoot the same content as Yuri. I'd guess he knows what he's doing.
Apparently he is not earning much as well. This amount is a funny number for Yuri for an entire year. He might have thought that this was better than nothing 
Stupid question maybe but how do you get this info (the screenshot above) for a contributor? Or do you have to have a buyer's account to see that at Shutterstock?
DT website, as Uncle Pete stated 
12
« on: November 28, 2022, 05:57 »
I think DT has always done better in Europe, so maybe that is Yuri's thinking? You have to have so many baskets for your eggs these days as earnings wax and wane ... look at how far ss has fallen while Adobe has taken over the top spot. I'm surprised he's not with Adobe, especially since they have their higher end collections. But I assume those require real exclusivity.
I haven't uploaded to dreamstime in ages, but uploaded 11 files today and the first 7 were accepted while I was finishing checking the keywords on the last 3, which they also took - really fast. And no "similars" issues despite all being the same theme.
Dreamstime is weird for me, I once made $325 on a $750 one-year EL of an image that is one of the highest amounts I've earned on a single license, but usually with my small portfolio of 365 images, I'm lucky to get one payout a year. It's generally my lowest earner. But I don't shoot the same content as Yuri. I'd guess he knows what he's doing.
Apparently he is not earning much as well. This amount is a funny number for Yuri for an entire year. He might have thought that this was better than nothing
13
« on: November 18, 2022, 14:35 »
Evidently, several forum members have just disputed what you said. @Microstockphoto no one cares what you have to say mate Cheers mate
14
« on: November 11, 2022, 16:27 »
Yuri is both an inspiration and a depression reason for stock business Thank you for the talk.
15
« on: October 07, 2022, 02:47 »
My answer is, good images sell more often, because they are good images, and not because someone is tricking the system.
No objection. Agree with this. Some have said that description is very important as well. Who sits and thinks, I'm allowed 250 characters for description, I must use all the words?
In the past, I was filling the entire 200-250 characters but a kind Getty editor got back to me and said dont bother, its not indexed by explaining the system basics. After that, I minimized the title to 1/3 long, good enough to cover the basic description. 😊 However, Shutterstock or Adobe might follow a different system, cant be sure. So LESS IS MORE should be true What would you say about this set of keywords that could bring an image down. I don't have the image and I guess I shouldn't show it if I did. 16 words that don't really need to be there or aren't in the image. "party, party hard, pattern, cheers, drop" ? I can see some as concepts, like celebration, make a splash or refreshing. But are graphic or object something that adds value to the search terms?
Yes true. Thats where I sometimes omitted before, I guess. Thats because almost every image has its nature so it pushes you to consume time for that almost-uniqueness, at least with 5-10 extra words. Too much effort. That would cause you to follow themes and schemes but it seems now a wrong strategy. You shoot, you edit, you find the name and with that kind of keywording, it would be in vain. Just thinking aloud I wanted to go off into some related side question. Do you ever upload images, that you think, no one will ever download? I do.
Likewise. And interestingly, some unexpected ones sell, thats why I dont close that door ever. I experienced some noisy, low resolution, blurry images sold. If I wasn't having fun, I wouldn't do this at all. Too much work for the minimal returns.
Same. I havent earned anything valuable so far to be honest. Some minimum wage jobs could have provided for more money so far but the nature of this work field satisfies my inner feelings. Maybe thats why I continue to consume my time. You can understand this better 😊
16
« on: October 05, 2022, 11:58 »
...and might reduce sales due to too many keywords.
Are we sure of this "too many keywords" negativity?
No way to know anything for sure, but views, without zooms or views without sales, or any way that the agency tracks, if someone looks at an image and then moves on, is going to be a negative. Too many keywords is the same as too many irrelevant or unnecessary keywords. I'm sure I do that sometimes, things like nature, scenic, beautiful, which aren't "bad" words or words that shouldn't be there, but do they add anything to the search quality?
Someone who wants an image, if they are at all intelligent, will find words that describe what they want. They aren't going to be doing two word searches that bring up thousands of images, which are all kinds of vague hits.
As an example:
- 100.00% compensation with massive increase in views due to Google, in proportion.
- 100.00% compensation, with massive increase in views but no download, in proportion, without Google.
+ 10.00% Image has just been downloaded and is not free.
+ 2.00% Image has just been downloaded and is free.
- 3.00% unnecessary keywords, number of keywords greater than necessary.
- 5.00% Title and keywords do not match.
- 1.00% keywords contradict each other e.g.: "background" and "isolated".
- 5.00% keywords contradict each other very strongly e.g.: photo of a woman but keyword "men".
Views without a download, will reduce the image rank. Which means if there are poor or irrelevant keywords and the image gets many views, but no sales, it will eventually drop down in rank. In effect if keywords are not a good selection or the descriptions are not well written, the image will drop in rank. Too many unnecessary or vague words will hurt the image rank.
I think the only place I can see keywords used for downloads is SS. (I could be wrong, AS, AL, IS are my others) Some images are a real surprise in that, the same keywords are used to find them and make sales. Often less than 10 words. Of course we wouldn't want to take a chance that possibly someone might use one of the other words. But reality says, most images, that I have sold, have the same "good" keywords that buyers looked for. If I see that I can also add those words to others in the future.
I am also in the 20-30 keywords numbers. Not because I limit them, or that I couldn't have an image with 49, but just because they don't apply. Personally I don't think fluffing up the numbers does anything to help downloads and from evidence from sites that give us advice, could very likely harm image rank.
Words that add value and information for a buyer, so they will see my image, are what I try to include. Words that are just general words, that almost any image could have, aren't useful.
Thank you for this informative response. This is really great reasoning, and firmly convincing. I haven't thought about image rank issue because of view/download ratio, but it is a logical explanation. I would have designed it if ı had a stock company So far, I preferred to put max amount of keywords but I think I won't do it from now on. Still, there is something making me curious on this issue. I wonder if some of my low quality images were sold because of those unrelated keywords or absence of that kind of images around. Of course we can't be sure of it. Just brainstorming.
17
« on: October 03, 2022, 06:48 »
...and might reduce sales due to too many keywords.
Are we sure of this "too many keywords" negativity?
18
« on: April 23, 2022, 12:42 »
Agree. After a long time, I realize that they are blood-suckers. Stay away from them.
19
« on: November 15, 2021, 12:58 »
As I understand it, you only sell the NFT 'rights' whatever they are.
The copyright, and therefore the ability to sell your images as stock, prints etc., stay with the original artist.
I'm currently rebuilding my website fotovoyager.com with a view to selling images as NFTs independent of the agencies.
I don't really understand how it works yet, but one step at a time.
I suspect that if it takes off, the agencies will be trying to sell those rights for you, taking their usual unreasonable percentage.
I don't think so. As far as I know, you sell your "product" completely and it becomes buyer's asset for good. NFT transaction does not resemble the distribution strategy of stock agencies, that's why you hear high amount of money circulating around on NFT markets.
20
« on: October 13, 2021, 16:43 »
I have no personal experience, but have asked this question before in a German forum. Most have reported that with upload stop the downloads do not decrease immediately, but significantly after 1-2 years.
I observe a similar thing. And stock agencies have some subtle ranks for contributors and promote their works according to their priorities + activity level. I am pretty sure, at least the top agencies, many follow this strategy.
21
« on: August 12, 2021, 17:56 »
I find one my images online but I never get paid for this image it was under Alamy but I never upload him to Alamy if I am correct only to one other agency. But not paid from them also. Never mind it was just picture but....  ? I already contact Alamy for any info about this sale, but it was not Alamy mistake for sure
Do you mean that you are not a contributor of Alamy but you saw your image there? Or you are a contributor but did not upload that image? In both cases, it is possible. Some stock agencies can upload your images to other agencies sometimes according to their partnership agreement. On the other hand, it is not a "sale" technically. When it sells, they have to pay you in near future though.
22
« on: July 29, 2021, 15:01 »
Ah, I did not know that, I only upload photos. I guess then it's probably not really worth the effort. Dreams actually not worth for photos as well but if you are going for non-exclusive, you can try. However, consider that you have to choose categories one by one. Yes they have so-called an ai to make it for you but it mostly chooses wrong ones so it takes time. Depositphotos, on the other hand, makes this process very easier. You just click to send (of course not for the videos). Pond5 is also relatively easy compared to Dreams, however they limit the titles. Still you can make multiple edits for choosing types or other features etc once, then send. Nevertheless, you won't sell there much believe me. Once you do, you would be very happy because of the prices however it won't continue unfortunately. Your choice.
23
« on: July 29, 2021, 07:44 »
If you are embedding your metadata directly in your photos or a using some kind of micros stock submitting service and it's just a matter of uploading the photos and clicking "submit", Dreamstime might be worth the little bit of extra money as it means no real additional work. Otherwise it might not be worth the effort. I make on Dreamstime in a year what I make with some other agencies in a month. But if it means no additional work, it's still nice "pocket money" once in a while. Just don't expect any big money from them.
embedding info to metadata won't work for videos, interestingly only adobe recognize that, but not others
24
« on: July 29, 2021, 07:43 »
As a test, I uploaded 500 videos about a year ago. Sold 2 videos only = 22$. Depressive 
I think 2 is a very good number for Dreamstime Congrats, count yourself rich lol.
25
« on: June 29, 2021, 10:43 »
This kind of stuff unfortunately has become so often nowadays.
You saw your products on it or heard of it?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
