|
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 - Anyka
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 38
351
« on: January 03, 2014, 11:47 »
I also hoped to get an Xmas present and be paid by Juha, but unfortunately I was not  .
Guess the Finn folks spend and lot on Christmas themselves so they needed our money.
 You sound as if being paid by an agency is a "present" ... I wasn't paid either by Rodeo for Christmas - I did not even get a REPLY for Christmas (to my e-mail).
352
« on: January 01, 2014, 17:00 »
December showed exactly the same trend als the whole of 2014 : earnings down 6% in $ and 9% in euros. For december this was mostly due to low sales at Alamy, Rodeo, Istock and Fotolia - all other sites performed pretty good. For the total of 2013 (compared to 2012) : SS : 1% up (port growth 14%) IS : 9% down DST : 6% up FT : 21% down GLO : 40% down BIG : 1% up 123rf : 7% up DP : 60% up CAN : 1% down Rodeo : 48% down Pond5 : 49% down Alamy : 21% down Total : 6,1% down This 6% loss was totally covered by the commissioned work that's growing constantly, so overall I had a good year. I expect this downward trend to go on, but hopefully not too fast
353
« on: December 28, 2013, 01:55 »
I plan to increase the average spend of my portrait customers (mostly Belly/Baby photos) so that this income will cover the loss of microstock. This is what happened in 2013, so diversification worked for me. I also plan to let portrait work not take ALL my time, because if I stop shooting stock, stock income will surely go down a lot more.
354
« on: December 27, 2013, 07:32 »
Wow ... 1 reply and 1 PM. Does this mean there's only 3 of us MSG'ers with images on Rodeo?
355
« on: December 24, 2013, 17:00 »
Merry Christmas Microstockers! I just finished decorating the dinner table for tomorrow 
356
« on: December 23, 2013, 16:01 »
Did they not give you a link and password to view your sales/royalties on-line? Part of the Rodeo site is now in English (the contributor part). The e-mails we used to receive have been replaced by a contributor page on the website where we can view our sales. If you have not visited the site since May 2013 (or if you don't have a password), then you might be in for a nice surprise ...
357
« on: December 20, 2013, 10:39 »
I often read topics about slow payment, and then "slow" means 2 to 3 weeks.
If 2 or 3 weeks is slow, what about 1 year ?
When was your last Rodeo pay-out? I had one on 23 November 2012 (payment up till Oct12), and when I complained in May 2013, they sent me payment for November 2012, so by the end of this month, Rodeo will owe me 12 months royalties (which happens to be more than 800 dollars).
Also in May, Rodeo let me know that sales had gone down significantly (I already knew that!) and I should not expect any payments until November. Well, November has gone now ...
A couple of weeks ago I sent another enquiry, but I have not had any reply yet (or payment).
From other Rodeo contributors I heard that I'm not alone. So here's my question : how many Rodeo contributors are there on MicroStockGroup? When was your last pay-out and have you contacted Rodeo about it?
358
« on: December 08, 2013, 12:41 »
When I started microstock in 2006, my keywording was horrible. It was not "malicious spamming", but many keywords were absolutely far fetched. Correcting the keywording for several hundreds of files on 10 agencies would be a complete nightmare, so I won't do it, but still, I'm really ashamed of my old keywording. But I'm sure I'm not the only one. Could it be possible that the files mentioned in the closed thread were also very old files, that the photographer would really be ashamed of? ... not that he'd admit it of course! 
359
« on: December 01, 2013, 07:22 »
I expected to worst after October, but I am fairly happy with November. Overall down 8%, and this was mainly due to NO sales at Alamy, 50% down at Rodeo, 20% down at Dreamstime and 60% at GLO (all compared to November 2012).
SS did well in downloads and very well in SOD's, but due to a total lack of EL's, I ended up at minus 8%.
Totally unexpected :
Istock - was a super surprise because of the increased October's PP
Fotolia went UP 1% compared to November 2013 (while all other months in 2013 were down more than 15%).
360
« on: December 01, 2013, 01:59 »
Done!
361
« on: November 05, 2013, 02:30 »
I can't even find such a policy for my OWN country. Or better said : I can only find indemnity insurance policies that EXCLUDE "copyright claims" 
362
« on: November 01, 2013, 03:45 »
Wow, I expected a downhill month, but this was MUCH worse than expected.
SS had a very bad start, but at then end I got a break even with October 2012 because the SOD's saved the month. Downloads were more than 10% down though.
Fotolia was a total disaster with 40% down compared to Oct.'12, Istock and DST both went down "only" 10%.
Rodeo almost stopped selling (86% down).
Alamy, 123rf and Canstock did quite well, but are too small to cover any losses.
Bottomline : -15%, plus another -5% because of the low dollar. So I am NOT HAPPY, especially since October usually is a BME for me.
Even if November does much better, it has 4 working days less ...
363
« on: October 31, 2013, 01:51 »
This site is protecting our own website(s), not our images. On my own website, I have about 500 watermarked images, but on Shutterstock, I have 7000 ...
364
« on: October 16, 2013, 01:01 »
Chiming in a bit late, but with the same song as most of us : sales down all over compared to Oct.2012. And not just "a bit down" but a LOT (between 20 and 25%). Oct. 2012 was a BME.
Only site that's doing well (read: showing growth) is 123rf.
The fact that I'm going down 27% at Fotolia WITHOUT going down too much in 7-days-rank means that this trend is not just for me ...
365
« on: October 06, 2013, 02:29 »
The approvals and rejections of microstock shaped the look and feel of the content created. Macro will do the same.
Absolutely! We all know that dark shadows, cut-off/cropped heads/feet, over/under-exposure, lensflares and partial out-of-focus areas will give an image a "realistic" feel. But we have al learned to avoid it, because these images would be rejected in 99% of the cases. Now suddenly these "effects" seem to be worth more ... Problem is that if we would start shooting like this, SS would STILL reject them. I love dark shadows (I hate cropped off heads though ), but I don't submit those images to SS - waste of bandwidth ...
366
« on: October 04, 2013, 14:39 »
How many gigabytes do you want to shoot/backup? I take a tablet + a 32gb usb stick, so no usb hard drive needed. Sticks are flash memory, which is more reliable than hard drives (unless your hard drive is a SSD of course).
367
« on: October 02, 2013, 01:06 »
I'm up 2% compared to last year's September, but that's mainly because Sept.2012 was not a very good month (I'm down 5% compared to Sept.2011). SS went up 15% because of 10 lovely EL's, while downloads and SOD's went down with 5%. The good guys were Dreamstime and 123rf, both good for 12% and 18% growth, and this was all "eaten" buy the losses at Istock (-16%) and Fotolia (-17%). Canstock had a bad month (-33%), GLO had almost no downloads but 1 very nice EL. Rodeo was down almost 40%. Juha said this was due to "growing competition by international sites", but it MIGHT also be because the site is really passive this year : I have a backlog of almost 600 files waiting to be approved since May !!. On 30th Sept. Alamy saved the month with a super sale of 140$ (net). October 2012 was a BME, so as a true pessimist, I expect Oct. 2013 to be down at least 20% 
368
« on: September 18, 2013, 02:25 »
I'm OK with most of the changes, but not with this part :
"If you choose to remove your images, but a customer has already signaled the intention to license an image, they can complete the transaction and well make sure that you get paid. This avoids any last-minute changes for customers when layouts have already been approved or a project is close to completion."
It has happened several times already that Dreamstime sold the rights of one of my images. I then get a short period of time to remove the image from all other sites. I can still do this without any problem at SS, but the above clause makes it possible for the big clients to buy and use that image a few weeks AFTER I removed it ??
That's not a problem. If you've ever "sold the rights" to an image that has sold RF anywhere in the past, it could pop up in some company's adverts for ever after. I don't see how having started the process of a sale (by supplying the comp) and entered an undertaking to complete that process prior to "selling the rights" is any different from giving someone the rights to repeated use for all time and then subsequently "selling the rights" to someone else. They only buying rights that you haven't already agreed for other people to have.
You're right, I didn't realise that, thanks.
369
« on: September 18, 2013, 01:20 »
I'm OK with most of the changes, but not with this part :
"If you choose to remove your images, but a customer has already signaled the intention to license an image, they can complete the transaction and well make sure that you get paid. This avoids any last-minute changes for customers when layouts have already been approved or a project is close to completion."
It has happened several times already that Dreamstime sold the rights of one of my images. I then get a short period of time to remove the image from all other sites. I can still do this without any problem at SS, but the above clause makes it possible for the big clients to buy and use that image a few weeks AFTER I removed it ??
About the secrecy clause :
I understand that talking about sales going down can worry people/companies who own SS stock. But to be honest I always get MORE worried if people STOP talking about it. If the doctor tells me I have disease X, I won't like it, but if the doctor tells me "you have a disease, but I cannot talk about it", THEN I GET REALLY WORRIED.
370
« on: August 31, 2013, 01:05 »
Is the keyword feature STILL putting the keywords in alphabetical order? If yes, I'm not going to upgrade.
371
« on: August 28, 2013, 13:56 »
Yes, I had a great day too at SS yesterday, but not 4x above average, "just" a bit more than double. I did not think any of it, as I had another day like that on 8th August. How was your 8th August Lisa?
372
« on: August 23, 2013, 00:31 »
I was wondering the same thing then I realized that I haven't seen leaf much on the forums. Hope he is alright and just shooting a lot and making a ton of money.
or on a well deserved summer holiday
373
« on: August 19, 2013, 05:00 »
...For the large amount I upload, I depend on Deepmeta heavily for keywording, and it alphabetizes everything, so that would certainly explain a lot.
I double checked several of my recent photos uploaded with DeepMeta and none of the keyword sets are alphabetized.
I should add that I keyword in lightroom not DeepMeta.
 I thought Lightroom always put the keywords in alphabetical order, automatically? That's the only reason I do NOT use Lightroom for keywording ...
374
« on: August 17, 2013, 00:29 »
If your card is from Sandisk, they have a free recovery program which works well, but I also tried RescuePro and that works well too.
375
« on: August 09, 2013, 01:08 »
OK, after reading the Fotolia price page 7 times, I think I've got it now :
Fotolia uses the word "minimum" price but really means the "standard" price = 1-3-5-7-8-10$
An image starts at the minimum/standard price (unless you're Emerald or higher, then you can double it from the start).
Let's call the lowest price (1-2-3-4-5-6) the "bottom price" :
A minimum/standard priced image only goes down to the bottom price if it did not sell at all in 24 months.
It needs 3 sales in 24 months to go back to minimum/standard price automatically.
(So this means that even seasonal photos still make a chance)
As for Emeralds or higher, who set their starting price at 2-6-10-14-16-20$ from the beginning :
If the image has not sold in 6 months at all, the price goes to minimum/standard price (not to the bottom price).
If it does not sell at all for 24 months, it will go to bottom price.
It needs 3 sales in 24 months to go back to minimum/standard price automatically.
It needs 3 sales in 6 months for the Emerald contributors (or higher) to be able to raise/double the price manually again.
(side note : what's worse : Fotolia setting non-sellers at bottom price after 24 months, or Dreamstime asking us to choose between "giving away for free" or deleting the image after 36 months?)
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
