|
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 - Mellimage
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 19
276
« on: April 15, 2011, 08:48 »
I just sold my 1000th image on Dreamstime. It is an image from my playful concepts series that I had shot last weekend and approved this week. My laptop broke a few weeks ago, but now I have a new one, all set up for new work - just in time for new spring images to be shot and posted. And in unrelated news: I just received an academic award. 
277
« on: April 01, 2011, 03:26 »
unfortunately I can't agree with leaf on Istock - they have dropped down to my #4 earner. On the other hand, I have not uploaded anything to them for over a year and the substraction of money from my account due to fraud this month hasn't upped my motivation to restart uploading to them, though my share was tiny compared to others. Fotolia brought in almost 6 times the earnings I got at Istock this month (after adjusting for currency exchange rates it would even be more than that). I had a really good month at Dreamstime too and a decent month at Shutterstock and my best month ever at 123rf (but still stayed beyond the 5$ earning per month mark....  ) Overall this was a decent month - usually March and April are my best months before the summer. So we'll see what April brings.
278
« on: March 12, 2011, 10:03 »
Got yours today, Blufish!
279
« on: February 23, 2011, 13:35 »
I am looking forward to the skijump competitions, including the first international world championship competition for women.
280
« on: February 19, 2011, 09:08 »
So did I - got Artemis' card - lovely color - my favorite. Also received some warm wishes from cold Canada.
281
« on: February 15, 2011, 13:30 »
Opening the mail box when coming home from work is so much fun these days. Thank you all for the cards!!!
(got Hugo's yesterday, Ann's, Pete's and Tyler's today).
282
« on: February 12, 2011, 07:49 »
OK, mine are in the mail. Hope they get to you soon.
283
« on: February 11, 2011, 11:02 »
I am working on mine as we speak and I already received two - thanks Opla and Elvinstar.
284
« on: January 22, 2011, 08:38 »
Just the return for the photographer is better. For SOME non-exclusive Istock contributors for instance this might look attractive - or maybe even just the idea of that fair trade agency might be interesting. I do not think that traditional stock can offer that much different stuff than micros could (though I am not an expert here). But photographers still do have a choice where they offer their products.
Now I personally find PD unsuitable for me - I am a small fish in the pond, doing very simple stuff, but I also look for different ways of distribution for my images outside of/additionally to micro, because I am fed up with what I am offered by (some of) the micros now.
285
« on: January 22, 2011, 06:45 »
I posted this link before on my Facebook page as well as the Microstockgroup's FB page. But maybe it provides some food for thought about what to do: Photographers Turn to Fair Trade to Beat Microstock
Chris Barton should do his research better. You quote him as saying, "Chris Barton asks why Time magazine would pay more when a cover image is available for only $30".
In fact, Time Magazine has a circulation of over three million, which would require an Extended licence of 125 credits for a 'normal' file or 250 for Vetta/Agency, which would come to well over $30. Though both times they used an iStock image on their cover, they had to be chased up for the EL payment.
I do not quote anyone. I only link to a piece of reading. If it is good or bad I leave up to everybody elses judgement. And just because there may be some mistakes in it, it may still be of value in other areas of the article (or not).
287
« on: January 21, 2011, 13:13 »
For Fotolia I can at least say that the German part of it has an office with a sales team. Whether or not that expanded since I saw it last (I visited the agency's Berlin office once a few years back) I do not know though.
288
« on: January 21, 2011, 05:21 »
No its the opposite! contributors with thousands of shots in their ports doesnt at all automatically mean great images? it could be thousands of just generic, mediocre stuff. means nothing, quantity does no mean quality at all.
However, quanttity means the contributor is going to think very, very carefully before deleting or erazing images.
Friend of mine has got a port in the Getty-RM, just 250 shots, thats all but extremly unique material and selling for incredible amouts of money. Quantity means nothing, in that respect but its a safeguard that the contributor will probably stay on.
I dare to disagree to some extend. Because other changes FT made are counterproductive to get more unique images. FT also introduced a filter that helps customers looking for newer images. What does that say to contributors? If I want to sell images for popular themes and I want mine to be found, I need to produce these kind of images on a very regular base. That doesn't mean these images will get better, no, more of the same will be flooding in that way. At least there is a big incentive to go back to work on themes that are popular, just to get images sold - and maybe also my older ones seen (because they may show up in "similar images by this artist"). So I am afraid this will be quantity raiser, but not neccessarily a quality raiser move. The only thing that may change is that hobbyists/ newbies won't join anymore - or at FT and Istock last, because they will first try where percentages for commissions are higher and FT and Istock are not attractive enough for these new talents.
289
« on: January 21, 2011, 02:47 »
This move was actually very clever from Fotolia.
They upset mainly those with smaller portfolios and who produce lower quality images, while keeping the succesfull contributors which mostly have high quality images happy.
If those smaller contributors stop uploading out of protest or occassionaly delete their portfolios, Fotolia probably really does not care much about it.
The probably p*ssed off the upper-level contributors when they lowered possible maximum prices for higher level contributors - had they cut commissions from these contributors now, they would have risked loosing those contributors (at least several of them). So they slashed at the lower level ones. And I am afraid it is a general trend - to boot out small contributors/ hobbyists.
290
« on: January 21, 2011, 01:28 »
I appreciate your candor Mat. You are right about declining options in this industry, which is why I feel it is imperative we look beyond this industry and leave it behind eventually.
My thoughts exactly... .
291
« on: January 20, 2011, 12:10 »
I received a Fotolia "Hot Shots January 2011" Newsletter. Design - pretty much like Istock's.
Treatment of contributors - pretty much like Istock's.
Did I miss the news where it said: Getty bought Fotolia too?
292
« on: January 07, 2011, 19:04 »
pfft... .
293
« on: January 06, 2011, 12:55 »
Ah good to see another person who enjoys Darwin's blogs and amazing photography!
294
« on: December 20, 2010, 15:53 »
Count me in.
295
« on: October 20, 2010, 12:55 »
deutsch, in Deutschland (wieder) und deutschsprachig (naja... )
296
« on: September 11, 2010, 17:55 »
I know that Scott Kelby buys from Istock, wonder if he knows what the agency is doing and if it would change a thing... .
297
« on: September 11, 2010, 12:23 »
As much as I hate all these changes, I have to give them credit for allowing us to really hammer them on their forums. You would never see Fotolia or Dreamstime allow that.
Yea thats about the only positive thing I can say. 
Wonder for how much longer though after reading this: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=253522&messageid=4673242
298
« on: September 09, 2010, 12:42 »
299
« on: May 14, 2010, 04:07 »
I think most of you people need a reality check: 75% of working people in the USA earn less than $50k, and 88% earn less than $75k (USA Census Bureau, 2008). Referring to $50k as "residual income" or mentioning it in the same breath as a McDonald's or student wage is way, way, way, out of touch with reality, as is regarding it as an insufficient salary to provide a good quality of life.
^^ Seriously!! Folks on this forum must have some pretty lavish lifestyles to consider 50k/year pocket change 
I considered myself FT at half that. Maybe because we had been living off my husband's income for over a decade while I raised my daughter, and also because his job provides health insurance.
50k seems like enough income for one person to me, and most Americans seem to make do on that or less.
I make about half of 50k in my day-time job (though I live in Europe and only work part-time). The photography income is a good supplement, even though it is is not a whole lot either. However, even if I were to earn 200$ a weekday with photography I would not do photography fulltime. I simply love my day-time job. Again - it's not just about money... .
300
« on: April 04, 2010, 10:58 »
Here mine: +19% compared to last month
FT: 68.4% (RPI 0.57$)
IS: 19.0% (RPI 0.27$)
SS: 5.2% (RPI 0.05$)
DT: 7.0% (RPI 0.08$)
123: 0.4% (RPI 0.03$) (am new there and just recently started uploading there)
Overall not bad, I think, especially considering that I have not been uploading to some agency in more than 3 to 6 months.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 19
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
