|
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 - Mantis
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 219
151
« on: June 03, 2022, 15:56 »
Even Pond 5 I am now getting $2 royalties. Rather than offer subscriptions they just "negotiate" a package price and regardless of what you have the clip priced at, forget it. You get what they give, subscription level peanuts through a back door way of screwing contributors once more. This is the new norm now, until it isn't.
152
« on: May 28, 2022, 08:19 »
Here's the best way to clean a camera. Works like magic everytime... https://youtu.be/_xj1FlL-iAo
I've found that this technique only works with a steel brush, not a toothbrush. I mean, to really get those baked on sensor spots off, you need to really agitate them. Use stainless though.
Aah so that's the trick to really getting the sensor clean and shiny. I'll give that a go next time. That's what's so great about this forum - quality sound advice we can all rely on.
AMEN to the idea sharing. That's our years of experience talking.
153
« on: May 27, 2022, 09:07 »
Here's the best way to clean a camera. Works like magic everytime... https://youtu.be/_xj1FlL-iAo
I've found that this technique only works with a steel brush, not a toothbrush. I mean, to really get those baked on sensor spots off, you need to really agitate them. Use stainless though.
154
« on: May 21, 2022, 14:08 »
I have all kinds of images removed and really don't care anymore. Even high selling ones.
155
« on: May 20, 2022, 12:46 »
I'm afraid this is the new norm, ultimately where contributors will be getting 28 cents a video DL like they used to with images at SS. There is no way Adobe will not follow suit with SS on images and even videos, especially if stock assets have their own P&L. This is merely phase one with Adobe. It won't be too long before penny royalties are common.
156
« on: May 18, 2022, 19:18 »
Flat as always. Uploading more content really no longer matters.
157
« on: May 13, 2022, 08:51 »
It's silly to think that SS acquisition of P5 will not result in royalty reductions on the P5 platform. SS is a publicly traded company and therefore their responsibility is to increase shareholder wealth. They will claw back royalties on P5 just like they did at SS. Just a matter of time, and probably this year. They know that milking contributors further on SS will not get them the level of return they need to drive up share prices. So now, they have a WHOLE NEW SHINY WIDGET with a lot of royalty reduction upside to do that with.
158
« on: May 06, 2022, 11:47 »
Looks like they limit you to 250 images unless you pay for the premium Pro membership.
159
« on: May 05, 2022, 11:56 »
Is the Pictorem site (https://www.pictorem.com/) worth looking into. Anyone making money there? How does it compare to FineArtAmerica?
The site doesnt show image thumbnails for me. Just the item description.
160
« on: May 04, 2022, 18:58 »
Imagine you are CEO of SS starting tomorrow. How would you improve it?
Since their job is to increase shareholder value, whatever they do won't be good for contributors. If anyone thinks a new superhero CEO will swoop in and save contributor bacon, welcome to fantasy land.
161
« on: May 03, 2022, 21:17 »
What will happen next is they will hire a new swamp creature who comes up with a mind blowing, brilliant idea. Cutting royalties in half.
162
« on: April 23, 2022, 12:40 »
Love or hate them, just this week we managed to get some exclusive inside-info from their Product Manager via an interview:
https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2022/04/18/interview-with-esmeralda-banos-product-manager-at-freepik/
Alex & Elijah
Alex, why do you look into the cheapest of the cheap? Why aren't you investigating premium and boutique agencies that are actually respectable and that actually sell image licenses instead of using images to make money from advertising?
The only useful information about "freepik" and all those similar scumbags is "Stay Away". (And I'm giving it for free)
Hi, I'm both a contributor and journalist. As a contributor, hell yea I'm upset about this growing trend of agencies pushing contributors towards giving away images for free. Together with the loosening of licensing standards and of course lower prices.
As a journalist, my aim is to be unbiased and ask the right probing questions to the right people, which includes those on the inside of agencies which promote such practices. I don't pick favorites and if I can I'll interview decision-makers within all the agencies, including Unsplash of which I'm looking to send an invite out (whether they will accept is another question). The ultimate aim is for the "Market-Wizards" interview section of the blog to be even more of a premium source of exclusive information from those on the inside of the industry.
As for interviews of those within "premium and boutique agencies", so far I've interviewed:
- Peter Chigmaroff, Director at OverFlightStock Niche Aerial Photography/Footage Agency;
- Mat Hayward, Adobe Stock Artist Evangelist;
- Luke Nester, Account Manager at Robert Harding;
- Nash Mascaro, Sales Director at Arcangel Images - no interview but plenty of insight at various blog posts.
The above decision-makers work within agencies that encourage a fair return to contributors.
As for Freepiks (which has a regular microstock licensing program), as Elijah has posted, he's indicating positive early results and will publish a full review soon on the blog.
Alex
Really? Didn't Adobe just go subscription for video? And Shutterstock not that long ago? There are plenty of people now getting $3 to $6 for an HD vid now (sometimes pennies), when the standard across most agencies WAS $28. How in the heck is that looking out for contributors? It is looking to generate more revenue for the agencies but the caveat is that contributors net less. Yes, they lie and say you will make it up in volume. BS and you know it. If these agencies looked out for contributors they would revenue share with those packages with which the total downloads weren't used. They happen to hang on to that chunk. Freepik? Trying to be objective? How? You as a "journalist" should reflect on their history of what they are, not hang your hat on what someone says they will be in the future. There's plenty of evidence out there. Go find it.
163
« on: April 17, 2022, 16:49 »
Im over this - just deleted all my images (10k+) and told them to close my account. They have become less and less relevant - Not even making payout last month for the first time in over 10 years.
Did you let them know why? I just emailed them asking for an explanation.
164
« on: April 17, 2022, 09:08 »
This is getting ridiculous. Every time I make 3-4 sales, 3-4 refunds are issues for older sales. This just started for me in April. Something doesn't smell right.
165
« on: April 05, 2022, 20:41 »
Another scum bag agency.
166
« on: April 01, 2022, 18:28 »
On February 14, I received an email confirming that my account would be deleted within the next 45 days.
I can no longer log in. I have not received my money either. Also a message about the completed deletion of my account has not been received.
I would first go into image manager and delete the images. I am not sure what their policy is on whether you can delete only a certain amount of images but if you go to the image manager and select all from a batch, then click on "OPTIONAL" as opposed to "MANDATORY" there is a delete icon on the lower right. So that would verify image deletion without closing your account.
167
« on: April 01, 2022, 09:25 »
Its April by Alamy standards and I opted out of everything except regular sales. Just got 29 dls of anout 3 pennies per image net. Screw that. Now to monitor if I still get this crappy sales.
That's my point. People may be flogging their computers, opting out and clicking with smiles and anticipation because they stopped the foul smelling sales. It's possible, in July we'll see no change.
Just in time for the cut from 40% to 20% and Alamy could see a mass exodus. What do they care? They have millions of images, all kinds of similar. They can pay us chicken feed and rake in the money, because everyone won't quit. This is how Microstock has evolved.
The agencies paid fairly enough for people to work hard at building. They promoted and encouraged referrals. They filled the collections to million of images, in excess. And now, they have all they need, plus the reserves, and I don't mean all of this is just Alamy but the entire industry, so they don't care if the inventory drops in half. They still have all they need. None of them care or need the artists to upload much new... they have an overstock inventory of images.
Exactly. The other agencies see what SS did and there will be other agencies that will continue further down this pathway. On Pond5 I am seeing more and more $2-3 net on videos.
168
« on: March 31, 2022, 21:30 »
Its April by Alamy standards and I opted out of everything except regular sales. Just got 29 dls of anout 3 pennies per image net. Screw that. Now to monitor if I still get this crappy sales.
169
« on: March 27, 2022, 12:30 »
Times a topic, which one moves me for a long time.
If you look at landscape pictures for example, the bestsellers are completely oversaturated by the colors and partly overworked beyond recognition - but they are bestsellers.
I noticed this particularly blatantly during my last shoot. I personally don't like the bestsellers, but they seem to sell.
How do you deal with it. Do you all turn your color saturation knob all the way up for better sales chances?
Ok, my shots and the competition bestsellers:
https://stock.adobe.com/de/search?load_type=search&is_recent_search=&search_type=usertyped&k=dinant+belgium&native_visual_search=&similar_content_id=&asset_id=217426858
In my opinion, less is more when it comes to post processing. At least for Adobe Stock, I recommend you submit the clean, sharp, color version of your file. This gives customers the most flexibility to enhance the image in a way that matches their project exactly. If you get too funky in post, you are severely limiting your potential customer base. I have discussed this extensively with our moderation team and when I asked what was the most common reason for rejection, there was exactly zero hesitation before I received the answer "oversaturation." Again, less is more. I use the vibrance slider almost exclusively in LRC and almost never the saturation slider for this reason. I do like to replace the sky from time to time, but as noted here, it should look like it belongs.
-Mat Hayward
This is how it should be at any agency (80/20 rule). I've had customers contact me in the past asking for the original UNEDITED file. I do believe some post is needed if you're shooting in RAW, but be subtle. This is not to say that there aren't styles and approaches that use aggressive post, but by in large don't overdo it. Honestly, I look at some of my old stuff and shake my head, "what in the world was I thinking?"
170
« on: March 11, 2022, 12:20 »
The world needs shots of green tomatoes. Stay away from the red ones.
171
« on: March 11, 2022, 08:56 »
I mean, low is to a degree. Going from $400 a month to $100 a month would be low. But going from what is now $20 to $10 a month, to me, is meaningless anymore (and that's about what I get now, as opposed to the $400 I used to get there years ago). DT like most other micros don't generate much return for me anymore so I really no longer worry about it because there isn't anything I can do about it. Low is relative, I guess. But, yes, DT bumped up in Jan, back to the new normal now.
172
« on: March 07, 2022, 15:15 »
https://dronedj.com/2022/03/04/missouri-debates-privacy-bill-to-ban-drones-photographing-people-or-property/
"In one of those periodic developments that pits questions of privacy against the rights of people to fly camera-equipped UAVs as theyd like, the Missouri legislature began debate this week on a proposed law to prohibit drones from photographing people or their property without consent.
House Bill 1619 was introduced in Missouris lower chamber on Tuesday, where it drew markedly contrasting responses."
This could be interesting as we have rights in the Constitution. Is the right to fly over public property and take photos going to be restricted? People or their property?
And the right to just take pictures or video in public. Really no different. I'd think that this bill would have to leapfrog into any kind of device, including phones, that can capture private property and people roaming in public spaces. I mean, if there is a real concern for privacy, why limit it to drones? This is where I think it would get very sticky with enforcement.
173
« on: February 19, 2022, 07:57 »
Seems Arcurs kept his account open at DT without images. He has a lot of downloads, but only a few images. Probably looking at those downloads and comparing his revenue per image on IS to other micros and realized the economies of scale with IS are no longer fruitful.
174
« on: February 13, 2022, 08:55 »
Pretty straight forward way to be thinking. Everyday things indeed can make up quite a nice collection. Thanks for your insights.
175
« on: February 07, 2022, 09:19 »
Alamy has such a bad system that it's really a crap shoot if you are paid correctly. I know I've had arm wrestling matches with them in the past. And the sizable refunds is also BS.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 219
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
