|
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 - Jonathan Ross
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 37
51
« on: June 24, 2013, 11:42 »
Hi Lone Wolf, This is an old one. I have forgotten most of this stuff so it was great to reread thanks  Take care all, J
52
« on: June 20, 2013, 11:45 »
Hi All, I believe the question was " what does Micro sales contribute to your bottom line ". For me 12% of my income comes from Micro the balance of the other 88% of my personal revenue comes from Macro sales, I do not have another job that is making me any money yet, I do have another job but I am reinvesting all the returns from that endeavor back into the company so no cash flow into my account from there. I have 3500 images in Micro and around 10,000 images in Macro. I stopped shooting Macro and Micro 4 years ago with the exception of three shoots recently. My Micro sales have dropped by about 50% over those 4 years my Macro sales are hanging very steady and have barely dropped since I stopped producing. Please understand that this is not necessarily the norm, I know many Macro photographers who's sales have dropped a great deal so I do not think there is a method to this industry the only factor I can come up with is are you producing what the buyers want? However, that statement is an entirely different can of worms Cheers, Jonathan
53
« on: June 13, 2013, 18:49 »
Thanks Leaf,
Some of the best photographers in the world great to hear how humble most of them truly are. Motivational? YES!
Thanks,
Jonathan
54
« on: June 13, 2013, 12:04 »
Hi All, Thank you for all the great feedback I am not one that follows the Micro agencies letters and forums never have but because of that I am ignoant and have to depend on all you for support  Thanks again for all the insight truly appreciated. Best, Jonathan
55
« on: June 12, 2013, 20:16 »
Hi Sean,
Yes, I have some friends that put tons of energy into TAC and I haven't spoken to them yet but this has got to be a real killer for people that invested so much time and effort. Thanks for the confirmation.
Cheers,
J
56
« on: June 12, 2013, 19:58 »
Hi All,
I have just heard word that Istock is discontinuing their TAC Collection. I am trying to find out more info on it can anyone steer me to some details.
Thanks,
Jonathan
57
« on: May 30, 2013, 12:09 »
Hi All,
Just wanted to report back that after a very slow beginning to my SS month it has picked back up and is closing out at usual returns for the month. Just thought i would share the positive return of sales. I hope others are seeing the same results.
Best,
Jonathan
58
« on: May 29, 2013, 13:21 »
Hey T, Looking at the response to the question on your votes I would say it is a strong support towards the YES as the people that are trolls and angry posters are going to be the first to vote against it so you probably have to decrease the NO votes by a good 25%-50% This was a joke ya'll! Cheers, J
59
« on: May 29, 2013, 12:49 »
Hi All, If tact is used there is a way to voice your concerns that are clear to all, appropriate in manor, and not insulting to any agency you are truly concerned with an issue over. I do not know an agency I cannot contact and voice my concerns over any issue, it is all in the wording and the use of respect and courtesy. I think it would help keep subjects on track and keep the lurkers at bay but I don't think you will get it to float here. Okay, I am ready for the minus hearts Thanks for sharing your thoughts and efforts, Jonathan
60
« on: May 22, 2013, 22:25 »
Hi w7lwi,
Great advice and thanks for the post.
Cheers,
Jonathan
61
« on: May 22, 2013, 12:52 »
Hi All, The speculation here is all over the board but I will just offer my own feelings if I was in Yuri's shoes. Move all my content to Istock and retire. If you do the math ( you all make money at this ) just add up how many images he has and how well they sell and the numbers are off the hook. Whatever he paid his team to produce was paid for out of past returns over the years of production so he is clean to shut down and make his retirement money off the sales of 100,000 images. If I was Yuri I would shut down and move onto something new. Quitting while you are ahead is not quitting it is smart, but that is an older guy talking who just wants to smell the roses for a few years My 2 cents Best, Jonathan
62
« on: May 16, 2013, 12:19 »
Hi All,
Just wanted to report back. I don't know if they are paying attention but the day after posting how my sales were plummeting at ShutterStock the very next day I had a $131 day. Maybe it was just a bad three weeks but I am keeping my eye close to the numbers to see. Hoping sales pick up like they used to be SS has always been my best return per image and the straightest shooters at the carnival.
Cheers,
Jonathan
63
« on: May 13, 2013, 16:20 »
Howdy again,
I don't think anyone is telling ShutterStock that they are failing or screwing anyone I think that the photographers that put ShutterStock on the map are curious why in one month ShutterStock sales are dramatically down for many of them, that is big news in the stock industry and it is always addressed when any agency takes a huge hit in one month, I believe that is what people are curious about and some maybe a bit reasonably frustrated.
It is difficult to compete in a business as an image provider if your point of sales does not steady, it does not allow you to run a clear business when you are dealing with constant readjustment to investment per image. If we cannot know from month to month what our images might make over a life time how can we be expected to continue to invest with no analysis or solid numbers to structure our cost of business.
The best selling Micro agency just showed several of their contributors the first sign of lowered sales, myself included. I think it is quite reasonable for people to discuss this issue as a concern as it has not taken place to this degree at least in the history of my relationship with ShutterStock.
The trick to being really successful in a distribution business is to cater to both your buyers and your suppliers equally. 2 cents.
Cheers,
Jonathan
64
« on: May 13, 2013, 15:02 »
Hi All,
Just wanted to concur with everyone here my ShutterStock sales that have been solid ( within $100 a month for years, averaging about $1400-$1500 a month ) have taken a dramatic drop for the first time ever this month, sad to see the best of Micro following the pack. ShutterStock was the one micro agency that gave me hope in this model of stock, now ...they can talk about adjustments but this one was a doozie.
Cheers,
Jonathan
65
« on: April 23, 2013, 11:27 »
Hi All,
Not sure if I understand the post but just to clarify Getty does offer 20% to their individual photographers in some of their deals. I make 20% on all my sales at Getty and 30% on some, just wanted to make sure that was clear. I am speaking about direct with Getty not one of their new models or stock just the plain old Getty license and they do still offer them I know a few new contributors.
Thanks,
Jonathan
66
« on: April 19, 2013, 12:35 »
Hi Gillian,
Congrats on your being accepted. Just so you realize the 10 images you submit for acceptance do not have to be sold through Stocksy. They want to see what you do best. The ten I sent in were already at other agencies as I didn't have anything fresh so once accepted I didn't submit the ten that got me in I sent in new work only. So your ten tests can be with other agencies you have the option after being accepted to not upload your ten test images however, they do want you to send in work that is comparable to what you sent to gain acceptance. Just an FYI best of luck.
Cheers,
Jonathan
67
« on: April 18, 2013, 11:06 »
Hi All, I don't know more than what I just read but it appears that there might be some rather wicked things taking place in the Micro world. This is about the top Micro sites doing some pretty naughty stuff. If anyone has any information I would love to hear more. I don't want to jump the gun and say this is a fact as I only have this one source. If anyone can help add some insight I would appreciate it. Here is the statement and a link that has been added to join force against the issue at hand. The issue lies with Fotolia, Istock, and Shutterstock according to the post on Facebook. Russian service http://sellimage.org/ allows to buy images without registration in microstock. There are a number of people buying the image by subscription and then transferring the files to users who paid the money service. Sounds like resale of images already purchased but I am not sure. Thanks, Jonathan
68
« on: April 16, 2013, 13:40 »
Hi Cobalt, I admire your not hiding your work or identity it is so helpful to see what people are truly talking about and the level of their talent and comments. I think your work looks great but more than that by identifying yourself on this site other agencies and buyers cruising this site ( and trust me they do ) that are interested in your work can contact you to see if you wold like to be represented or hired you for a job. Everyone here has their choice to be a hidden or present themselves openly and their work clearly here, I believe sharing your work in as many locations as possible opens you up to buyers and agencies that are interested in your style and portfolio. Far more precious than being able to speak your mind and not worry about upsetting one of your distributors. Just that much more exposure, my two cents from talking to buyers and agency owners. Cheers, Jonathan
70
« on: February 15, 2013, 13:08 »
Hi All,
Just an FYI but Fine Art America sells very well for our Spaces Images as art work. We have been very happy with their sales results. They take individuals work as well.
Best,
Jonathan
71
« on: February 14, 2013, 12:50 »
Hi All,
I think a smarter approach to all of this that might have made the situation a bit better for everyone would have been to keep the photographers credit and even promote the name so it directed buyers towards our portfolios if they liked what they found in the Google Doc image collection. Then we would have our images in front of many users that might see our names and look for more of our work or similars in the market place for future purchase. At least with that approach we would have gotten some marketing out of the deal and the agencies might have made future sales from Google doc users. As it stands the end user has no way of finding out the creator of an image I think that hurts all parties. Just a thought.
Cheers,
Jonathan
72
« on: February 11, 2013, 13:53 »
Hi All,
Just my own experience but RM is another great way to sell the images that you already produce with property releases and model releases for commercial use. I would not necessarily chase the editorial side to much unless you are serious about editorial. If you are a paparazzi or you travel the world to capture the news that is needed today these are two of the biggest money makers in editorial especially paparazzi's. Your images that are not property or model released that are placed into editorial can still make money just not nearly as much as commercial sales. I think the best bet for all of you creatively focused image makers is to continue your craft and upload some content to several RM agencies and see what works.
The biggest concern for most agencies that sell RM is that the image has to be exclusive to their company so they can track the sales results and information so the next buyer knows where the image has been used or can control the use of the image for a duration of time with assurance that the image will not be used by other parties at the same time ( this is just one example of RM use but it is where the biggest sales come from ).
Say Sony wants to use an image from RM they can make sure by paying more that no one in the electronics industry can use that image for a purchased period of time, once Sony's contract of the image is complete it is placed back into the agencies collection.
There are a couple of agencies that have multi distributed RM so you can upload to them and they will distribute your work to all the top agencies around the world this way they can track the sales and pull any images that a buyer wants to have control over for a period of time or a region or several other issues by removing the use from all their other distributors while that image is being used by a specific buyer, the buyer needs assurance the same image will not pop up somewhere else. Once the contract of that image deal is finished the image goes back live to all the sites it is multi distributed through.
Selling the same RM image through several agencies is going to be tough because it keeps the model for RM from working and most agencies will not accept an RM image that is being sold elsewhere through another competitor. Multi distribution is one way to get your RM images out to the entire market place and still be able to offer the buyer the protection they want. Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Jonathan
73
« on: February 04, 2013, 22:31 »
Yes Sean,
We have that power to change the board as a group every year, I have never been on the board since the company was founded.
Best,
Jonathan
74
« on: February 04, 2013, 21:38 »
Hi Gostywick, The board made that disicion on the Getty deal, not me. Thank you this is a perfect example of what I was just saying and trying to point out about people having to get along, not surprised you attacked  Cheers, Jonathan
75
« on: February 04, 2013, 21:31 »
Hi Racephoto, It was more about being able to have people in our group that had already been on the other side of the agency biz. They helped us out so much from making to many mistakes that you would never even think of, we still made our fare share . The group put a lot of personal money into images that we did not have assurance would make us a dime. We did get great distribution thanks to those that had direct contact with the big players and also because our group had at the time a strong pull of respect for being able to produce content that would sell and release of niche at the right time. I don't want to say the dates as it has been almost 8 years now but I can check on the turn over when we went from red to black and PM you later. So many details to cover about the issues a co-op would have but one, you would have to vote in a board. Only the board would make decisions for the group and I think with thousands involved it would get pretty hairy at times. You also have to pay your board because they are running the business the entire time and cannot produce content so the board can get expensive fast. I could see several big Micro people getting together that really have the revenue to make it happen and start a co-op between twenty maybe forty on the high side and then delegate your board and start shooting like crazy ( the best stuff you can ) and wait in hopes that everyone else is going to pull their weight equally, positive side all exclusive content. This would be my approach as I see a several thousand member co-op as being pretty tough to manage and compete with the agencies already established in this market place. All that said there is still an option for the right group of people to gather their strength and be a much more friendly site to photographers being that you would all understand the photographer side. Some of these big agencies do not understand how important it is to keep strong relations and open dialogue with your contributors. Now I am rambling but always happy to share my 2 cents, I hope it's worth something. Cheers, Jonathan
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 37
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
