|
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 - ClaridgeJ
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23
401
« on: October 28, 2012, 16:36 »
Extremely daunting but brave move and in a totally oversaturated market where supply is much higher then demand and where most other agencies are turning their screws tighter and tighter around contributors.
I know somebody almost exactly in your shoes and with almost exactly the same amount of files. He keeps a low profile, doesnt really want to talk, let alone write about it. He left the entire micro industry and uploaded all his thousands of files as RF instead.
Today, just over a year later he is doing very well, almost on par with his earlier earnings.
Wish you all the luck and as Lisa said, concentrate on SS at first, thats where your bread and butter will come from. 
He left micro and uploaded all his files RF instead. Isn't micro RF. What are you telling us Christine?
Well Mildred, I am talking RF Macro, you know, Getty, Corbis, Alamy, etc, etc.
402
« on: October 28, 2012, 16:29 »
Well, I must have had a bad copy of the 24-105 because I dumped it for the 24-70 and am pretty happy. On my 5DMII F/4 wasn't overly sharp and neither was 50-90mm. So for my type of subjects I left it on f/8 and avoided 50-90 which made it a compromise and not what I would expect from a $1,000+ lens. My 24-70 is consistently sharper and I like it a lot more.
Youre in luck then Paul, most people that I know including myself have issues with the 24-70, same with the 16-35. Soft corners and CA. In fact when it comes to Canon wide-angles Im not too sure I trust them all that? I mean take the Nikon 14-24, it simply slaughters the rest and in everything. As the saying goes, Nikon for wides and Canon for teles. Rather expensive to practice.
403
« on: October 28, 2012, 12:29 »
Well the 24-105L. is probably the best workhorse lens you can buy, superb colors, contrast and tack sharp. I have the 24-70L.II, as well, dont really like it, soft corners, CA, etc.
The 24-105L is slightly slower but offers a wider zoom range. You cant go wrong with it.
404
« on: October 28, 2012, 10:21 »
There is another snag here as well. Many older files uploaded say about five, six years back would probably not pass todays quality and technical barriers.
I know for a fact that some of my own files accepted at SS and IS, around 2006, would never pass todays technical aspects irrespective of subject matter.
405
« on: October 28, 2012, 05:50 »
He left the entire micro industry and uploaded all his thousands of files as RF instead.
Today, just over a year later he is doing very well, almost on par with his earlier earnings.
That is, he uploaded his files RF on macro sites?
Thats what I meant. yes.
406
« on: October 28, 2012, 00:18 »
That tells us quite a bit, but doesn't give us a basis for decision - the pros and cons of RF vs RM in terms of dollars and sales prospects.
Think about it this way: in the old film days, everything in the trad-agencies was RM, there wasnt anything else. No RM/RF agency is going to commit themselves, saying one sell better then the other. Professional stock-photographers will put up pics for sale as RM but only if they think the picture is top commercial, nieched, etc and in the hope of big sales, ofcourse involving all the purchase oif rights. Here is a typical example of an RM sale, involving rights license, etc. Picture: 800 dollars. Rights/worldrights: 2000 dollars. So, you see? the actual rights /Worldrights business is actually far more expensive then the actual picture and it also prevents any other buyer to use that particular picture for the stipulated rights-time. Ofcourse! few buyers need worldrights, this was just one example. Getty, is by far the biggest and best RM agency, they will only accept the very best material as RM. Thats their creame of the crop, hence its almost impossible for somebody today to get into their house( Stone, Image-bank collections). Alamy, Mastefile, Jupiter, Corbis, etc, I believe accept almost anything as RM, as long as it doesnt clash with anything else, exclusive basis that is.
407
« on: October 27, 2012, 23:55 »
Extremely daunting but brave move and in a totally oversaturated market where supply is much higher then demand and where most other agencies are turning their screws tighter and tighter around contributors. I know somebody almost exactly in your shoes and with almost exactly the same amount of files. He keeps a low profile, doesnt really want to talk, let alone write about it. He left the entire micro industry and uploaded all his thousands of files as RF instead. Today, just over a year later he is doing very well, almost on par with his earlier earnings. Wish you all the luck and as Lisa said, concentrate on SS at first, thats where your bread and butter will come from.
408
« on: October 27, 2012, 00:24 »
Jeez! some people are enough flattering themselves here. I dont think there is much chance of anything, billboards, wifes, models? your pics will probably go no further then the usual little webbie. Or maybe a 50 meter gigantic poster on Hollywood hills, next to the sign, where everyones models are sitting in Bentley Continentals and Bugatti Veyrons. 
409
« on: October 26, 2012, 00:43 »
yes! small fortune just beginning to show.
410
« on: October 25, 2012, 14:28 »
Not exactly tanking but it should be better. Used to be such a good earner before this sort order.
411
« on: October 25, 2012, 13:33 »
Brillant! better then ever.  plenty of ODs and ELs.
412
« on: October 24, 2012, 01:53 »
Clever marketing and advertising is what drives IS customers to TS. Throughout the years Getty has always been extremely good at promoting and gearing industry/markets to themselves. You have to hand them that.
Its the faith in their marketing and strategy that still keep the old-timers with them.
413
« on: October 24, 2012, 01:49 »
The only sites worthwhile are the ones with tough editing, they are the ones selling. Sites that just approve any old rubbish are not worth bothering with.
If youre looking for an easy way out? there are none.
414
« on: October 23, 2012, 14:43 »
You are asking people to give up their livelihood and take a gamble with their mortgage and their children's tuition.
Well, ok then it's not for you.
Me, I have no mortgage and no kids. I could get interested.
I am single with no kids and rent an apartment. I have a good paid day job. I am just speaking for tons of others who do depend on stock income. Would you give up your day job for something completely radical with no guarantee of income, because a random stranger asked you to? No.
Serious photography, Im not so much talking stock here but serious conceptual photography and commissioned work as well is a passion, not a job as such. Its simply something you feel you are driven into and for better or worse for poor or rich. Its like taking the oath at the alter when getting married. Followed by trouble and strifes.
415
« on: October 23, 2012, 09:31 »
My sales have dropped off a cliff, my port is 3000 photo's. Several exclusive artist I know with larger portfolios are also reporting the same huge income drop. Why is a mystery?
The best match shows lots of high canister exclusive content - not particularly profitable for iStock. I can only guess migrating customers. If it carries on like this it will force un-exclusivity for a lot of us very soon as the portfolios at iStock become worthless.
Might just be exactly what they want! always a method behind the madness.
416
« on: October 23, 2012, 02:14 »
Good one. My personal favourite is Rule #3;
"Quit looking at what others are doing and create the images that only you can create."
Mine too.
417
« on: October 23, 2012, 01:09 »
Best-of? its going to be interesting to see how they do this. Are they themselves going to chose whats "best-of" in every category or are they going after picture sales, i.e. downloads? cause in that case creative photography wont stand a chance.
418
« on: October 23, 2012, 01:04 »
Yes Im wondering too, whats the problem? have I missed something? I thought Picture-Engine was alive and kicking or at least got off the ground.
419
« on: October 22, 2012, 12:51 »
After doing a little research on Picture Engine, my first impression is...This is EXACTLY what I'm looking for in regards for ALL of us to leave our Agencies and list our own images, and take back control of our images.
Now migrating all your images to Picture Engine is easy. You set up your own Web site, which is great, because you know all of us our picky and want total control of everything...LOL
So you can be creative and make your own, or like I chose to use PhotoShelter from me. You can use KTools or whom ever you'd like. Price your images your own way, and make 100% of the money owed to you!!!
NOW is the time to JOIN, and LEAVE your AGENCY!!!
OK I know most of you need money, and are scared! I am too, but WE NEED TO STICK TOGETHER if we want to have maximum impact on the market.
Here's my idea!
Set up your website... List it with PictureEngine...If your exclusive with anyone, make sure you change your Agreement with them. Get everything ready to leave your Agency...When Picture Engine has all of the bugs worked out and is ready to launch... Everyone at the same time puts in their 30 day notice to the Agencies all at once...A MASSIVE exit all at the same time.... Now the Agencies have to remove your images from their Library or be liable to be sued! Picture Engine will now be the ONE source for Art Buyers world wide to find images...OUR images that we have 100% control over..
Look we've got to do something... Stock Agencies are treating us worse and worse every year! Their taking more and more of our share of our sales. Enough is enough!!! Let's show them who the BOSS is and fight back and tell them where to stick it!!!
I encourage you to look at your industry, and ask yourself has it gotten better or worse? Are you making more money or less? Are you happy with your Stock Agency?
I think you know the answers, and our only option is to STAND UP AND FIGHT BACK...TAKE CONTROL YOUR IMAGES AND WIN THIS FIGHT!!!
Sigh!! yep its all easily done I suppose, storm in a teacup.
420
« on: October 22, 2012, 12:35 »
It's blindingly obvious that all the agencies are now drowning in a sea of poor-quality material and need a way forward.
It would be great if Alamy could actually say "we're biting the bullet and are going to actually look at the product we sell and decide what's good and what isn't, so we can present to customers on that basis" - like any ordinary retailer does with his products. But with 25 million unique products in stock, that's simply not possible. All they can possibly do is fall back on some variation of popularity-based ranking - which, as we know, is basically instant death to new images. It results in that casino-like situation where your image has to 'get lucky' and make a couple of sales very early, or it sinks into the depths forever.
Hope I'm wrong about this and that Alamy has some new spin on an old problem - or gives us a way to re-keyword our images to take advantage of the new system.
[/quote.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly! spot on! they are basically drowning in it, poor quality, irrelevant material, spamming, etc. It really shows and in almost every search. Buyers, even if they dont care about quality must find it a nightmare. Its beginning to resemble a photography-class where all their material in hung up on the classroom wall, especially an evening class with introduction to PS elements.
421
« on: October 22, 2012, 12:19 »
Well? dont know really, from 8 this morning up to now, I ve made, 420 bucks. Can picture engine beat that, if I leave all agencies? doubt it. SS alone stands for 35%.
422
« on: October 22, 2012, 01:12 »
So far my experience with Pond5, is very positive. They work more like a trad-agency, set your own pricing and I do the same as CS, 15 dollars and it works fine. Its also nice to see dollars coming in and not cents.
They are very established in the video market and have been for many years so they are well known indeed.
Im very happy with them.
423
« on: October 22, 2012, 01:07 »
Same here, about 10% fewer files at TS then IS. My experience so far is somewhat differant. TS seem to sell quite well actually, small sales but plenty of them and I was up 70% this month.
424
« on: October 22, 2012, 01:01 »
Not at all sure this Getty/Zoonar thing is working out? for some reason they dont even seem to want to know about Zoonar?
AGE: well they are not happy at all with micro and certainly dont want micro mixed up with their RF/RM, etc.
I think Zoonar is more of an Agent actually, a sort of middleman if you wish, not an agency in its own rights? could be wrong ofcourse.
bottom line: ther are too many ppl, too many middlemen, agencies, agents, third-fourth parties trying to cut slices from photographers incomes that in the end its a big fat ZERO.
425
« on: October 20, 2012, 09:46 »
And as far as that snide remark about people who weren't maintaining sales, the only way for an indie to keep a 20% royalty rate was to have over a million RCs. I think only Yuri got to keep 20%. So yes, they cut indie royalties for everyone but Yuri.
Yep. My sales maintained very well that first year of the royalty credit fiasco, and I still got stuck at 19%. Of course now that sales have plummeted across the board for pretty much everyone on IS, a lot of us are going to go down a level or more.
It's unreasonable to blame a failure to "maintain sales" on contributors when the site has been barely functional for months.
Look, all you independents did was get getty 2.4 billion and then h&f 4.4 billion. Do you really think it was a good long term (more than 2 years) strategy to heavily promote ( mainly yuri and monkey) on istock best match from 2008 - 2011. Why would a company allow prominent shelf space to a non-exclusive files that are available at 10 cents on the dollar a click away. You got played by men who pumped and dumped istock. Why do you think the strategy of promoting independents suddenly stopped. It was bleeding off customers. Sure the price hikes sped up the migration but the short term balance sheet got two groups of owners 4 billion. Now they have a problem. They built up the competition beyond a controlling interest and now the value of their brand is going the wrong way. How will the new group sell for 7 billion in three years at this rate?? Anyone with half a brain new that promoting non exclusives while raising prices was incongruent. But it worked like a 4 billion dollar charm.
Sure we got played, show me any business that doesnt play its members or employees. Banks play their customers every day. However you have to be extra, extra stupid to give them carte-blanche to play you, by signing up for exclusivity. Next step would be the nut house.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
