|
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 - pkphotos
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 21
326
« on: February 28, 2016, 15:17 »
Over 1 million? In microstock? Wow. 
Of course not seriously. It's called humour, people see that button and have to click it because they know it'll create a stir, which will amuse them. And although I asked for that button it wasn't me who clicked it. It can only have been Yuri
327
« on: February 28, 2016, 04:18 »
Can you please add >1,000,000
328
« on: February 25, 2016, 22:52 »
There is no such thing as success on Alamy.
Speak for yourself. Some of us do pretty good on Alamy.
I agree there is no such thing as success on Alamy. I do OK with Alamy from 7000 photos, however Alamy is a perenial under performer compared to my other agencies including Getty. They just never really hit their straps in the marketplace.
329
« on: February 25, 2016, 15:14 »
To qualify a clip had to have two or less sales, therefore in general many good clips but not selling for whatever reason.
330
« on: February 23, 2016, 00:33 »
Someones deluding themselves they make $70-80 average per photo a year
331
« on: February 18, 2016, 00:52 »
Don't count on VB sales as a sale until they clear.
332
« on: February 16, 2016, 19:31 »
Hi everyone, I'm deleting some of my popular images on SS and putting them as RM on alamy (not sure what other RM site to try). Is it okay that they were once sold as RF? Do I have to wait 30 days to say they are exclusive or anything?
Just wondering if someone else has done this or knows. Thanks!
Most of my sales on Alamy are RM. There is still a big place for RM, especially with editorial/creative. RF is better for generic images where high turnover is expected. With animals for example, some animals are so popular that RF may be the best way to sell them. However for obscure species that are not published very often then RM would be the obvious choice IMO. If you have deleted all the files from being sold as RF then there shouldn't be any problem with you now selling them as RM.
333
« on: February 15, 2016, 15:06 »
1800+ clips. About $6000/month.
If these stats were true what would motivate you to broadcast them, it doesn't make any sense, therefore I'm very skeptical
334
« on: February 14, 2016, 16:12 »
Exclusive 4600 clips - on average $2100 a month.
I'm just about to go non-exclusive and I'm a little surprised by some of the low amounts?
I only do video stock - I have no photo's in my portfolio.
You would be in the top 1%. Most people are struggling. Photographers think video is easy, but it's not.
335
« on: February 13, 2016, 21:31 »
4000+ clips for average $300 per month from three agencies. Average per clip 13.3 cents per month.
4000 * 13.3c = $532.00
4500 * 13.3c = $598.50
So I'm confused by "$300 per month from three agencies". I don't know if that means $300 total or $900 total, but neither number matches 13.3 cents per month average.
Yes you are correct, I only earn 7.5 cents per clip per month. Got my maths wrong. Three agencies, $300 from all agencies. People think footage is going to dig them out of their photography hole but they are going to be disappointed.
336
« on: February 13, 2016, 19:34 »
4000+ clips for average $300 per month from three agencies. Average per clip 13.3 cents per month.
WOW!
seems like very low numbers for the amount of portfolio
what type of footage do you specialize in?
It's probably about average. IMO many people seriously inflate their figures to make themselves feel better. The reality is there are a lot of clips out there and only a few are doing really well. I take all sorts of subjects, mostly outdoors, nature etc.
337
« on: February 12, 2016, 21:32 »
4000+ clips for average $300 per month from three agencies. Average per clip 13.3 cents per month.
338
« on: February 08, 2016, 22:45 »
If you're a travel photographer you can claim all of your travel expenses. So by the tie you subtract your expenses from your income there is often no tax to pay at all.
I'm afraid you won't be able to claim your vacation to Rio, in case you plan to.
Maybe only a small part: expenses strictly related to photography.
If you travel for work, then all expenses can be claimed.
Good luck in convincing the IRS to accept all you vacation expenses only because you snapped a few photos here and there!
They are not fools and photographers are a known target for a thourough scrutiny.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
It may depend what country you're in. And there's a big difference to someone taking a holiday and taking a few snaps to try and justify some expenses as opposed to a full time travel photographer who is on the road indefinitely. Professional full time travel photographers who are never at home are not taking holidays as you put it, they are going about their profession. There is a big difference between the two.
339
« on: February 08, 2016, 17:05 »
If you're a travel photographer you can claim all of your travel expenses. So by the tie you subtract your expenses from your income there is often no tax to pay at all.
I'm afraid you won't be able to claim your vacation to Rio, in case you plan to.
Maybe only a small part: expenses strictly related to photography.
If you travel for work, then all expenses can be claimed.
340
« on: February 08, 2016, 00:25 »
Very silly idea to talk about how much you make, share your niche markets if you have any etc. It's fine to help people and give advice, but it's also important to protect your livelihood against competitors. That means withholding information on your earnings is a good policy IMO.
341
« on: February 07, 2016, 23:44 »
Those commissions are impossible in microstock. There is no point for a comparaison here, the two business models are at the opposite.
So, Getty is not a micro stock? I don't understand the difference. You get commission as you sell your clips, right?
Getty is rights managed (RM) or macro as well as royalty free (RF) micro. However photos sold as RF at Getty can often get a lot higher commission value than the typical micro site. Generally speaking micro photos/footage is high turnover for low value sales. Macro (RM) is low turnover but for higher value sales. Therefore when you have photos/footage of obscure animals or any subject matter that is unlikely to be in high demand, it is pointless submitting it to micro. However these days RM agencies are few and far between and Alamy is the go to agency for most. Unfortunately Alamy struggles against the power of Getty so sales figures from Alamy have always been poor.
342
« on: February 06, 2016, 16:36 »
If you're a travel photographer you can claim all of your travel expenses. So by the tie you subtract your expenses from your income there is often no tax to pay at all.
You're not making any money then are you?
The difference with travel photography/videography as opposed to home based is the amount of expenses you can deduct. So whether or not someone is making money would depend how you look at this aspect.
343
« on: February 06, 2016, 16:15 »
How on earth someone can buy one video with 455$ ?
No offense
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
$455 was for a photo not a video, but clients will pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars for a video. That's the thing that many new photographers, or those only familiar with micro don't understand. Before micro came along clients would pay thousands for photos, usually for advertising purposes. At agencies like Getty it's still possible to make several thousand in commission from one photo license, however this happens less often than ten to twenty years ago. The main reason for this is the digital age with over supply and the fact that everyone has jumped on the micro bandwagon, happy to make whatever they can from their photos. Therefore there is a generation of micro shooters out there who believe $28 commission for a photo is a great result. I think collectively photographers have shot themselves in the foot by offering too much to microstock especially the very high quality content that is not generic enough to have high turnover sales. The problem now is that it's almost impossible to get into Getty and although Alamy sales can be much higher value than micro, their highest value sales fail miserably in comparison to Getty.
344
« on: February 06, 2016, 04:14 »
If you're a travel photographer you can claim all of your travel expenses. So by the tie you subtract your expenses from your income there is often no tax to pay at all.
345
« on: February 03, 2016, 17:11 »
Video is now over supplied and not worth it. Concentrate on trying to find better niches in photography.
Well, I suppose it depends on your expectations, but I have a very small video portfolio (about 200) of very basic clips and I've sold 4 on SS already this month.
Seems well worth it to me...
This is the reason video is becoming over-supplied, because people have to let everyone know their success stories. So it's nice that you can tell people your stats, but don't be surprised when new contributors act on this and become your direct comeptition
346
« on: February 03, 2016, 15:57 »
Video is now over supplied and not worth it. Concentrate on trying to find better niches in photography.
347
« on: January 29, 2016, 21:37 »
Motion Elements is generally considered the best performing footage agency in the business.
By who?
A lot of videographers and my sales figures, although perhaps I should've kept this quiet.
348
« on: January 29, 2016, 05:32 »
Motion Elements is generally considered the best performing footage agency in the business.
349
« on: January 18, 2016, 21:36 »
Congrats to Pond5 for coming up with an innovative, unique way to kill video microstock. I don't think it will take longer than a year or two for us to look back and see this as the pivotal change that ruined things.
Forgive my pessimism if I prove to be incorrect (which I would definitely love to be).
I think the VB model is far more damaging than what P5 is planning
350
« on: January 18, 2016, 12:29 »
Big congrats!
I've yet to sell a 4K video (as 4K) on VB. In fact, it's been over 3 months without a single sale of any kind there; quite disappointing after the great start.
VB is dying, that model was never going to succeed
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 21
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
