I posted this in a previous thread here:

I like DT's pricing and structure. I was very surprised at a sale I had today. It was on a level 5 image, sold as small size, I received $6.35 (the buyer paid 11 credits using 2010 credits), the previous sale for the same image was a sub, I received $1.05. The image in question is a single tomato on white, nothing special. I think this is another demonstration that (some) buyers are not particularly price sensitive.

I don't think it's a case of small images being too expensive, but perhaps large images are too cheap.

Quote from: gostwyck on February 12, 2010, 06:22

It's strange how virtually everyone here, mainly sellers of course, champions the virtues of DT. However, as we all know from our own sales, most of the the real buyers don't. Why is this?

Because they don't do enough marketing, open any magazine to do with any part of the industry and you'll most probably find adverts from iStock, Shutterstock and Fotolia, I have never ever seen an advert from Dreamstime. If buyers don't know they exist how do Dreamstime expect to attract them to the site. Go into any design office and you'll see a stack of related magazines that everyone in the company reads. I also know that Fotolia has a very active sales team in the UK that constantly target potential customers.

Existing and having a great site, good database of quality images but relying on Google searches is not enough IMO, direct marketing works, it always has and always will. Look at all the sites that have tried and failed and you'll see a common denominator - bad marketing.

I was also going to make this point. Thanks for saving me lots of typing.

well all I can say is I just wasted 2 minutes of my life reading this bizarre thread

Thank you for saving two minutes of mine.

Quote from: Eireann on February 11, 2010, 09:50

One more for DT.
I use the 'fair trade' argument.

Buyers don't care for fair trade. I choose DT from a buyer's viewpoint (I'm a low volume buyer too). I get much faster what I want on DT. The best match of IS sucks big time, at least for me. All those "did you mean?" questions slow me down, and I know that IS deletes many relevant keywords, so I have to wade through much more pages than at DT. For a commission of just 2 euro per suggested image, I can't afford that.
Also, IS has too many microstockish images, avoiding the more creative ones. DT has it all.

For illustrations, DT is much better. There are many great rasterized illustrations on DT, and IS avoids those, in favor of vectors. The group I work for is not a design group, but a daily media group. I guess they don't even know how to treat vectors. If they were, they wouldn't have time for it too since they have tight deadlines.

IS doesn't seem to like the idea of 'let the buyer decide'. Not all buyers are designers.

I like DT's pricing and structure. I was very surprised at a sale I had today. It was on a level 5 image, sold as small size, I received $6.35 (the buyer paid 11 credits using 2010 credits), the previous sale for the same image was a sub, I received $1.05. The image in question is a single tomato on white, nothing special. I think this is another demonstration that (some) buyers are not particularly price sensitive.

I took a quick look at my past 250 sales or so and none of them received a commission below $0.35, perhaps I've just been lucky. Whilst I'm not jumping for joy at receiving $0.35 as a commission, at least DT has a structure in place that allows popular images to return more to the contributor.

Depending on the quantity purchased, bundle credits range from �0.63 - �1. When customers purchase bundles that put credits to a value of under �1, contributors are still paid out at �1.

^ Just a portion from FT's reply to Warren.

Am I misunderstanding this. Does is say we are paid at the rate of �1?

Quote from: massman on February 08, 2010, 09:47

Quote from: Perry on February 08, 2010, 09:39

I was just thinking about uploading all my images to DepositPhotos and then I read here that they have CATEGORIES!? Why can't all these startup sites listen to contributors? We want easy uploads like 123r of canstock...

Never mind about the categories, is nobody troubled by this? - http://www.microstockgroup.com/new-sites-general/discussion-for-those-submitting-to-depositphotos/

Should we be !?   

That is what I'm asking.

Quote from: sjlocke on February 07, 2010, 14:29

...
Again, this is not the macro-micro discussion.  This is actually your peers trying to actively work more for less.

Yes, but it's a similar argument that will have similar results.

If there's a marketplace for cheaper imagery - and there definitely is - you ignore it at your own financial loss. So go ahead, sjlocke, continue making fancy images for a so-so return at Getty. I'll practice techniques to whip off a lot of simple low-res stuff for the ultra-cheap subscription market - I'm already pretty good at it thanks to Shutterstock. Let's rejoin the discussion in a year to see how we fared.

Wouldn't you be better off being independent if the future is low cost subs?

I don't know if this helps anyone.

I asked FT:

Hi

I have noticed that the grey box to the left of my contributor account page no longer contains the credit value of which I will my commission is based. Has this changed and will it be displayed in the future? Thanks

FT Replied:

Thank you for your e-mail.

We are currently updating our website. I was told that we will won't display that anymore.

Kind regards,

Fotolia Team U.K.


I asked FT a further question beceause the first reply didn't realy answere the question:

Hi

Thanks for the prompt reply. As the current credit value is no longer displayed in the grey box, please could you let me know where I can find this information. Is the current credit value for contributors commission still �0.75 and will it be changing in the near future. Thanks.

FT Replied:

Thank you for your e-mail. The current value for contributors is the same - �0.75, it never changed so far. I am not certain about any future plans.

Kind regards,

Fotolia Team U.K.



So there you have it, make of it what you will. I still don't know where on the site I can find out how to calculate my commission, does anyone?

Very good indeed. Wearing a seatbelt has already saved my life for sure.

I was searching for an old thread from here and I stumbled apon something I said about StockXpert being bought by Getty and sub sales. "In any event, it can't get any worse, can it?" I fear it has.

The full post is here, it's worth a read I think if just to remind us of the damage subs can do.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/stockxpert-com/revenue-plummeting-at-StockXpert/

I gave up submitting there after so many of my designs were mutilated by the CMYK to RGB conversion process. I did enquire about this and was given a load of rubbish as an answer.