|
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 - pkphotos
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 21
101
« on: November 01, 2018, 03:56 »
I find Adobe/Fotolia good for photos but scrap feeders for video
102
« on: November 01, 2018, 01:42 »
The big two are P5 and SS. The rest are just bit players feeding over scraps.
103
« on: November 01, 2018, 01:39 »
OK thanks, password changed.
104
« on: October 31, 2018, 23:22 »
I'm a contributor who works with Shutterstock's new contributor support team. I wanted to let you know that Shutterstock is experiencing a major hacking incident that's been going on since at least Monday. Please check your accounts. If you can still login, immediately change your password to one that is secure. Spread the word. Hopefully we can nip this in the bud before it gets any worse.
I'm dubious hearing it like this. Where is an announcement from SS, and where is any evidence, such as just one forum member reporting it's happened to them.
105
« on: October 31, 2018, 16:06 »
I used to have 8000 RM photos on Getty until I ditched them recently. It'll cost me in the short term but I'm not overly concerned. I was bombarded with the custom content brief. I ignored and deleted them 100%. It looked like huge work for a small % chance of success. They are a greedy outfit and from all accounts heading towards growing problems. They should never have acquired Istock.
Whose accounts would they be?
How many millions are they in debt? It's a leaky boat with multiple holes to plug
106
« on: October 31, 2018, 14:19 »
I used to have 8000 RM photos on Getty until I ditched them recently. It'll cost me in the short term but I'm not overly concerned. I was bombarded with the custom content brief. I ignored and deleted them 100%. It looked like huge work for a small % chance of success. They are a greedy outfit and from all accounts heading towards growing problems. They should never have acquired Istock.
107
« on: October 31, 2018, 13:40 »
123RF are perennial bottom feeders of the mid-range micro agencies
108
« on: October 19, 2018, 22:25 »
I got sale yesterday and the price still at $49.00!!!
No big deal, it was probably made a day or two before the change in price.
109
« on: October 17, 2018, 11:24 »
Maybe the US buyers have very distinct tastes and buy mostly US material or at least with a US style
110
« on: October 14, 2018, 00:26 »
So... thinking of uploading to shutterstock...
Then took a look at a few numbers, did some math, and then noticed a few posts talking about 'spammy' portfolios (i.e., 1000 pictures of a pair of shoes, from 0-360 degrees in 0.3 degree increments, etc)...
If my math is correct, it seems on 'average' right now you'd need to have a portfolio size of about 10,000 images to 'make' about $600/year? Does that sound right? (Of course, I realize there would be outliers on both sides), but that seems to the case?
Any agreements/disagreements?
That is a ridiculous notion and would illustrate zero understanding of the stock photography market. You could have 1 million photos that only earn $600 a year if they are of the wrong subjects. Or you could have 100 photos that make several thousand per year. Anyone posting hundreds of similars also has little clue about the business of stock photography. 10,000 for $600 per year is an epic fail financially and creatively and suggests one should be doing something they're better at to make a living.
111
« on: October 14, 2018, 00:11 »
They've done a runner with all our work
112
« on: October 12, 2018, 14:38 »
wouldn't say the problem is the plane design: a property release would not solve it!
So you're saying property release isn't needed for Boeing planes? Adidas shoes? Ford cars? I would think you need a property release for branded products. A plane is a branded product unless the manufacturer cannot be identified.
113
« on: October 12, 2018, 12:26 »
The answer is that the manufacturer of the plane is the obstacle to your release. It's a case of property release by way of brand.
More importantly what in heavens name are you doing uploading video to istock? Are you some sort of financial masochist?
114
« on: September 29, 2018, 09:20 »
Since Blackbox does not submit to Vimeo, what you're actually doing is spamming.
What does this have to do with the topic of Vimeo Stock?
People are talking about getting in to this new video sales platform. I am pointing out that video is much harder than photos, and that there is a viable alternative that gets you on multiple platforms with a single (and pretty simple) upload mechanism. The icing on the cake is that you also get paid MORE when going through them, than if you had the same sale directly from the agency (unless you are doing insanely large volumes of sales).
Thus, I believe it is very relevant to anyone wondering about how to get into the new Vimeo video sales platform.
It is pure spamming and I don't see the point in blackbox. It's hard enough doing stock with what the agencies take without adding extra middlemen. Complete waste of time IMO.
115
« on: September 26, 2018, 13:11 »
Hello,
Something very fish is going on with Shutterstock.
I encoutered strange spikes, very highs and very lows.
For example:
20-30 sales (various, new and old in different parts of the world).
Once the images in review got approved the next day 1 sale.
This happened for the 3rd time already.
30 sales, images reviewed, the next day 1 sale.
Today is the same scenario.
I really don't know what to make out of this but it seems that Shutterstock is struggling with their Search Algorithm and is deeply affecting my sales. There is no consistency anymore, just random sales (even sold few images from 8 years ago).
Anyone else seen this pattern?
Edit* : By "manipulating" I don't mean something "evil" going on. But so many strange changes in the Search Algorithm in such a short period of time makes everything hazardous.
Don't waste your time trying to analyse sales. If you have 3000+ assets and a few years of data then you probably can make some sort of basic presumptions, otherwise forget it.
116
« on: September 25, 2018, 23:21 »
IS are a complete joke these days and I doubt many people are stupid enough to contribute further material. AS is still a very small player in the video market IMO. Therefore SS and P5 still dominate video but contributors are uploading furiously anything they produce, thereby saturating the market
Stupid perhaps, or maybe their work is good enough to actually sell there 
You missed the point. Everyone with images/videos still makes sales there, I still make sales there, but very few are stupid enough to keep uploading when the commission we make is 10 or 15%. You're majorly undercutting your work at other agencies if you do.
117
« on: September 25, 2018, 13:49 »
For me the answer to that is pretty clear. IS and AS are eating Shutterstock's lunch. Shutterstock has made some confounding and bizarre moves in the past months which have alienated a large segment of their buyers, while both IS and AS have been agressively pursuing those buyers. The only commensurate growth I am seeing in relation to portfolio size is with IS and AS, and persistently diminishing returns at SS. SS may still be selling more overall, but the kind of buyers who purchase my work are moving on. For good reason.
i agree...in addiction is clear they control sales and revenues based on contributors.....is not possible that often portfolio seems really disappear from ss, from one hour to another...then appear again...
today i sold images uploaded in 2007 never sold......probably buried by zillions images....images compared to my last two year wrk i would be ashamed to upload today.
Your images that you are ashamed of are like ten times better than the images they are accepting today for the nobs 
yes sure...i am ashamed as anybody improving in years is a bit ashamed of the images he did at the beginning..clearly years ahead 90% of stuff uploaded today...anyway i cannot understand who and how they can find images unsold from 2007..
IS are a complete joke these days and I doubt many people are stupid enough to contribute further material. AS is still a very small player in the video market IMO. Therefore SS and P5 still dominate video but contributors are uploading furiously anything they produce, thereby saturating the market
118
« on: September 25, 2018, 13:46 »
There's only one way that sales are going to get better and it has to be a combined effort by all contributors. The answer? Stop uploading, everyone must stop uploading now indefinitely and do other stuff. Then you'll see sales will gradually get better.
119
« on: September 21, 2018, 12:56 »
PM me for my bank details and once you've made a sizeable deposit I will tell you all my secrets. I make my living from microstock.
120
« on: September 05, 2018, 02:38 »
Getty went from an absolute powerhouse just a few years ago to falling asleep at the wheel and being overtaken and left in the dust by the likes of SS in particular. Even Alamy has managed to gain strength in this ever changing business. Getty were too busy sending out BS extortion letters trying to intimidate people rather than concentrating on adapting to the market.
121
« on: September 04, 2018, 11:59 »
The obvious question is, why if you have once ounce of sanity would you even contemplate for a millisecond submitting to IS?
122
« on: September 04, 2018, 00:18 »
I don't know why Pond5 sales take longer to generate than SS. It seems to me they have a different kind of buyer than SS. I think these buyers sometimes identify clips long before they intend to use them but it's all speculation. The Pond5 sales data isn't reliable IMO. It used to be you could look at cart adds and almost predict sales a few days later, however cart adds don't seem to happen now. You see a few bin adds but more often than not a clip can be downloaded without bin or cart adds and maybe without views.
123
« on: September 03, 2018, 13:59 »
New clips at Pond5 have always taken a lot longer to get off the mark than SS.
124
« on: August 23, 2018, 04:17 »
When was the last time anyone anywhere uploaded something to Istock? Surely at least a year or two now given their greedy unethical commission % and sales prices
125
« on: August 19, 2018, 09:00 »
That's been my biggest challenege, total exclusivity and then getting almost microstock rates for most of the sales. I've gotten one or two huge sales as well, but its like finding bigfoot
Yeah your portfolio is very small. I had 8000+ photos mostly RM, just a few RF. Revenue peaked around 2015 and then plummeted over the next three years. This happened to all contributors. The only safe ones either had massive portfolios of high quality imagery or very creative portfolios. Sales volume in particular, dried up and then the micro size sales became increasingly prevalent. I was waiting for a recovery or huge month but it never came.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 21
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
