|
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 - ThomasAmby
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18]
426
« on: May 10, 2009, 13:23 »
I set up an account with FeaturePics and was just about to submit my portfolio (sales or not, I wanted to support them for the 70% contributor commission)
What stopped me from doing this was this statement in their contributor agreement:
You can request to delete Image(s) any time. It can be actually deleted in 90 days.
...Which means that if I put up my portfolio at FP and sell another SR-EL on Dreamstime, I will be breaking the law by not being able to take down my own images within 78 hours or so.
Is this the case? Are there no "delete"-button by the images that you upload?
Thanks
Thomas Amby
427
« on: May 05, 2009, 06:07 »
428
« on: May 05, 2009, 05:58 »
Among other things, what we pay the big agencies for is them marketing our images and making sure customers will come to their site. If we are thousands of photographers and illustrators in this altogether, we will be thousands of photographers and illustrators willing to try and direct buyers to our site through social networks, education (as hqimages mentions), marketing paid by donations and so forth.
We can be competitive by having lower prices than the big 5 (not too low), and we will still earn more. Also by branding the cooperation as an agency that treats the artists as they deserve.
I think there would have to be some donations involved in this, so maybe someone with knowledge could put up a site for fellow contributors to donate money? They money should be spent on either buying up an existing agency or having a person with programming skills build up a site from scratch.
I like the wikipedia-idea a lot. Self-moderation works great on Wikipedia.
A question to all: There would have to be some money spent on paying administrators and people running the site, so you're commission would not be 100% to make this work. We can all agree that 20% commission is way too little - how big a percentage would you be willing to cut off of the price the image was bought for?
429
« on: May 04, 2009, 13:39 »
actually it was one of my ex students who told me about it. at the u, he did a thesis on the porn industry and how individual girls (most ex showgirls, ladies of the nights,etc..) would be running their business. all without the help of their pimps or agents. when he mentioned this to the class, they all laughed at him.
by the time he finished his presentation, no one was laughing.
Believe me, none of these girls who started out in the advent of www was making 25 cents per download. and today some of them are truly enterprises with their own fashion shop, merchandising stores,etc...
It isn't a dirty thing, it's real effective marketing and a true community in the sense of the business world. A model to emulate? I should think so.
You may have hit upon a possible solution there. I was thinking down the line of Wikipedia being self administrating and staffed by volunteers, etc. If every contributor effectively had their own site, set their own prices and was self-editing ...
Wouldn't that be a bit risky? There would have to be some sort of intervention from people who knew about things such as copyright infringement, and who knew which images to reject. I wouldn't bother donating money for the purpose of hiring a team of moderators, though. It is worth fighting for and would be a great investment for us suppressed contributors.
430
« on: May 04, 2009, 13:31 »
How about!, and this idea is off the top of my head, so don't kill me over it!
If we contacted one of the low earning sites and make some kind of legal agreement with them (if they go for it of course), where it would be profitable for us as well as the site, and all of us start uploading all our new photos and take away the good stuff that we've been uploading to the big guys for pennies, that way, they could take care of the marketing and day to day performance of the site and we would supply the product...I think buyers may tend to buy from that site instead of one of the large ones, since they will be bombarded with great quality photos that other sites will not have...what do you guys think?
Edited: GeoPappas, I upload to FP and lately I've being getting some good sales there, not in quantity but in commisssion, they could be a perfect candidate to contact.
Great idea! A 50% commission would be fair, in my opinion
431
« on: April 12, 2009, 11:14 »
Is this a joke?
Soon the number of microstock agencies will exceed the number of contributors
5$ for free? 25% commission? 0,5$ prices? - There is no way you will ever see my portfolio on that site. I am not going to give away my illustrations for free.
432
« on: April 08, 2009, 07:44 »
Let's discuss traffic on the biggest agencies. I tried to compare the traffic of the five biggest agencies on Alexa and I got this:  This is quite surprising to me, as Stockxpert, which seemingly has significantly less traffic than all of the rest, makes up 19,5 % of my microstock income. Are they about to die? iStockPhoto had a big decline in July 2008, which I think is kind of okay. This might force them to treat contributors better to stay competitive. I have only been in this business since September 2008, so I have no idea why iStock had this decline - does anyone know? Feel free to comment on any of this Regards Thomas Amby
433
« on: March 27, 2009, 02:38 »
I thought this was interesting. Someone posted a response they got back from Fotolia about the vector changes:
"Thank you for your e-mail. As we mentioned on the previous e-mail, Jpeg files and illustrations that comes with the Vector file format are only for Thumbnails.
Unfortunatelly the Vector file is no longer available in Jpeg format to submit it as Xs, X, M, L, XL, X licenses anymore."
I'm not really sure why they would do this.
This is the most stupid decision ever made - why the limitations? Will they accept it, if the JPEG comes along as another upload?
434
« on: March 26, 2009, 09:57 »
Thank you very much. That's sad  I liked the design of it and wanted that card rather than the IS grungy one. As IS makes up less than 4% of my microstock income, I haven't yet reached $100, only half way. I guess I will have to wait till then, then apply for the IS debit card, and afterwards will I be able to link the IS card to DT also?
435
« on: March 26, 2009, 08:00 »
Has Dreamstime removed their option to cash directly to Payoneer debit cards? I want to order a Dreamstime debit card, but whenever I go to "request payment" and click on the "login/register at Payoneer"-link, I get a 404-error and I am redirected to their front page. I have tried only yesterday and today. Also on Payoneer's homepage, the Dreamstime debit card is not listed. http://www.payoneer.com/payoneercards.aspxHow can I order a card? Did they removed this option? Did I miss something?
436
« on: March 25, 2009, 05:19 »
I believe they have been forced to lower their prices as a result of the vector prices on another agency starting with V. More and more people have been submitting their vector art to that site even though their prices are ridiculously low compared to other agencies, and this is the consequence. Soon other agencies will follow, pretty sad.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
