|
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 - RalfLiebhold
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15
301
« on: February 03, 2022, 08:52 »
Same experience like you, Alex. Most of my bestsellers are listed as "never used". For others it is correctly stated, I can't really see a rule here, the age of the images doesn't seem to matter. The score is probably diced.
302
« on: February 02, 2022, 12:18 »
Just a waste of my mood. 
Before the compensation change I was also before the next old level, I think I was still missing a dozen downloads. I have also not bothered to calculate whether the new system brings me disadvantages. Like you say, just a waste of mood 
303
« on: February 02, 2022, 05:59 »
It's a real mystery to me why the frustration here is directed exclusively at one agency. 
I don't think it's much of a mystery at all.
SS is just the latest in a string of sites that has begun seriously screwing its contributors. That's why it's at the top of everyone's mind right now. Others took plenty of heat in previous years too. You just weren't here for those "conversations."
Thanks Martha, in conjunction with Wilm's previous explanation I now better understand the general frustration.
304
« on: February 01, 2022, 16:56 »
The core problem is that you have to wait for the big SODs at shutterstock. When these dont come in, it is a disaster. Shutterstock has become a microstock lottery.
I don't have that problem with the competitors.
Wilm, the core problem is not shutterstock, but stock photography itself in my opinion My core problems are: 123Rf: RPD 21 cent (they do not even seem to have ODs) Alamy: 1 cent sales to china Adobe: Few downloads istock: RPD partly in single digits (iStock is actually my biggest disaster. There you fight through this moronic vocabulary, and then such a lousy result). Eyeem: zero sales Mostphotos: zero sales Deposit: RPD ~ 30 cents (they do not have a lot ODs either) Dreamstime: High payout limit with low RPD It's a real mystery to me why the frustration here is directed exclusively at one agency.
305
« on: February 01, 2022, 14:25 »
OK so January is over so the full scale of the SS level reset can be seen.
For reference i finished the year on levels 5 images and 4 video to give it context and finished January on levels 4/2.
Firstly the earnings graph (actual figures removed due to T&Cs etc etc).
Can see (i) how brutal the reset is and how similar it was to last years as well. Download numbers also near identical.
Actually seeing an even lower image RPD than last year although video is *slightly* better.
RPD a mere $0.32 per image (2021 average $0.72) and for video $7.35 (2021 average $12.42)
Unexpectedly given the time of year Adobe provided me with a best month ever in earnings and just over double what SS provided.
In short as expected the level reset makes for a fairly horrible January. Will see what Feb brings as i slowly crawl back up to where i was before.
First of all, I find the reset crap, the communication with us, the 10 cents, etc..- but this is not the issue here, you can do something else or avoid this agency. I am altogether not such a friend of statistics. That a reset to 15% has no positive influence on the January income is also clear - without any statistics The rest of your graph looks very good though, hey in December a Rpd of 90 cent, great. So why always so negative? (this applies here in principle to the whole forum) 
306
« on: February 01, 2022, 11:40 »
I find it remarkable that Shutterstock runs so differently individually.
I upload regularly myself and Shutter is still in first place despite the reset.
I would be interested to know if those who have a bad Shutterstock experience still upload material at all?
Some have probably deactivated a certain time their portfolio, perhaps that also plays a role.
If you upload a lot of new photos, which are easy to find, a buyer can also see some older photos of you (listed there), which are in the same category. As a result, they may be bought more often and therefore sink less quickly.
Or is this a wrong theory? 
I had one really good-selling shot of old books and I later uploaded more shots of the same (but sufficiently different to pass the 'similars' rejection). The newer shots did tend to piggy-back on the original one but the big problem with SS compared to AS is that when you get a dl at SS, you'll see that a number of alternatives are proposed. These alternatives seem chosen by some similar visual only algorithm without heed to keywords or subject matter and there's often not one of your own 'similars' there. In this case there is one of my similars there but the other 6 are not. AS on the other hand does show your shots from the same series which, I think, gives you more chance.
Thanks for the explanation, I hadn't noticed that before. Despite this fact, I have on average about 4- 5 times as many downloads on Shutterstock compared to Adobe for the same portfolio. That makes up for the worse RPD in terms of final revenue. By the way, I like your book shots
307
« on: February 01, 2022, 11:32 »
I find it remarkable that Shutterstock runs so differently individually.
I upload regularly myself and Shutter is still in first place despite the reset.
I would be interested to know if those who have a bad Shutterstock experience still upload material at all?
Some have probably deactivated a certain time their portfolio, perhaps that also plays a role.
If you upload a lot of new photos, which are easy to find, a buyer can also see some older photos of you (listed there), which are in the same category. As a result, they may be bought more often and therefore sink less quickly.
Or is this a wrong theory?
Thijs, I have no idea. But reading the posts here, Shutterstock seems to be only a matter of sink or swim and little in between.
308
« on: February 01, 2022, 11:28 »
Double posting 
309
« on: February 01, 2022, 07:25 »
I find it remarkable that Shutterstock runs so differently individually.
I upload regularly myself and Shutter is still in first place despite the reset.
I would be interested to know if those who have a bad Shutterstock experience still upload material at all?
Some have probably deactivated a certain time their portfolio, perhaps that also plays a role.
310
« on: January 30, 2022, 11:41 »
It will be by far the worst month ever at shutterstock. There I now also have the lowest RPD of all agencies. $0.30.
For comparison:
January 2021 $0.43
January 2020 $0.59
January 2019 $0.65
January 2018 $0.82
...
At AS, it's $1.17 in January 2022, which means I'd have to achieve four times the amount of downloads at shutterstock to earn the same as I do at AS. And I am very far from that.
Wilm, that's bitter, of course, and it's for sure not much fun under these circumstances. I myself had imagined the month after the first week worse but the sales have recovered. My January RPD is at 62 cents, ok not the best, but that was to be expected. In terms of revenue, this January was much better than December 2021.
311
« on: January 29, 2022, 07:15 »
So, 4 weeks are now over. As expected, January was certainly not the best month. The downloads were average, but the last 2 weeks the revenues were back on a normal level with a nice sale of 37 $ yesterday, which I luckily got in level 4 and not in lower level
312
« on: January 28, 2022, 11:27 »
I disagree that old images are removed. Yes, new images show up on the front page but also dissapear if they are not sold. Older images remain, if they are regulary sold. I have this deer image on the top of the first page for about 2 years for "deer" keyword and it's also selling regulary. I'm also seeing other deer images on the first page, that are there what seems like "forever".
Dumc, I think we can discuss this for pages and pages because everyone has their own view on things. I myself observe more current topics and there is quite a lot of movement in it - perhaps this is the difference in perception. But the fact is, if e.g. a dozen new pictures on page 1 prove themselves, 12 other pictures must disappear from page 1 for it.
313
« on: January 27, 2022, 14:28 »
Thank you very much, Mat. I find it really very impressive how you are the only agency that keeps in touch with us. Even if everything is not always perfect, at least you make us feel noticed and respected. But if my sliming around here doesn't result in mass downloads tomorrow for me, I'm going to be pissed.
314
« on: January 27, 2022, 13:52 »
My theory is based more on facts. We don't know.
Pete, I don't want to offend you, but the only facts you have are that there is not much action on the first page on the subject of tomatoes. My observation on other topics is quite different. For images that I sell frequently, I always try to track where they land in the ranking. And I actually experience it consistently that there is always a lot of movement on the first site. New images are added, old ones are removed. Why the image is so static on tomatoes, no idea, but is rather atypical. How the algo works at Shutterstock, I stay out of it, no idea.
315
« on: January 25, 2022, 16:31 »
Really, what a nutter you are, you don't seem to even understand English.
What about your knowledge of Spanish, German or French . Your level of argumentation is really underground. 
316
« on: January 25, 2022, 16:00 »
.... I made Level 1 in eight days ....
Hmm, ok, I assume that most of us have reached level 1 much earlier The rest of your text I have not really understood even after translation and found it quite confused. In any case, I wish you much success, for whatever.
317
« on: January 25, 2022, 15:34 »
BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.
I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion. Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.
318
« on: January 25, 2022, 15:02 »
I have a question: Have you seen an increase in 10 cent sales under the SOD category? I've had five single and other category sales for 10 cents this month. I have not seen that before. What's with that?
Reimar, I had a look and can not confirm that for me.
319
« on: January 24, 2022, 14:49 »
You should therefore also look at, for example, housing costs, health care costs, rent subsidy for low wages, costs of food, accrual pension, .....
It's called "cost of living". That's easier then summing up all kinds of examples
But who likes it nice and simple . "rent subsidy for low wages" and "accrual pension" not belong to "cost of living"
320
« on: January 22, 2022, 09:43 »
My experience is the other way around.
While Shutterstock is developing positively (also Alamy and Adobe), iStock is becoming less and less important for me and has now reached the level of 123rf.
321
« on: January 22, 2022, 07:15 »
Also, knowing that China does not see copyright as we in Europe and the US see it, why on earth do Alamy even want to disseminate our images there, far less in bulk at tiny prices.
There are many stolen images in China. For example, if my pics are used in a newspaper, they're showing on many Chinese sites before I even know of the sale. Alamy won't go after these image thefts, because they know they are unlikely to be successful.
There's a serious lack of joined-up thinking, reeking of some combination of desperation and/or greed. Or wanting to make a fast buck before ...?
Those were my thoughts as well. If someone in a country where copyright plays almost no role buys masses of cheap images, the probability is relatively high that nonsense is done with our images - without us noticing.
322
« on: January 21, 2022, 17:49 »
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. 
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje)
4 brewery CEOs in a bar, after a conference:
The CEO of Heineken: "A Heineken, please!"
The CEO of Amstel: "An Amstel, please!"
The CEO of Grolsch: "A Grolsch, please!"
"And you, Sir?" says the waitress asking the Leffe CEO.
"Same for me, a glass of water, please".
You're even worse than Ralf. Fortunately, we also have Hertog Jan.
Thijs, I put you out of your misery. Hertoog Jan has the best wheat beer, even better than bavarian snow mountain pee
323
« on: January 21, 2022, 16:09 »
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care.
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje)
324
« on: January 21, 2022, 15:48 »
I don't see this as an attack on Mat or anything else.
I see it just like Pete as quite strange that an agency with such technical know-how is not able to provide a reasonable statistic or an app - as it is obviously desired by most users.
It's just a joke on Pete. He used these exact words on me when I had some critcism on Alamy in another thread where James of Alamy responded. So never mind. It's just lame Friday evening humor. Have a nice weekend
325
« on: January 21, 2022, 15:15 »
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
same here - you just never know what a buyer needs - which is why the rejections for LCV are rediculous
If anyone is feeling bad about LCV, and I'd agree, let the buyer decide not some reviewers personal opinion, I want to share my first rejection in maybe a year on DT.
Your image might not be suitable as a stock image because of one or more of the following reasons:
We have reviewed your file and this is not quite what we're looking for. Please note that this image is not eligible for resubmission.
Image is not RF stock oriented or its sales potential is too low at this stage. Please note that Stock photography is a commercial type of imagery, so, snapshots are not Stock. It is also very important to understand that Art and Stock are two fundamentally different categories of imagery, that only meet when an artwork can adapt to a wide range of commercial usage.
Lack of concept.
This event is too old and no longer presents interest in the editorial section.
Holy Cow! I should have had a can of this before I uploaded?
I feel like I've gone back in time to grade school. 
ps Accepted at Adobe Stock...
Pete, at Dreamstime I don't even pay attention to the rare reasons for rejection. But the rejection of german style lager because of lack of sales potential hits me personally.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
