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 ... 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 ... 91
926
« on: December 20, 2014, 18:27 »
I understand that some low earners are not worth the time to upload to, but as long as they aren't shady or openly cheating us, I would let the images you have worked to upload ride. The sites that are seriously undercutting prices and commissions - drop them.
I even managed payout on SF this year, although it took long enough.
927
« on: December 20, 2014, 16:27 »
34.70 - which is more than I made there last month. I wonder if it would be worth my while to file myself to get about double that (assuming it is about the same next year).
As an aside - I had a nice bunch of sales earlier this month and assuming they all clear Alamy will be my #1 this month (unless sales pick up dramatically elsewhere)
928
« on: December 20, 2014, 00:18 »
I was going to add to this post on the DT board; but thought it might be better here.
Since May DT has gone south. HUGE drops in Nov and this month. I think they are losing customers or changed the search and I m on the sh!t end of the stick.
I don't believe you can judge reality with just a few months totals - especially when we all clearly have different experiences - , but DT has been seriously sinking for me over the past half year. Still, I was stunned when I added up totals as of today (Dec. 19) only since the beginning of the month. The context for you all is that I have only about 300 images uploaded, and only to the "Big 4".
SS has accepted the fewest images; DT the most.
Also, I've only been doing this for a couple of years; but at this point I am getting a payout from one or more every month. (my min. for all sites is set for over $100).
So, with that in mind, here are my percentage of sales (in income) for the past 19 days:
BS: 10% DT: 0.9%  FT: 44% SS: 45%
Maybe this means something....maybe nothing. Just thought I'd toss it out.
Wow, those are impressively high numbers for BS and FT (or poor ones at the other 2). For me DT is over 4X BS. Maybe SS is managing to shift serious sales to their screw the contributor more experiment site.
929
« on: December 19, 2014, 11:53 »
most of the people that have any say on the sites have been run out of here a long time ago. Very few admins and influential contributors come onto this forum compared to a few years ago.
This forum is still read most days in Calgary.
You can prove that for yourself by putting a small invisible image in your signature. Similar to how flagcounter works.
I guess there's a chance someone important is still reading it then.
Anyone in Calgary is still important?
930
« on: December 18, 2014, 15:34 »
By interposing a bogus currency called 'credits', with no fixed exchange rate, DT and others have created a system where they can sell our images for whatever they want. The published price or royalty schedules really don't mean anything anymore. We don't know what a buyer paid for an image, and we get whatever token payment the agency chooses to make.
Instead of openly discounting images, they can simply discount 'credits'. It's probably more complicated than they like, but it gives them total freedom to compete on price without technically violating any contributor agreements.
It's only for those 'big important customers' of course. And we'll make it up on volume.
I have to admit, while it is nice to talk about high royalty rates, you are right that it doesn't mean much when the dollar value to you is calculated. While I have little idea what specific royalty Shutterstock pays me, at least I know how much I will get per sale. Dreamstime (and others) are all about posting maximum payout rates to contributors, and then selling customers on how low prices are! On their payout page, DT list the contributor royalty as $1.02 for this example of a level 1 credit sale, with a little * at the top and a note about these being maximums. I'd at least like to see them post minimums! Essentially they'd be within their legal rights to put on a penny sale and pay us nothing!
They really should post the range or the minimums. In fact I am pretty sure I suggested they post the minimums - which they probably don't want to do - since they can be down near single digit cents per credit - not at the .08 or .07 bottom that IS has, but still pretty low. Any time I get under .25 per credit I am annoyed and under .20 I feel cheated. I'd still rather credit sales though. Maybe the level 0 sales can stay subs...
931
« on: December 15, 2014, 22:43 »
They primarily sold 3d designs. Sorry to see them stop selling my stuff, although they were only about 2x my Stockfresh sales, so not too much. I had pretty much stopped uploading there anyway except a flurry inspired by a good month this spring. Curiously enough 2011 and 2014 were my best years there.
932
« on: December 15, 2014, 13:23 »
Sept. 23, 2007
933
« on: December 14, 2014, 17:20 »
I submitted some last night, then this morning I clicked on the completed images and it showed me the metadata from other images (no idea where they came from) but didn't show the images. When it refreshed it was my stuff.
934
« on: December 14, 2014, 08:54 »
That theory can't work, because in US you have to pay taxes, which are huge on $ 6.5 millions. Anyway, I'm more and more disgust towards human beings behaviour and humans in general. Nothing is good for us. Nobody is good for us. We critic and spit on the best among us. I'm just recalling all the crap we said about Yuri Arcus here. And now Lik. Can't we just respect somoones success, qualities and skills?
I think you could probably write it off as a business expense if you bought your own work...
935
« on: December 12, 2014, 20:00 »
If they add a # of images into the CC license will we be able to "buy" our own images? - that could be a mess, and if we aren't then you just need to team up with a buddy and swap...
In any case I'd love to see the worst of the greedy liars in charge of FT go away... I am not holding my breath waiting for improvements for the creators. There will probably be no big changes for a while anyway.
936
« on: December 04, 2014, 10:46 »
Interesting since the reviews are by order of submission. Something happens after acceptance and is changing during indexing? That might be interesting to watch.
I'll assume you are using file numbers for the determination of what's submitted after yours, but appearing first. Also should be same file type, meaning there are four file types: photo, video, editorial and illustration. Those are not the same and have different review orders.
I have images accepted yesterday morning - like 6 am eastern time - that still aren't visible in search either newest, most popular (very specific keywords) etc. or in my port. Others (submitted later) accepted at the same time are visible in both now. I presume that by the time they are indexed they will be at least somewhat buried.
update - one more just showed up, at least it is obscure enough that it will show up if ever searched for.
I think it was a glitch in indexing. I am basing this only on my own images (except for the ones doing the burying). The last 2 images that were missing are there this morning, but were not visible late last night. Images I submitted after them showed up in my port 2 full days before they did (all reviewed at the same time though). I have never seen this before, although I have seen periods of time where there was an extended delay in indexing.
937
« on: December 03, 2014, 16:39 »
I have images accepted yesterday morning - like 6 am eastern time - that still aren't visible in search either newest, most popular (very specific keywords) etc. or in my port. Others (submitted later) accepted at the same time are visible in both now. I presume that by the time they are indexed they will be at least somewhat buried.
update - one more just showed up, at least it is obscure enough that it will show up if ever searched for.
938
« on: December 03, 2014, 15:35 »
Less Flash. less dropdown menus. In fact none might be nice.
939
« on: December 03, 2014, 01:59 »
You can upload a low-res watermarked version to 500px and then a high-res unwatermarked version to the store for licensing on Prime. So if you're concerned about what shows on 500px that's the best way to do it. On Prime we use the high-res version and downsize it and apply a 500px Prime watermark to that.
Here's an example of the 500px Prime watermark. You can see how ridiculous it is.

That's horrible. Come on 500px, toss the dog a bone here, please?
even I could photoshop that out.
940
« on: December 02, 2014, 17:24 »
Since I haven't seen one of these yet and I have added up my totals I thought I'd start one...
November was the worst month for me since Jan 2011. That is the big picture.
Basically the all of the sites that tend to be very up and down were down (Alamy, Veer, etc.) in fact not a sale on Alamy - although a nice one Dec 1 sort of helps. Then the bigger earners were all so-so months. Not the worst, but not enough to make up for the others. Some of the lower earning sites did quite well, but are such small potatoes that they don't really make much difference. As usual SS is the big kahuna and I had one good week there and the rest were so-so to lousy adding up to being the second worst month of the year there - and since they are around 50% of my totals, that makes a big difference, especially when no other site steps up.
Hopefully December can keep the momentum going before it screeches to a halt for the holidays.
941
« on: December 01, 2014, 21:30 »
you have to click on something near the lower left where it talks about releases and then you can see all of your releases to choose from (I am assuming you already have the releases you need uploaded).
942
« on: November 30, 2014, 21:53 »
certainly more images - no thumbs yet, but when they show up I can see - I might have repeated a batch when nothing happened after a few days...
943
« on: November 30, 2014, 18:13 »
The last batch of images I uploaded via ftp disappeared and they never appeared in my pending portfolio or anywhere else as far as I can tell - how long should that take and/or am I missing something.
944
« on: November 29, 2014, 23:51 »
IS could have ruled the microstock kingdom but they sure didn't and then once they sold out and then through greed and incompetence (or perhaps a desire to kill microstock?) they have been severely degraded.
Imagine what would have happened had they paid more for image exclusivity and not broken all their promises. sure, they might have had to pay out 30 to 40% average to contributors, but with far less competition they would still be doing better.
945
« on: November 28, 2014, 23:59 »
Nothing but subs for me today (Nov 28) - normal payment.
946
« on: November 26, 2014, 12:53 »
Sales $ totals at DT the last 5 months have been pretty steady (at the monthly level) where the previous 8 months or more they were bouncing around all over the place (factor of 4 between the lowest and highest months). While the last few months have been steady and on a slight rising trend, they are also about level of 2009/2010sales - when I had less than half as many images.
I also see blocks of subs and the occasional but very important blocks of credit sales. ELs were never very common for me there, but I can't remember the last one - it has been a while.
947
« on: November 19, 2014, 16:39 »
The month started out well for me but has taken a big downturn the last week and a half. Not a huge drop in the number of sales, but nearly all just subs lately.
948
« on: November 13, 2014, 19:58 »
Selling videos at 15 cents each how much do contributors get. Maybe 6 or 7 cents a sale. Clearly you don't think BigStock is going to give contributors all of the big money.
I am curious what contributors are getting for a sale - probably more than .15 since as we all know the number of subs actually downloaded is quite a bit less than the maximum allowed. BS - that is total BS. you aren't trying to sell only to youtube people, you are playing in your sandbox to see if you can make more $ with rock bottom offerings - similar to what you do with stills too - undercutting SS.
949
« on: November 13, 2014, 19:29 »
I think that the article doesn't address the biggest concern for seriously attempting microstock as a career and that is changes to the market. Think about the changes to IS over the last 60 months. How is anyone going to make a business plan with that kind of unknown in there?
This model looks like it expects RPI to remain constant over time - which I don't think is true. At some point it will start to fall and eventually with a steady output of pictures one's income will reach a somewhat steady state (although still subject to the whims of the agencies - so probably gradually falling over time). The more interesting question is is the amount of work required to maintain that steady state acceptable compared to the income you make at that point.
950
« on: November 03, 2014, 14:19 »
does anyone know how many RC one gets for an LEL? or if it is variable is there any way to determine how many one gets for each one.
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 ... 91
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|