|
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 - PaulieWalnuts
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 120
551
« on: May 10, 2015, 16:53 »
552
« on: May 10, 2015, 15:45 »
I wonder why I never get these requests ...
You're a celebrity.
553
« on: May 10, 2015, 15:43 »
Then creatives need to take some sales and marketing business courses and learn negotiating skills. No wonder why this industry is full of starving artists.
That ignores the fact that creative expression seems to be a need for many (or all?) of us. And it ignores the fact that many people do have a full time job supporting them, so they can afford to be creative for free. The difference may be that it's rather easy to press the shutter button on a camera (or phone) rather than typing 50,000 characters on a keyboard.
While that may be true, there's creative aspects to many professions and I can't think of one where people so willingly work for free. Do you know of any beauticians who work for free? Maybe as a favor to friends or family but not to strangers who say "Hey I love your work. Will you style my hair? Pay you? Why would I pay you? Can't you just do my hair". And regarding a full time job, I don't know of anyone who ever makes enough money at their full time job. Unless you're filthy rich, and I don't think most creatives qualify, you could probably use more money to help your finances so why not earn something from your work? So Semmick can have his topic back, I started a new post about free stuff at http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/strategies-for-free-usage-requests
554
« on: May 10, 2015, 15:30 »
What the heck is wrong with just saying NO!?
Why do photographers wet their knickers over whether to give stuff for free?
Free doesn't pay bills 
You can say whatever you want but just plain no usually ends the opportunity for getting paid unless the person really wants your image. The "thanks, but" approach probably has better chances of getting paid.
555
« on: May 10, 2015, 15:27 »
I just lie and tell them I'd love to help out but I'm contractually obligated by my agent to charge a minimum usage fee. Thankfully no one ever asks who my agent is.
I have pulled the 'iStock/Getty exclusive contract' line on occasion too, when I'm refusing a 'commercial entity', when approached by an acquaintance.
I use that too but I also am hoping to discourage them from even asking by letting them know this is my business and supports my family. The only reason they ask in the first place is because creatives say yes. If creatives stopped saying yes people would stop asking.
556
« on: May 10, 2015, 13:29 »
Free usage. This came up in another post so I decided to start a new topic. Seems that creatives just give work away and that's just the way it goes. But lately I've been noticing a lot more ranting and backlash about it. http://beezlystreet.com/2015/04/28/exposure-now-legal-tender-for-photographers - Does a pretty good job of showing how ridiculous it all is http://petapixel.com/2012/01/10/this-photograph-is-not-freehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2a8TRSgzZY - A classic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE - Harlan Ellison -- Pay the Writer (NSFW) I get contacted constantly with requests for free usage, exchange for exposure, and other usually meaningless offers. Some creatives get angry and respond angrily. Some creatives ignore the requests. Some creatives just give-in and hand over their stuff for free. I don't do any of those. I respond politely but firmly and work toward getting them to pay. I think this industry as a whole needs to stop the freebies and move more toward an exchange of equal value. You don't give unless you get. And I mean money. Not exposure or credit. Not all people end up buying but a decent percentage do. You just need to politely say no and tell them what you're willing to accept. Now if they're willing to offer something tangible I'd consider it. Maybe it's a new local restaurant and they're willing to offer $200 in gift cards to cover my $200 licensing fee. Great! But I've had restaurant owners propose I spend thousands of dollars out of my pocket for me to put prints in their restaurant because it's a "high traffic restaurant and would be great exposure for you". Hahahaaahhaaha, no. Here's a few examples of what has worked for me and this also applies to discount requests. [The Make You Famous] Our super well-known company would like to use your image and we'll give you credit. This will be great exposure for you. [Me] Sounds great. Using my images requires a very reasonable fee of $XX in addition to giving me credit. Would this work? [The Small Broke Company] I'm starting up a small business and don't have any money but would like to use your image. [Me] Totally understand. I'm a small business too and my fees are affordable for any budget. That image is only $XX. Would that work? [The Carrot] We'd like to use your image. We always hire photographers and will make sure to add you to our list for future work. [Me] Sounds great. What I'd like to propose is you license the image for a very reasonable fee of $XX now and after that we can discuss discounts for future work. How do you usually respond and what's worked for you?
557
« on: May 10, 2015, 12:19 »
Is there any other product or service that people so willingly give their work away?
Yes, basically in all creative areas: Musicians pay to go on stage at some events. Authors are paying to get their books printed. It has been like this for decades. Why should photography be different?
Then creatives need to take some sales and marketing business courses and learn negotiating skills. No wonder why this industry is full of starving artists.
558
« on: May 09, 2015, 15:38 »
well, what else could they ever had in store for us once they become the leader in microstock and are growing 33% per year with investors in Wall Street throwing billions at them ?
greed and loss of touch with reality is the natural consequence of all this, as much as we're here complaining about SS paying the lowest fees in the industry i'm sure Oringer and his gang of cro-oks are not even aware of whats going on for contributors, they probably think we're paid fairly well actually !
these guys dont reason with the logic of a photographer, it's all about money and quick profits, that's their only goal and the only reason for SS to exist, in their eyes we're merely a cost, a nuisance, a necessary evil ...
Correct. And one of the reasons they are able to do this is that many, and I mean MANY, photographers have migrated to SS over the last few years due specifically to leaving exclusivity. They are in a complete power position to behave the way they do, so this "new supplier treatment plan" triumphs "sharing in success. Yes, sharing in success. We helped make SS what it is. We upped our game, we invested in gear and practice, we uploaded bigger and bigger files (because they encouraged us to in order to maximize our own success), we cheered them, we called them the best thing in micro stock, we dumped on 123, IS, DP, FT as greedy schmucks and practically put SS on a pedestal. Now? They are in a power position and publicly traded. NOT A GOOD RECIPE for suppliers.
I will state my opinion once more: Scott Braut left for a reason linked to the above scenario AND............more commission eroding strategies are coming.
I warned everybody over and over and over again years ago to prepare for what was coming. I wonder if anyone listened.
559
« on: May 08, 2015, 17:00 »
No, that covers the agencies most people try submitting to which are the top 12 toward the right side of this screen in the Microstock Poll Results. If you only submit to one then, well, good luck.  And again, this is for a newbie who is amateur photographer. Your results may vary. If you're exclusive somewhere it will vary widely so this is just a general.
560
« on: May 07, 2015, 06:53 »
Yes, it seems like photography business is going after VSCO these days. Has any photographers seen better sales by adding vsco filters?
I think unsplash is affecting the whole photographic scene now. Those photos are so in demand right now. I'm using them frequently. I would assume that those kind of images sells great on microstock.
Just checked out Unsplash. So let's see if I have this right. Crew, a web design firm that uses images for their paid work, starts a website for... free images. And wait for it... photographers gladly submit work. For free. So designers can take those free images and... charge their clients for the work. Their clients are using the finished product, which includes the free image, to... make money. And, and... it's based on Creative Commons whose board and advisers consist of... publishers, web companies, and other businesspeople who have an interest in free images. SMFH. That seems to be the trend these days. Maybe I need to quit tying to sell my images and set up a website where everyone just gives me their images for free and I sell them, make money, and pay them nothing. Sure would save me a lot of time and money from having buy equipment and take pictures. And photographers seem to jump at any chance for attention. I'll just hang the exposure carrot out there and watch them jump like crazy for it. I'm beginning to wonder if photography really has no long term financial potential. We are increasingly headed toward everything being free. It's becoming easier to take great pictures and those who take them don't seem to care that while they slave away at their day job, and even second job, while everyone is using their pictures to make money except for them. Is there any other product or service that people so willingly give their work away?
561
« on: May 05, 2015, 17:43 »
For me April isn't in a slump any more than the new normal slump. And since a good portion of my sales are now subscriptions I won't find out how I did until May 25th after everything else is reported.
But the thing that really just caught my eye is the Redeemed Credits which for the first time in years are on track to be 1/2 of what they were last year and 1/4 of what they were in 2013. So to add insult to injury I will absolutely drop a level in royalty percentage unless they freeze it. And they should. Their sales are down. Regular download sales are disappearing and being replaced by subs. And we don't earn RCs for subs or other deals.
562
« on: April 06, 2015, 13:49 »
Giving loans to people who can't afford them is what caused the collapse, and if that's the way it's going again. I'm with you. Danger ahead.
If banks didn't give loans to people who can't afford them, THEY WOULDN'T BE WRITING MANY LOANS! Because most people today can't really afford a home loan, when their employers keep cutting back their hours, wages and benefits!
I don't follow your logic. Instead of writing 100 loans for a $500,000 house a person can't afford wouldn't they be writing 100 loans for a $200,000 house a person can afford? And that's the problem, really. If the minimum cost of a house in that area is $200,000 and the person can only afford a $100,000 house, what's the answer? Have the government force businesses to increase wages so that person can buy a a $200,000 house? Force already overburnered taxpayers to cough up more money to provide subsidies for a person to buy a $200,000 who can only afford a $100,000 house? I have houses, townhouses, and condos in my town that are $75,000. I'm sure in other areas of the country there are less expensive houses. Move. If you can't afford to buy a house, who says you need to buy one? There are plenty of excellent affordable rental options. Maybe people should live where they can afford instead of forcing the community to financially support them. And if they dont like the places where they can afford to live they should get used to it or do something for themselves so they can earn more money to live where they prefer.
563
« on: April 06, 2015, 08:52 »
I said I would report back on the results of my going non-exclusive. It has been a year. My only regret is that I ever went exclusive. In earnings now where I left off on istockphoto. The main thing I love is you are not at the whim of one sites acceptance policy. What sites decide to accept and not accept seems so random sometimes.
My wife has an illustration that was reject by istockphoto as not quality enough for microstock that is her current top earner.
I upload to Shutterstock (by far the best earner and contributor relations), istockphoto (next best earner, contributor relations is improving a little), canstockphoto (horrible pending times), dreamstime (might discontinue this one). The problem with dreamstime is they want you to gang all sports illustrations on one page. So if I make a shield type design for all sports they want me to put all of them on one page. This is not acceptable to me when they are paying so low and from the buyers perspective, if I am working on softball, I don't need the other sports.
Does anyone know why canstockphoto is so slow? Is that a problem or just the way they are?
Thanks for the update. I'm barely hanging on to being exclusive. Are you saying that after a year your income is now the same as it was when you were exclusive? Do you have the same amount of images on other sites as you had when IS exclusive? Was any of your stuff part of the E+, Vetta, Getty higher priced collections?
564
« on: April 06, 2015, 06:25 »
At the bottom end employers will pay as little as possible. If left to market forces we will have what we have had in the past, which was basically slavery and/or people working under horrible conditions.
exactly, or even not paid at all with the excuse of unpaid stages and internships, i can attest this sh-it is going on even in top-tier multinationals like IBM or Oracle, go figure...
the market forces don't care about the social consequences of all this, and the governments have abdicated from their natural role ... the entire West is de facto at the mercy of the greediest and most corrupt multinationals and speculators in housing, education, food, energy and pretty much any primary item humans need, sooner or later they will privatize even water with the excuse of global warming.
Long article but worth the read, not completely accurate but close enough, they sucked the middle class dry on a large scale and left many without retirement or jobs.
The Subprime Mortgage Crisis Timeline
http://tinyurl.com/37q963
Worked out good for me. I was able to buy a foreclosure for $75,000 in 2011, remodel it for about $15,000 and now I'm selling it for $150,000 after 2.5 years. All tax free because I used it as my primary residence and reinvesting it in a new, better house.
Your attitude simply amazes me. The only reason the mortgage crisis worked for you was luck. If you'd bought that house 5 years earlier, it would now be worth less than what you paid for it. But heck, it worked for you, so eff the suckers who could afford a house before you could.
It's horrible and unfortunate when someone loses their house. It's your home. It's your life. Here in the US a major reason for the housing crisis was people buying homes they couldn't afford in the first place. Where I live a large percentage of foreclosures were "McMansion" $300,000US+ luxury homes. Before I went to buy a house I ran the numbers for my expenses, income, savings, etc, and figured out what I could afford. When I went to the bank the loan officer told me "you qualify for $XXX,XXX.". It was twice as much as the number I came up with. I told him "yeah, I qualify for that, but there's no way I could afford it." I'd be in foreclosure within months. But plenty of people bought houses based on what they qualified for which wasn't what they could afford. Why? Maybe some greed of wanting a nice house. Maybe ignorance not knowing what they could afford. Maybe poor planing and not having enough savings in the event one member of the household lost their job. Maybe just horrendously bad fortune. I'm sure few people will agree with what I'm about to say because this is probably considered "old school" mentality. In my opinion we are increasingly moving toward a society where there's little self-accountability. When someone does something wrong or makes a bad decision it's someone elses fault. Commit an armed robbery and get shot by the convenience store owner? It's the store owners fault. Can't get a job? It's because somebody else isn't providing the jobs. Don't make enough money to live in an ultra expensive city? It's the business's fault and the government needs to force them to give higher pay. I believe your fortune should only equal what you're capable of achieving. But we're increasingly headed toward a society of penalizing the hard workers and rewarding people who make bad decisions, perform poorly, or expect hand outs. The news is constantly reporting about the move toward only rich and poor. Should we be surprised that the middle class is disappearing? So who's fault is it when someone buys a house they can't afford? Banks fault? Seller's fault? Foreclosure buyer's fault? Nobody is responsible for their decisions anymore.
565
« on: April 04, 2015, 17:01 »
One main thing that a lot of the workers don't understand is the difference between cost of "living wage" and "minimum wage". The living wage is what you need to have a decent life in that area so for example if you live in San Diego, California you would need around $30 an hour to have a good apartment and food on your table. In Louisville, Kentucky you would need $14 per hour to have the same standard of living. Minimum wage was never intended to be 'Living wage'...
If someone's earnings aren't high enough to match the living wage of the city what's the solution? Use the government to force higher pay? Or maybe let the market dictate who can afford to live there? Can't afford to live in ultra expensive San Diego or Seattle? Simple. The United States is huge with a lot of affordable options. Move to an area you can afford. Debate over.
Except that's not what people are doing. They just complain and expect someone else to fix their problems for them. That seems to be the way of things nowadays. I don't buy that there aren't opportunities for the next generation. There's plenty.
There's plenty of opportunities for people who have the right skills for jobs that are in demand and are motivated to get a jobIt seems like the go-getter is a dying breed.
566
« on: April 04, 2015, 12:11 »
One main thing that a lot of the workers don't understand is the difference between cost of "living wage" and "minimum wage". The living wage is what you need to have a decent life in that area so for example if you live in San Diego, California you would need around $30 an hour to have a good apartment and food on your table. In Louisville, Kentucky you would need $14 per hour to have the same standard of living. Minimum wage was never intended to be 'Living wage'...
If someone's earnings aren't high enough to match the living wage of the city what's the solution? Use the government to force higher pay? Or maybe let the market dictate who can afford to live there? Can't afford to live in ultra expensive San Diego or Seattle? Simple. The United States is huge with a lot of affordable options. Move to an area you can afford. Debate over.
567
« on: April 04, 2015, 10:49 »
I guess I get bothered by entitlement attitudes. You're not supposed to be given anything, other than the freedom to make a way for yourself. At least that's the way I see things. I understand other people see things differently and think things like health insurance or free education should be a right. I just don't. I think those things should earned.
I guess I'll be getting negatives also but I feel the same way. I believe that market supply and demand should drive compensation. The position I hold in my day job is in very high demand with very few people available to fill the role. As a result, the pay is much higher than similar roles and I get constant desperate calls from recruiters who can't fill the roles. Years ago I decided my career at that time wasn't going anywhere. So I researched and found an opportunity where I saw job growth with few skilled people. I went to technical schools, studied hard, got certifications, hunted down employers, and created a new and better career for myself. I didn't stumble on that job. No one handed it to me. I didn't take a low paying job and demand I make more money. The reason minimum wage jobs are low is because supply of people can do them is so high. Today, here in the US there are so many safety nets provided by the government that people are becoming lax because they know somebody will bail them out. While I have no sympathy for greedy businesses I also have no sympathy for people who don't make enough money or can't find a job. I have two jobs. If you don't even have one job you are doing something wrong and need to make changes. If you don't want to change that should not be my problem to need to contribute my hard earned money toward you. I realize some people have unbelievably bad fortune and need a hand occasionally and I feel for them. Maybe their spouse died, insurance refused to pay massive medical bills, or they were in a debilitating accident. But I personally see a lot more people who are fully capable of working and don't seem to be truly making much effort to improve their situation. To me this is common sense. And maybe very few people share my views. If there are no jobs for your skills it's time to get different skills. If you don't make enough money find out what you need to do to get a raise. If you can't get a raise get a different job. If you can't get a different job get a second job. If you can't get a second job cut back on spending. If there are no jobs in your town move. If you can't move find an internet based job. And on and on. If you've sincerely exhausted every avenue I feel for you. But if you really haven't sincerely exhausted all avenues and are just unwilling to do anything other than demand more money I have no sympathy. ETA: Totally forgot to finish my point here. Guess what would happen if everybody working a minimum wage job improved themselves and moved on to better jobs so that there were no people left to fill the minimum wage jobs? Exactly. Those companies would be forced to make changes (increase pay, offer insurance, etc) to attract people to want to take the job.
568
« on: March 31, 2015, 20:56 »
What sells, and what doesn't
27
Incorrect. It's 42.
569
« on: March 31, 2015, 16:54 »
Interesting new approach. They must have learned that getting blood from contributors by making a massive flesh wound once a year isn't a good idea. They get the same amount of blood now by using the Vampire Bat technique to quietly and painlessly take a little blood more often.
570
« on: March 28, 2015, 16:48 »
I use Photodeck. Super fast. Nice regular and mobile interface. Lots of configuration options. No code needed but customizable if you need to. Integrates with Wordpress.
Just curious. Why do you want to go to the effort of creating your own site and then linking to micro? If someone finds your site why not let them buy there and you keep the 100%?
I've thought about selling at my own site, but I just don't like hassle of having to deal with customers directly, and with the new VAT rules in EU it's even more complicated. I'll probably link to Creative Market where I get 70% which is pretty good.
Makes sense. It's a shame though. We have too many obstacles as it is and now more government fees discourage certain options.
571
« on: March 28, 2015, 06:49 »
I use Photodeck. Super fast. Nice regular and mobile interface. Lots of configuration options. No code needed but customizable if you need to. Integrates with Wordpress.
Just curious. Why do you want to go to the effort of creating your own site and then linking to micro? If someone finds your site why not let them buy there and you keep the 100%?
572
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:24 »
What Yaymicro API partner does this site use? I want to know what one to opt out of. I could opt out of all of them but then I might as well dump Yaymicro. None of these sites seem to sell much, so I don't think we need to get too concerned. Never understood why new sites haven't noticed that almost all the buyers use sites that charge them more than all the failed sites that tried to undercut them.
The thing that's really getting to bug me is the imbalance. These sites get rich and the contributors get very little. Even if this person is working solo they may not get rich but could probably make a very good living with very little sales volume. So the pattern continues of site owner does well and contributors don't. And it's just another site that sets the expectation for buyers of premium for cheap. Why bother supporting stuff like this? And all of these backdoor partnering API deals. I keep saying it and I'll say it again. By supporting these sites we are leaving money on the table. I just sold a small business website usage RM license through my site for $150. He initially said too much money, he could go to the micro sites and get something for way less, and asked for a huge discount. I negotiated a little but he still bought the image. Are we our own worst enemy?
573
« on: March 24, 2015, 17:21 »
Unfortunately there were at least two other passengers in the car and three teenagers are dead. Maybe the passengers weren't stupid.
574
« on: March 24, 2015, 07:05 »
Nice that Canon finally made a move but I've already moved on from DSLRs. My 5DMII and D800 are collecting dust. I'm now shooting with a Sony A7R and will wait to see if Sony comes out with a 50MP version. Still have all of my Canon lenses and will do some testing on the A7R with a Metabones adapter.
575
« on: March 21, 2015, 19:49 »
I like the site but after seven months with 300 images that have proven to sell well elsewhere, no sales.
I did a few test searches. For one of my more popular images the search turned up only 40 images with the same search term. 13 of the 40 are mine.
Based on that, I'm going to say either their buyers are looking for something very specific that I don't offer or they have no buyers.
Either way, I haven't invested any more time and won't until there's some sales activity.
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 120
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
