Just had a subscription download and the amount shown on the "downloads" page is $0,348.
This amount is not even on their commission structure table (see here), so it's not a simple mistake of taking the wrong contributor level.

(The glitch that showed an unrealistic high amount of credits for a while is fixed, at least on my earnings page a realistic amount is shown; this would not have been an explaination anyway, as the amount received is not one to be expected for any level...)

Anybody seeing something similar?

Quote from: dirkr on November 03, 2014, 07:06

Why do images with unrecognizable people (like tiny spots on a far away beach) have to be RM? Allow them as RF, so they can be sold at other RF places as well, that would be an improvement.

Who decides whether a person is recognizable - especially when so often that is about context ? Straight yes/no is best IMO. Same as with property - e.g. vehicles, houses etc.

Anyhow - surely we don't do want them to do anything which encourages people to upload the same content to Alamy as they are also selling elsewhere as RF for typically much less money ?

If you don't have a release (e.g. crowd scenes) you could still sell as editorial, but there's no reason that cannot be RF.
So allowing to mark  images as "RF + no release available" would be good.

Remove the existence of three different keyword fields, keep just one.
Everything else is ok.

But while you're listening: Why do images with unrecognizable people (like tiny spots on a far away beach) have to be RM? Allow them as RF, so they can be sold at other RF places as well, that would be an improvement.

Where can I see this statistic?

In your account click on "see statistics", there in the first drop-down field the last entry ("How many credits have I earned from US buyers?").

Quote from: Shelma1 on October 12, 2014, 07:53

Quote from: heywoody on October 12, 2014, 06:22

To be perfectly honest, I get a better return for my sales at FT / DPC than I do at IS where we are getting raped on both pricing and commission but I suggest the decline there is more to do with the ineptness of the folks in control than any external factors.  SS are holding up, DT is coming back nicely after a few bad months mostly due to good RPD and the only place I see a downturn is 123.  There is a sense of running faster to stay in the same place generally that can be totally explained by the vast increase in supply over the last while.

Well, yes, you're getting a better return at FT/DPC...because your fellow artists boycotted, which pressured them into offering higher commissions to hold onto the content. Just sayin'.

This is perfectly stated. If we would have never caught or addressed DPC the way we did FOTOLIA could have raped us blind and laughed all the way to the bank.  ANY positive changes came at the pressure of contributors, NOT because FOTOLIA felt that it was the right thing to do. They will get away with anything they want until it hurts them, like pulling millions of images and, unfortunately, with some collateral damage of contributors being targeted for their opinions and accounts closed. Who WANTS to be associated with a company like that? Not me. Yes, I lost $50-$75 a month. Big deal. I am much happier without them and their rape the contributor business mentality.

ANGER CHECK: I am no longer angry. Was over that in June when we separated.  But I will continue to participate in forum discussions about FOTOLIA to share the facts around their behaviors and business decisions and, what I believe, an intent to price competitors out of the market. This is expressly why I believe that if you support DPC you support a new, lower tier business model.

I fully understand why you don't want to work with them. I don't like them either, though I still have my portfolio with them.

But what I don't understand: why are you still with IS? Their attitude towards contributors is no better, and they have been - for the longest time - the role model for all other agencies to keep commissions down. They had the lowest percentage in the business since they started. And when they decided that 80% is too much, I left them.
I don't think that decision had any positive effect for me. Since then I'm a bit more cautious with deleting portfolios, even at agencies that screw contributors like FT and 123RF.

And by the way, my sales at FT have been up last month, although I am opted out of DPC. Must have some other reason.

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on October 07, 2014, 11:29

How much should my RPI be to make $1000 a month on SS?



The Median of the answers lies in the 0.26 to 0.40 bracket.
Means for an average portfolio you need about 3000 files - roughly.

no - this poll is USELESS for averages.  the high rpi reports might be carefully selected images in high volume sales topics; the low rpi could be portfolios with hundreds of low selling images.  ( a different strategy, but one that will result in lower rpi)

so unless you know the details of all the datapoints you can't predict how many images are needed to make $x per month.  and of course, that's ignoring any definition of what the portfolio of the new artist consists of....

besides, underlying this entire debate is the faulty premise that nothing is changing in the environment -- but what worked last year may not work next year & vice versa, etc,etc

The poll is useless for averages because it doesn't contain data about the specifics of a portfolio?

It's exactly the other way round: this poll provides usefull data about averages. Only on average data points.
As always with any statistical analysis, you can't derive direct conclusions for a specific situation from a statistical average.
But that's not the point.

1) To remove the impact of deleting non-sellers and such, calculate your RPI based on uploaded images, not on accepted / online images. You made them, processed them, keyworded them, uploaded them. All the effort is spent. You have to include them in your statistics, if they are not accepted (or you delete them because they don't sell) you don't get your spent effort back.

2) RPI is meaningful to compare how different agencies perform for your portfolio. RPI is also meaningful to see how your average image performs to other shooters average image. Yes, it's different content, different style, different postprocessing, different keywording. But that doesn't mean you can't compare it, it means that is what you are comparing. If somebody has a higher RPI he is shooting something more in demand, better quality, is keywording better...
So it is very helpful to compare against others.

3) RPD is almost meaningless as a statistical value, as it does not say anything about how often sales occur so it says nothing about the bottom line.

OK, I'm bored enough to check this.

�0.55 = US$0.69
So, I made US$0.69 over 24 months

$0.69 divided by 24 = $0.03 (rounded up)

1218 photos = $0.03 per month.

10,000 / 0.03 = 333,333.3333333333
333,333.3333333333 X 1218 =  406,000,000

I see the problem. I simply don't have enough images there. I'll get to work on that.

Disclaimer: My math is on par with my Yaymicro sales, so there may be an error or two.

400 million images...
Assuming your camera shutter holds for 200.000 shots, that's only 2000 cameras 

FT changed their subs commissions after all the complaints about DPC (and about their monthly subs packages, which essentially are nothing else but credit packages, but used to pay just subs royalties). Now you get 20% of what the buyer paid (25% if opted into DPC).

Do get 5 Credits the buyer must have paid 25 for the one image.

On the German site they sell those monthly "subscriptions" for 25 � for 5 images.

So if a buyer just used one of those, that might lead to such a sale.

That assumes that FT really takes into account how much of his quota a buyer has used. But that would mean that they can only inform you about the sale once the validity of the credit pack has expired, so no real time reporting for those subs...

Many assumptions, but the only way I can come up with a 5 credit sub sale.
The biggest I had was a little over one credit, 1.07 to be exact.

It's not a bug, it's a feature 

Your balance from month end was over the payment minimum and will be payed within the next two weeks. That's why your balance is reset and starts from zero again...

Maybe that's why they have titles like 'big bird, thick branch'; and there was me unkindly thinking the contributor couldn't be bothered looking the species up and putting 'Vernacular name, Latin name' like any normal person would do. Maybe they had 'vernacular name, Latin name' on another site.
Ho-hum 

Yep, that's what's troubling me about that requirement - when you have accurate, fitting titles and descriptions on other sites, making them unique for Stocktal will make the less accurate and fitting...

When is StockTal's official launch? Someone sees some sale? Anyone saw anything sold so far?

I am also supporting them.
They asked me to resize(diamensions and size MB) my images, which I did using a batch script. It just took few minutes and uploaded them. Next they asked me to take out duplicate images, that also followed. Though my portfolio has shrunk a bit but I would say it is still better there.

Views are rising but waiting to see the real sale.

Did you write new titles and descriptions for all your images?

My illustration copyrighted in 2007
http://www.istockphoto.com/vector/style-runner-3517764

Bormash illustration
http://www.canstockphoto.com/running-man-13419539.html

On Canstock:

"Oops!  The file you requested has been deleted by the photographer."

Your thread already worked...