I looked at the "My Conversions" tab and it seems its been going on for a few months for me.  I get paid and submit another request right after (same day).  They all have been 2-3 weeks apart for me.

Yes, but just got paid today.  Now I get to submit my current credits and wait.

So if we are paid directly by the buyer, what then would the commission be to ClusterShot?  Right now its 12%, but that includes the transaction fees also.

D'oh...  I just got done uploading a picture of my a...

I am honestly thinking to just start listing everything editorial that is even close to any issue.  After taking the shot, removing the logos, then getting them rejected for silly reasons like this; I will just shot and submit editorial to save time.

With the natural flood of images that will just increase with this stock model, I am sure the reviewers are being told to error on the side of caution.

As all the emails and interviews have been saying lately, "Stock is dead..."   

Ok, so now cityscapes are copyrighted also?  I have submitted a few Houston Cityscape images to Shutterstock.  All logos removed, and this is not about the quality or technical aspects of the image.  I have received this each time I have tried to submit them (I figured someone reviewing these maybe did not understand that "Modern buildings are TM" response).

Do all cityscapes have to be editorial now?  I sure hope not.


Trademark--Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement--not editorial.
Modern buildings are TM

np 

You can use printscreen on your keyboard and paste it into a photo editor.

Only one sub there for me, but I have not uploaded much there.

Quote from: leaf on March 04, 2010, 07:11
I think there is a bit too much focus on 'who is pro' and 'who is not' and where the line should be drawn.  I do agree that it is nice to know when someone posts about a 100% increase in earnings when they have a portfolio of 20 images, but to shun people who are 'not pro', however you define the term, or if we take the attitude that they don't have anything to ad - I think is narrow sighted.

For some reason there seems to be some sort of vibe that microstock shouldn't be for people who are new - that you need to be a seasoned pro before you can submit to the micros.  Perhaps this is part of the negativity seen?

I think that is forgetting what microstock IS and how it started.  Microstock is crowd sourced and can be contributed to by everyone.  If the images aren't good enough they won't get past the review process.  Micro is one the stock arena where everyone is allowed to play no matter how many images you have or how long you have been involved in the industry.  Being so tightly reviewed it allows everyone to at least try submitting.  Some people are happy making $50 a year - that should be fine.  For those who want an arena which is an exclusive club and only pro's can submit - they should apply to Getty or Corbis or one of the big macro agencies.  

I'm not for drumming up hype that microstock is any sort of unopened treasure chest, but to discourage someone simply on the basis that they are 'new' or don't have top notch images, I think is unfair.

edited for clarity - .. hopefully it is clearer.

Thanks.

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 03, 2010, 15:50

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 03, 2010, 15:44
FD-amateur, calling luissantos84 a moron is not going to help anything.

that's no big deal, I just want some respect because I have been working hard, couldn't be the best stock photos but I am doing my best, if stock agencies accepted them I guess I deserve a little of respect, but I am getting used to this fight, but like FD-amateur said this forum is to help, so from now on I won't fight!

It's pointless really.  It's just getting worse.  As profits drop, people are finding places to point the finger.  I am in no way a newbie, but I have never claimed to be a pro.  I also don't run around posting referral links on other people's sites.  I have my own sites, and I can do whatever I please with them.

Microstock was started for people like you, me, and everyone else for that matter.  I had film scans of stock photos that, like the ever famous "bitter" could not get them accepted at any big stock house.  Why? I either did not want to get that collection of 1000 images to start, or I simply was not in the crowd.  Or as the haters would say, "Your photos suck."; but if you compare your images to their images you find the truth.   I enjoy photography.  And with microstock it's a hobby that more than pays for itself.

I submit stock photos when I feel like submitting stock photos.  I do not need someone clinging to the last hope of a dollar telling me what I can and can't do.  I also take a stand against the agencies when they feel like pulling a fast one on everyone.  That's more than most of the people bashing the newbies can say.

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 03, 2010, 15:44
FD-amateur, calling luissantos84 a moron is not going to help anything.

« Last Edit: Today at 10:37 by FD-amateur »

Thanks for editing that.

FD-amateur, calling luissantos84 a moron is not going to help anything.

I feel like I am in 2002 again.

Does anyone ever "gain respect from the folk that do know what they're talking about"?  And who says they "know what they are talking about"?

Hahaha, you all crack me up. ( and by you all I don't mean anyone specific   )

You take an industry that was created on welcoming hobbyist, amateurs, and newbies; then you find a way to make a living.  That's great, more power to you.  You did this while fighting off traditional RM and RF stock shooters whose market you were destroying.  You were partying off your nickels while telling the "Professional" stock photographers to shove it.

NOW, you are in an industry that is STILL welcome to hobbyist, amateurs, and newbies with one simple change; quality has increased.  Now that you have found the flaws in your actions, you blame it on new comers and forget where you started.  But it's never been your fault has it; it's theirs.

Be rude to anyone you want; it's not going to stop, or even slow down.  The agencies love you.  They do, they want to give you a hug; really.

Saying websites are taking advantage of newcomers is like saying microstock contributors are taking advantage of the agencies.

It's ok though, I have a solution to THIS problem that's almost done.  I just need to get these Chinese and Indian language packs working just right.  

Quote from: lisafx on March 03, 2010, 00:01
LOL!  If the people who keep threatening to leave the discussion actually did so this thread would be a lot shorter

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 01, 2010, 02:08
If it was yesterday or before I wouldn't joined this forum! I am not enjoying staying here, I am sad about that, once I thinked that this would be a nice place to chat around about agencies etc.. and other stuff! but ok..

wish you all a great week!

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 23:11
Ok, I give up.

I didn't say I was going to leave; I said I give up.

I am simply going to stop kicking the dead horse that some seem to blame on everyone else.  My "solution" is already under development.

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on March 02, 2010, 23:36

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 23:13

Quote from: sjlocke on March 02, 2010, 22:28

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 21:54
Here is a metaphor I have heard, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."

I wonder why _you've_ heard it ...

Haha, thanks.  I was waiting for someone to catch me on that.  Glad it was you.I have had many solutions, but not many of you all "making a living" have cared to join in.

Hey were you two separated at birth?

Hahaha.  I think there is a decent age gap there.  (no offense to Sean)

Quote from: sjlocke on March 02, 2010, 22:28

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 21:54
Here is a metaphor I have heard, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."

I wonder why _you've_ heard it ...

Haha, thanks.  I was waiting for someone to catch me on that.  Glad it was you.

I have had many solutions, but not many of you all "making a living" have cared to join in.

Ok, I give up.

Fingers pointed: Newbies increasing supply; Helping newbies; blogs about microstock; referral links

Points addressed: Newbies are not the problem, the microstock crowd-sourcing model is; blogs/forums/ads market what the agencies are paying for, why are they the bad guys; you hate referral links yet you post all day on a site and increase its traffic that makes its income from referral links

I guess people are only part of a problem if they think they are part of the problem, until then its everyone else that is the problem.

Where are all the people "making a living" from microstock when Fotolia cut percentages?  Or moved levels?  Or when Dreamstime cut percentages?  Or when all the subs were introduced?  Or any of the other recent or past issues?

My finger pointing: If you think a growing supply is a problem (I can assure you the agencies do not), then the model is to blame.  The very reason microstock was started was to do exactly what you all are complaining about.  Every single person selling in this model (including me) is to blame.  Every person referring buyers and sellers to this model is to blame (including me).

Solutions?  Maybe agencies should shut the doors to newbies?  Maybe upload limits need to be closed more?  Maybe you should have at least 5000 images to get in?  Hmmm, but then that would not be microstock as we know it then would it?

Referrals?  Agencies buy more than images and video.  They also buy traffic.  Its pretty bold of someone to say they can sell their images but site owners cannot sell their traffic.  It's even bolder of them to actively participate on a site that does exactly that.

The fact is that referrals and newbies do increase supply.  Of course they do.  So do cheap DSLRs, Macro Photographers having to leave their model because micro has taken over, the internet, global economy, the world wide recession, your images, my images, that guy down the street's grandma's images...... come on!  Why beat the crowd with a club when you can work on fixing the gate?

I got starting on this because I am tired of seeing newbies bashed and blogs/forums blamed for the microstock industry's problems.  But it's ok, I am done wasting my breath.  Maybe I will just provide a solution for the newbies.

Well, everyone has their opinion.  My point is that we can all find someone to blame, but never point the finger back to ourselves even if we are the cause of the problem.  I guess what I have learned from this thread (well, maybe not learned but reminded) is that we are now realizing the negative affect we had on stock photography.  The people with the most to lose need to also be the people fighting the hardest to fix it.

How many people in this thread came into microstock starting off with a large portfolio of stock images?  How many of us where already full time photographers?  How many of us here were searching through Google to get started?

With every one of your photos sold, you are hurting someone sales.  Who is going to be the first to delete all of their images to help their neighbor's sales?  No one?  Really?  But the newbies need to stop.  I see.

With every post to this forum, you are advertising the referral links you despise.  I would guess this forum pulls in much more than even some of the larger microstock portfolios.  Hmmm.  The newbies have been feeling threatened lately.  Maybe there is now a market for a "newbie" microstock forum.  I send everyone here, but maybe this is not the place.

Five years ago macro shooters were the victims and the people who are "making a living" now shooting microstock was the problem.  Now microstockers "making a living" are the victims and newbies or referral links are the problem.  Five years from now free images will be the problem because there will not be anyone (or much less) "making a living" from microstock.  And why, because everyone else is the problem.

Here is a metaphor I have heard, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."

Quote from: Microbius on March 02, 2010, 16:56

Quote from: sjlocke on March 02, 2010, 16:52

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 15:37
Does everyone really think it's the blogs, forums, and referral links killing the market?  I mean really, come on.

It's one thing to vent and just choose yourself as the victim, but then there is the truth.

I thought we had all learned the truth after all these years of complaining.

Tell me how all that helps the oversupply issue.

Of course all the referral links and blogs are helping kill, if not the market, then the profitability of working ion this industry.
How do you think exponential growth of supply is being fuelled? New suppliers aren't randomly stumbling onto the agencies!

I knew about stock well before microstock showed up.  I found iStock as an image buyer back when they gave images away.  You never really "randomly" stumble into agencies, that's called marketing.

Quote from: sjlocke on March 02, 2010, 16:52

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 15:37
Does everyone really think it's the blogs, forums, and referral links killing the market?  I mean really, come on.

It's one thing to vent and just choose yourself as the victim, but then there is the truth.

I thought we had all learned the truth after all these years of complaining.

Tell me how all that helps the oversupply issue.

Well, true.  I can't say it helps, but I can say I send as many or more buyers as I do "real" sellers (people who actually get approved and have images for sale) from my sites.  BUT, if my site did not send them there another site/ad/agency/forum/wiki.... would.  Do a search on Google and see what ads you get.  Marketing can be a double edged sword for us, but its nothing but gold for the agencies.  The agencies are still recruiting.

My site MicrostockPhotography.com gets thousands of hits a month from just the keyword phrase "microstock photography" alone.  I have a feeling, and this could just be me, but people searching for "microstock photography" already have an idea what they are looking for.  If they did not buy or sell using my link, they would from someone.

The problem is not who is joining, from what country they come from, or where they find their information.

The problem is the crowd-sourcing model itself and the fact that the agencies have ALL of the control.  There are more people with cameras then there will ever be buyers for.  The model itself is to blame and we all joined in to help promote it.

If someone really wants to help, start a thread on "How can we fix our ever growing and out of control Microstock model?".

Quote from: Microbius on March 02, 2010, 16:43

Quote from: macrosaur on March 02, 2010, 16:04

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 02, 2010, 15:37
Does everyone really think it's the blogs, forums, and referral links killing the market?  I mean really, come on.

It's one thing to vent and just choose yourself as the victim, but then there is the truth.

I thought we had all learned the truth after all these years of complaining.

the real problem is always the same : the buyers have less money than before and many
are going bankrupt and closing down.

the pie is getting smaller and smaller while production costs are not getting cheaper.
amateurs and hobbysts should be booted out from serious agencies.

agencies should enforce harder prerequisites to join the market, let's say
providing a starting batch of 500 saleable images for instance.

this alone would filter out all the crap getting in and leave space
for serious shooters.

after all many RM agencies do the same, i could list LonelyPlanetImages,
AGE Fotostock, Masterfile ...

The problem is that this is exactly the opposite of the business model agencies are now moving towards. Shutterstock showed them the way and it involves as many contributors as possible with the agencies maximising their profits at the contributors expense. Don't forget that under the subs model the more you make the less the agency does. They don't need a few decent photographers, they want loads of mediocre ones. The more discerning can cherry pick the best few photos from each contributor's largely poor portfolio and still have enough images on their sites. The volume merchants like SS can just take everything. It means that no single contributor has any power at all over the agencies, nobody's opinion counts.

It's not that microstock is "moving towards" that model, it IS that model.  That is my point.  Microstock was started on the basis that everyone with a photo can contribute.  Quality requirements have increased, but the model is the same.  Agencies can care less about your images being lost in the search; as long as they still sell SOMEONE'S image they will get paid.

That was a good commercial.  But now I can't decide whether to buy my wife another LV handbag or a new Hyundai.

LV should get billions.   

Does everyone really think it's the blogs, forums, and referral links killing the market?  I mean really, come on.

It's one thing to vent and just choose yourself as the victim, but then there is the truth.

I thought we had all learned the truth after all these years of complaining.