|
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 - Wilm
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 35
51
« on: September 21, 2024, 10:37 »
I'm surprised this seems rather confusing for a lot of people? I believe I even read where it stated what the weekly sales rank is?
It's simply your rank, in terms of downloads - relatively to ALL the other contributors - for that week. Lifetime rank is simply for all contributors over the LIFETIME.
So, if you get more downloads than more people - your rank goes up. If other people get more downloads than you, your rank goes down.
So you 'could' be ranked #1, if for example you had '3' downloads, and 'everyone else' had 1. Or, you could be ranked #10000 if you had say 1000 downloads, but 'everyone else' had 1001+...
Really quite simple. Your weekly ranking is just simply how many downloads you've had relative to everyone else in the system.
Correct!
52
« on: September 20, 2024, 10:13 »
slightly off topic but just curious... how many downloads do you need to get a lifetime rank? Unfortunately, I can only help with 2 numbers here (my account and my wife's account), but maybe we can narrow it down:
-> 811 downloads do not give a lifetime rank, shows "---"
-> 10.776 downloads shows the lifetime rank "10.950"
As you know I had my 44.444 th download in September - lifetime rank 2.880 And you've read about another contributor: 65.200 downloads - lifetime rank 1.820
53
« on: September 20, 2024, 09:58 »
Slightly below average for me.
54
« on: September 13, 2024, 15:26 »
Thanks, would you say focusing on real photos is a waste of time ? Or doing Ai at the moment is the best option?
This is like asking which camera should I use to get more sales.
You should focus on content and genre, you can have great sales with real photos and ai. Most agencies dont even take ai and still people have sales.
The majority of sales in the industry are real images, not ai. ai is a niche.
Why dont you follow the various newslettersd and blogposts of agencies what they recommend to shoot?
They put a lot of effort and research into these newsletters.
Sadly, most producers never read them. They just sort by downloads where that is possible then try to copy the exact image.
Then complain they are not getting sales.
Look at subjects you understand really well, try to find what is missing. Then shoot that.
And get inspiration from the newsletters. The agencies want to make money, they recommend what people like to buy. They give great tips for styling and current trends too.
... the larger agencies (tend to be) pushing the "d.i.e." crap ("diversity, inclusion, equity") - which actually really has absolutely nothing to do with "equity", etc - but rather the people behind blackrock/vanguard attacking the christian/caucasian family unit (trying to 'encourage' boys/girls to cut off their body parts to become 'trans', or samesex, i.e., depopulation)... you don't really see them pushing "gay east indians" or "trans arabic women with hijab" people, it is primarily targeted at white people.
 Are you serious?
55
« on: September 11, 2024, 04:14 »
You are boosting the theory that anyone who started uploading 20 years ago has a forever advantage in the algos. 
I have a doubt in this theory as well. Since I was in 800 position after only 4 months of uploading very few files. However, I do have a question, what does the lifetime position mean? Im 12,000 something now. Whats yours? May be it does point to the length of being a contributor and adds to the formula somehow?
Your lifetime position indicates that a good 12,000 contributors have achieved more downloads and/or revenue* in total than you since they started selling images on Adobe Stock / fotolia. *In my opinion, it could be a mixture of both, as otherwise contributors with a pure video portfolio could not be compared with contributors with a pure image portfolio if this rank is based on downloads only. But it could also be that one video download is equated e.g. with 10 image downloads so that the statistics are comparable. My best lifetime position I ever had was 1,120 years ago and since then I've dropped to 2,880, losing 10 places every two or three weeks.
56
« on: July 30, 2024, 04:42 »
makes sense now. Here is my history to see if this helps you on your goal. I started in 2011 with $654 for that year. My 2nd year I made 247% more and as you can see my gains continued for awhile and then the wall hit me. Now I am losing each year. It was fun while it lasted.
Year Income %
2011 $654
2012 $2,268 247%
2013 $7,778 243%
2014 $15,778 103%
2015 $26,433 68%
2016 $33,937 28%
2017 $35,238 4%
2018 $33,370 -5%
2019 $25,804 -23%
2020 $22,790 -12%
2021 $22,504 -1%
2022 $18,532 -18%
2023 $15,582 -16%
are those numbers only for adobe, or all stock combined?
is the large loss in the last two years mostly from shutterstock? (not your fault)
how much did you upload and how many new concepts or genres did you expand into?
how are your videos doing?
Thank you for sharing real numbers. It is extremely valuable even if our ports are all so different.
I'm sure that this is Adobe/fotolia only.
57
« on: July 30, 2024, 00:58 »
If we soon discover cave paintings from the stone age as brand new images in the database, we know that the review is taking too long. I have uploaded a few new images when Ramses II was still going about his government business - they are still waiting for the review.
but those were the glory days of papyro-stock - when we were paid 1 loaf of bread and a pint of beer for each papyrus sold
Ja, thats true! 
59
« on: July 28, 2024, 13:54 »
I uploaded a panorama photo today as editorial that could of passed for commercial but I couldn't let this one wait as it is more time sensitive.
It was reviewed and accepted in just a few hours.
Sorry, but that's not how it works! You can't just take a photo of me and put it online without a model release and my permission! I didn't even notice that you had a camera in your hand. That's stalking! What's more, the photo isn't even recent - it must have been several months ago! I don't look that attractive anymore! The waiting for the Review is wearing me down!
60
« on: July 18, 2024, 01:13 »
Miserable month for me!
61
« on: July 15, 2024, 13:23 »
ok,this explains everything! 
those files have now sold so many times in the golden years of 2012 that they will always be ahead.
the time since you are a contributor also counts on Adobe,in fact I believe that even if I stop uploading now and then come back in 5 years and start uploading again,I will earn much more than now,simply because in the meantime 5 years have passed.
I have to disagree. I've been doing this since 2009 and have many images with more than 100 downloads. Most of them disappeared from one day to the next due to an algorithm change - this also applies to images with more than 250, 500 or 1000 downloads. There are images where I can understand why, because the style, visual language or zeitgeist has changed. For the majority of images, however, it has nothing to do with this - they were simply sorted to the back.
62
« on: July 14, 2024, 13:42 »
If we soon discover cave paintings from the stone age as brand new images in the database, we know that the review is taking too long. I have uploaded a few new images when Ramses II was still going about his government business - they are still waiting for the review.
63
« on: July 14, 2024, 13:31 »
Here are my stats this week: position 5060 with almost 700 files.
Pretty slow week, I've seen my position already dipping below 4000 in the past.
Definitely not bad, considering that you only have 700 files online. They must be good images.
64
« on: July 14, 2024, 11:54 »
Back in the days of Fotolia, there was a forum moderator who was banned for a long time because he had been caught buying his own new images via another account in order to push these images up the rankings. In this case, I think a block is fine.
But: in dubio pro reo! If someone buys a large package of images from a contributor, you can't just block the account. It can't be right that a contributor is punished for something he can't do anything about!
From my point of view, Adobe has to prove that there was fraud.
65
« on: July 08, 2024, 15:07 »
Same with me.June was my worst month on Shutterstock.
Anyone get paid from Shutterstock yet?
Yes.
66
« on: July 07, 2024, 12:07 »
Are your vector images being reviewed. I don't submit many images but it's kind of demotivating to add more. I also have one vector sitting there for 8 months.
Something might be not right with that file. I had a png with no transparency sitting for 3 months. They didnt reject it, but let it sit there. I accidentally saved it with no transparency in Lightroom. Resubmitted it, and it was reviewed normally
Excuse me for asking, but what sense does a png make without transparency? Why did you upload the image as a png and not a jpg?
67
« on: June 27, 2024, 02:50 »
I find the humerus bone particularly interesting...
68
« on: June 27, 2024, 02:22 »
update: 3 weeks+ and I am still blocked. No answer from Mat or the Agency...
Off topic, but I can't resist. Here's a doozy in the recently approved genAI content (90+ million and growing).
Anatomy redefined! Orthopaedists will be delighted!
69
« on: June 22, 2024, 17:02 »
Must be a slow week for everybody. Average downloads, lower revenue, but higher ranking. I'm happy about the ranking at least.
Congrats on your very steady port.
In my case the current rank is actually an improvement to last week and at least I will make 100 dollars thanks to a video sale.
I am also seeing a little uptick in the people I upload. They need time to get noticed but then they are quite consistent. Still only 700 people stock, a long way to go.
Now I have 5200 files. Mostly seasonal images for winter/spring.
At least it is better than last year June, probably will be 30% more than June 23.
Cobalt, you are on the best sellers list again, even with your 5200 weekly ranking. Congratulations. (100,000 downloads and 100 pages?, unless its a different Cobalt)
Whats your lifetime rank? May be thats what we should look at as well?
I stand to be corrected, but I would argue that this is a different cobalt!
70
« on: June 22, 2024, 11:53 »
For me SS is going better and better, last month was the BME for income and downloads.
Over 4 digits income this month and still one week left to go.
Congrats! Well deserved!
71
« on: June 21, 2024, 18:26 »
But there will come a point when it's absolutely not viable anymore. Perhaps if I'm earning just $50 from 15,000 images and 4,000 clips at Shutterstock on any given month it's really time to never upload again. I wouldn't close the account because at that point it's 100% passive.
Let's not kid ourselves, Alexandre: the day will come. And it won't be long now. There was a time when microstock was really fun. A few years ago, I said that I would quit Microstock if the monthly income fell below 1,000 euros. The time has since come. I'm still involved, but my productivity has dropped to almost zero. It also no longer makes sense as long as the legalities between AI and copyright have not been clarified. Nevertheless, the microstock period also had its good side: money is still coming in. Less, much less, than before. But also without work.
72
« on: June 21, 2024, 10:24 »
Thank you all for your answers!
@Alexandre: It looks similar for me. June in a 5-year comparison at shutterstock:
06/2014:
- approx. 1,000 images in the portfolio
- $ 508
06/2019:
- approx. 1,200 images in the portfolio
- $ 353
06/2024 until now:
- 1,367 images in the portfolio
- $ 90
73
« on: June 18, 2024, 16:36 »
Worst month since December 2023.
74
« on: June 18, 2024, 07:29 »
Since 6 June, my download figures have deteriorated dramatically. Am I the only one or is it the same for someone else?
75
« on: June 16, 2024, 12:31 »
Wow! Im impressed. My portfolio is about 50/50 sales/no.
For me it starts on page 13 with the pictures without downloads.
Thank you, but there is no reason to be impressed. - I've been with AS (former fotolia) for 15 years. So many of my images have had a lot of time to be downloaded. - With a small portfolio, it's easier for the proportion of images without downloads to be smaller than with very large portfolios. We've discussed this before. There was a large contributor with around 1.3 million images in his portfolio at that time. Of these, around 1 million images did not have a single download. However, this was also due to the fact that he always uploaded series on one topic. Out of 30 images in such a series, only 3 or maybe 5 images usually sell. The rest are commercially useless.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 35
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
