|
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
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 197
51
« on: March 13, 2025, 12:32 »
Where did Steve write about his bestsellers?
Just in case it's not obvious or you didn't already know, or someone else is reading this? https://backyardsilver.com/I think this is the "Plastic Bag" and a cat, best seller which is a bag of ice, if I see it right?  All this time, I thought it was about the subject, composition, colors, keywords, descriptions, and finding areas/ideas that are under supplied, to fill a need. Images that buyers want and need. But apparently (according to some people here) it's all about luck, the search placement and random chance.
Then I'll say, worrying about analyzing what has sold, then making more of what sells, or "Learning from 16 years of stock photos that didn't sell", is a waste of time. It's just all about luck. 
It's not all about luck, it is of course selling what customers want, but (and I can only speak for iS) algorithm certainly has its part to play. I've twice had files which were good sellers (by my standards, i.e. sold almost every day) disappear overnight and I discovered that they had dropped in the Best Match algorithm for their 'most likely to be searched' keywords, whereas they were previously near the top of page one. One of these got no sales for a couple of years, and now gets occasional sales, not enough to take it onto the first page: the second hasn't have one sale since it dropped (a common subject, so away down below page 20 on the best match search now).
So is that LUCK or is that the way the agency programs their search?  Luck is random chance. I tend to think that as artists and creators, most of our good fortune is based on how we work and what we make, not some magic, outside forces. And if someone wants to argue that it's luck, then, I hope they also credit their success and sales, to luck, and not their skills and effort. Oh I see. When things are "the way the ought to be" then it's me. When they aren't and sales are down, it's luck and something the agency did. Of course for my image to move down to page 2 or 3, that means someone else, moved up to page 1! I will agree that things change and we have no control over how our work is displayed, what page, how the search finds things, or any of that. But that's still not luck, it's just the way it is. Everyone works with the same rules, the same system and the way the agency designed their search to operate.
52
« on: March 13, 2025, 12:12 »
All this time, I thought it was about the subject, composition, colors, keywords, descriptions, and finding areas/ideas that are under supplied, to fill a need. Images that buyers want and need. But apparently (according to some people here) it's all about luck, the search placement and random chance. Then I'll say, worrying about analyzing what has sold, then making more of what sells, or "Learning from 16 years of stock photos that didn't sell", is a waste of time. It's just all about luck.
53
« on: March 09, 2025, 14:07 »
Recently I spent 6 weeks trekking in Spain, last 2 on Canary Islands. Had a chance to visit spectacular place - Roque de los Muchachos Astrophysics Laboratory on La Palma. Nearby is "Monumento al Infinito" or Monument to Infinity -- more details
Can anyone comment, should these be Editorial or non-Editorial images? Judging on above, I don't think Reviewers really know and it depends who you run into
I hope you had a wonderful trip. Nice photos. Being a work of art, I believe it's not Public Domain, the artist retains the rights to his or her work, even when they are paid or commissioned. You are right of course about varied reviews, and that comes from different reviewers who don't always know all the minor technicalities. Also every agency seems to have their own views of what's allowed or not and what's editorial. The laws are clear, but an agency can make it's own rules about what's acceptable into their collection. Nice photos.
54
« on: March 04, 2025, 12:20 »
Closed down at $22.80. Its just $0.80 above it's IPO on 12 October 2012. Down it goes in step with downward earnings.
Nice graph, I was looking at that yesterday. The people who got in and then sold when the stock had doubled or tripled, aren't crying. Long ago, I was of the opinion that SSTK was a good $30 stock. I keep looking at this part of the deal, and can't understand why the price of SSTK isn't higher? "Shutterstock shareholders can choose one of three options at closing: $28.85 in cash per share, 13.67 shares of Getty Images stock per share, or a combination of 9.17 Getty Images shares and $9.50 in cash per Shutterstock share." Cash = $28.85 or GETY 2.045 x 13.67 = $27.95 or (9.17 shares) $18.79 + $9.50 = $28.29 Any of these are at worst $5/$6 better that the cost per share of SSTK. What's missing? Why aren't people buying at $22 to get back $28?
55
« on: March 04, 2025, 11:58 »
I got the email and I have no idea which were removed. Because they could be buried in my pages of rejections somewhere.
I looked as soon as I got the notice, made a note of how many images were in https://contributor.stock.adobe.com/en/uploads/rejected Now that it's the 4th, no change in the number of images File Types All. I'm still waiting and watching. " As part of our commitment to providing the best content discovery experience for both customers and contributors, we have identified duplicates on Adobe Stock that will be removed from the site beginning on March 4, 2025. You are receiving this email because you have 1 or more assets that will be removed.
All removed duplicates can be found in your contributor portal under Uploaded Files - Not Accepted. All assets were evaluated to ensure minimal impact to your portfolio. "So I still have no answer how people have seen images removed, or a notice of which images, when Adobe says it wasn't going to start until today. If someone has a different link, so I can see where they are seeing changes and removals, I'd like to go look at mine.
56
« on: March 03, 2025, 13:01 »
SSTK $21.38 Monday morning, dividends paid to owners of record.
GETY 2.055
It just doesn't look like anyone important, is looking forward to the merger.
57
« on: March 03, 2025, 12:52 »
how you know 52? from the mail or where? mail says "1 or more" but i dont see any changes.
Find out tomorrow.  I went through all of mine and yes I got the same email, and no nothing was recently removed for being similar. I did find one from years ago, which is funny, because it's a one of a kind, background pattern. Just can't wait to see what happens, when they actually start doing this, not just sending an email. 52 of my photos and videos are marked for deletion on March 4, 2025.
Where do you see that?
58
« on: March 03, 2025, 12:44 »
what's funny about this is i have posted and sold kind of similar images. the concept being junk food looking greasy and unappetizing. could be used for an article about clogged arteries or obesity.
Some of the strange images, that I upload now and then as a joke or filler, have actually sold on multiple sites. Heck if I know why. Unlike planned shots with great lighting, aligned subjects, all organized and they just died. I did one of cooking a pizza on a gas grill, and it's not that special. It was sold for an article, "Never cook a pizza on a grill"
59
« on: March 01, 2025, 12:38 »
Only 34 people, the forum is broken, can't load, can't save, and what's left is a half dozen people, arguing politics.  
60
« on: February 25, 2025, 15:45 »
They also don't have to compete against each other with lower prices, I am confident prices will rise after the merger.
Yes I hope you are right. Not just editorial. As soon as this merger was announced, Adobe stock went down. SSTK is down, GETY is down. I don't see many people ready to jump into this new plan. Getty just refinanced their debt, which helps a little. SSTK had earnings below expectations and a drop in sold images. They were popular like a fad, when things go up, the advisors sell these stocks to the granny's. SSTK is a dividend stock as well. When the fad slows and the earnings don't reach expectations and people don't see growth in the company or their future, they are pretty fast to abandon and look for something new and better. You can get GETY shares for $2 and change right now. Last 4 months they have been under $3 and treading water. I hate to say it, but this is going to be interesting to watch. We aren't in control we aren't even pawns that are involved in the game or the plans.
61
« on: February 25, 2025, 15:14 »
Good, long story Peter. But even Cobalt who is doing a seriously effort doesn't get further then like $100 a week (at least last week it seems like that). Maybe $200 0r $300 a week when luck is her way? That is not enough in the western world we live in to get bills paid. Unless you have wellfare on the side and don't report income.
Maybe ZeroTalent has enough income to come by (haven't heard from him for a while now though). But otherwise it seems pretty useless to pursue a living from Microstock no matter what history there was how we got to this point in time.
Thanks for NOT quoting the short story.  The whole idea, inspired me to create the latest forum poll, and what do you know, people are really doing very well on Adobe, in terms of "Position". Leaf used to do an annual poll, and someone did do one this year, for a general earnings type of thing. In general, and I don't try very hard, I make more from eBay than I do on Microstock. That's just cherrypicking things from the local estate auctions. I'd rather be making photos. You're right, even some of the good and successful people, have other sources of income, that are greater than Microstock.
62
« on: February 25, 2025, 15:03 »
I just recalled that this can be found in the dashboard if you click on lifetime. I had forgotten it was there. I'm pretty sure that it does carry over from Fotolia.
And I have to say, WOW I'm impressed with the results so far. Many more people, in the better position than I expected. I should know better. There was a time when the poll results worked and based on what IS reported, the MSG forum was in the top 5% of all IS contributors.
63
« on: February 24, 2025, 13:12 »
SSTK reached their 52 week low today $24.30. Seems that something is going on? I'm not "smart money" or some big traders or any of those types.
"Stock photography and footage provider Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK) will be reporting earnings tomorrow before market hours." Dividend is going to be 33¢ on March 6th.
Is this low price a lack of confidence? I don't understand how the promise from the merger, which is higher than the current trading price, isn't holding up the value?
GETY is at 2.195 right now
64
« on: February 24, 2025, 12:44 »
I used Chrome instead of Safari today and had no issues with the new uploader. I suppose I could alert SS support about the Safari issues, however often in the past when I have reported bugs the support staff were extremely polite but nothing ever got actioned.
Yes, you said that right. It's like, "Thank You, but we're just pretending to care or listen" Your results could be very helpful to others who use Safari. As I mentioned before, someone I know says her phone doesn't work now. I'm pretty sure she has an iPhone. Next would be, iPhone with something other than Safari, might work. Thanks for the idea.
65
« on: February 24, 2025, 12:40 »
Hopefully I made these with good limits and definitions to group by the numbers. LIFETIME and you can change your vote, if something changes and you care. I'm not sure how high these go, so I added the 50,000, and also, I know that sometimes people see "- - -" for the lifetime, that comes and goes.
Since it's lifetime, the brackets and position are not likely to have big changes. I expect to move up, as I pass people who quit, and my DL numbers increase over time. I'm fairly sure that these numbers, include Fotolia sales. Someone who was very active there for many years, will hold their position, until we catch up and pass them.
66
« on: February 24, 2025, 12:26 »
Only 1289 people in the world ahead of you. Very small number of people making a living at this while sales and income are dropping.
The estimated annual revenues from the merger between Getty and Shutterstock will be 2 billion dollars.
Given the earnings of us, contributors, we can estimate that Adobe Stock also has 1 billion in revenues.
Total 3 billion from the 3 main competitors in this market.
And from 3 billion only 1000/1500 contributors manage to make a full-time salary?
This is incredible in my eyes.
But I wonder: Do the agencies take a slice of the profit too big or is the cake divided into too small slices? 
Aside from "where do you live" and all that. And how much is enough to live on. I think the answer to your two part question is both. As an example of the agencies taking too much of a slice for themselves. How would someplace like 123RF or Deposit be able to stay in business, if they paid us a fair share. They are both companies that are staying alive, only because they can still make some sort of profit, from artists who supply images and video for a minuscule earnings reward. Eventually they will fail. I'm surprised they are still in business. Is the cake divided into too small of a slice because of too many contributors? Maybe, but as you pointed out, only the top, the factories and maybe some like Cobalt, who make a serious effort to produce new work, and also study what sells and what's in demand, are making enough to possibly make a living wage from Microstock. Using the more recent number and I still say it's like a cork floating on the waves, the rank/position, goes up and down. What we should be looking at is not the crests and troughs, but the average position. Looking at things daily for a weekly rank is just too many points and too variable. The best view, in my opinion,is at most Monthly, once a month. That number will reflect the income and download, peaks and valleys with the average, in a more sensible form. Looking at daily income from Microstock is just watching too close. Also since there are the obvious trends, Saturday stinks, Sunday isn't very special, Friday people are usually working a short day... weekly average, makes for a smoother viewpoint. Unfortunately the "Position" from Adobe is unreliable in any sense, since it's only downloads, not income. The fact that no one knows how it works and the claim that it's 7 days, including the last 7 days, which is impossible, because it goes back to zero on Sunday night, makes the who idea of watching position, daily, or weekly, even more absurd. Oh yeah, back to the question. Sorry. Yes I think you are right on both points. The agencies don't pay us a fair percentage. Adobe comes the closest, at 33%. The rest that are 15% or the one that includes the silly dime Singles and the reset are a terrible insult. But then, it's a take it or leave it marketplace for many people, as there's no other way to scuffle for nickles and dimes, from making Stock Products. The losers, bottom feeder agencies, don't have enough sales volume to make sense for anyone who's actually trying to make a living from Microstock. The only favorable consideration is, the artist already has all the images, with the data, so it's really not much additional effort to add images to the parasite agencies. On an individual level, that might work and be helpful, but for the entire industry, every time, someone adds images to the parasites that don't pay well and are giving us an insulting low percentage, that undercuts the agencies that do give us a reliable return and volume. So, while we may not be competing directly with our own images, the effect of supporting the parasites is driving the value of the entire market down. And that's where the low paying agencies beat us all into the ground with low pay and low earnings, because too many people are so desperate that they will take fractional cents from places like Freepik or Envato or Miricanvas and so many others. Whether it's 2,000 accounts, or some other debatable number, the point is, there's not enough business, not enough return and not enough money, for someone to make a living wage from Microstock, except for a very small number of people or businesses. That's in the World! Pretty elite business that says, only 1% of the people who are trying to make a living at it, are a success. I will admit, people who try and are serious are more than 1%, it's just that if there are 200,000 people who have something online, the return on that is dismal. Personally, from experience and the past, I'd say it's very possible that 5% of the people who work at Microstock are making a true business profit. For Cobalt as an example, being 2,000 or 3,000 is pretty good and a compliment to her hard work, smart work, paying attention and doing what's right. If I'm usually around 25,000 sometimes higher, sometimes lower, and I represent part time, hobby. That shows something about how few people are serious or making money from this. To be clear, not weeks or months, and I only started when Adobe bought FT, my Lifetime right now is 26,200th. I'm not very good, I don't work hard, I barely have 1,000 images (1,046), I don't do video. 26,200 of all the people on Adobe. What's the message about how successful others are? And Adobe is my best agency right now, but lifetime I've made more on SS or Alamy, since I started in 2008.
67
« on: February 24, 2025, 11:31 »
I love blue cheese and it photographs really beautifully. The only thing wrong with your photo, Pete, is the background. The two-tone is too distracting. But a full black background would have been too flat. It's good to have some texture in your backgrounds too sometimes.
Getting the right background is 50% of what makes a good photo. As you know I used to go to salvage places and get a lot of things there. Like those old wooden large trays that I painted and distressed. Or get some sample vinyl floor tiles. I still use the dark slate ones.
Here is a page I left out of the book because it was getting too large. The background of my black forest trifle in the champagne glass are those dark slate vinyl tiles. Used just 4 - 2 behind and 2 on the base.
Oh, and there are my polka dot cups and saucers !!
Not my photo, just used for an example. However... Good advice on backgrounds and worth remembering. I also have flooring and counter samples for backgrounds. The further advice on side lighting for food is also always something to remember. Yum, Yum, one of my delicious and attractive food photos. 
68
« on: February 22, 2025, 12:21 »
What operating system, computer hardware, browser? We shouldn't have to guess? Honestly no one can give you an accurate, intelligent answer, without knowing what you are using to connect.
I never intended for anyone here to troubleshoot this for me! I can contact SS support for that. But fyi my operating system, computer hardware, browser are Mac OS 14.6.1, Apple M2 Studio, Safari 17.6. I will try with Chrome instead next time I upload.
Oh I see the problem, you're a MAC user.  Seriously your system should work better than anything I have. Dell Precision T5500 2009 that runs Windows 10, and Firefox. Can anyone advise how to use the new version successfully?
Can't be answered unless "anyone" knows your OS, computer and browser. And me answering that it works fine for me, doesn't help you at all, even if I tell you my system. Too bad it wasn't easy like, it doesn't work on phones. Good Luck, you aren't the only one with these problems, so maybe all the people who find it isn't working, should get together and share their system configurations and look for the common point of failure. As for the new system, which we didn't ask for and didn't need, I adjusted and adapted and it's better than the old, in many ways, now that I learned how to use it. The catalog manager is not better, it's over complicated and difficult. The sort by "Top Performers" is limited to 25 per page, which is a waste of time, if I'm looking for something.
69
« on: February 21, 2025, 13:02 »
wow! Thank you Annie! Amazing! Thanks
Tom
Everyone who knows anything, knows you never serve food or take food photos, on a BLUE PLATE! For everyone else, who doesn't understand that, it's a running joke that's been going on for over ten years. And we also know, that the best food photos, are made on polka dot plates!
hahahahaha - omg, I almost forgot about that!
I better explain so that Tom doesn't throw out his plates. Years ago, yes over 10 yrs as Pete said, we used to have a food competition on the old SS forum. We would pick a topic, for example, 'raw food' and anyone who wanted to participate would go away and shoot raw food that week, and the most innovative photo was the winner, and the winner would pick the next week's topic. That thread went for a long time. A few fights but not too many, considering it was a competition. A lot of people joined in along the way.
There was a guy called Barry who would shoot all his food on these awful plastic blue plates, which Pete said turned him off his food - but I think that's all Barry had. lol. As for polka dots - I have an old dinner setting of different colour polka dot plates. I love quirkiness. I used to shoot red food on red polka dot plates, green food on green polka dot, etc. I still do sometimes.
I don't know if they were awful old blue plates, but eggs for breakfast on a nasty blue plate? At least you guys have some taste in colors. I have generic, kind of white, restaurant and cafeteria plates, so I won't get rejected for the pattern being trademarked. Boring! And I can't defend baked cod dinner, isolated on black. But that's the color of the table top at the hotel. While you wrote the how to book, I could write the how NOT to, from experience and using my own images. I think the positives and how to do things right, is a better approach. This is my kind of blue... 
70
« on: February 21, 2025, 12:42 »
I tried to use the new one but after I entered my description, keywords, category and Illustration file type and tried to submit, most of what I had entered disappeared!...
one suggestion is to add meta data to your images before uploading - will save time other agency uploads.
multiple images w meta have all been easily submitted w the new system
Same for me, no problems. I will say that someone else told me, laptops and desktops work fine, phones and tablets don't. There could be an answer in that. I'm on a desktop, running windows 10 and using Firefox. Most of the time, on any site that I have problems, it turns out Firefox is the worst and Chrome or Edge work better. So as always, when someone says, some site or software isn't working, the first thing they should include is, the hardware, OS and Browser, otherwise the answers might mean nothing and make no sense. Example: I tried to use the new one but after I entered my description, keywords, category and Illustration file type and tried to submit, most of what I had entered disappeared! I tried doing it in different orders, and saving multiple times during the process but no matter what I did I lost my inputs and couldn't submit. I ended up using the suggestion above about getting to the legacy version via the keywording tool and was able to submit that way. Can anyone advise how to use the new version successfully?
What operating system, computer hardware, browser? We shouldn't have to guess? Honestly no one can give you an accurate, intelligent answer, without knowing what you are using to connect.
71
« on: February 21, 2025, 12:31 »
Actually one striking reason the stock has fallen is pretty simple. The Merger, makes it a dead corporation. No future, no gains, no potential.
The Merger terms: Shutterstock investors will receive $28.85 per share in cash for each share they own. However, Shutterstock shareholders can elect to receive GETY stock, or a combination of cash and stock as an alternative.
I could understand if someone paid the fees for buying the stock and the cost was under $28,85 a share. Small gains, but no point, because the stock is going to be deactivated. Maybe people are dumping their SSTK shares, because they don't want Getty stock? And I didn't find the cash and stock offer.
If the value of the Getty stock plus the cash, is $26.11 which is what SSTK is listed at right now, that all makes perfect sense.
Should I buy all the SSTK I can afford at $26 and then take the $28.85 a share and pay the short term capitol gains tax? A little help on this: Short-term capital gains tax is a tax on profits from the sale of an asset held for one year or less. Short-term capital gains are taxed according to your ordinary income tax bracket: 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% or 37%.
So I buy SSTK for $26.11, 1,000 shares @ $26.11 for $26,110 plus the brokerage fees. If there's a merger, I get $28,850 for a profit of $2,740 then I pay 25% income tax, and I made $2000 profit for risking my $26,110 on the bet that the merger will go through, as planned.
That's why the stock is at $26.11 right now. Potential investment profit and loss, nothing else. Someone with $27,000 to risk, might not think that $2,000 is enough profit?
72
« on: February 21, 2025, 11:53 »
@Uncle Pete
I believe that all these numbers are useful to guide strategies.
The more accurate the data analysis, the fewer mistakes you risk making.
Sorry for any mistakes, but it's Google Translate's fault
Guiding strategy is what I was talking about, that is good and knowing the market, the trends an demands. Watching some unreliable, inconsistent, unexplained "Position" that's only relative to others downloads (maybe?) that doesn't match our actual downloads or anything else, is a waste of time. Position is relative and only compares us to, others, where we don't know what they have uploaded or what they sold. The data is just a number. There is no accurate data to analyze. "I believe that all these numbers are useful to guide strategies."If you are looking at what sells, and where and for how much. Yes. The only way to see ahead. Any errors are all mine, and I know I'm the one who made them.
73
« on: February 21, 2025, 11:39 »
wow! Thank you Annie! Amazing! Thanks
Tom
Everyone who knows anything, knows you never serve food or take food photos, on a BLUE PLATE! For everyone else, who doesn't understand that, it's a running joke that's been going on for over ten years. And we also know, that the best food photos, are made on polka dot plates!
74
« on: February 20, 2025, 12:25 »
Yep - there was a database error. I got it fixed yesterday morning.
I've also managed to stop some of the spam, which should help speed a little bit (hopefully)
75
« on: February 19, 2025, 15:16 »
To add insult to injury, there is a total lack of guidance from them about what the merger with iStock will do. Will they merge their portfolios? iStock has different selection criteria. Will the SS files that don't meet their standards be deleted? All these factors make uploading to SS a waste of effort.
What merger? There hasn't been one, so no one knows, not Getty and not SS. I played with the new system today. It felt a bit clunky but that's probably because I'm not used to it. I did an upload and was able access the legacy keyword tool so that was good. Don't really understand the need for change but I guess the IT department has to be seen to be doing something.
Seems that way at SSTK, lets change things that are working fine, just to make a change. I'm getting used to the new, it's cumbersome and navigating is a little odd, but with the pop out menus on the left, it's starting to make better sense. The whole, leaving for the keywording tool, actually works better for me, because I leave it open, instead of the way it used to be, jumping in and back out.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 197
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
