|
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 - ThomasAmby
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 18
151
« on: April 07, 2011, 04:28 »
One more thing to further hinder a group action is that the high-end contributors are almost always pleased when it comes to royalty cuts. Little to no changes in the top level royalties, and that's clever. That way the contributors with the most power are kept happy.
152
« on: April 07, 2011, 04:16 »
...On topic: I decided I need the money and since we act as individuals there's nothing we can do to prevent royalty cuts in the future, simple as that. However I stopped making "IS friendly" content, but use my energy on stuff I know will get accepted at the other agencies. For instance, icon sets of 25+ items that IS wouldn't allow on their site. If I get a rejection for "too many blend steps" or such imaginary issues, I won't correct and resubmit.
We will never know if we could of prevented cuts in the future because so many people have just continued uploading there. We do act as individuals but I think there's a lot of heard mentality here. People see others uploading and think why should they miss out.
I don't think we disagree. I think it's fairly safe to say that we could have prevented the cuts if we acted as a group. I've also had high hopes for something like that, but have finally come to the conclusion that it's practically impossible. Every thread taking up this topic has been dissolved because people can't agree on what to do in unison to make things better for all of us. Make 20 prominent contributors pull their port, and I'll do it too. Get 500 contributors to stop uploading and I'll be a part of that group. No one wants to be the first, because as individuals we're redundant. I'm wondering if IS' business would be hurt by Yuri leaving (count out the possibility of others following his decision). I honestly think it wouldn't - that's what it has come to, they already have the buyers. Maybe if all the black diamonds left though, it would have some impact. Actions like the above stated requires some managing efforts and a great speaker. I'm not up for the task but if anyone wants to step up and start the group action revolution we need, sign me up. I think the most significant problem here is that we're artists, not businessmen nor union leaders - but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
153
« on: April 06, 2011, 19:26 »
FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...
yes, Germany and Denmark in particular are model societies when it comes to education IMO. I've spent time in both countries and marvel at the level of education of most people. Cuba is also a country with almost 100% literacy, with education being entirely free up to any level.
I believe Denmark has a 50% income tax rate for everyone or something like that? however, paying high taxes enables the Danish government to subsidize everything from healthcare to education, to social assistance. I believe Denmark has very little unemployment as well as default subsidized care for the elderly.
Yeah, as I stated earlier in this thread it ranges from somewhere between 40-65% (not totally accurate). We have a progressive taxation so people with an income of approx. $73000+ pay an additional ~15% top tax rate on the extra income. Imagine if the stock agencies worked like that - punishing you for doing particularly well. Really it depends on many different things. We have a local tax that ranges from 22,8% - 27,8% depending on the municipality you live in, a healthcare contribution of static 8%, LM contribution of 8% and then there's the progressive taxation conditional on your income level - a basic tax rate of 3,67% and an additional 15% on income above $73000 - add to that 1% if you're a member of the national church. I think my tax rate is about 44-45%. On the bright side, we have free public schools, high schools, college, state education grants, hospitals, state pension, social security, libraries, highways and stuff like that. Starting a business here, however, is not very attractive - obviously.
154
« on: April 06, 2011, 04:29 »
FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...
Same here in Denmark. It's crazy. However these things are financed by the 40%-65% we pay in taxes + LM contribution. Which is also crazy, bordering on ridiculous. On topic: I decided I need the money and since we act as individuals there's nothing we can do to prevent royalty cuts in the future, simple as that. However I stopped making "IS friendly" content, but use my energy on stuff I know will get accepted at the other agencies. For instance, icon sets of 25+ items that IS wouldn't allow on their site. If I get a rejection for "too many blend steps" or such imaginary issues, I won't correct and resubmit.
155
« on: April 05, 2011, 05:07 »
Hi nruboc,
Glad it worked out for you. My images are still there in spite of several complaints and requests of removal. My mails are being forwarded and I never hear back. I was thinking about sending a DMCA takedown notice, but this seems better.
I just have no idea which radio buttons to check here ?
Does your complaint concern employment practices?
Yes No
Does your complaint allege discrimination?
Yes No
Does your complaint allege civil rights violations?
Yes No
Has this complaint case ever been involved in litigation?
Yes No
Hi There,
I put 'No' for all of those, but you may interpret 'employment' in the first question differently. Since they are paying you. I think either a Yes or No for the first question would apply
Thank you. I decided to put no for all of them. Hope to finally see some action and I find my complaint very legitimate as I already tried to deal with iStock directly. As Lisa said, I hope people won't abuse the system. I know it's more complicated than so, but legally they would be in their right to cut commissions whenever they want to right? And I don't see how they would address this sort of complaint with anything other than a "no thanks". (And no, I don't endorse the paycuts)
156
« on: April 04, 2011, 14:47 »
Hi nruboc, Glad it worked out for you. My images are still there in spite of several complaints and requests of removal. My mails are being forwarded and I never hear back. I was thinking about sending a DMCA takedown notice, but this seems better. I just have no idea which radio buttons to check here ? Does your complaint concern employment practices?
Yes No
Does your complaint allege discrimination?
Yes No
Does your complaint allege civil rights violations?
Yes No
Has this complaint case ever been involved in litigation?
Yes No
157
« on: March 31, 2011, 05:47 »
Well actually I don't think my math is wrong, but most likely my estimates are. I'm just saying that if I bought a subscription, being a freelance / stock illustrator, I would also use my subscription on weekends. At the same time I acknowledge that most buyers wouldn't.
It probably doesn't make any sense to talk about an average commission as it's much higher for 38c-contributors. There's just too many things to factor, but I've revised my belief that they pay out 40-50%. It's probably more like 25-40% depending on the level you're at.
But one thing is for sure, I wouldn't expect a raise from them with the current market situation (and if you're reading along, Shutterstock, I certainly don't need a paycut either)
158
« on: March 30, 2011, 06:20 »
I'm sure one day someone will come up with the solution and we will all use a site that pays better commissions
Crossing my fingers 
Google is ultimately an advertising agency. Everything that Google does is about driving traffic. Mostly they give stuff away. So are you hoping they will let you give away your pictures in exchange for some share of the ad revenue ? Who would be the advertisers on a free images site ?
No wait - hasn't the free images idea already been done. Isn't the best known now part of and presumably driving traffic for .... ?
I know, I'm just a big fan of Google and was hoping they could set up an agency that paid a fair share to its contributors. Surely they could wipe out the competition if they ever did. But as you say, they survive by giving stuff away, and I'm not interested in that scenario, of course.
159
« on: March 30, 2011, 06:15 »
About 6 years ago Jon stated on the forum that roughly 36% was being returned to contributors.
Your figures are slightly out as referral fees of 3c per subscription download may also apply. Shutterstock are therefore paying out up to 41c per subscription download.
Shutterstock have always walked something of a tightrope in that they need to balance the risk to the business whilst, at the same time, they need to provide as much incentive to the contributors as possible to prevent them being lured into exclusivity.
Wow, I haven't been around that long, but nice to know. And you're right, I completely forgot the referral fees. But six years ago the commission structure was different than today, wasn't it? I keep hearing about raises they gave for some years in the past, but was subscriptions substantially cheaper back then?
160
« on: March 30, 2011, 05:37 »
I mean percentagewise.
If a buyer buys 25 images a day for a month, he pays $249. If he buys images from top tier contributors only Shutterstock pays out $285-294 to its contributors, so there's a potential loss for Shutterstock. I know very well that most buyers don't use up their full subscription, but I've no idea why Shutterstock doesn't come out to reveal the average percentage they pay contributors as I suspect it's very high. They could brag about it if they wanted to.
If I were to buy a 25 a day subscription I'd probably use up 70% or more, even if I didn't "need" those images. If half of those 525 images are 25c ones and half are 38c ones Shutterstock would pay out around $165, which is 66% of what I paid for my subscription. If 25% of the images I buy are 38c and 75% are 25c, which is probably more realistic, that's a payout of $148 - an average commission of 59%.
So without knowing buyer habits, we can never know the exact percentage, but I'd like to hear some thoughts and estimates. What do you think is the average commission on Shutterstock ? With ELs and ODDs taken into consideration, I think the average percentage is somewhere between 40%-50%
161
« on: March 27, 2011, 12:13 »
I can't figure out why anyone would want to behave like that. What's the gain?!?
162
« on: March 27, 2011, 07:37 »
If a portion of the images were exclusive to the site, that would be something to bring in buyers. But of course there would have to be an incentive for uploading images exclusively. But that has also been discussed.
Looking forward to seeing the result
163
« on: March 27, 2011, 05:59 »
I'm sure one day someone will come up with the solution and we will all use a site that pays better commissions
Crossing my fingers
164
« on: March 26, 2011, 13:38 »
I'd probably be excited to join, but wouldn't be interested in a partial ownership of the company unless I had a written confirmation from all of the agencies I submit to that I'm not violating my contract by doing so.
IMO it would be great to have an option to join without "owning" part of the company, possibly with a decreased royalty.
And I'm not a nay-sayer, I'm all for it, if it can be done without breaching the agency contracts.
165
« on: March 26, 2011, 11:15 »
Thanks everyone, it always makes me happy to know that so many people enjoyed his music
Count me in. Always been a big fan of Dio and was truly sad when he passed away.
166
« on: March 26, 2011, 10:10 »
I've e-mailed you two days ago but haven't got a reply
167
« on: March 25, 2011, 05:09 »
I was amazed to see the amount of views it's got though, 46 million since February 10..
168
« on: March 25, 2011, 05:07 »
Just saw it yesterday! Really great and catchy song with amazing lyrics.. fun..... fun..... fun....
I especially like this part:
Yesterday was Thursday, Thursday
Today i-is Friday, Friday (Partyin)
We-we-we so excited
We so excited
We gonna have a ball today
Tomorrow is Saturday
And Sunday comes after...wards
I dont want this weekend to end
169
« on: March 25, 2011, 04:59 »
Yeah, here too I have a suspicion that the Stockfresh banner is targeted towards people like me who browse microstock sites and forums 90% of the time. Because the Stockfresh banner is everywhere now, most recently I saw it on garfield.com. Yes, it's on GARFIELD.COM. I guess for people not involved with or interested in microstock the banner shows something else
171
« on: March 24, 2011, 05:05 »
I don't think I get the message. That customer service will ignore your calls ?
172
« on: March 23, 2011, 10:16 »
Worst sites in regard to uploading imo:
iStock
Veer
Stockfresh (unfortunately)
Dreamstime (upload JPEG, wait half an hour, describe and finally attach an EPS that will get accepted half a month after the JPEG)
What's wrong with Stockfresh?
Please don't take offence, it's just the tiring process of zipping EPS files individually and the preview can't be included in the ZIP. Fotolia and a few other sites require a zip including both EPS and JPEG, so I already have a folder for those. But AFAIK Stockfresh (and Stockxpert) are/were the only agencies to have a requirement of individually zipped EPS files and a preview alongside. It won't stop me from uploading though
173
« on: March 23, 2011, 09:07 »
Go back in time and see what the microstock agencies looked like when they launched Here's an excerpt from Fotolia's main page back in 2005: Photographer BenefitsPhotographers set their own price Fastest image review Highest commission in the industry ( up to 80%) International sales in 4 languages 100% of uploaded images are online and generate revenue Some of a deal you had back then. I started in late 2008, so I never knew this side of Fotolia. Here's the link: http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
174
« on: March 23, 2011, 08:30 »
Love submitting to 123RF, Canstock, Graphic Leftovers and Shutterstock, but ClipartOf takes the cake as all you have to do is FTP your images and wait; no keywords, no descriptions, no categories.
Worst sites in regard to uploading imo:
iStock
Veer
Stockfresh (unfortunately)
Dreamstime (upload JPEG, wait half an hour, describe and finally attach an EPS that will get accepted half a month after the JPEG)
Statistics-wise, I love the new Shutterstock tools. And Dreamstime is high on my list as well, BigStock is not too bad either.
175
« on: March 23, 2011, 04:24 »
Hi,
I'm no photographer nor have I any experience in photography at all, so my opinion may not hold much weight. And I'm not going to comment on your photography skills, because I wouldn't know. But I think some of the objects you're using in your compositions could look more stocky. For instance, the calculator in your image "foreign investments for 2011" looks rather dull and "old". And in "tax nightmare" the piggy bank, the box of pills and the calculator looks like they are from three different worlds, which kind of takes away the focus from the subject.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 18
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
