With a name like that, why would anyone NOT want to join??? 

Yeah, it's a good thing they let you opt out.  I did.  I wish all the agencies would let you opt out of certain of their sales channels.  Not that I'm thinking of anyone in particular (dtdtdtdtdtdtdtdtdtdtdt.... )

Quote from: fotografer on March 19, 2008, 07:37
To me it's all about total earnings.  I have 800 images on SS and this month I'm averaging just over 100 dls/day. With a few el's thrown in  I should earn about 1000$ by the end of the month.  The most I've ever made anywhere else is about 700$ a couple of times on IS.  To me that is a convincing enough reason to accept 30c a time.I check my stats far more at SS than anywhere else.  I also like the satisfaticion of seeing the numbers go up quickly

Yer exactly right.  They're the only ones doing sub sales effectively.  The others are just sapping their contributors' profits (and patience).

Did you see this one??

http://paradoxoff.com/mass-destruction-of-the-canon-cameras.html

Incredible...

Makes me want to quit microstock tomorrow and go out and do some  real photography.

Thanks for the link.

Wow.  That ad does absolutely nothing for the image of microstock overall.  What a sad joke.

Quote from: nruboc on March 18, 2008, 04:36

Quote from: Gregor909 on March 18, 2008, 04:13

Quote from: epixx on March 17, 2008, 18:06
I opted out of subs at StockXpert the day it went online, and I can't see what I have to lose from missing the odd .30 sales.

Search engine ranking!
I also hate the 30 cents sales, but if you opt out on the subs, your files can end up lower in the search results because they have less sales. And then you lose credit sales as well.
I hate to see my eps files go away for 30 cents, but if I should opt out on StockXpert, then I have to be consistent and delete my account on Shutterstock as well. And then I definitely lose out on income.

I agree with this 100%, if you opt out at StockXpert but still submit to ShutterStock, and/or Dreamstime, you are biting off your nose to spite your face

I disagree.  It's obvious from the sales volume of SS that they have a different client base than StockXpert or DT.  It's highly doubtful that many of the same clients that download madly on Shutterstock to fill their daily/monthly quotas have the luxury of time to browse StockXpert or DT to see which files they'd like to search for on SS.  I'm sure some do, but not many can afford the time involved.  Shutterstock's strategy works to give you a decent income with subscription sales----none of the others do, so far.

Quote from: anonymous on March 17, 2008, 18:21
I see they've announced my recent sales there!

I'm not even on MP yet, but I'm already saying "NO!" to subscriptions.  (Shutterstock's the only one that's been able to pull off subscription selling satisfactorily).

Deleted

Quote from: fullvalue on March 16, 2008, 23:40
I think Exclusivity should require that contributors download a monitoring program that crashes their system if they try to visit any other site on the web.  (I don't think this will phase Windows users as we're used to it but it will drive Mac users crazy.)

For a bonus you could give this same "program" to your customers as a gift.  Sales would skyrocket.

Quote from: jorgeinthewater on March 16, 2008, 20:01
I uploaded my vast collection of Blue Ocean Images (all 10,000 of them) and guess what ,all rejected on copyright issues. I didn't know that images of the ocean where copyrighted. Could someone please help me with this? Is there a link to get more information? and if is true what can I do with all this water?

How can we expect a lemur to understand the concept of "copyright?"
(For that matter, how can we expect Istock to understand the concept of "copyright?")

Yes, I was considering going exclusive also, but then I read the fine print of the submitter contract and was turned off by the phrase "if you become exclusive here you must remain exclusive here for the remainder of your life."   A 10- or 20-year exclusive commitment I can deal with, but a lifetime??  No, thanks!

Agreed.  I hate to see them falling behind, but they seem to be plugging their ears to their contributors, at least on this issue.  Hopefully they'll listen soon.  Buyers are important, but without good-quality contributors, the buyers will eventually go elsewhere.

DT seem to be very sensitive about anyone discussing the subscription-sales issue on their forum.  Seems to be a very raw and exposed nerve with them.  Whyever so???  Why should it be such a sensitive topic that they would need to close so many threads about it??   I guess if you want to discuss anything about DT's subs you just have to search their forums as they tell you to, where it has been discussed so many times.  And there you are supposed to find your answers.  (I haven't found any answers there but I'm still searching....)
Well, I can't complain too much about DT's early sales, as at first they were pretty good.  Lately, though, they're really sinking lower and lower for me every month.  I've decided that unless they give us an opt-out for subs, I'm dropping them as soon as my lock-in period is over.  I sure hope a lot of other contributors do as well.   And once again, many kudos to StockXpert for making their sub program optional.  I think by now they've heard the undeniable voice of their contributors.

Well, after the big 5 or 6 got firmly established, seems like all the new startups are big on hype ("we've got BIIIIIGGG plans!!"), but nothing seems to be materialising from them.  Sure I hope they'll do well, I am in this for the money after all, but for the giant waste of time many of them have been I'll reserve judgment on this one too.

(snap snap)

Quote from: holgs on March 14, 2008, 07:32
If I post 239 threads on your contributor-only forum showing everyone my "cakes and sweets" will the sales magically go through the roof for my images that so far haven't had any sales for the 3 years they've been online?

I spoke with support (a rather rude lemur), and they said only threads showing pictures with the theme "the color blue" will be allowed.  All others will be deleted and the posters' accounts will be suspended pending further review.  Something about wanting to keep the site's image as professional as possible, unlike others....

Leaf,

Thanks so much for your dedicated work.  It is most definitely appreciated!!!

I hope this thread lasts a long time 

And just in case the domain name is taken, how about "Gutterstock?"

Unfortunately you cannot go through yet with your plans.  Madagascar lemurs are a protected species and as such are exempt from servile labor of any kind.   Talk to Canstockphoto.  From the sounds of it their reviewers may be looking for other employment soon, and then experience will be on your side.

Quote from: Leo Blanchette on March 09, 2008, 15:59
I don't know fotolia, so anything is possible I suppose.

You don't know Fotolia?  Well, this is the Fotolia we've all come to know and love.  Welcome! 

(PS- that was total sarcasm)

Pretty good stock quality.  Their library has a different feel than the typical micro, somewhat classier, more like an RM site.  Far fewer isolated-on-white shots.
But even though they appear to be selling, it seems poorly attended by the big names in this industry.  Why would that be, if they've been around so long??

Someone please educate me:  What was the point of the original post? 

Quote from: Eco on March 06, 2008, 18:26
So glad I opted out of subscription sales. Since I opted out I am uploading my maximum size images. Just today had my first XXL sale with an earning of $5.00. To earn that much with subscriptions I would have needed 16 downloads.

I think that says it all, Eco.  I really really wish Dreamstime offered an opt-out option.

Very strange.  Why should this have taken so long to implement??  I'm not a programmer but I know from having asked programmers that it can't be that difficult a task.  Outward indications point to very very very big problems hiding under the polished facade of FT.  Ever since and even before V2 their IT department has been a very bad joke, if it even exists at all.  How does a business like that survive?  I guess customer-service standards and expectations have really lowered all around the world.  After all, it's the customers (and in this case the contributors also) that make businesses survive or die.  It's a very sad day we've entered.