|
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 - michaeldb
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37
801
« on: December 31, 2008, 19:39 »
Like Sharply_Done, I stopped uploading a couple weeks ago and am resuming now. The last 2.5 weeks of December are a wipe-out.
It may be just my imagination but it seems like sales do take longer to get going at StockXpert. And last month they had a glitch which caused some new images to not show up in searches for weeks. StockXpert has a thread on this in their forum (which you might look at if you have not seen it and fear that some of your images were buried as a result of the bug), and in the thread an admin says, "Of course you can delete your images and re-upload at any time."
So if you want to give your images a fresh start in January, you could delete an re-submit.
802
« on: December 31, 2008, 19:22 »
I think the future depends a lot on exactly who the buyers are. There are plenty of people who are happy to buy some digital asset at 50 cents a download but not $5, and they're not too fussy about quality. If this market segment is big enough, then when the major agencies raise quality and prices, newcomers will enter at a lower price point and with lower quality images. At the moment most of the sites seem to be trying to woo the big spenders, professional designers and the like, away from the macro sites.
It is natural for us to think about the future of microstock in terms of suppliers, because we are suppliers. However, I think Averil has it right. The future of microstock will be determined by the market, not the suppliers. Many posters have noted the increase in the number of suppliers, but is that increase greater than or less than the increase in buyers? And, as Averil, wonders, who are those buyers? What do they want and how much will they be willing to pay for it? Answer those questions and you will know the future of microstock. Unfortunately, the data is not made public.
803
« on: December 31, 2008, 19:11 »
I have been on DT since 2005. Uploaded files: 760; total Sales: 5534.
Almost all of my images there are vectors (with a few 3D renders). Most of my sales there are JPG renders of my vectors, not the eps files themselves.
Last month DT edged out IS as my second best site for revenue; I made $374 there, down from $414 in October. StockXpert is close behind.
804
« on: December 24, 2008, 16:37 »
IMO opinion IS values originality and virtuosity much more than any other site and values an image's commercial potential the least. So submit your most technically impressive work as opposed to your most commercial work. And avoid images which are similar to those which IS already has.
Merry Christmas and good luck!
805
« on: December 24, 2008, 16:03 »
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from the Rocky Mountains of Montana
Smilling Jack
Merry Christmas from Helena Montana to Jack all the microstock photographers and illustrators -- everywhere, have a merry one!
806
« on: December 20, 2008, 15:16 »
...just suppose that IS, is loosing it? just suppose that things are far from rosy and they are going through a really bad spell, Ive got to know quite a few high-ranking exclusives and their reports are far from good. Sure best match has got something to do with it but THIS? this is in fact much more worrying.
I recon theyve had it their own way for so long now that its running out of steam plus the fact other leading agencies are not only closing in fast. Theyre already there. Remember the saying in business, "It pays to be second." Few of the originators of a major new business model live to dominate the business. I recall the legend of Gary Kildall flying his plane and missing an appointment with IBM reps (while Bill Gates showed up on time in a suit and tie). IS exudes that sort of arrogance. Maybe the conspiracy theories of Getty buying IS to destroy it are true. Or maybe IS has just shot itself in the foot one too many times. Yes, it's bleeding from the best match but that is certainly not the only self-inflicted wound. I hope they patch things up and survive and thrive, for there is much to like about IS. We'll see I guess.
807
« on: December 18, 2008, 13:24 »
It looks like maybe what people are reporting is just ebb and flow, and no real change in best match or other policies. As for me, it continues to be a whole lot of ebb and not much flow.
808
« on: December 15, 2008, 19:57 »
I came to understand that if you opt in at StockXpert, they send you extra money. I opted in. They send me exta money. I am happy. 
809
« on: December 15, 2008, 19:01 »
And wouldn't one think too that the recession should be bringing more customers to the micros from the trad agencies? I mean even in bad economic times images are still needed ... one would think a bad economy should be a boon to the micros?
No, I don't think so. Pictures are usually a very small part of the overall advertising budget. The problem will worsen when companies die or stop advertising completely.
"Pictures are usually a very small part of the overall advertising budget." I still think that companies will try to cut costs in that area; they will probably try to cut costs everywhere. "The problem will worsen when companies die or stop advertising completely." Unfortunately that is no doubt true. Maybe we had better just hope that the economic downturn doesn't last too long.
810
« on: December 14, 2008, 20:51 »
Don't you think that the sluggish world economy might be part of that equation as well?
I dunno. If so, though, the results of that poll on the right side of the screen seem to indicate that iStock is the only one of the Big 6 suffering from a downturn due to the economy then.
And wouldn't one think too that the recession should be bringing more customers to the micros from the trad agencies? I mean even in bad economic times images are still needed ... one would think a bad economy should be a boon to the micros?
Maybe it is wishful thinking, but I believe this is what is going to happen. Some businesses are helped by economic downturns. Auto manufacturers lose out, but auto parts manufacturers prosper, because people get their cars repaired instead of buying new ones. The movie industry grew up and became a giant during the Depression when people couldn't afford big luxuries but they could still pay a nickel to see a movie. Maybe microstock will prosper this year.
811
« on: December 14, 2008, 20:45 »
Noticed a nice little $3 pay per download from photos.com in my StockXpert earnings yesterday. But $30 would be nicer.
812
« on: December 14, 2008, 20:39 »
...FYI, I'm sure most of you know this already, but just in case, the search engine only searches keywords from the keyword list, not description or title--yet... Is this a little hint that StockXpert will someday start using title and description words somehow in the keyword searches?
813
« on: December 12, 2008, 12:34 »
I've have jui sales each day this month, I assume they are added daily but they could have just snuck them in when I wasn't looking (I dont check often)
Phil
I have been getting some JIU subscription sales almost every day this month, 4 today so far.
814
« on: December 09, 2008, 12:37 »
I'm non-exclusive and an illustrator and if anything is changing it's only getting worse at byeStockphoto. I could blame some of that on myself for not uploading since I realized the best match made it a waste of time, but from what I have read in the forums byeStock has quit reviewing images anyway, but that doesn't matter either as it will soon suspend paying.
815
« on: December 07, 2008, 16:03 »
And very similar to fotolia, dreamstime has a great setup where image prices increase the more downloads the image gets. I think this is an ingenious idea because a contributor with 100 images could potentially have all their images in the top price ranking, while a fotolia photographer would need thousands of images and several years of downloads to reach emerald status when they can finally raise their commissions. At dreamstime after a mere 5 downloads the pricing (and revenue) for that image doubles. At 10 downloads it nearly doubles again. I agree with this 1000%. IMO the emphasis in microstock should be on rewarding some images more than others, not some photographers/illustrators more than others. Microstock's 'crowdsourcing' model is basically about egalitarianism. Participants are rewarded for what they do, not who they are. That is the way it should remain, I think. A long thread on DT's main forum ( http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_11623) advocates starting a badge system there. Obviously, I think this is a bad idea. I hope sites avoid following IS which seems determined to create a divisive hiearchy of haves and have-nots, with its badge system and use of exclusivity in a destructive and divisive way, as discussed in other threads here. Personally, I like that SS does not have exclusivity, and I would like to see it do away with payment tiers, even though I am at the highest tier and such a change would cost me money. But it would be good for microstock, because payment should be for how good the image is, not who made it. If buyers like a certain image, they can go buy more from the submitter's portfolio. That should be enough reward for doing quality work.
816
« on: December 06, 2008, 21:35 »
If you do 3D and vector you have probably checked out turbosquid, but if you haven't maybe you should (they do sell .ai files I think).
817
« on: December 04, 2008, 21:11 »
...
Irrelevant, but today I got 4 EL's
Yee haaaaa!
I second that. you have some great ideas and geat execution, I love the 2 kids talking on the tin cans.
818
« on: December 02, 2008, 20:32 »
It has been really shocking to see how poorly exclusive vector artists have been treated with this latest best match. I can't imagine why istock would risk losing some of the most popular exclusive artists by not addressing this issue.
When did IS start accepting vectors?
If it is true that the new best match is heavily weighted towards the length of site membership, then it might be possible that this is affecting vector artists more than anything.
I don't think so. Many vectorists on IS started by first submitting photos and/or 3D renders (this is the way I started). Suddenly one day in mid-October we vectorists, new and old-timers, saw our old slow-selling raster images move to the front of best match search results, and our good selling vectors move to the back. It is without doubt that the new BMs greatly discriminate against vector illustrations. Early on, an admin posted in the Illustrator Forum that IS did not intend to discriminate against any kind of image format and the situation would be quickly rectified, but it never was.
819
« on: November 28, 2008, 18:44 »
Oh yeah, massively suitable as stock. I'm sure it will be the best match in the millions of searches on "miniature tambourine" and "Afro-centric man rests chin on microphone stand".
820
« on: November 21, 2008, 20:01 »
But then, as the old saying goes, "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar", and vinegar seems to be what they are offering lately.
Yes, a very apt homily. IS is leaving a bitter taste in many mouths. I wonder what has gotten into them. Non-exclusives feel that IS hates them, exclusives with small portfolios feel that IS hates them, vector illustrators feel that IS hates them... Threads with honest complaints are locked with little explanation except, "This is the way it is, accept it. Nothing is wrong and maybe we will fix it someday, or not." I stopped uploading vectors to IS a couple weeks ago. I won't go into why. My complaints only echo those posted by scores of illustrators, before the complaint thread was locked. I tried submitting some as raster illstrations, which is technically allowed. One was rejected because it was "an overfiltered photo". Although it is clearly an illustration, with 'vector' and 'clip art' in the keywords. Appealing to scout is a joke. Oh well, I will try not to think about my lost IS revenues, and stick with those sites still offering honey.
821
« on: November 18, 2008, 18:45 »
I did a bit of an experiment with svg files a couple of months ago on fotolia. I uploaded all my files as svg for 3 months (files created within that period) to see if it made a difference in sales, and the answer is NO!
I realise that you get more if the file is downloaded as a vector but the extra time and effort needed to convert the files and manually keyword out ways the benefits. I am quite surprised that it didnt help boost sales but I guess that maybe people are confused about the SVG format or are just not interested in needing an editable file.
If the svg format/fotolia support IPTC data in the future I might reconsider uploading svg's
Interesting. I have been uploading all my vectors to FO as svgs, and you are right, it is a pain. However, about 12% of my sales have been the $2.59 for the vector format, and it seems like the percentage is increasing. But I don't know though if the extra money is worth the extra time. A question: Did you notice any difference in acceptance/rejection rates for the svgs?
822
« on: November 13, 2008, 21:36 »
I don't think I have ever complanied about DT.
Their sales are consistent and i like the site very much.
DT is one of the good guys among stock sites, IMO. Fair, efficient. The only thing I hate about DT is having to submit vectors one at a time. And the title length allowed is shorter than other sites. I love their stats page. My sales there have been a little weak in Nov so far, but I had great Oct and Sept.
823
« on: October 31, 2008, 00:57 »
iStock has a clear, informative system to explain the ELs you get there. It's one of the features of their site which is really well done IMO. The only problem I have had with their system is that I don't get enough ELs  But when I get one I like how they tell me exactly what rights were sold, how much they charged, and how much I got paid. I just look at the list my ELs and click on each and a window opens which gives me the information. It's been so long since I got an EL at SS that I don't remember how it works. Since they started ODs I have seen several people say that ELs have dried up. Maybe it's coincidence.
824
« on: October 30, 2008, 16:42 »
what sort of volume are you dealing with? i have about 4500 different images spread across about 10 agencies, for about 23,000 images for sale. trying to track all the $.25 and $.33 sales would be nervewracking
hali, Sorry, I didn't mean to say that it is impossible to track sales, a couple of people have said that they do. But like cascoly says, if you have a lot of different images on a lot of different agencies it would be very difficult, at least for most of us. And in my case I upload vectors and rasters to SS, and they both look identical in thumbs, so they have different sales and keeping track of them I would have to use the ID numbers. Plus I am lazy. If I don't have some automatic way to do it, tracking the sales of individual images would take many hours. Not impossible but not practical
825
« on: October 30, 2008, 14:57 »
there's nothing automated, and what's worse, sites like SS make it difficult to do -- and swince that's a major source for most people it doesnt make a lot ofsense to bother with other MS sites that sell much less.
on SS you can see how many sales a image has, but it oud be a nightmare trying to update hundreds of images.
i track monthly and cum sales by each site and sometimes take a brief look at what's been selling. i tend to submit series of images over time, so while one image may not sell a lot, my penguins or moose can do well as a group.
to me that's a more important stat - what TYPE of image sells? flowers? landscape? wildlife? and that's what takes the most work
the next posts to my blog on automating the submission process will cover workflow and tracking.
I do what cascoly does, for the same reasons. The subject of this thread is one which I think about sometimes and I believe is important. If we could track, with certainty, the sales of a given image, new business opportunities could open up. E.g. -I have thought about collaborating with another imagists on an image, but how would we know how much each of us earned? -some photographers want to pay models a percentage of royalties rather than money up front, but that is not possible if you can't track the sales of the photo. -and so on. We are actually in the business of selling IP licenses to our images. If we don't what an image has earned, we are limited. But if we do know, that information could be valuable in many ways, most we cannot necessarily foresee now.
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
