|
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 - SuperPhoto
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 35
676
« on: September 18, 2018, 08:07 »
So...
People that are established on envato are probably pretty happy. Reduced competition with the new uploading process. But it seems envato has been doing that for the past year (from deleting 100's of items on the queue with their old cumbersome interface, to a 'six month' waiting time (which, of course would probably be extended seeing as how they do business).
Any comments on what to do if you've been blocked from uploading?
677
« on: September 10, 2018, 10:14 »
If it is a small fee *per sale*, sure, why not? (I am thinking you mean a small % of the sale?) If so, yes, I would go for that.
678
« on: September 07, 2018, 14:05 »
If you have lots of time, OR, believe it will generate sales, go for it. Otherwise, I'd move on, because it's pretty time consuming.
BTW, I admit I like the second one better. The deer is more the focus/subject of the picture.
679
« on: September 06, 2018, 22:30 »
I'm impresed. I have 0 sales @ alamy.
19 is good.
680
« on: September 02, 2018, 21:17 »
No sales as of yet from them. Large portfolio too (2500+ videos).
However, got several e-mails from them promoting their membership package.
681
« on: August 31, 2018, 22:21 »
Sent you a PM. Bottomline though - it really comes down to sales. If you can figure out how to make people *profitable sales* (and lots of them), then you'll have a winner. Very good considerations SuperPhoto.
There's definitely pros on cons about being self-hosted. And in terms of sales it will never be anywhere near as what you can achieve with the help of stock agencies. But I do see it as an interesting alternative to the stock agencies for people who have a certain size of portfolio. Some of the interesting aspects:
- 100% commissions
- Options to sell different licenses (exclusive licenses, TIFF files, RAW files, graded / ungraded video)
- More control to present your portfolio the way you want
- Get to know you customers
If you don't mind SuperPhoto it could be interesting chatting a bit more. Can I get your email?
Took a look at your survey.
I think I know what type of project you want to put together (if it's what I think it is, I was thinking of doing the same thing a while back).
Creating a site where you charge a fee to host files (photos/videos) is kind of a good idea - but I think you have a limited market.
The issue I think most photographers/videographers have is they don't know how to market themselves to generate sales - so unless you solve that problem, I don't think charging a subscription fee for photographers/videographers to host their own files will be that appealing. Simply because they don't know how to market it (even though you'll probably promote it that way). So what's the point of *paying* someone to host files for something they already get to do for *free* (portfolios on other sites). Yes, yes - you can say "no agency commission!" - but then the challenge is marketing and making SALES. And most don't really know how to do that on their own. They are photographers/videographers, not marketers.
So the thought process would be 'why should I PAY you money to host, with no sales if I have to do ALL the work in marketing TOO'? And they probably wouldn't buy.
BTW - re: income - do you generate $40,000 USD per month through photography? You had that in your survey question.
My educated guess is there is maybe 1% that do above $5k/month - but - they'd probably be happy with how they are doing things already (letting the agencies promote), so wouldn't really be interested in such a service. Then, maybe 10% that do $1-$2k/month - but again, too much work to promote themselves. And then probably 75% doing from $100-$500/month - but then your service would probably be too expensive (assuming you'd be charging between $30-$50/month) - AND - reaching those people and converting them I think would be a challenge. Unless you have some 'in' (relationship with an agency) - or - some way of reaching that vast majority of photographers/videographers - OR - figuring out how to make them SALES - I think you have a bit of a challenge before you.
682
« on: August 31, 2018, 21:03 »
Huh, interesting.
How did they get the images in the first place, wouldn't they have had to have 'purchased' them?
683
« on: August 29, 2018, 23:22 »
Took a look at your survey.
I think I know what type of project you want to put together (if it's what I think it is, I was thinking of doing the same thing a while back).
Creating a site where you charge a fee to host files (photos/videos) is kind of a good idea - but I think you have a limited market.
The issue I think most photographers/videographers have is they don't know how to market themselves to generate sales - so unless you solve that problem, I don't think charging a subscription fee for photographers/videographers to host their own files will be that appealing. Simply because they don't know how to market it (even though you'll probably promote it that way). So what's the point of *paying* someone to host files for something they already get to do for *free* (portfolios on other sites). Yes, yes - you can say "no agency commission!" - but then the challenge is marketing and making SALES. And most don't really know how to do that on their own. They are photographers/videographers, not marketers.
So the thought process would be 'why should I PAY you money to host, with no sales if I have to do ALL the work in marketing TOO'? And they probably wouldn't buy.
BTW - re: income - do you generate $40,000 USD per month through photography? You had that in your survey question.
My educated guess is there is maybe 1% that do above $5k/month - but - they'd probably be happy with how they are doing things already (letting the agencies promote), so wouldn't really be interested in such a service. Then, maybe 10% that do $1-$2k/month - but again, too much work to promote themselves. And then probably 75% doing from $100-$500/month - but then your service would probably be too expensive (assuming you'd be charging between $30-$50/month) - AND - reaching those people and converting them I think would be a challenge. Unless you have some 'in' (relationship with an agency) - or - some way of reaching that vast majority of photographers/videographers - OR - figuring out how to make them SALES - I think you have a bit of a challenge before you.
685
« on: August 29, 2018, 10:11 »
Market's go in cycles, and tend to be cyclical. Start, go up, way up, plateau, decline, go way down, then start over again.
a) If you mean breaking your contract so you can upload the 1.6k photo to other sites, yeah, not sure if you'd be making a lot of extra work for yourself to maintain the same income. (I.e., dip in %, but increase in sales from other sites). What types of images do you have? (If you want to PM me, I can look at your porfolio and let you know my thoughts). Depends if it is what is in demand, is your content evergreen, is it unique/difficult for others to duplicate, etc, etc.
b) Second option "risk-free". Become a hard worker (again) - and upload new stuff to the 20-25+ agencies over 6 months. See what kinds of results you get.
While images are of course still in demand (I've purchased licenses myself for various projects),
i) Subscription/inexpensive solutions are very popular. (So less likely to make a $100 usd sale, more like a $1 sale)
ii) Competition is much higher. ("Everyone" has a cellphone and considers themselves a "photographer". Some actually buy a real camera, and then consider themselves "professional"). Plus you are increasingly competing with more and more people from countries where $3 usd/hour is considered a great wage.
So even if your stuff is great, getting found, and getting people to pay high prices will most likely be challenging. Not to say it's not possible - but you need to adapt, figure out what's working *now*, and do that.
686
« on: August 29, 2018, 09:57 »
Seems it's only you. I can log in.
687
« on: August 14, 2018, 13:13 »
Yeah I understand what you said, I'm just wanting to know where was this country where they said they were raising it to 10% and then they only raised it to 5%, and when was this?
Also - recently (in Ontario), the minimum wage was increased from about $11 to $14 (about a 27% increase). However, the cost of regular goods & services (so companies could pay the higher salaries) went up about 40%. On top of that, now since most people are in higher income/tax brackets - they actually pay even more tax than they did before. So numbers wise - they "make" more gross income. But practicially speaking, they are poorer/worse off than before the wage hike, because their dollar doesn't buy as much, AND, they now pay more taxes overall.
688
« on: August 14, 2018, 13:03 »
Unfortunately, at this point in time, doesn't make much of a difference. Because if one person decides to stop uploading, there are 10 more in his place ready to jump at the opportunity to make 'riches' submitting content. I don't think they really care, other than their bottom line. This line of "thought" is absurd conspiracy theory. If they were deviously planning both a commission cut and price raise, it would have obviously been much smarter to have done them at the same time to soften the blow of the commission cut. By doing one and then waiting 1-2 weeks, they lost portfolios, lost uploads, killed trust with their contributors, etc. Plainly NOT the best course of action from a business standpoint. What this appears to be on the surface is exactly what it was: they thought people would accept a 50% commission, since that is still tied for highest commission among major sites. But they sorely miscalculated vis a vis their low prices. When it was shown to them just how bad their thinking was by a whole lot of pissed off contributors who took the time to respond, they realized they needed to adjust, so they did.
Absurd conspiracy? Maybe. But I cannot imagine they never considered a possible backlash. The thought of angry contributors threatening to cease uploading or removing their portfolio should have crossed their mind. Business decisions aren't made over night, it's a process of careful consideration, meetings, discussions, weighing the pros and cons. If they really underestimated our reaction and suddenly decided to cushion the blow after the fact, then management is simply incompetent. I don't know what's worse: deceiving your contributors, or mismanaging your business.
689
« on: August 14, 2018, 13:00 »
Various local cities with respect to property taxes, and percentages vary. Every 2-3 years, the city will say "to grow/support infrastructure, we need to increase property taxes by _x_ amount". Usually a large percentage. Then a public outcry. Then the city says 'oh, okay, it will only go up by _x_ amount". Also, something that is popular in Canada is to say that people are getting a "huge" tax break with a home renovation project/whatever the flavor of the year is, usually between $500-$1000. (The real value of that though is actually only about $75-$150 off the 'final' tax bill, because it is pre-tax). But then the CPP contributions (a type of tax), or something else (varies, again) increase by "only" 1% of the total income. People that can't do math, or don't take the time to do it think its a great deal. But 1% of a $30k income (which is a base/minimum wage salary) is $300 in taxes. So the net effect is that taxes have gone up. Of course, if you make more than that, you pay more. Have politicians ever done that?
Cite a higher raise in taxes, then only raise them slightly? Yes, many many times.
(In my example - there was still a 5% raise in taxes. However, how it was "worded" is people think they are "saving" 5%, but the wording is "5% off the original 10%", so it is still a 5% raise. Not a 10% raise.
lol - I guess it works though. Re-read what I wrote - and you'll see there still was a '5%' raise... 
Yeah I understand what you said, I'm just wanting to know where was this country where they said they were raising it to 10% and then they only raised it to 5%, and when was this?
690
« on: August 11, 2018, 09:22 »
Have politicians ever done that?
Cite a higher raise in taxes, then only raise them slightly? Yes, many many times. (In my example - there was still a 5% raise in taxes. However, how it was "worded" is people think they are "saving" 5%, but the wording is "5% off the original 10%", so it is still a 5% raise. Not a 10% raise. lol - I guess it works though. Re-read what I wrote - and you'll see there still was a '5%' raise...
691
« on: August 11, 2018, 09:02 »
It's what mainly politicians do with respect to taxes. "Next month taxes are going up 10%! What? Too High? Sorry, we can't"... <several weeks pass> "After careful consideration, we've realized we can save you 5% on taxes, so it will only go up 5%"... <applause from audience> Did they regain my trust completely? No. After all, they deliberately cut our commissions, broke their initial promise and tried to pass it off as a good thing. That means they are either incompetent (i.e. their business plan wasn't sound to begin with) or greedy, or both. The damage is already done and I'll never look the same at them again.
Think about it, they must have discussed different scenarios before implementing the commission cut. Did the backlash really surprise them? I find that hard to believe. Maybe this was part of their cunning masterplan; cut commissions, wait for a backlash and then proceed with new pricing to make us feel heard.
And apparently it works. Contributors are slowly accepting the new situation: SB profits, we lose money but still continue to upload. Well played SB, well played.
692
« on: August 07, 2018, 21:15 »
Probably not the answer you want to hear - but it just 'happens'.
I have some that make 'marginal' sales - and yet - there are a few of my competitors that see if I make "a" sale - then flood their accounts with 5-10 versions that seem nearly identical to mine... and some are competing in countries where making $3 is "big" money.... so...
I guess just keep producing & building your portfolio.
I am doing this for fun - but of course I do want to make a lot of money from this, so am working on that too.
693
« on: August 07, 2018, 15:54 »
Never done wedding photography. Why would you say it is stressful? The fact is making money in what can loosely be called "the arts" is mostly very tough and competitive....for short time microstock allowed people to make reasonable money shooting more or less what they pleased when they felt like it. That was never going to last and even now you can still make a few $$$s without working very hard. Things like wedding photography are infinitely more stressful.
I hated wedding shooting. Loved shooting other events though. I worked for a company that assigned memory cards at the start and collected them at the end, it certainly made you a quick study if you wanted a second gig. 
694
« on: August 06, 2018, 21:11 »
a) People like complaining
b) People don't like change, so people hope things will change back to how they were
c) It's fun to whine about how someone else is getting ahead of you, instead of adapting and/or making yourself better/smarter/etc.
d) It's still fun taking pictures/videos/etc.
e) People are 'comfortable' with what they know, and don't want to change. (Me too sometimes).
Kodak was THE camera company in the 80's and 90's and dominated. They refused to accept people would go digital. They are a shadow of their former self.
Likewise - the "old" way of making money through photos has changed.
You have an army of people with cell phones figuring they are "photographers" (which, ironically has changed the definition of 'good' photography in some instances. Before you needed good lighting, proper composure, etc, etc - but because the people purchasing photos are used to "bad" photography (cropped body parts, poor lighting, etc, etc) - but the majority of the population identifies with that as "good" photography - that is what sells. (Companies buy photos that will encourage more sales. Bad photos sell).
People like getting things for free. They don't like paying. Google has made getting "free" images easy. Google doesn't care, because they make money from ad revenue (and analytic insights/marketing data which they resell or use for their own purposes).
So you are competing with "free" images.
So what does all this mean?
You can still make money with photography (pictures) - but you need to learn & adapt.
Some suggestions.
a) Get into wedding photography. Baby pictures. etc. Granted, not the 'online passive income' bit - but I was shocked to learn people sell $10,000 wedding packages on a regular basis where I live. (I've never done wedding photography - and it is competitive - but get 3 gigs/year - you have your standard living expenses paid for. 1-2 weeks work, not bad. Get more than 3 gigs/year - now you are making a profit).
b) Become an expert in a specific field. Maybe you are the "rose" guy - that takes 10,000 pictures of beautiful roses. Or the shoe guy. Or the hand guy. Or whatever. People are willing to pay for someone who is an expert.
c) Learn how to do your own marketing/sales. Yes, it's extremely competitive. But, things go full circle. The internet in many cases is now simply an 'extension' of a bricks and mortars store. But get your name out with 'free' photography (or - maybe give 3-4 prints 'free' from an entire set) - and sell the rest of the set if the client wants it. If they don't - it builds your portfolio to showcase to others.
There are many ways to make money as a photographer.
695
« on: August 01, 2018, 21:39 »
Yes, chances are they are the best sellers.
Videoblocks has the sales data, so knows what sells. And chances are - they purchased those clips and that is what the contributor provided.
Probably also the reason why you see very little sales from your own collection, because most people are happy with what they find in the collection, so don't want to pay for anything else.
696
« on: July 23, 2018, 10:38 »
There's a whole number of things that could affect your sales.
Maybe you are correct. Maybe SS does have an algorithm that favors newer submissions over old. Or sales history. I don't know. It would just be a guess unless you have access to that information. But just a guess - so no point worrying about it, because nothing you can do about it.
HOWEVER, more likely these reasons factor into your sales:
a) Increased competition. More & more people uploading. (So your discoverability is lower).
b) Less people buying. A possibility.
c) More agency competition. More and more agencies (i.e., videoblocks) are "giving away" 10,000's and 10,000's of clips for a "cheap" price, so that can affect individual clip sales. (I.e., why buy a single clip when you can have access to 10,000's. Of course there are still reasons, i.e., your clip is unique/something someone wants - and can't find in VB, etc).
d) Your content is seasonal or trendy. (I.e., if you have all christmas stuff, then less likely for people to purchase it now).
LOTS and lots of different reasons.
The microstock industry is a moving target. While uploading more is one possibility - based on your personal experience, probably not the best solution. (Simply because from the sounds of it you've done a lot more work, and now getting 50% the results).
So...
I'd suggest focusing on unique/desirable content that only you can produce, or is technically hard to re-produce (i.e., expensive cameras for unique shots, etc), and that way you can at least have a little bit longer of a 'sales lifecycle' (i.e., say 1-2 years of the same content selling), as opposed to it becoming 'expired' after 2-3 months (because of other competition, similar clips elsewhere, etc, etc).
697
« on: July 21, 2018, 00:27 »
a) Every agency is different.
b) That being said - 'generally' speaking if the images/videos/etc are "generic" (i.e., you could have taken a picture of a boat from 1,000+ different places) - then it is more likely to be accepted - than say something that "identifies" a specific location (i.e., "naval shipyard abc @ location xyz). Furthermore - if it is specialized technology/equipment/etc for a specific company - then yes, you may need a property release from them where they give you explicit permission to use it for re-sale, etc.
698
« on: July 20, 2018, 07:41 »
pps, what is the direct CEO e-mail?
I wrote to support as well - and not only did they not really read the message - it appears I received the *exact* same carbon copy message
699
« on: July 20, 2018, 07:39 »
They didn't read the message then. I got a virtually identical response. I sent them an email (directed to their CEO) and at least their support desk responded - with the following email:
We completely understand where you are coming from and I want to help clarify.
The reality is this: we have been proud to offer 100% commission since the launch of the Marketplace, and we made major investments in its success, but we need a more sustainable way to manage the operating costs going forward. After weighing every option available, we have determined the only way to maintain long-term health and success of the Marketplace is an even share in commission.
We get that this isnt ideal, and its not what wed hoped for either. Thats why we want to show our continued commitment to our contributor community by making impactful changes. Our plan is to increase the promotion of Marketplace content to those customers who are purchasers. This will lead to more sales for you.
We will also continue to educate all new and existing customers about the benefits of the Marketplace as part of their subscription. We definitely want to support you moving forward. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks!
If there is anything I can do to assist, please let me know.
700
« on: July 19, 2018, 09:05 »
Well - my question is more of - how WOULD you be able to market your site?
(Not - 'oh man, it's too hard').
I'm genuinely interested if anyone has any ideas on how to do this successfully. Or even just ideas.
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 35
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
