|
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 - Lee Torrens
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15
226
« on: April 08, 2008, 13:54 »
I would guess that every site we upload to has a clause in the TOS that they can for free use our pictures to advertise their site.... and the do all the time, making ads, banners etc without compesation to us.
This is no different. Snapvillage will be using one of our images in their ad... for free, just like all the other companies do.
LuckyOliver buys all images that they use themselves. Obviously that's a big discount given they keep the majority of the license fee, but at least the contributor is rewarded appropriately. This is one of the reasons I like LuckyOliver despite their slow sales for most contributors so far. They do things like this and they don't boast about it.
227
« on: April 03, 2008, 21:12 »
well i think that was Lee's point. These events are attended by non avereage stock shooters. They are not made to appeal to the average stock shooter. If it was it probably wouldn't be for a week. The only ones who can take a week off are the ones who are self employed stock shooters.
I am a self employed photog... and guess.. i can not afford such social trips.
Patrick...
ps : i live in belgium, the second highest tax country in europe next to denmark... from every dollar i earn i consider myself lucky to keep 50, maybe 55 cents... not even taken into account what i loose on conversion rates etc.... not even taken into account the cost of living, not even taken into account the cost of models, props, studio, appartment etc.... but hey... i love doing it so i keep at it.
I think this should make perfectly clear that i can not afford social trips whenever i like....
In fact, I plan to have a vacation for the first time in 10 years this year to Turkey... to visit a (successful) fellow photog, but i need to save for that, it just doesn't come falling from the sky.
Then it's tax deductible for you. If your rate is 45 cents in the euro, you'll only need to have earned a little over 1,100 in the tax year to make the trip completely free from a net-tax point of view (using michaelo's actual costs). I think you can easily afford it.
228
« on: April 03, 2008, 21:07 »
I attended the last iStockalypse as a guest
like a guest who was paid to come, or had a free pass? how did you wrangle that?
as Press
229
« on: April 03, 2008, 16:28 »
Subscription will be credit based, so subscribers will still pay more for larger files!!
230
« on: April 03, 2008, 14:46 »
In all honesty, what photog/contributar from outside europe can afford this trip and say afterwords, ppppppppffffffff, i easily earn that money back... !!!
Please come foreward... and in doing so it will be clear that this cathering isn't for the average photog/contributor.
Patrick.
Hey Patrick, That's easy. There's a list: http://www.istockalypse.com/BuenosAires/whos_coming.html See how many contributors came from Europe to South America, and not all of them from rich European nations. Then take a look at their portfolios - not too many average ones there. Then sitemail them and ask them how long it takes to recoup the cost. Buenos Aires isn't so expensive, so perhaps you'd better look at some of the previous iStockalypse events and find one in a more expensive location. But you'll see the same thing - "non average" contributors traveling from all parts of the world.
231
« on: April 03, 2008, 12:39 »
What average contributor can afford to go on vacation with his earned money to ................................................................... ..?...
Agree 100%. I went to the last one and didn't see any "average" contributors there. Only successful ones who knew how to create stock photos that sell. Everyone who goes makes a profit on what they spend. Just another hollow ad campagne.
Disagree 100%. The contributors profit and iStock profits. It's win-win. What's "hollow" about that?
232
« on: April 03, 2008, 12:36 »
So Lee, Argentina to London to Malta - you coming !?
I'd definately like to, though at this time it's not looking likely.
233
« on: April 03, 2008, 12:06 »
I've written about this on my blog in the past and the core piece of evidence in the 'against' case was one of the top-selling microstock contributors once deleted 600 of his poor performing images from iStock and noticed an instant and significant drop in revenue.
Of course that only demonstrates it's a bad idea at iStock, so it could still be helpful at other agencies.
Also, since I started monitoring my sell-through rate I've been noticing many sales in the recent sales pages at iStock, Fotolia and Dreamstime where the download count is 1 - indicating it's the first sale of that image. Some are new and many are old. It's the long tail at work. The image might only sell once in it's lifetime, but if your portfolio is large enough this can add up.
234
« on: April 03, 2008, 11:02 »
a question for those who have gone to these things. Can you use the pictures you take in the shoots for stock? It seems it could get complicated or something when there are 50 people with images from the same shoot 
and would it be worth the ~$1000+ it would cost
Creating stock is the primary focus of these events. Think about the prices for a moment and you'll see something interesting. The ticket price is US$350. Do you think iStock would profit from that? Do you think they'd even come close to break-even?? Of course not. They book locations, LOTS of models, LOTS of lighting equipment, makeup & wardrobe, plus all the organisation, and sending 5+ staff members out! The money they make is in the photos taken during the event and the rise in (usually exclusive) contributors' skill level. (Any other agencies reading this take note!!!). So while they make a massive loss on the event, it's recouped within months and after that it's all profit. Why else would iStock continue running iStockalypse events? I attended the last iStockalypse as a guest and asked the "is it worth it" question to about five of the participants who had previously been to one or more such events. The responses varied between three and six months to recoup the cost, after which it's all profit.
235
« on: April 01, 2008, 11:55 »
Sorry Leaf, couldn't resist.  Referring threadiStock were first to market, so they likely have a lot of buyers who started when they were the only option and have never had a reason to leave. We all know how loyal iStock exclusive contributors are, so there's likely a similar element in their buying members. They do a MASSIVE amount of marketing, events and pressing the flesh. Their website is great for buyers with a lot of functionality that isn't available at competing agencies (zoom to 100%, corporate accounts, etc)
236
« on: April 01, 2008, 11:49 »
1. They often have just what I'm looking for among their exclusive photos, but trust me, I usually try to find it elsewhere first
2. I always buy for web, so I like the price of the smallest size: $1. A subscription is out of the question and some other agencies charge much more than that for a web-size photo
3. Being a contributor I know they take more care than any other agency to ensure their files are legal, which gives me a lot of confidence when I publish
4. I keep getting free credits whether from a promotion they're doing or from the code on the back of the staff business cards
237
« on: March 31, 2008, 11:12 »
LuckyOliver are a young agency relative to the ones they're often compared to, so I'm never disappointed with my earnings there, no matter how low. There are many agencies where you could contribute your photos and experience zero sales.
I know other contributors reach payout at LuckyOliver every month, so when I see my low earnings it's my portfolio that I look to for answers.
Days since last sale: 1 (not that I sell a photo there every day)
238
« on: March 31, 2008, 11:03 »
$50000+ - 0 (0%) Andres, you didn't vote yet??
239
« on: March 27, 2008, 23:15 »
Interesting observation Hatman. I've been playing with some charts lately comparing the growth of my portfolio at each agency to their entire portfolio size - where the data is available. It turns out I can grow my 'market share' by uploading just a modest quantity of images each week.
But that's just quantity - if my quality isn't improving relative to other images it won't matter how much market share I have.
However, I'm finding my own sales at Shutterstock are rising steadily both in months when I upload and those I don't. My 3-month moving average is all over the shop, but the 6-month one is a nice steady incline for the last year and a bit.
240
« on: March 27, 2008, 22:59 »
What ftp program is there that allows you to upload the same images to multiple ftp sites at once? OR like madelaide also commented, at the same time as you're uploading them to a website like istockphoto.com or something.
I do this with SmartFTP as you can have as many simultaneous upload threads as you like. If you sort your upload queue appropriately you can have 10 files going to 10 different agencies at once. As this is a "normal" FTP program (outside the browser) you can do whatever you like with iStockphoto uploading and anything else - they're completely separate.
241
« on: March 27, 2008, 22:56 »
Can you instal an older version above the last?
Don't blame me if this wrecks your computer, but I "believe" SmartFTP is one of those simple apps where it's all run out of the core .exe file. Try it at your own peril. I'd suggest creating a backup of your Favourites and uninstalling your existing copy first.
242
« on: March 27, 2008, 17:38 »
25.2 though it was in the 40s when it was new. Isn't that always the way?? 
243
« on: March 27, 2008, 17:31 »
If you're a fan of SmartFTP but the newer versions have problems, simply use an older version. Just Google " old version smart ftp" and you'll find heaps to download. I'm using 2.5.1005 and it's fine for me.
244
« on: March 14, 2008, 11:50 »
It depends on who you are. More specifically, your subject and your quantity of images. One of the top selling contributors on Shutterstock says his statistical analysis shows a massive difference in download quantity for images that go live on Monday. He has his finger on the pulse of the amount of time it takes for images to go live after they're submitted, so he knows when to submit. Naturally, that delay varies over time and has the occasional hiccup, but he uploads a lot so he's intimately aware of any variation.
However, this doesn't work for me. I'm lucky if one of my new images that goes live on a Monday sells 5 times in the day. Whereas the above mentioned guru is likely measuring that metric with three figures (an assumption). But that's because he's uploading amazing images of popular subjects - very different from what I contribute.
So while we each do our own testing and form our own theories, they're only useful for ourselves. What works for you won't necessarily work for others. In other words, your mileage may vary. Find what works for you, and keep testing it as your photography and processes evolve.
245
« on: March 13, 2008, 21:46 »
They'll send it on the 15th. Their policy is that once you've reached payout level, they'll pay you on the 15th of the following month. Yes, it's a bit of a loan, but maybe they spend it on advertising!
246
« on: March 08, 2008, 19:13 »
Looks like they're tightening up then.
It's interesting to see what macrostock agencies are learning from microstock agencies.
247
« on: March 08, 2008, 17:57 »
Alamy Terminates Contributor Over Model ReleaseThis topic gets more and more interesting! In this case the photographer said that he DID have a model release when he didn't, but it's interesting in the context of the apparent relaxed attitude to model releases at Alamy.
248
« on: March 06, 2008, 19:44 »
Wow, I didn't know that! Alamy clearly views the sophistication level of its buyers very differently to microstock agencies.
I'll got have a look for the discussions on the Alamy forums. I wonder how many Alamy buyers decide to use unreleased images for commercial purposes.
Thanks for the info.
249
« on: March 06, 2008, 18:14 »
Of course if you dont have a model or property release then also set them as RM.
You can only sell an unreleased image with an editorial license - not with a commercial stock, RM or RF, license. I had the same misunderstanding in the past, and even wrote it on my blog! After time it seemed a little odd, so I investigated and was assured that model releases are very much required for Rights Managed stock. (I corrected my blog )
250
« on: February 25, 2008, 20:03 »
Nice start Michaelo. Looks like you do a lot of traveling around Europe. Lucky you! My Critique: learn from your best sellers and keep your horizons straight. Write an update when you hit bronze!
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
