|
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 - pancaketom
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 91
776
« on: January 21, 2017, 16:59 »
Last time I read the the various microstock fine print I think at least some required that the images be all your work. I would read them pretty carefully before submitting stuff even if the original source allows it.
777
« on: January 19, 2017, 09:47 »
I haven't messed with Pentax dslr video much, and from what I hear they are definitely a bit behind the times, but it might be possible to get good results with different settings - maybe scour pentax forums for video settings to solve or at least lessen your problems.
At least Pentax seems to be a universal lens donor if you want to stick them on other bodies.
778
« on: January 17, 2017, 13:46 »
I am not sure why the buyer wouldn't choose to buy an image based on that image, but I suppose there are some stupid enough to buy an inferior image because the portfolio it comes from doesn't contain any horrible images.
I think your time would be better spent working on new images and getting the metadata right for them (and if your metadata for the existing images is horrible fix them - starting with what you think are your better images).
Unless the search takes sales / image into account I don't think it would help much to delete 80% of your images.
779
« on: January 07, 2017, 13:09 »
The other thing to consider is that even if you hit a wall and just keep submitting more without increasing your income if your level of work and return are something you are happy with, that is fine. If that isn't the case you can switch to something else and your stock sales should at least provide a bit of a cushion to let you get started doing that.
Don't put all of your eggs in one basket since you never know when a site might Istock and crush your income.
Depending on your skill and luck your hourly return might be pretty pathetic though.
780
« on: January 04, 2017, 14:55 »
There are ways that searches change that push various images or whole portfolios up and down in the search. For instance location search. I wish I had paid closer attention when I changed my address since it didn't change any of my photos (at least at the moment I did it) but suddenly my location was drastically different and if that is a factor in what images get shown to buyers... Sure the big picture is that keywords and sales are a huge factor, but do you take portfolio into account or just the image? So many factors can make the difference between good sales and poor sales and we are pretty much at the mercy of the search. Sure nobody can make the buyer buy an image they don't want, but with for example at SS 3850 pages of fireworks pics having your generic image on page one meant a lot of sales and having it not on the first 3 pages means almost no sales (an example I know for a fact since one of my images went from the first line of the first page to I have no idea where one day and sales did the same).
Maybe they make a secret deal with Nikon and those files get a boost. Or boost "pro" cameras, or whatever random thing they decide to boost. If their testing shows more sales they go with it even if it might help or hurt any one port or even the whole site in the long run.
781
« on: January 03, 2017, 21:59 »
Good luck with the other sales venues.
When I deleted most everything from IS I did it because I wanted to for me. I was still making more there than most other sites, but I just couldn't let them treat me that way anymore. Sure it would be nice if they got the message and changed, but ultimately you need to do what you need to do for you.
782
« on: January 01, 2017, 13:08 »
port up 3% (I wasn't very motivated and I had other things on my plate)
revenue down 33%
downloads down 15%
This is for SS (and I'm in the .38 group and have been for some time) October through December in particular just kept getting worse and worse.
Overall revenue was down 20%
I spent a lot more time doing things and taking photos in 2016, I wonder if it is worth processing and uploading them to micro or if I need to try to find another outlet for them.
783
« on: January 01, 2017, 12:55 »
I tried to see the sales totals in December and although I could see the number of sales from thinkstock and PP I couldn't see the value of those sales. I presume even that isn't visible now. It is a tiny # since I deleted almost everything, but there should still be a way to see sales totals.
784
« on: January 01, 2017, 12:48 »
yeah, same old same old, they report 0 for Dec and Oct.
It does decrease trust in their ability to calculate the RC correctly among other things.
Of course they will say the actual accounting is perfectly good and correct "trust us" - but if they can't report it correctly to us that does decrease that trust a lot.
The fact that Oct - Dec sales were at about 33% of sales for the rest of the year doesn't help my enthusiasm for the site.
785
« on: December 31, 2016, 16:29 »
Dec 2016 is on track to be my worst month at SS since 2009 when I had about 1/3 of the images. I suspect among all the other usual reasons the fact that I have been busy and not uploading much for the second half of the year hasn't helped at all. I also have at least one 0 day this month, which didn't happen for about 5 years, but has a few times this year.
An even more shocking statistic is that I have to go back to my 2nd month with SS to have a lower number of downloads - with 1.2% of the images.
786
« on: December 16, 2016, 23:44 »
After a decent Sept. they fell off a cliff for Oct. Nov. and Dec. below 30% of normal. before that it was ticking along at a pretty sad rate (compared to the promised doubling of sales when they started their crappy pay you less RC system). I don't usually even bother to check submissions there anymore since they take a month or 2 to review, just fire and forget. (the last batch I sent in was reviewed though). Either I haven't really figured out their new interface or it just has less information available than the old one. More glitz and bling and less information.
787
« on: December 16, 2016, 00:09 »
....
People will see what they want to see and no amount of evidence will change their mind. This is how superstition and myth works. My search place that I look at is the same. I'm still on top of the ones I watched.
.... I want to see more and higher $ sales. That isn't what I am seeing. I haven't looked at this search, but search changes do happen and they can be devastating (or good) for any one seller, although I think when they are good your sales ramp up and when they are bad it is like shutting the tap off so much more noticeable.
788
« on: December 15, 2016, 06:58 »
how will that work since they seem to go back and change the sales totals up to a few months in the past (or maybe a lot more, I haven't bothered really looking at them all that hard since they are so miniscule). More mystery smoke and mirrors to hide the fact that they already took the pea out from under the shell.
789
« on: December 08, 2016, 07:23 »
So far it seems like a lot of weekend days so far. At least some of them have been good weekend days.
790
« on: November 08, 2016, 11:34 »
I still can't quite believe that so few people made a stand when they cut below 20%. That was the final straw for me, all my best selling images were deactivated and I haven't uploaded anything new for years.
If Getty had the choice of paying us 30% or having no images to sell, what would they choose? If they chose to have no images to sell, that would send buyers to sites that pay us more. Isn't that the worst that could happen if we all decided not to put up with less than 20%? Obviously this is different for exclusives but they don't seem to have as many of them as they used to.
That was what made me stop uploading, I think it was some other indignity/abuse that got me to delete most of my images.
791
« on: November 05, 2016, 13:07 »
Thanks for that report Jo Ann.
I have noticed a serious drop in the SOD sales, especially the higher value ones. It is sad that they are working hard to benefit themselves and the closed club enterprise people and not the regular rank and file.
792
« on: November 02, 2016, 16:52 »
upload it right now and title it "Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas Christmas "
793
« on: November 02, 2016, 16:49 »
They either need to tell us they don't care and make it open season or else drop the boom on these spammers.
There are hundreds if not thousands of images that would be suitable for most buyers, search placement is what makes the difference between a sale and nothing. If spamming can get you onto the first page it appears to be well worth it.
I bet if SS did just a few searches and disabled the obviously spammed image ports they saw on the first page we would see a huge drop in this problem - they obviously are not willing to do this.
794
« on: November 01, 2016, 22:44 »
Sadly I think SS got rid of the actually useful tool that would show a graph of search terms over the year - as I recall there was a big spike for Christmas in November up to just a few days before the 25th. I think with web advertising the 6 month lead time no longer holds true. I do recall selling Christmas pics just a few days after the holiday though.
795
« on: November 01, 2016, 02:38 »
My SS was 42% of Oct 2015 (which was a good month). October 2016 was a bit low even for this year - so a lousy month.
Overall a rather poor month too - so sadly pretty typical for this year.
796
« on: October 30, 2016, 22:44 »
I'm about 1/7 of last month (which was a good month for them) and maybe 1/4 of what passes for normal there now. I have been having multiple week days in a row with no sales or just one measly sub. It is pretty sad and still a far cry from the promised doubling of sales.
I am also sad to see the useful information that was available in the old contributor pages gone.
797
« on: October 25, 2016, 14:43 »
old istock - we have this really arcane and basically impossible way to keep your earnings percentage above the industry low 15% base
New istock - never mind - you all just get 15%
I deleted my port down to almost nothing years ago - and my earnings reflect that. At least this new exciting news won't hurt me much.
798
« on: September 06, 2016, 11:34 »
Mine only shows 2012 sales for Jan and then flatlines the rest of the year.
It does clearly show no doubling of sales when that was promised to go along with our hefty percentage cuts with the RC system when it was implemented.
At least we can get more info without dealing with the "you will not see this page unless you have logged out" Captcha annoyance.
799
« on: August 26, 2016, 16:43 »
I removed my stuff when it was going to get sent somewhere else where they would pay us less. I did like the original though... Come to think of it I think the only site I really didn't like back then was iStock/Getty.
800
« on: August 14, 2016, 23:34 »
New image earnings have been particularly weak for me for a while (like a year?), but I have been pretty busy so haven't uploaded much. There isn't much motivation to upload though when new stuff doesn't much sell. Old stuff seems to sell a bit, but I haven't had a good day yet this month and I notched up another 0 day today - I went a number of years without them, but now they are back. (over 3,000 LCV to MCV images for sale).
As an aside I sorted my port by age and the results had nothing to do with age as far as I could tell - what kind of new algorithm is this?
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 91
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
