I propose the establishment of union stock contributors. ( Stock Syndicate )

With the following requirements :

1. minimum 50 percent on  sales paid to contributors

2. Price structure  similar price structure at Istockphoto .

3. Stop of sales by the system of subscription ( Shutterstock mode )


sorry for my english  :-)

Those are similar to my goals. I'm looking to get my average RPD in the $5-$10 range. I guess the question is the level of devotion. I couldn't afford to just delete my portfolio from those sites that don't live up to those standards. I assume most contributors couldn't or wouldn't.

I could stop uploading (and I have) to sites that don't meet those standards. But again, you might be hard pressed to get other contributors to do that as well.

That really only leaves you with the promotion aspect or which sites do you recommend. Which is nice, but can only really take you so far.

These union concepts are nice, but they really have to have some teeth to work. And, I haven't seen any commitment or desire from many contributors to take steps towards having that level of power.

Its easier than delete portfolio , or stop contributing...

It is, but probably has less impact too.

Many exclusives on some sites don't like actions like this... So it also could be a sign of big potential...

Cthoman, I'm sorry if your agencies are not on the Poll's list... I put all rated agencies from MSG (column right), which mean that contributors mostly work with them...

No problem. I mainly just submit to smaller illustration sites or my own, so they don't get listed because they never get enough votes.

• They're "authentic." I.e., they're aspirational, but the lighting and situations look perfectly real and naturalistic.
• They tell a story and they're immersive. In other words, images that as either a single image or a group of images tell a story that you want to spend time with.  Some of the best images from National Geographic, for example, are images that you can spend time with and pore over.  They have an intensity that focuses your interest, even as a single image.
• They've got contemporary art direction and style.  Food images, for example, will be carefully styled for catalog use or use in gourmet magazines.
• They've got high production values.

Gotcha! So, things like this...

http://www.mystockvectors.com/Fruits_Vegetables_g90-Peanut_Butter_Royalty_Free_Vector_Illustration_p2780.html

I'm one of those people who makes the most money from SS. I do this for the money, full-time. I don't care about the warm-and-fuzzies, I care about putting food on the table. And I also picked the sites I picked in this poll based on the results I want to see. Shutterstock, averaging $0.50 in my pocket per sale, is not the kind of results I want more of. No one wants that. Sure those $0.50 average earnings add up to thousands of dollars, but I'd be far better off if I took each one of those sales and moved them over to Stockfresh, GL, etc.

It is completely irrational to vote for SS in this poll. It makes zero sense. I get that people are voting based on total earnings, but that's not the right way to look at this.

I tend to agree. Shutterstock has always been courteous to me in my dealings with them and one of my top overall earners, but they are still my lowest per sale earner. So, it is hard to escape the fact that all of that comes at a price. If a fraction of those sales came from other sites, I would earn somewhere between a little more money to a veritable @ss load more. So... It's not all about warm fuzzies.

Not be supporting in what way?

Not promoting them to potential clients?
Not uploading there anymore?
Pulling your port?

Even though most of us get screwed in some fashion by most of the agencies, not uploading to them or pulling ports is a big step for many who have a reliance on the income.  Now, I dont support Istock, for example, when I recommend agencies to potential buyers, but I wouldn't pull my port (yet) because of a personal situation I am facing.

Theoretically, if money wasn't an issue, I would pull from ........in priority

1. Istock
2. FT
3. BS

It was kind of open to interpretation, but it looks like you have the idea. I definitely wasn't asking anybody to do anything. Just curious.

Not sure why so many people have voted for SS.   There are other places I'd much rather send buyers to  where my RPD is much more than at SS. The fact that so many people make more money there than anywere else means that they are taking customers away from places that pay us more per download. DT give me an RPD of 2 or 3 times more than SS for instance.

I hear you. I usually promote my own site and its RPD is 24 times SS's RPD. That seems to make the most sense to me.

Quote from: borg on March 27, 2013, 15:40

...
It's still weird to me that other opposite pool today has more votes than this...

Complaining still seems to be easier for some folks than actually trying to do something for the better.

I love your initiative and will be part of the campaign. Even the smallest bit might help.

It wasn't necessarily started as a complaint thread. It was more to get a complete picture. If Agency X is simultaneously the favorite and least favorite agency, should that be the one you promote? It doesn't look like that's the case though.

I have mixed feelings.  I voted for my least favorites, but if I am honest I haven't stopped selling on either site.  So it could be argued I am still "supporting" them, albeit reluctantly.

I don't see anything wrong with that. I did the same. I doubt many of our ideal situations match up to our actual ones. We still have to make money.

What have you got against FeaturPics - listing them twice   

Whoops. I fixed it. Hopefully, I didn't screw up anybody's votes. I can always reset it.

Looks OK. It looks like you have some big ups and downs (like you said), but overall it's steady. Your last 6 months look kind of flat for growth though. It will be interesting to see how the next 6 months go.

Quote from: Xanox on March 27, 2013, 02:50

am i the only one feeling frustrated at the idea that potential buyers first look on google images rather than in the agencies sites ?

.....

I am sure you use Google and/or other search engines to find stuff on the internet.  That is what search engines are for, and I don't understand why you are upset about the fact that the search engines are effective - that seems a little like complaining that your medication works.

The search engines provide a single mechanism to find almost anything, a great convenience.  If you don't want the search engines finding images, how do you want potential buyers to find your images?  How would you find your images in use - licensed and otherwise?

Now you know how well the search engines work, why don't you just put them to work helping your buyers find your images?  Wouldn't that soothe some of your frustration?  Why get angry when you can get even?

Regards

Count me as one person that is glad that Google works that way. They go out and index everybody (even the small sites like me), then let the people decide what they are looking for. I can't say the same thing for Bing. They have only indexed a small fraction of my site.

I don't currently submit to any of those. Haven't we tried this before and you can never get a consensus? I guess it doesn't hurt to try again though.