Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2010, 00:10
Maybe I am crazy, but I think the fact that Yuri's production model is ultimately proving to be unprofitable is both predictable and welcome news. 

The factory folks who have been flooding the micros the past couple of years with thousands upon thousands of cookie cutter images all shot on the same formula have virtually buried the offerings of the rest of us.  While at the same time they are running up production costs that are totally unsustainable at micro prices.

It seems inevitable their business model would cease to be profitable for them.  Maybe once they move on to greener pastures it will allow those of us with realistic production costs and thrifty business models to thrive.

With respect to the newbies being recruited, I think the barriers to entry are increasing to a point where only the very determined will stick it out.     

It would be nice to think his business model isn't panning out and he'll leave the game for the rest of us to play, but he seems to have something else up his sleeve.  He's stated that he might start giving his images away for free.  That doesn't seem to make sense, but it does if you're extremely ambitious and do extensive research like Yuri does. 

Blogging is now the bigger game, and he's done his homework.  Nothing beats the word "free" for SEO.  If he can bring traffic to his blog for free downloads, he could make a whole bunch more money off his blog than he ever made doing photography, and with much less overhead and physical work.  I stumbled on one blog that wasn't giving anything away for free, just her random writings about her fairly mundane life.  She had enough traffic to secure just one big name advertiser and now pulls in 120K a year.  Imagine what Yuri could make if he were giving away free photos and writing about business in general.  And what would that do to others shooting similar images and trying to sell them the traditional way?  I actually thought about pooling several photographers into a blog and giving away free photos a few years back.  Even that long ago blogging was generating enough advertising money that it made sense. 

Aside from learning illustration because it's lots of fun, I've also turned to blogging.  If you're on twitter you'll find there are hundreds of blogging gurus handing out advice because it is growing so rapidly and is so profitable.  Those turning to blogging do need a LOT of images, but they don't need good quality images, nor are they at all impressed with the snob factor of high end equipment.  In fact, they want photos that help break up blocks of text without overpowering the text.  If stock agencies are smart, they'll keep this in mind and adjust their reviewing standards accordingly.  IS made a brilliant move with Vetta to keep the price point high on quality work, while lowering the price on "good enough" photos to feed the blogging market.  It just doesn't make sense to me to pour thousands of dollars into camera equipment when I can blog for the same income with just my computer and a keyboard.  That's not even necessary now.  Sites like Helium are planning on selling their writing as stock to bloggers.  That's quite an indicator of where the next big market is.

As for Andres and some others in his league, there's been some posts made by him and others that they're so fed up with the games of microstock that they're thinking of going strictly RM.  That could be frustration speaking, but it's certainly social networking in action.  You can't just put up a portfolio and promote it on sites like this any longer.  You've got to twit and tweet and have a fan page on facebook, do the hokey-pokey, then turn yourself about. It's all very exhausting from my perspective, and the game plan will probably change all over again by this time next year!

You're very right in stating that it's an unhealthy practice encouraging hobbyists to enter the game.  It dilutes the market, lures them into buying more equipment than they need, and in general doesn't do anybody much good. 

There are some things that never change, like the more things change the more they stay the same :-)  If you're in it for the money, then the money has to be your focus at all costs.  If you're in it because you love photography, then don't sweat the changes and enjoy the ride.  You'll always come out on top, so long as you know why you're doing what you're doing and would do it for free if you had to.

Quote from: donding on March 03, 2010, 22:38
Since it seems most of these flags came from 2007....did they have the 2 cent deal back then? I thought that was something recent..either that or time has flown by unnoticed by me.

The flagging I got from one contributor was from 2007.  She was surprised as I was that it's just turning up now.  Her flag was actually an act of trying to help me because I had spelled a critical word wrong.  She was very gracious in accepting my apology, and I felt like a dunce for pouncing on her. 

The other trolls on the loose looking for a few extra pennies are a different story.  If these flagged files are dating back to '07, as many seem to be, then something is really messed up.  If it's taking almost 3 years to address those flags, how long will it take to clean up what's happening now with all these people scrambling to get their two cents?  The site could be user-hostile for years to come.

In all fairness, things have been changing rapidly in microstockland, and it's only been during the past two years that keywords have become such a big issue.  Reviewers of past would give a quick glance at keywords to check for obvious spamming, but the main focus was on building the catalog as fast as possible.  I wonder if these guys really thought this business would become the monster business that it has become, or if they thought they'd make some cash while the getting was good then retire when the game ended.  Surprise, surprise.  The hunger for images has gotten even bigger over the years, and now all the sites are scrambling to fix messes they let pass by during the race to get more images online than the other guy. 

How the issue is handled is going to determine who stays in the game and who folds.  The one with the most user-friendly search engine that does NOT turn contributors against each other will probably come out ahead.  So far, DT is not handling it well.  Using words like "award" for flagging, and "penalty" for removed keywords are fighting words in American English idiom.  It's one thing to master a foreign language, and another thing altogether to understand the subtle nuances.   I've always felt that this was a problem with the communication on DT, especially where Serban is concerned.  But what the heck do I know. 

FYI, those trolling for a penny or two are, for the most part, not making personal attacks.  One guy who flagged me is doing random searches, cruising the keywords in hopes of finding something he can make some money off of, and does not see the name of the person whose image it is.  What is not at all fair is that the person flagged does see the flagger's name, and it can feel like one heck of a betrayal or a personal vendetta.  That is not fair to those earnestly trying to help clean up the site.  That needs to change, and quickly.

Quote from: Digital66 on January 04, 2010, 19:19

Quote from: gostwyck on January 04, 2010, 13:09
Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs.

No comments! 

Well, shut my mouth :-) 

Has there been any clarification as to whether or not putting them in the free section/deactivating, or any other activity on these files, extends the 6 month hold they have on you?   I'm not looking to go exclusive anywhere else, but I would like to get off the site because sales are so bad.  That lets them hold and use my money for a much longer time, and I don't like that.  I'm moving more into illustration and just don't see the sales there that I do on other sites, so why give them even more money, just a few bucks short of payout?

Photos of people I will NOT give away for free.  I have enough trouble selling people without knowing where they're going without giving them away for who knows what use.  I found that my sales rocketed on FT when I put a bunch of photos in the free section and thought that would happen at DT.  It didn't, so I'll disable from now on. 

I just want to know if I disable does that extend the 6 months?  If I do nothing and they disable it, does that count towards the 6 months? 

Can you tell I'm confused?  LOL

I got a bunch of them today, too, and all from just two people. 

Several were on photos of angel food cake, which were uploaded when we couldn't hyphenate words and the search engine was designed to put the two words together in a search and bring up the image.  They changed the system  and now I have to go through and do....what?  I tried changing it to angelfood, as it is in similar images, but the system wouldn't take it.  Do buyers search with hyphens?  Oh, dear, what's a girl to do.

DT sometimes seems like a site doing its best to make itself crash.  Oh, dear, oh, dear.

When I  was a contributor, I thought the prices were awfully low.  Now that I've moved on to other things and buy images, it's hard to understand how much I can get so much for so little.  Even on my tight budget while putting together these projects, I could, and would, certainly pay more for what I'm getting. 

The demands put on contributors are extremely high, and their portion of the download simply isn't enough for what they're producing. 

But there's that old saying that we teach people how to treat us, and that seems to be proving itself in microstock.  My mother always used to say price it high because you can always lower it if you have to, but once you stick a bargain basement price on something it's nearly impossible to raise it.  These subscriptions with even lower prices is a disservice to the hard work and dedication of pro photographers.  It's kind of sad.

I apologize if this has already been mentioned, but you can speed up the deactivation process by opening multiple browser windows.  That's how I used to upload to iStock when I was too cheap to buy their upload software. 

Quote from: cthoman on April 26, 2009, 17:52
It looks good. The only thing that I can see is that the tongue doesn't really attach to anything and is kind of floating in the mouth. Also, some of your shapes look a little rough. It could be that some of your shadow shapes don't line up right or overlap other edges. The reviewer might have seen something when zoomed in at 800%.

Overall, I think it's a great looking illustration, but it's hard to tell about the execution without digging into the file real close.

Nice catch.

I still think it looks good.

Quote from: epantha on May 18, 2009, 15:21
I've spent more money than I've made 14 months in. Had to buy all of the photography equipment and this year I will be replacing my 6-year old computer and upgrading my software. Have another full time job so it is fine to be spending all this money now.

That's actually pretty good.  Any other start up business expects to run in the black the first three years, then break even for the next two before turning a profit. 

Microstock is one of the very few businesses where you can start seeing profit during, or shortly after, that first year.  I think it depends on how you approach it and whether it's a hobby or a full blown business.

Almost 3 a.m. and they're still down.  I need some photos but, oh well, guess I'll buy them elsewhere.

I also contribute and rather like the changes at IS.  It's caused my sales on the other sites to go waaaay up.  They pay better, so it's all good.