|
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 - Uncle Pete
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 ... 195
376
« on: August 01, 2024, 09:20 »
On track for the worst month in 11 years.
July 2023 $510
July 2024 $64
Now that the month is over, worst month ever on SS since I started. New record was also set, with six days, in a row, no sales. That's roughly 14 years of being a contributor to SS. I know this varies by content and amounts and we're all different. One sale on Alamy, surpassed the entire month on SS. That's how bad it was.
377
« on: July 24, 2024, 14:22 »
Everything you upload should be made by you (and you should therefore own the copyright), uploading derivatives and public domain images is not allowed.
It is strongly recommended to carefully read the submission guidelines of each agency. Adobe's guidelines can be found here:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html
Yes, I've seen this in the guidelines. What confused me was finding other similar-type images using public domain content with a simple search - not even AI work. It kind of makes it seem like they may allow derivative types of work, but not straight up selling of a PD image (which I also see on certain sites).
I guess I'll keep things status quo and just offer these images elsewhere!
Maybe because Fotolia and Adobe used to allow PD images to be uploaded but do not now. Many agencies that have had a change in policy, left old accepted images in the collection. SS is another that did until 2010. IS still does, if you prove the images are from before 1900. Pretty clear on AS: "We do not currently accept public domain content, which is content where the copyright has expired or where the content has been dedicated to the public domain. " You can add a property release, in which case, if they accept that, you're fine. Property release would need to include the source and date of the original copyright.
378
« on: July 21, 2024, 11:41 »
i use Adobe Bridge to add keywords to eps files
I add my keywords and title in the EPS file.
What software? Mine doesn't do that. I mean, I can't attach keywords and title/descriptions to EPS files. I have to cut and paste for each image, which is a long process.
Thanks both, I don't use bridge and if I did, I'd still need to copy and paste the keywords from the JPG to the EPS, so I might as well, copy them from the JPG to Adobe, when I upload. Maybe I should learn bridge? 
379
« on: July 15, 2024, 12:53 »
I have to feed the beast daily because I'm sure that last upload date is part of the search algorithm, but even that doesn't help anymore...
I don't know what last upload date would have to do with anything, except you think they reward people for being active and punish people for not uploading often enough? Seems counter productive to providing the best images to buyers. I read that as New Images have a boost in the search, which has been true from the start, and nothing to do with anything individual or personal? I started uploading microstock in 2005/2006 (18-19 years ago). After initial growth and relative stability of a few years, I feel scammed every year since around 2012, so welcome to the club  Everything changes, always for worse.
I can see that too.
380
« on: July 15, 2024, 12:39 »
I add my keywords and title in the EPS file.
What software? Mine doesn't do that. I mean, I can't attach keywords and title/descriptions to EPS files. I have to cut and paste for each image, which is a long process.
381
« on: July 11, 2024, 12:26 »
No provider or user of an interactive computer service that takes reasonable steps to address known unlawful uses of its services that create serious harm to others shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider in any action arising out of the publication of content provided by that information content provider.
Similar to the reason why SS gets a free pass on people stealing our work.
382
« on: July 11, 2024, 12:26 »
You could probably get more attention from Shutterstock, if you sue the buyers or the stolen images. Stock image users are supposed to give credit to the author, so you'll find credit lines such as "Thief name / Shutterstock". Those buyers don't have a valid image license as they bought stolen good. After you sue them, they will sue Shutterstock for the damage 
You can't sue a buyer who downloads the image in good faith, based on the promise from SS that the images are safe. You might sue SS, but I'll bet there's something in the TOS that says, you can't. As I've suggested and others have as well, the answer is a class action suit, but first someone has to find an attorney who's will to take the case on a contingency. If there's enough money is taking the case and getting their percentage, this would be a done deal. Either none see the potential or the chance of winning are too slim. Last of all, maybe petition the US justice department to investigate ShutterStock for not protecting our rights and images. The only reason SS isn't responsible is, they claim to be monitoring and catching the illegal activities. If someone can prove, that SS is unresponsive and neglecting their duty, that would wake up the agency to check for stolen images and thief accounts with sincerity.
383
« on: July 11, 2024, 12:11 »
You could probably get more attention from Shutterstock, if you sue the buyers or the stolen images. Stock image users are supposed to give credit to the author, so you'll find credit lines such as "Thief name / Shutterstock". Those buyers don't have a valid image license as they bought stolen good. After you sue them, they will sue Shutterstock for the damage
You can't sue a buyer who downloads the image in good faith, based on the promise from SS that the images are safe. You might sue SS, but I'll bet there's something in the TOS that says, you can't. As I've suggested and others have as well, the answer is a class action suit, but first someone has to find an attorney who's will to take the case on a contingency. If there's enough money is taking the case and getting their percentage, this would be a done deal. Either none see the potential or the chance of winning are too slim. Last of all, maybe petition the US justice department to investigate ShutterStock for not protecting our rights and images. The only reason SS isn't responsible is, they claim to be monitoring and catching the illegal activities. If someone can prove, that SS is unresponsive and neglecting their duty, that would wake up the agency to check for stolen images and thief accounts with sincerity.
384
« on: July 02, 2024, 11:09 »
Lately I've been getting more money from posting my content on Facebook than from selling it on Adobe. Time to say goodbye to microstock is getting closer..
How do you get money for posting to FB? Sounds like you're doing the right things.
There are a few different ways of earning money on Fb and IG - e.g. ads on videos, performance bonus and more. Availability depends on country, achieving specific reach milestones and on plain luck as some are invitation only. In the past I never would have thought I'd be saying I earn money by posting on FB, but here we are . My post was not about praising Fb though, but about ever declining Adobe earnings, which is the last microstock agency still "standing"
Thanks, that's interesting. I won't be doing FB, but monitizing that, is entertaining. Yes, this has been said for years now. This statement is nothing new of course, but I used to have hope -
This industry doesn't look sustainable at all.
I think I'm pretty much done with submitting - for a while it seems like a waste of time. Better to try something else - blog, youtube or whatever.
What's fun to read are new people, who come here, read and research, and still join and think there's some money in Microstock. Less and less, old people, are motivated to work for dimes and low commissions. Ten years later, if not 12, new people are still asking how to make money and what agencies. When it used to be 25 agencies, now we're down to maybe 4 or 5. For some people that number is ONE. So, I'd have to answer for the new people, how to make money in Microstock, is, don't start, go do something else. The boom is over, the rush has ended, the ship has sailed... the train has left the station!
385
« on: July 01, 2024, 10:19 »
If you're satisfied with sales in the price range of $250 going under "extra channels," but sales from 123rf at 10 cents being listed as a separate agency, then there's no need to worry. I'm not trying to change your opinion on this. However, not everyone feels the same, and my message is aimed at those who might want to know this.
You're changing the original post, concern? There are many other places and partners and they are reported under Extra Channels. Your original post says: "However, they don't mention anywhere that they sell on KeyCutStock." You are correct, they don't list all the places that are partners. As I pointed out, no agencies of the major type, tell us who their partners are or where the distribution for their version of extra channels, is going to. If I got a sale of $250 reported in extra channels, for WS, I'd be happy, not concerned. As for 123RF, have you looked lately? They might be reported under Extra Channels now.  There's no opinion for me to change. It's a plain fact, that agencies do not disclose partner sites. Partner Sites = Extra Channels on WS.
386
« on: July 01, 2024, 09:34 »
Wirestock can probably be defined as a "sub-agency",an agency that distributes content to other agencies.
But defining Wirestock as an agency is not wrong in my opinion,because if I'm not mistaken they also have their own direct sales.
They do have Marketplace Subscription, which is somewhat invisible and sure, a fine point. BUT... Their main business and how we generally work with them is their functioning as a distribution route to other agencies. Maybe someone here has had an actual sale from WS? I've seen none. WS is also supposed to be, providing a service, managing the metadata for us. I don't need that and don't want to pay for vague descriptions or keywords, when there are important specifics. I also don't support, paying to offer my images for free, for "exposure" or whatever else. They have had Marketplace for years, which isn't anything I'm interested in using. If Marketplace makes WS an agency, on a technical fine point, OK, but it's certainly not important or profitable. "Wirestock Marketplace extends an exclusive opportunity for buyers through a supplementary subscription plan. Each time your content is downloaded from the Wirestock Marketplace, it contributes towards your monthly earnings. These earnings are calculated based on the total subscription revenue from buyers and the relative contribution of your content to the platform." what a great idea ! latest from wirestock: "Great news! Weve launched the Wirestock Marketplace. To boost its promotion, well include 5% of your unsold content in our free collection. " "By offering your content for free, you gain unmatched exposure, potentially increasing your sales and overall platform visibility."
dont they know unmatched exposure leads to skin cancer?
Yes, another bad idea from WS, that most of us will ignore.
387
« on: July 01, 2024, 09:21 »
Lately I've been getting more money from posting my content on Facebook than from selling it on Adobe. Time to say goodbye to microstock is getting closer..
How do you get money for posting to FB? Sounds like you're doing the right things.
388
« on: July 01, 2024, 09:19 »
For me personally, it does not matter since whatever I have left on Wirestock won't be eligible for licensing there. I just thought that whoever sends their content to Wirestock should know this. It's not mentioned anywhere on Wirestock where the "agencies" are.
"KeyCutStock could be licensing selected images through Wirestock, by choice. Extra channels make sense."
Did you see the portfolio there with 3,800,000 images and 31,000 videos? I would not call this "a selection."
The question here is transparency, or the lack of it.
Extra Channels? "What do I get with Extra Channels?
Were constantly seeking new partnerships with brands, stock photo agencies, print-on demand marketplaces, API integrations, and other platforms to expand the market for our creators. Wirestocks Extra Channels program provides you with even more opportunities to make money with your content. Anytime were approached by a company interested in purchasing content from Wirestock, we find the very best, helping our creators maximize sales for every image, video, or vector.
All sales through Extra Channels are reported on your dashboard, with specific information about each source. It is important to note that pricing and royalty rates may vary. For standard partnerships, it will be 15%. However, in some cases, our commission rate may be higher than 15% (but never more than 50%) due to costs related to sales fees, integration and maintenance costs and specific partnership types."Only 31,000 videos? Looks like an API partner, who selects what they want from the Wirestock collection. The TOS cover this kind of distribution, where we all have a choice. Sign and agree or don't upload to Wirestock. You probably already know, but just in case, do you understand API partners and how the major agencies all use them, to distribute and create more income for us and them? For your transparency question, do you know all the partners for iStock, Adobe, Shutterstock, Pond5 and Dreamstime? Do they disclose that information? My impression has been for years, that none of these places and not Wirestock either, have informed us, who their partners are. This is normal and usual.
389
« on: June 25, 2024, 12:04 »
I tend to think that a couple hundred images and videos ago, SS decided, they didn't really need new content, just pay pennies for the old. And if people leave, what does SS care, they have hundreds of millions of images already.
Id agree but also add SS seems to be transitioning itself to a big-data company not a media stock agency. Its got the vast database of images, videos complete with descriptions and keywords. They see the money in offering subsections of that as datasets for AI training and production.
They dont really NEED any more content so will be happy to slow or stop it at some point once the transition is complete.
I think you're right. Also remember when the story was subscription model, how people paid and didn't use all their allotted image downloads. Maybe it's just me, but I get almost no Subs anymore. They list as Single and Other, as if everything is being sold with some new system.
390
« on: June 25, 2024, 11:43 »
I tried wirestock a couple of years ago,after 2-3 months I deleted everything and closed the account,and judging by the gains I see from those who use it I have done well.
When they went pay, I left the account active. I still have around 500 images, which are distributed to sites where I have no account. 123RF, DP, Evanto, a bunch more, in other words, everywhere except SS, AS, AL, IS and DT. And some of those have rejects and other files, activated for sale, from WS. Odd how that works? Rejected personally, but accepted at WS and the agency that rejected the image?
It makes me as much a year as IS, which is a nice bottle of single malt. For free, I do no work, I'm happy.
But I wouldn't pay for the right to upload or have them do the keywords and distribution. Maybe some other people find it a benefit? I'd have to have many more images, to make it worthwhile.
Of course,it's all subjective in the end,it depends on what works for you,or simply what you prefer to do.
as far as I know,based on what those who use wirestock say,more or less you get 10usd a month for around 5000 contents,then maybe clearly this will be different for someone I don't know.
what I know,and that's fine with me,it's just that it's not worth leaving content on display for thieves and copycats if an agency makes so little,not to mention the waste of time it takes to upload and all the various problems it can cause,such as in this case the free collection without pay.
If an agency doesn't make much money,it's better to let it go than settle for crumbs and have too much wasted time and various problems.
Wirestock isn't an agency, they are a distributor to agencies. You can't blame Wirestock for thieves any more than the actual agencies, which are the same as we upload to and the same as they distribute to. If you make $10 a month on WS then you would make $10 a month on your own. Wirestock is not an agency.
Just like someone else who says Wirestock claims to own the right to your images, which isn't true. I guess anyone can write anything they want and ignore the truth. If they asked me to include anything in free, I'd say no. They asked, and anyone with any sense would say, Hell No, exposure doesn't pay the bills or put food on the table. Wirestock is NOT an agency, you're right. I don't know how anyone can compare earnings from how many images, when the same agencies that we can work on our own, are supplied by Wirestock. If sales stink, it's not the fault of WS, it's the images or the agencies. Small advantage in the search when WS has a better image rank for sales because they make more sales and have more images. Worth 15% and paying for access, distribution and questionable keywording? That's up to the individual.
391
« on: June 25, 2024, 11:24 »
It is probably covered under "extra channels".
KeyCutStock could be licensing selected images through WS, by choice. Extra channels makes sense. It will be really strange if it is covered under "extra channels" because as I mentioned this stock site has quite high price range for video (it was video only till couple of years back). Also KeyCutStock is one of the very few that asked for written and sent back contract on paper. Its not a penny stock agency to cover under the "extra channels".
Did you think of writing to Wirestock and asking?
392
« on: June 21, 2024, 11:27 »
If this were a flower shop or restaurant, etc with similar numbers it would have been forced to close long ago.
If this was a flower shop and they promised to pay you $10 an hour, then every year, dropped your wages, so 2019 $10, 2020 $9, 2021 $8... 2024 $5, but the employee keeps coming to work (as in, keeps uploading to SS) then why would the business care? They get the job done, the business profits, they pay less and less, and the workers may complain, but they keep coming to work.  I tend to think that a couple hundred images and videos ago, SS decided, they didn't really need new content, just pay pennies for the old. And if people leave, what does SS care, they have hundreds of millions of images already.
393
« on: June 21, 2024, 10:58 »
For me it starts on page 13 with the pictures without downloads.
Thanks, makes sense, if I look at Dashboard, and sort by "Downloads" and see what page the -0- start, then count and subtract from the total. Find the percentage... not related to the (shall we say spirited) discussion at hand... what portion of your portfolio has never sold? i'm curious about some of the permanently sleeping files and if they ever wake up after years of slumber. i notice a higher % of my photos have sold than video but video takes longer to pick up (and obviously fetches more $).
No brags, I have some terrible Crapstock from years ago and some, see if it sticks, uploads, with no real potential for sales. 45% have one sale or more. 27% more than one DL. Meanwhile, no I've never had an image, wake up from slumber. The way the search and rank work, this is even less likely as image rank is set in the first 30 days. I won't say impossible. Something topical that is suddenly in the news and short in supply on stock. Here's one FREE image, that I waited for, for probably two years, as I drove past on Sunday mornings. The farmer doesn't always have the cattle up in that field, but the old school behind, has the flag up high, every day. Good fun, waiting, waiting, then stop and shoot. Yeah Baby, 5 DLs lifetime, and now free.  The school house over the hill? Zero downloads.  55% Unsold, to answer the question. Waiting for fame and fortune, this one is unsold. 
394
« on: June 15, 2024, 11:36 »
Why, in this case, I took the photograph myself and never submitted the work to the website that Shutterstock sent me a link to. I have the original work and raw files that I have kept and sent to Shutterstock. I did nothing wrong. Why does my account get suspended when I am the owner of the work? I am very upset to encounter this. 
SS sent you a link to a different website, which has your image, in use in some way, and that's why they suspended your account? Is that another stock site? Seems odd that SS would care, so I'll guess, someone filed a DMCA against you, for your own image? I know none of us can answer, but why would anyone do that? Seems unusual and there's no gain, unless they were just out to cause trouble for you. If you have the RAW files and know the site, file a DMCA against that person!
395
« on: June 15, 2024, 11:28 »
not related to the (shall we say spirited) discussion at hand... what portion of your portfolio has never sold? i'm curious about some of the permanently sleeping files and if they ever wake up after years of slumber. i notice a higher % of my photos have sold than video but video takes longer to pick up (and obviously fetches more $).
Does Adobe give us that percentage? Adobe doesn't even give us lifetime stats on images, DLs or earnings. If there's a spot that shows, how many images have sold at least one time, I'd be interested in seeing that, but it won't change anything. And for your question: good images tend to keep selling, some drop down and sell fewer after time. Images that are duds and those that have never sold, in all my years, have never suddenly woken up and started selling. The weekly rank (which is actually "Position", not rank) is supposedly based on DLs only and nothing else. We did some tracking and people with identical DL counts had different positions. Then the next day, one person had more DLs and their rank didn't change, BUT... the person who had no DLs had their position change. I just want to point out that we have been told, more than once, that position, means nothing. It doesn't change reviews, the search rank or anything else. Bragging rights only. Beyond that, just sharing numbers with friends, it appears that it is either not DLs only or is an unreliable number to base any conclusions about rank. It's a position, where 1, 10, 100 or 1,000 other people, could be the same position. It's a group bracket. Now someone who knows might tell us some day, why, if it's only DLs, would people with the same number have different positions? Or why someone who had a DL would have their position unchanged. OR why someone with no activity would have their position changed? I can give a theory/guess on the last two. If I have ten DLs and next day, have none, but someone else had one new, their position would go up or stay the same, but mine would drop. Same for why getting a DL doesn't change position, if everyone else also had the same, and I'm in the same bracket, people with ten DLs. But nothing explains identical numbers of DLs and different positions. Unless it's not, only DLs?  It's a mystery. I don't have a weekly rank, there is no such thing.
396
« on: June 14, 2024, 10:02 »
No.
Well, yes someone could, but they don't pay us anything extra for doing that.
397
« on: June 13, 2024, 23:39 »
saw on youtube as comment lol:
"
"We only train AI on licenced content."
Fine print:
"By using our service you give us a license btw."
"
and what's wrong with that? it's boilerplate ToS (always fine print). if you don't agree they won't se it - isn't that solving the complaints that AI training doesn't ask their permission?
- some go much further, such as many contests which state when you submit you are giving them license to use your image in any way they wish.
I'm not outraged and headlines or Subjects that lead with an emotional opinion are divisive. If clarifying the TOS is creating an issue, some people have nothing better to do than find things wrong or be grumpy. Yes, the contests are more often than not a scam anyway. Paid jury, entering and paying, gives them unlimited rights. Nothing but paying to give away our work, and rights, which is worse than low pay.
398
« on: June 09, 2024, 11:21 »
The replies to the OP are unbelievable.
Does shooting stock make photographers a) mean b) masochist c) bitter d) all of the above?
Other than the letter was a quote, so don't shoot the OP? d) All of the above (and more) We've been lied to, cheated, had income cut after promises, treated poorly and fed pure BS from time to time. I think that makes people, angry, bitter, mean, and leads them to distrust the agencies. Those who continue must be masochists or at the least, some kind of addicts? Who else goes to work, hating the place they work, the people they work for, and put up with miserable low pay as a reward for their personal efforts?
399
« on: June 08, 2024, 09:30 »
Wow, you can get 50% of the commission that you would have earned by uploading them to IS, yourself? Thank You EyeEm.
400
« on: June 04, 2024, 12:40 »
Understanding what is fair use.
fair use is the idea that there are certain ways that you can use a piece of copyrighted work regardless of whether you have the rightsholders permission, and it's determined by a balancing test that considers four factors
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 ... 195
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
