Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on December 20, 2016, 19:47

And people say VideoHive is bad... there you'd get $9 if you're non-exclusive, and $12.5 to $17.50 for a 4K sale!

Yes, Spacey, it is very bad because on P5, I get $37.5 for non-exclusive HD clips. Let me add: sometimes it is "low-hanging-fruit" type of clips.

Fruit is fruit, no matter where it hangs. I'd rather have some low hanging fruit rather than none... in conjunction with my mid and high hanging fruit. 

These are all just theories though... do you have any examples of this actually happening?

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on December 22, 2016, 00:19

Agreed. But as it's pretty rare that a site as large as iStock doesn't have sufficient choice so that the buyer has to go elsewhere... so it's probably more likely that if a buyer didn't stumble across my items on iStock, then they would have just bought something else from iStock instead.

Yes, it's possible they would have visited a different site instead (one where the prices are higher and the commissions are better), but who's to say they would have found my items there (different search engines), and who's to say they wouldn't go to a site that I don't have any stuff on. My point is that if I make 100 sales a year on iStock and I shut down my account, it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically get an extra 100 sales a year spread across my other accounts elsewhere. 

I've not been on there for that long, but I've made just over $1000. If what I'm saying above is accurate, then that's $1000 that I probably wouldn't have made if I didn't sell stuff there. My point is that if I make 100 sales a year on iStock and I shut down my account, it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically get an extra 100 sales a year spread across my other accounts elsewhere. 

Buyers like certain sites, and I'm sure that there's a bunch of buyers out there who think that iStock is perfect for their needs. And if iStock wants to keep p***ing off contributors to the point that they leave, then I'm happy to meet the needs of those buyers.

   

You're the epitome of https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Tragedy_of_the_commons

And I'll say it more directly: you, and the likes of you, are the reason the profitability (and value) of videos will decrease faster than it needs to. You won't like what I said and you'll continue doing what you already are, so actually no point in me writing this, but hey, whatever.

My reply was to the guy before you by the way. I don't agree with what you're saying at all. You're just parroting what a bunch of other people say, but it's all pretty much nonsense.

Nobody yet has been able to give any kind of structured example of how uploading to iStock, or Envato for that matter (that's when this tired old allrguement is usually dragged out), is unsustainable, or will cheapen the market, or will result in the end of the world as we know it.

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on December 21, 2016, 03:29

Once you pop, you can't stop.

Don't be daft you don't have to sell video for such cheap rates.

By uploading to this outfit you just encourage them 

Agreed. But as it's pretty rare that a site as large as iStock doesn't have sufficient choice so that the buyer has to go elsewhere... so it's probably more likely that if a buyer didn't stumble across my items on iStock, then they would have just bought something else from iStock instead.

Yes, it's possible they would have visited a different site instead (one where the prices are higher and the commissions are better), but who's to say they would have found my items there (different search engines), and who's to say they wouldn't go to a site that I don't have any stuff on. My point is that if I make 100 sales a year on iStock and I shut down my account, it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically get an extra 100 sales a year spread across my other accounts elsewhere. 

I've not been on there for that long, but I've made just over $1000. If what I'm saying above is accurate, then that's $1000 that I probably wouldn't have made if I didn't sell stuff there. My point is that if I make 100 sales a year on iStock and I shut down my account, it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically get an extra 100 sales a year spread across my other accounts elsewhere. 

Buyers like certain sites, and I'm sure that there's a bunch of buyers out there who think that iStock is perfect for their needs. And if iStock wants to keep p***ing off contributors to the point that they leave, then I'm happy to meet the needs of those buyers.

     

Oops, I should have looked into that

So in 40 years you'll have made $1 per image?

What LDV81 said... a lot of agencies are going from strength to strength, it's just that there are so many more people, uploading more and more files, so our slice of the pie gets smaller.

What was on that recent SS earnings report... 69% more files than last year? If you're starting out in stock then it's probably pretty easy to upload 69% more files in your second year than you did in your first, and maybe your third or fourth, but let's say you've been doing it for ten years and you've uploaded 1000 files a year. So in 2015 you have 10000 files. To match the 69% increase you're going to have to upload 6900 files in 2016. 11,600 in 2017. 19,700 in 2018 and so on and so forth.

Meanwhile, their sales went up about 20% from last year, so it's not like they'll be going anywhere anytime soon.

All I can advise is to keep on uploading more stuff than you did in the previous year, and make sure the stuff you upload this year is better than the stuff you uploaded last year. Otherwise, it's pretty inevitable that people's income will start to drop over time. Easier said than done, but hey ho.

I get two or three times more on SS.

At the risk of pointing out the obvious, have you considered dividing your $20 over the three weeks it took to make, and then multiplying it by 52 to get an estimated forecast for the year?

Sure, your rate of sales might increase and you'll make more, but it's impossible to say if it will decrease over time as well... it's a bit hard to say after only three weeks.

How long they will sell for is a bit of a tough one as well. Might depend on the content. A picture of somebody with the latest smartphone can quickly become a photo of somebody without the latest smartphone. Same with cars, fashion, changing skylines etc. Certain landscapes and stuff that doesn't really change over time, are likely to have more longevity.

Depends on the amount I guess. If you're earning hundreds or thousands a month then paying hundreds sounds very high. Sounds like PayPal would be better. If you're making tens of thousands then it sounds about right. I think the going rate is about 1.5% for currency conversion. I could be wrong.

Just ran the numbers to see what I make per hour (full time is 2,080 hours per year).   So taking $34,200 and divide by 2,080 hours comes out to $16.71 per hour.  Goal is $20 per hour next year 

I made $161 an hour in November. I didn't work many hours though!

Not had it yet. I reckon today is the day. Although I'm in the far right of the world at the moment, so that means Friday!