|
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
4701
« on: April 26, 2018, 08:08 »
I think it's covered, focus on a dot of light, in the distance, manually (read all of the above) wide open. Mirror lock up if it's not already on the list. I don't know if I missed reading that? I just want to repeat, you need a rock solid tripod, and if you aren't on firm ground, the floor, wooden deck, or anything that can vibrate, traffic, will cause movement. If these are long time exposures, you should have a brick, rock, old lifting weight or something heavy, attached to the center of your tripod, to prevent minor movement.  (borrowed from this site: http://www.instructables.com/id/Tripod-stabilizer-weight-hook/ ) I've set up on a balcony on a building, concrete, 10th floor and done some night shots. They had shakes, and I was inside. The building moved!
4702
« on: April 26, 2018, 07:51 »
If the middlemen are taking too high a percentage or not providing a good service then they are ripe for replacement. If for example Google opened up a marketplace and only took 25% I bet they would own the market very quickly. I don't see it happening, but I do feel that this market is ripe for a shakeup.
There has been a theory floating around that Google is altering the search because they are getting into the Microstock market. The problem I see is this. If they are manipulating the search, where are the buyers getting their images? You can't have SS and IS and DT and the rest, all having lower downloads and lower earnings, without someone somewhere picking up that lost business. Who and where? Or have sales just evaporated? Anyway, to answer, yes if Alphabet opened a new agency, or bought an existing one, and offered 25%, you can bet that those of us who are left, would go drop everything we have into their collection. Problem is, so would the image factories and there we would be with our thousands of images, competing against their 100s of thousands for the same market share. What I mean is, sure I'd like 25%, I'd like 50% a bunch more.  How does mystery new agency, paying 50% and not racing to the lowest prices, asking for exclusive new images sound. Now I'm really interested! Might as well add since this is all imaginary and isn't going to happen, the agency reviews for quality and edits keywords and descriptions for truth and accuracy. Buyers would love that too? Meanwhile back to the real world and the subject. Supply and demand. Does the world need another stock agency? Is there room for someone else to take another big slice out of our cheesecake and make the other slices smaller? So we get 25% of a higher volume and lose everyplace else where some people have worked to build their collections. You take money from one pocket and put it into your other pocket, you still have the same money. At this stage that's all I see for new agencies, unless they do something different. No gain for us, just a redistribution and dilution of meager returns. Supply and demand, individuals produce, big image factories produce 100 times more, buyers still only need what they always needed. We're all going to make less unless we have something that the big factories don't make.
4703
« on: April 26, 2018, 07:34 »
I tried a few months ago to put for sale higher resolutions (cca 50% higher resolution than previously)
Conclusion:
-no significantly higher sales
-much longer upload time
-more space use on my disks
I'm not saying it does not work at all (maybe for a few commercial extended licenses, it could be a good strategy), however, it's a big lottery with a very unsure return on investment...
Yes I think that's the same as answering this same question over the years, no one knows for sure, but everything costs more and takes longer. But do higher resolution images sell better? Is it something that buyers look a lot at?
Not really, but it's much more flexible to work with.
Most buyers use very small resolutions, and people have been printing large posters with great success from 8mp images for years.
Also true, it does depend on what, who's buying or what they are using the images for. But you hit about the best reason I can think of for a larger sensor (assuming it's the same Mfg. and one can use their already existing lenses!) More Flexible to work with. Someone can take a photo and crop it into different views. You have room to work and recompose. Does anyone feel the ability to have lower noise levels at high asa is an advantage....I'm desperately trying to rationalise a new toy but to be honest I'm not sure the marginal improvement in IQ is worth the s anymore.
Also a yes if noise is a problem and shooting at high ISO is important. I don't find that necessary over what I have now, for myself. Others might? My part of the addition consideration would be, how long does it take to make up the cost of the new equipment in a struggling market. That's if one cares about Microstock or Stock as a source of income. Expenses vs income vs cost to produce the products for that market? How important is a new bigger sensor, with much of everything else remaining the same. I still downsize most of the time for Microstock. But in my case the content is more important than the size. Others may find a different situation. I don't downsize for news agencies and Alamy for example. I make almost everything for SSTK and FT/AS down in the 6MP range, unless it's something that I feel lends itself to a larger size, like a stitched panorama. I guess everyone needs to decide on their own what their market is and if they need bigger, maybe better, images. New equipment means new debt to pay off. You don't make money until the equipment is paid for... 
4704
« on: April 26, 2018, 07:09 »
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-reports-first-quarter-2018-110200026.htmlFirst Quarter 2018 highlights as compared to First Quarter 2017: Key Operating Metrics. Paid downloads increased 0.5% to 43.7 million. Revenue per download increased 16.8% to $3.40. Image collection expanded 41.6% to 187 million images. Video collection expanded 45.1% to 10 million clips. Earlier News - holdings and ratings. https://www.dispatchtribunal.com/2018/04/22/metropolitan-life-insurance-co-ny-cuts-stake-in-shutterstock-sstk.htmlFeb. 22nd 2018 - "Shutterstock also saw its key operating metrics continue to climb. The number of paid downloads rose 4% to 43.9 million, accelerating from their pace of growth last quarter. Revenue per download climbed 11% to $3.33, continuing a nice double-digit percentage run higher. The company now sports more than 170 million images and 9.1 million videos in its collection, sustaining growth rates near 50% for both metrics." Looked this morning, the stock was at $50 a share which I still think is high, at least 20% over what it should be.
4705
« on: April 24, 2018, 13:24 »
I'm 90% sure that I once read somewhere that a score of 100 meant that the average earnings from that site equates to $500 a month.
I'm not going to go digging for the specific answer from Leaf but, yes you remember right. Before the change the sites were based on the highest site, which put ShutterStock at 100% all the time and everything else as what percentage of the base = ShutterStock, any other site was. No dollar relationship. Now the new version is not showing dollars but roughly based on 100 equals $500. There's also a cap on how much someone can report for a site, so the IS exclusives could be at over $2,500 a month, and of course someone on SS could also, but the poll would never allow a response higher than +$2500 maybe that's good so huge variances are eliminated and anyone playing with the poll or working as a shill for an agency, can't create a biased higher result with one vote?
4706
« on: April 24, 2018, 13:00 »
old are those, who are in the Microstock business for more than 7 years. They ran out of new ideas. And they remember the golden days.
That is not true. I still have ideas, I just keep forgetting them on my way to the studio. And sometimes I also forget why I was going there or where I am.
Dr. Josephine, is this a symptom of being in the stock business for 12 years?
Maybe you could prescribe a dose of instagram and free sharing social networks. The young people there seem to have a lot of ideas. Still confused why they live in their parents house at age 35, though...
Best answer so far. I'll add this: 
4707
« on: April 24, 2018, 12:32 »
I was just sorting some old storage and came across this from 2012 - the top 12 contributors. I don't have the time or inclination to repeat the search, one by one.  December end of year 2017 - 17743 members with over 1000 images, that would be the active contributors at some kind of level, not that someone with 200 really unique images couldn't be working. There's just a line somewhere and 1,000 was it. Africa Studio keeps working, 130,000 images, Featureflash is an agency, couldn't find Helga.
4708
« on: April 24, 2018, 11:16 »
May I ask what your age group is for "old people"? Curious ...
Oh, fat old bald people like me for sure. Anyone who gets set in their ways will be old, stale and lose their creativity. You can call it the generation gap. I think they left the C off Rap. But I like Lady Gaga and Adell, Meghan Trainor and some other newer artists. Stagnant creativity or only looking back, is "old". Looking forward and accepting change is "new". I can listen to Zappa or Van Morrison and have a good time, but I don't block out everything new, just because it's new and different. It's not your age that matters, but where your head and heart are at. You can be old in years and young at heart. Your mind can be forward and open to innovation, but be old in years. You can be young and has arrested development, stuck in the past or at some age. Because change is new and good and resistance to change is OLD! Of course the bones don't move like they used to, I'm don't leap walls like I used to, but not much one can do with mind over matter to change that part of old. That's my personal answer but it's not just about dates and ages or how many years I've been doing stock. I'll work on the rest: "paper or plastic"? Do you want fries with that"? "hand me my walking stick", "I remember the good old days..." Yeah get over the past, look to the future. 
4709
« on: April 24, 2018, 10:58 »
I have there over 2000 pictures for about a year.
No reports from them.
No web interface contributor. Pathetic.
Thanks, I was hoping someone took the time to give them a try. I just stumbled upon them and wondered. Thanks for the information.
4710
« on: April 24, 2018, 10:53 »
Yep I reckon every new business sees an initial explosion with seemingly insatiable demand and big profits then everyone piling in to make their fortune then a shakedown with a few businesses who really know what they are doing surviving...what puzzles me are the number of tiny agencies limping along...and more so the start ups who think there is still money to be made from a simple "me too" agency.
Also, and maybe some here are too young, when computers started, there were all kinds of companies and operating systems, some were smaller, some had big company names and some where smaller and struggling. Now what do we have? Basically three, Microsoft, Apple and Ubuntu. Yes there are some specialized and niche OS projects but for the most part, two and one open source. Phones are the same. Game companies for computers, all over, individuals, small, large and the sharks either consumed the little ones, bought them or drove them out of business. Anyone remember Lotus 1-2-3? Dbase, Wordstar, Wang word processors. We had to pay for web browsers until Firefox (actually Netscape and Mozilla where open source) But Internet Explorer gained a foothold because it was bundled with Windows 98. Microstock is the same. Rapid growth to start, all kinds of competition from small to large. Like it or not, like all other technology there's a flash of development, innovation and then a process of weeding out. Only the strong survive. Genius is Adobe offering their own connected stock site, keep watching. I don't know how so many of the smaller agencies are hanging on and staying in business. Maybe it's the outstanding profit margin because they pay us almost nothing! Oh and the OP, yes is there an echo in here? I've been saying the same things since the start and so have many others. It's simple supply and demand economic for people working in Microstock or Stock. We went from having useful and creative images, with better sales to the level now of providing a common commodity, in many cases. There are still degrees of quality, but a photo of an Apple is a photo of an Apple and if the buyer doesn't like mine they have 100,000 other choices. I don't think the big two agencies are doing anything to help us, and the change to lower standards, go for numbers has just made the market worse for those of us who care and produce the quality work. We're like a local fine import grocery store vs Walmart or some big chain food store, and next door is a dollar store. Many different levels of quality and pricing to match. The corner store and neighborhood grocery stores are mostly history. Only 10 agencies make the list on the right now and that number could drop another one or two if they don't make meaningful income for us? I've already left, but some people are still struggling to make what they can from all the outlets. You can only support and work for nothing to keep the bottom feeders and dying agencies in business. Eventually they are just sapping your production, competing with your own income, and a waste of time.
4711
« on: April 22, 2018, 14:56 »
I just got this email from Flickr:
Were excited to announce that Flickr has agreed to be acquired by SmugMug, the photography platform dedicated to visual storytellers.
.......you can choose to not have your Flickr account and data transferred to SmugMug until May 25, 2018. If you want to keep your Flickr account and data from being transferred, you must go to your Flickr account to download the photos and videos you want to keep, then delete your account from your Account Settings by May 25, 2018.
If you do not delete your account by May 25, 2018, your Flickr account and data will transfer to SmugMug and will be governed by SmugMugs Terms and Privacy Policy.
So, what are you guys and gals doing?
Watching, I don't use either. Quote from Variety: "With Flickers acquisition by SmugMug, Flickr users have until May 25, 2018, to either accept SmugMugs terms of service and privacy policy or opt out." I found my account, last upload was 2009. Tried to login to SmugMug apparently I don't have an account for any of my email addresses, which sounds like good news.
4712
« on: April 20, 2018, 16:47 »
Interesting read, thanks Uncle Pete. Unfortunately, it's a pure speculation, so not of any value.
Yes it is speculation, no argument. However, the speculation is based on observations that my best sellers are not first and new files, plus some that have never sold are also on the first page of popular. That leads me to some self evident, simple conclusions.
I'd like the alternative views to what I wrote if you have something to add. That would be interesting. Or point out where my reasoning is wrong? Look at your own collection and most popular, what do you see that's not as I wrote?
I have almost the same experiences and conclusions based on my portfolio (more than 10 years of microstock work). What I'm optimistic about is that they will be giving up on favoring the bestsellers that are too old, because it's just a nonsense that 10-15 years old pictures are kept on the front page, when there is a flood of new images everyday. Maybe when shareholders hear about that or something. It will change for better, I'm sure.
What I wanted to say earlier is that I would prefer to hear opinions of some insiders that work on these algorithms.
Ah yes, now I understand and I agree. I have never heard anything from anyone at any agency about the secret algorithms they use to make "popular". I'm sure there's some top secret NDA connected. April 26th before the market opens, SSTK will release the first quarter reports.
4713
« on: April 20, 2018, 15:46 »
Did you receive it close to a payment? I am wondering if this is coincidence.
Nope, just one in Dec or January, one in Feb and one this week. I think some others have also, maybe they can see if it was near a payment due. I'm really just going at the basics. Someone stole our email addresses somehow from the site. The only reason I saw the Dec. was, it was in the Spam folder.  The addresses could have also come from the DT forum registration? I don't know, but somewhere, somehow, someone has been finding email addresses for DT contributors.
4714
« on: April 20, 2018, 15:39 »
Interesting read, thanks Uncle Pete. Unfortunately, it's a pure speculation, so not of any value.
Yes it is speculation, no argument. However, the speculation is based on observations that my best sellers are not first and new files, plus some that have never sold are also on the first page of popular. That leads me to some self evident, simple conclusions. I'd like the alternative views to what I wrote if you have something to add. That would be interesting. Or point out where my reasoning is wrong? Look at your own collection and most popular, what do you see that's not as I wrote?
4715
« on: April 20, 2018, 13:08 »
https://www.superstock.com/I was reviewing a website to see if I would apply to be their manager and all the photos came from SuperStock. Oddly the website was built with Website Builder. I don't know if that's a connection or not. Anyone work SuperStock and if so, what do they pay? There's a page to apply as a contributor but nothing about commission.
4716
« on: April 20, 2018, 11:44 »
I know this is an old thread but I just noticed I have a similar fake Dreamstime mail.
It was sent just around the time I received my payment.
I am not happy they have my mail...
Yup, got another one this week, saying my EID or SS# were wrong. (on an account that's been there since at least 2008?) They come from a spoofed address and are impersonating someone at DT. Of course DT never answers any mail or phishing reports so they don't care. I suspect that someone figured a way to harvest all the emails from DTs servers. Or mine could be true and DT just discovered that they don't have a clue? LOL
4717
« on: April 20, 2018, 11:37 »
Hey, uncle Pete, With all due respect, how sure are you to say that "Most Popular on SS isn't best selling"?
Noted there are quite a number of contributors who copied not just the ideas but to simply imitate the popular images like a total copycat and spam them on SS. My images had been copied every now and then but they don't get to be popular.
I like to point out that the reason why images get to be the cream of the crop is not happened by pure luck. Truth is, the more popular your image is, the more it sells. When an image is listed on the 1st page, it will sell better than the one which is listed on the 10 page. why? It's a simple logic. Plus I have my images listed from the first page to the tenth page so i can compare the number each image brings.
"Get a slimmer body without doing exercise nor no diet in just 3 days by taking xxx supplement" Will anyone buy into the idea? You'd be surprised or shouldn't be too surprise that there are people who will and still buy into that. If they believe that's the solution to their problem, they will also believe that success in microstock is to be the copycat as they are and to spam SS with their mediocre counterfeit images. Just be lazy and reaping rewards? Thanks...but no thanks!
My personal view of Most Popular or whatever it's called this week is the first in the search are "selected suggestions". Things have been that way for quite some time. Old most popular, hypothetically in 2011, was most downloads over time the image was on the system. Reality is more complicated, but that's a nice basic viewpoint of the way it was. So if someone uploaded a picture of a kitten in 2004 and it's sold, over and over, for years, it would have been on the first pages, based on # of downloads. Second, old days and still now, a new image got featured presentation, because if they didn't, it's no use uploading something new, with no views, no sales and it would just, at best, start in the middle, languish without any change, and slowly slide backwards into oblivion. There was always a "honeymoon" for new and there still is. If you know a particular subject, of your own, that has good sales, and you check from week to week, you'll find your page one images will sometimes be down the page or second page?  Because new images have been uploaded and they are featured. Look a week later or maybe two and if those new images (by keywords) haven't been selling, they will be sliding down the pages. Your best materials will be back on top again. Not that viewing my own collection is a critical observation, but when I look at my "Most Popular" (not logged in and sometimes on the road, so IP address doesn't say - Hey Pete's looking at his own stuff) I see new images on the first page, I see unsold images on the first page, I see some of my best sellers on the first two pages. If it was what any kid in grade school would say is Most Popular, it would be best selling at the very least? So that's why my opinion is, that Most Popular since about 2011 has been, Suggested Images that SS wants buyers to see or buy, mixed with best selling, most viewed, newest, and who knows what else? As far as copying, yeah, what's the difference, anyone can go to any site that isn't manipulating the results and see best selling images, right on top. IS used to show how many sales! Most of us know by now what kind of materials sell best. My only suggestion is, expanding from best selling subjects to best selling ideas and concepts. Or best selling lighting and composition. But if shooting sliced vegetable, or the same two burgers from 50 angles, is the answer to making money for someone who just copies what's most produced, they are going to fail and then blame the system or some conspiracy. This isn't art, but there is a need for being different and creative, otherwise, why would any buyer think my photos standout? I mean anyone can bake a cheesecake or pick one up and style it, and have a slew of great cheesecake shots. Are they going to sell vs the existing 13,877 Cherry Cheesecake stock photos? Even if they are spectacular and the best darn photo on ShutterStock, first page, most sold? What's the demand and how many different versions can how many buyers need. That's where our slice of the pie keeps getting smaller and smaller, because there are more and more of every best selling item and a limited number of buyers for those same items. Adding more of something common, is like throwing a pebble into the ocean. Here's an all time favorite and I'd bet the number, if you check next month, will be ever growing. 308,390 Sliced Vegetables Isolated On White But heck, why fight the masses and the trends, I shouldn't care if the competition keeps shooting stillborn images or wastes their time, day after day, making photos that will rarely get any traction or sales. I should just shut up and say, "yeah that's the answer, keep repeating the same subjects that are dead and hope for better results". Nope I don't see that Popular is actually popular, I think it's just Shutterstock Suggests...
4718
« on: April 20, 2018, 11:11 »
Just got a new one from Yahoo and also Roku and it's been at least a week now and FB has not sent me "my history" as promised. They said I will get an email when it's ready.
Here's what came from Yahoo. Doesn't leave much room. I mean I can get email or drop my account that's from the 90s? I think we'll see more of this.
New Privacy and Terms
Yahoo is now part of Oath, the media and tech company behind todays top news, sports and entertainment sites and apps.
By choosing I accept below, you agree to Oaths new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Below is a summary of some of the key updates. To learn more about our approach to privacy, click here.
How we collect and use data.
Weve updated some of the ways we collect and analyze user data in order to deliver services, content, relevant advertising and abuse protection.
This includes: analyzing content and information when you use our services (including emails, instant messages, posts, photos, attachments, and other communications), linking your activity on other sites and apps with information we have about you, and providing anonymized and/or aggregated reports to other parties regarding user trends.
Sharing Data with Verizon.
Oath and its affiliates may share the information we receive with Verizon. Learn more about Verizons privacy practices.
I think that means they can read and monitor everything, use it for advertising and user trends.
Got a similar message from Strava announcing that:
Well soon be asking for your consent to collect and process certain data.
So it is up to all of us to decide if we still want free services from internet companies.
Exactly!Anything "free" comes with some conditions. I especially liked the AT&T / Yahoo notice with basically tells us what they have been doing all this time. And if the message got lost, almost all free email from Internet providers, cable or local service is actually managed by Yahoo Mail. Gmail is not of course. I have my own hosting and they are independent but do I want to change to my website name and try to drag along the business email which is on Gmail or my various personal account that are on Prodigy, or just give in and say, fine, monitor and watch me? The good is that people are now aware of how much we are being observed and documented for marketing and other uses.
4719
« on: April 20, 2018, 11:00 »
@JetCityImage I was asking about the little red icon which suppose to work and it does not work in my case. But @Uncle Pete explained it wonderfully how to solve my problem.
Yeah, who knows where PMs go or if my computer ate the message. Good to see it works now.
4720
« on: April 19, 2018, 15:09 »
Your search box should clear when we type in new terms.
Yes. By the way, we're all new and I see that there's a cookie that remembers last search, but also a button to clear search. That's useful. And although Sue pointed this out, it's still wrong, search should say separated by commas not "Terms separate by comma..." or possibly Separate Search Terms with commas...
4721
« on: April 19, 2018, 14:45 »
...and yet you all keep posting that Shutterstock is where it's at, bringing in 100 million more images. Oh, how ironic.
Well, despite all of this, there are plenty of cases where we are 5 or 6 having a picture on the same subject. It's usually pretty specific topics, but it still works in terms of income.
SS, and microstock in general, are no different from other internet businesses. It is a huge world, so you have the choice between two strategies: either producing huge to flood the market, but with the impossibility to work correctly (like for instance on keywording), or to be on niche markets where there is little offer and a reasonnable demand, but where you gonna have to get the most appropriate offer possible (not necessarily about quality, but in terms of accurateness).
That's actually a big part of the long tail strategy. Once you find the niche you can fill, a big part of the strategy is done. The most difficult remains, being able to develop your business and to innovate once you saturate this little market, but that's another story...
In the meantime, regarding precisely SS, they are far from being my friends, but I just check three indicators: the overall income, the RPI, and, less important, the RPD. In any case, all of the three are the highest of all the platforms (even though sometimes competing with IS). So, in the end, I don't care if there are 200 million or 200 pictures on SS, it still works and gives me time and finance to think to other strategies.
Long Tail Strategy, didn't work for these guys?  But yes that's what I've been trying to point out, adapt, adjust, go for something other than the mass of similar to what's already been done. Find a specialty and hammer it! Find subjects that aren't well covered. Any one of us will get more downloads with one of 100 photos than one of 40,000 of any subject. Having one best photo in the 100 will make more than the lost best 10 in the 40,000 slices of common over produced images. There are 62 pages of jelly donut images. Even if someone had the best darn jelly doughnut ever photographed, 42 pages, and uploaded it today, if your photo isn't on the first few pages, or doesn't get placement and downloads from the new image boost, it's going to move back into the pack and say good-bye to the work and time spent on taking the photo. If you shot an Alexandertorte you would be one of one. Extreme, sure, but what about Apple Strudel? 10,379 Apple Strudel = really don't bother! How about Danish Kringles, there are only 13 on all of ShutterStock. Just on a whim I picked pastry, because of the cheesecake idea, and in probably 5 minutes found two that someone could procure and photograph and make more money, than being buried on page 30 of any group. It doesn't take hours or genius to find areas that have a need to be filled. Personally I think it's much smarter than repeating the same shots that are already made and over shot and expecting that somehow, the new versions, of an old subject, will magically get better downloads. ps don't bother with triple cheeseburger, it's an interesting idea, I've had some shots for years, no market. I think one download and when I found the use it was some article about Big Mac's. Someone brilliant uploaded about 300 of the same illustration with a flag from every country in the world. Oh wow, spam, triple cheeseburger illustrations, the torture has no bounds. I'm happy that Most Popular on SS isn't best selling. The lazy people who just copy ideas and make more of anything that ever had hope, will just make more copies and kill the entire subject, concept or specific item.
4722
« on: April 19, 2018, 14:00 »
Just got a new one from Yahoo and also Roku and it's been at least a week now and FB has not sent me "my history" as promised. They said I will get an email when it's ready.
Here's what came from Yahoo. Doesn't leave much room. I mean I can get email or drop my account that's from the 90s? I think we'll see more of this.
New Privacy and Terms
Yahoo is now part of Oath, the media and tech company behind todays top news, sports and entertainment sites and apps.
By choosing I accept below, you agree to Oaths new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Below is a summary of some of the key updates. To learn more about our approach to privacy, click here.
How we collect and use data.
Weve updated some of the ways we collect and analyze user data in order to deliver services, content, relevant advertising and abuse protection.
This includes: analyzing content and information when you use our services (including emails, instant messages, posts, photos, attachments, and other communications), linking your activity on other sites and apps with information we have about you, and providing anonymized and/or aggregated reports to other parties regarding user trends.
Sharing Data with Verizon.
Oath and its affiliates may share the information we receive with Verizon. Learn more about Verizons privacy practices.
I think that means they can read and monitor everything, use it for advertising and user trends.
4723
« on: April 19, 2018, 13:43 »
I can't figure out how to add the link to my SS portfolio to the footer.
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/royaltyfreeart this is my account.
I use g/royaltyfreeart or royaltyfreeart, nothing works.
It keeps showing 404 error. What am I doing wrong? 
Did you get the PM I sent a few days ago? Only enter your SS user number. Go to https://submit.shutterstock.com/dashboard click in the upper right, (next to language it's your name), and then Account Settings, you will see ID and your number. You probably have the same number other places, easier to find, like from when you registered or what you use for ftp? Unless things changed here? See what it says for SS: " Shutterstock: User ID # " the forum needs only your user ID number. Good Luck!
4724
« on: April 19, 2018, 13:24 »
Nobody in the real world knows what a stock photographer is.
So just say you are a commercial photographer
I'm always very curious about this fake world we're all apparently living in.
Sorry but my controllers have forbidden me from confirming or denying, or to admit the existence of any world. 
4725
« on: April 17, 2018, 09:51 »
It would be interesting if anyone has kept a record of the poll I expect there's been a long term decline across the board particularly the low earners
I actually thought the screen captures would bring some comments on the state of Microstock. Maybe most here don't read the "Newbie Discussion" area?
Things like, look how many agencies there were that made the list in 2012? 19 (whatever the numbers, 50 people or more were voting)
Look at what IS numbers were when the totals were combined vs split. IS was 50 - now Ind are 25 and Exclusive are 200 many months...
Fotolia/Adobe and Pond5 are the only two that have gone up in the poll. (did I miss something?) Make a note for Alamy but that has to do with who votes more than earnings, as I know personally the licenses there have dropped in dollar value, but have increased in number.
It confirms what we already know I think so not really much to say...other than despite all the complaining about it SS remains by far the dominant earner. Across the board its a much tougher business and its not about to get any easier
Yeah that's the low hanging fruit. I think some others might see something else that I missed. I never considered the before and after on IS, being with Exclusive and without. SS may be dominant but look how they have fallen. No wonder people complain? If the drop is the same for us as the agency on a whole, that's easily 30% of earnings. IS has dropped 50% while some others have fallen off the charts. I always have to keep in mind, only people who care to take the poll are represented. It's anonymous, but not everyone takes the time. I know I don't remember every month. I don't want to declare Microstock is dead just like the DSLR is dead which we've seen for years and years, but I'm beginning to think, Microstock is not a productive way to make useful income. I don't see any reason to believe there's any hope of growth potential at this stage. I need to remind myself to be positive and instead of flat earnings, call it stable earnings. LOL
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
