I'm not American, so I consider myself objective - though you can never be really objective.
I'd recommend to burry all your hate and viewing as many trustful sources around the world as you can. If you do that objectively, that might dramatically change your mind and improve your mood. Hate is driving this world deeper and deeper into a crisis and unless we start understanding that we are in all this together, that won't change.

I´ve done it once with a video: as long as it is not one of your top sellers that is highly likely to earn you that amount within 3-4 years, do it!
They may ask you though, to delete some similars, and also to delete them on other sites you have the files on. Do your maths before.

Quote from: Noedelhap on October 08, 2018, 12:16

Quote from: nataq on October 06, 2018, 16:54
Hi Mat,
I´m a video contributor and have met the requirements around Feb. 16th. But I didn´t receive an Email yet. May I ask for your help? In fact, I had just renewed my subscription plan a few days ago - I´m using a different email for that though.
Thanks and all the best,
Wolfgang

I suggest you contact Adobe Contributor Support. I used this contact form: https://contributor.stock.adobe.com/uk/contact

I got a quick email back that I was eligible and on the list for the next wave of emails that are being sent out, so I'm eagerly waiting

Thanks a lot!!! Check let´s hope for the best!

Hi Mat,
I´m a video contributor and have met the requirements around Feb. 16th. But I didn´t receive an Email yet. May I ask for your help? In fact, I had just renewed my subscription plan a few days ago - I´m using a different email for that though.
Thanks and all the best,
Wolfgang

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 19, 2013, 15:34

Quote from: Xanox on May 19, 2013, 15:30
to me it sounds like a super fake.

Yuri's father ? hahaha ....

on that we agree, just that

Oh well - everybody always just seems to want to read their own words. If you don´t know, why write?
Dhoxax IS Yuri´s father.

I´m (a currently not very happy) exclusive iStock photographer and to be honest, I don´t care that much. Actually the contrary. I really thought that iStock didn´t value exclusivity anymore. If this move is more than a joke or bug, it gives at least hope that they still do. It will give iStock some publicity and with it all our portfolios, which is a good thing.
Reading Yuris post, I guess they´ll put all his work into the new higher collections and (beside other things) he made a deal that they will never drop them into the "value collection", even if some of them don´t sell for years. That way he has all his files sent over to Getty. I guess he will also get the same mass ingestion process that all the content comming from getty gets, and you can´t blame anybody - that´s just business. VIPs always get the better deal no matter what. They buy less for their cars, food,...
To me this is a wakeup call for all out there who thought that they can live without agencies and sell their work on their own site. I´m not an iStock fanboy, but the agencies keep the majority of our sales for a reason, even if it sometimes is too much especially for non exclusive content. Maybe not even Yuri has enough money, manpower and publicity to make his own site worth all the effort and pay for his bills in the longrun.
And btw: some of Yuris "trainiees" are iStock exclusives for years, and it was his recommendation.

The more I think about it, the more bizarre this move is. What did they really think? Did they expect this to be kept a secret? Didn't they think for a minute that this will give the new site (+the sites that will publicly promote that Sean is now with them) a lot of interest?
What more free publicity for contributors and buyers alike can a new competitor site ask for?
I bet they once again thought they were clever, but time will repeatedly tell they weren't.

They'd better start caring for sales again instead - it might be too late though.

Wow, with all respect, iStock: if you read this: what business sense does this make from your point of view? What do you expect to happen?
My feelings are with you, Sean. I hope that track is the right one for you, even though you didn´t choose it yourself. Thanks for all the help and gadgets you´ve given to me and the community.

Sounds interesting to me. It´s not a new idea, but finally somebody had the guts to do it. And it´s not just "somebody". I think it´s probably the only new venture that might have a chance in microstock. But I´m not sure if it´s clever to only invite the biggest contributors. You need almost everybody because to start with you need the power of word of mouth. Contributors need to tell their designerfriends about the site to make them change their image outlet. Otherwise it will be much harder to get the customers to move to the new site. Not impossible, but much harder.

Hi Luis,
it´s been a while and I hope for you that you´ve seen some success yet. Unfortunately for many of us it looks more and more that you´ve made the right decision. IStock currently seems to fall apart.
Would you be willing to share some of your experience again? It seems to gain importance day by day.

I started to use old fashioned checks. I won't support a company cashing twice only for non-US customers. Even if I had a US$ account in Europe I'd still have to pay conversion fees, while a US$ account in the States would't. So they took around 3% of my income for years.
Plus: they are charging fees from the agencies too. Charging once should be enough!!!

Quote from: Pixart on September 13, 2012, 16:45
I have had 2 freebie photos on Shutterstock.  One photo was already very popular, but since it was offered for free it has been violated over and over again.  It is offered for free on so many websites as wallpaper, or as a "creative commence" that I have pretty much given up on it.  Again this summer it has had a new burst of free offerings and it was a freebie about 3 years ago so I wouldn't be surprised if it has been downloaded a million times by now.  (It still sells a few times a week btw).

Note to self....  put aside an entire week and send invoices to all of those sites.

The most violated photo was quite visually appealing - I thought the 2nd photo was a bad choice on SS's part, it doesn't have that "wow" factor - but in retrospect it maybe was a good thing - I can't find it on any free sites at the moment either.

At one time I thought the SS program was just fantastic, but now I really don't know if a 2 month bump of sale was worth it.  Certainly noone would ever buy-the-rights.  I'm sure the people downloading it for free wouldn't be purchasing it anyway.

Another bad example, thanks for sharing.

You should team up with a lawyer and try to make money from those people violating the rights. You could share the revenue for the images ;-).

Quote from: heywoody on September 13, 2012, 15:40
Is that how free file of the week works?  I just assumed someone just picked something out of a permanently free section. Personally, wouldn't do it as licences aren't too far away from free anyway and if someone doesn't want to shell out, let him steal.

The questions aren't great as most submitting to top 4 don't have a choice about subs so the choice is agree to this or don't submit.  Beyond that, the sub rates in 123 from next year will probably result in my port being pulled.

Perhaps the poll was written too much from a video contributors point of view. I´m an independent videographer and exclusive photographer - I don´t know too well how the situation is from an independent photographer standpoint.

Quote from: fotorob on September 13, 2012, 14:53

Quote from: leaf on September 13, 2012, 12:41
I feel free files are great for the agency as advertising and seo but serves no purpose for the photographer.  Both Fotolia and Dreamstime actively try to get us to offer our images for free but we aren't doing ourselves a favor - we are doing them a favor.  We are essentially paying for their advertising.  That is something they should be paying for themselves with their generous share of the commission.  That's what we're paying them for.

Very well said. There is nothing to add to it.

+1

But initially I was talking about the "free files of the weeks", that almost all sites do. Same applies to these.

Quote from: ShadySue on September 13, 2012, 12:26
Your poll doesn't take in all possibilities, e.g. I don't offer pics for free, but as I submit to iStock, their subs scheme is compulsory, but I don't submit to 'all sites'.

Hmmmm - you´re right. Would below fit (I could also edit Nr. 2 to and/or opt out possibility because iStock has reasonable subscription rates)?

I don´t offer files for free, and my exclusive contract at iStock doesn´t allow me to make a choice.

Anything else missing?

As an independent video contributor, I am regularely approached by agencies to offer this or that file as a free download, or to opt into subscription models.
Usually these agencies are not among the biggest and offer rather low rates for their subscription models.
The justification for such requests is always to "attract more customers".

But hey, I´m a businessman - not a dummy. If one agency attracts more customers because their rates are lower or they want to have my free file of the week, they usually come from other agencies. And if the customers change because of the cheap subscription rates, or free files I always lose money. Why on earth should I support that?

I have long ago deleted my portfolio on fotolia because of their rediculously cheap subscription model without having a chance to opt out. I am inviting others to do the same and to opt out of subscription sales on all other agencies that don´t value our work with subscription rates that honour the work we´ve put into creating those files. Shutterstock for example has a really good subscription model and it seems to work, they are doing really well attracting customers from other sites and we can still make money.

Regarding free files: they do give exposure to our work, but does that lead to more DLs? I doubt that.
I´ve been photographer of the week on Dreamstime, Bigstock and iStock - none of the sites had a significantly increased number od DLs during that week or the weeks to follow. And I´ve talked to other contributors that report the same. If being contributor of the week doesn´t push sales, I don´t think free files will do. It sure is an honour, but that´s just about it.

So as a call to all the agencies out there: try to find other ways for attracting more buyers than just reducing prices and giving away our work for free. That alone won´t make you or us or anybody else successful in the longrun. Try to think about a marketing plan that brings new buyers into the stockworld rather than shifting customers from one agency to another.

What about you, are you giving away files for free, or opt into subscription models?

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 03, 2012, 07:07

Quote from: nataq on May 03, 2012, 07:00this is never going to happen because humans are never satisfied with the things they have. They always want more, even if they can never ever spend the money they have. Am I different? Perhaps a bit...

Good lord! So the rumours about you being a non-human lifeform are true, then?
(sorry, I can't resist an open goal).

I'd win any E.T. lookalike contest hands down

Quote from: lisafx on May 02, 2012, 18:23

Quote from: nataq on May 02, 2012, 08:07
In a perfect world there would only be one Stock agency, paying their contributors good money and having a lot of well paid and satisfied employees. The photographers will pay their models a fair fee and buy new equipment produced by people that are getting paid well. Models and stock agency employees would buy fair trade food and goods.

Sorry, I'm confused.  When has a monopoly ever produced a fair trade environment?  If there were only one stock agency, or if GOD FORBID, Getty bought Shutterstock, then there is no incentive to pay contributors well.  As the only game in town, (or in the second scenario nearly the only one) they can pay contributors whatever pittance they can get away with. 

Lisa, you put my quote out of connection. My post continued like that...

Quote from: nataq on May 02, 2012, 08:07...The well paid farmers on their end would buy fair produced products in factories that care about the environment,... In the end everybody would be happy and live a comfortable life. Sounds like real communism, does it? But this is never going to happen because humans are never satisfied with the things they have. They always want more, even if they can never ever spend the money they have. Am I different? Perhaps a bit - but not really.

BTW: I don´t think regulatory authorities will allow a fusion of SS and Getty, so there´s probably nothing to worry about.

Quote from: wut on May 02, 2012, 13:43

Quote from: nataq on May 02, 2012, 13:33

Quote from: wut on May 02, 2012, 10:32

Quote from: Mantis on April 28, 2012, 22:50

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on April 28, 2012, 22:26

Quote from: Mantis on April 28, 2012, 22:15

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on April 28, 2012, 16:20

Quote from: Mantis on April 28, 2012, 13:58

Yes, it's something big "for him".  But the more power to him, nonetheless.  He has taken a love of something and turned it into a successful business.  Good for him.

He's hardly the first one to be successful because of a love of money, is he?

No but he certainly has gone from a point and shoot process to the most successful MS'r in the world.  I think that in and of itself differentiates what I was trying to say from your comments.

You don't seriously think he did it out of love for photography, do you? He saw a business opportunity and exploited it with unparalleled brilliance. His achievements are outstanding but they are primarily the achievements of a businessman.

Seriously, you don't think he'd do it if he hated it do you? No disrespect, Paul, but most MS contributors would give their right nut to enjoy his kind of success....and to enjoy creating the product to boot (the love of photography, yes).  The only question I would ask is, if Yuri won the LOTTERY, say 10 million bucks (USD) clear after taxes, would he keep going with his photography business?  Perhaps not and in that context you'd be correct.  But I can't speak for Yuri and maybe he would keep doing it, who knows.

No love whatsoever is radiating from his photos. He's just doing the same boring concepts over and over again. Lise Gagne (and a small fraction of other big players, but she's the biggest of all of them) on the other hand is doing what she loves, her photos show it. She shoots less lately (in the last couple of years or so), but she does shoot interesting things she enjoys, that chimpanzee businessman is brilliant (very stocky too) and then there are shoots that aren't as saleable (and I'm sure she knows it), but she shoots them anyway, because she enjoys the process of taking them. Then there are all those playful mustache photos etc. She started to really enjoy herself after becoming big, not being burdened if the new series are going to bring in a ton of money like the old did or not. It looks as though she doesn't really care about that (but also knowing at the same time her old series will still keep on bringing her lots of money) and just enjoys herself. That's love for photography! And I'd do exactly the same if I made just 10% of what she did. Yuri is just an effective emotionless robot, when it comes to taking shots. As others pointed out, he's just passionate for the money (I didn't get past this quote, so I don't know what ppl wrote after this post) and I think, also for the attention (could be even more for the latter). It's not that I don't like Yuri or anything, not only I respect his achievements, but I also think he's a nice guy, for instance if you ask him about something, even via PM, he'll reply (I doubt many ppl like him would), but I'm pretty sure there's no big love for the photography, or he'd at least make a shoot that's different, not that stocky, but more "for his soul" type of shoot, from time to time. Making 100k shots that all look the same, just doesn't show that (the same style, of course there are hundreds of concepts, all very stocky with the aim to maximize the sales, not enjoy taking those shots)

Ah, OK - I wonder if you think whether I love photography. It´s interesting to see how some people seem to know just about everything.

Just an opinion, perhaps you could add something meaningful to this discussion

I could - and I did.

Quote from: wut on May 02, 2012, 10:32

Quote from: Mantis on April 28, 2012, 22:50

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on April 28, 2012, 22:26

Quote from: Mantis on April 28, 2012, 22:15

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on April 28, 2012, 16:20

Quote from: Mantis on April 28, 2012, 13:58

Yes, it's something big "for him".  But the more power to him, nonetheless.  He has taken a love of something and turned it into a successful business.  Good for him.

He's hardly the first one to be successful because of a love of money, is he?

No but he certainly has gone from a point and shoot process to the most successful MS'r in the world.  I think that in and of itself differentiates what I was trying to say from your comments.

You don't seriously think he did it out of love for photography, do you? He saw a business opportunity and exploited it with unparalleled brilliance. His achievements are outstanding but they are primarily the achievements of a businessman.

Seriously, you don't think he'd do it if he hated it do you? No disrespect, Paul, but most MS contributors would give their right nut to enjoy his kind of success....and to enjoy creating the product to boot (the love of photography, yes).  The only question I would ask is, if Yuri won the LOTTERY, say 10 million bucks (USD) clear after taxes, would he keep going with his photography business?  Perhaps not and in that context you'd be correct.  But I can't speak for Yuri and maybe he would keep doing it, who knows.

No love whatsoever is radiating from his photos. He's just doing the same boring concepts over and over again. Lise Gagne (and a small fraction of other big players, but she's the biggest of all of them) on the other hand is doing what she loves, her photos show it. She shoots less lately (in the last couple of years or so), but she does shoot interesting things she enjoys, that chimpanzee businessman is brilliant (very stocky too) and then there are shoots that aren't as saleable (and I'm sure she knows it), but she shoots them anyway, because she enjoys the process of taking them. Then there are all those playful mustache photos etc. She started to really enjoy herself after becoming big, not being burdened if the new series are going to bring in a ton of money like the old did or not. It looks as though she doesn't really care about that (but also knowing at the same time her old series will still keep on bringing her lots of money) and just enjoys herself. That's love for photography! And I'd do exactly the same if I made just 10% of what she did. Yuri is just an effective emotionless robot, when it comes to taking shots. As others pointed out, he's just passionate for the money (I didn't get past this quote, so I don't know what ppl wrote after this post) and I think, also for the attention (could be even more for the latter). It's not that I don't like Yuri or anything, not only I respect his achievements, but I also think he's a nice guy, for instance if you ask him about something, even via PM, he'll reply (I doubt many ppl like him would), but I'm pretty sure there's no big love for the photography, or he'd at least make a shoot that's different, not that stocky, but more "for his soul" type of shoot, from time to time. Making 100k shots that all look the same, just doesn't show that (the same style, of course there are hundreds of concepts, all very stocky with the aim to maximize the sales, not enjoy taking those shots)

Ah, OK - I wonder if you think whether I love photography. It´s interesting to see how some people seem to know just about everything.

Quote from: cthoman on May 01, 2012, 23:54

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 01, 2012, 22:23
As I said earlier, I don't believe anyone else has the corporate presence to have a chance of pulling off this trick and making it pay, but Yuri does.

What's the trick? Anyone can open their own site, sell their images and make a profit. It's a pretty low bar to entry.

The emphasis is on "making it pay". Anyone can start his/her own website but noone has the same presence as Yuri has to start with. Well, and there are things like marketing and such. It doesn´t help to have a website and offer your images as long as nobody visits your site. That´s why some of the calculations made are a little off. You can´t say you gain 100% of the commissions paid to the agencies because you need to spend substantual money on marketing. And marketing let´s say 3000 images doesn´t make sense at all unless they are really unique and niche photos. But I´m sure Yuri made his calculations and it does seem to make sense for him. It will definitely also bring some commissioned work - especially since he put up the site pretty clever with model search and other tools. Other companies aren´t that clever demanding to upload a model release for every single image and therefore lose the valuable data that sits in linking model releases.

I wish him all the best and think he deserves it because he is one of a few that really put a lot of energy into his work. People who work a lot should get their revenue - no matter if stereotype or not. I guess we all have some sort of stereotype - some call it style ;-).

Microstock in general didn´t hit the roof and it won´t anytime soon.
It´s us contributors who hit the roof because demand doesn´t grow nearly as fast as supply does.

It won´t take long until revenues won´t pay the costs for shootings and most "professional" contributors will lose interest. But there will always be people who are happy getting the investment of their camera back. And in fact there´s nothing really bad about that, we can´t blame them can we? Most of us would act the same way.

I wished getty buyed shutterstock (awaiting your attacks now). If they kill microstock - well, why not. If there is no supply for cheap images, people will pay more and eventually make professional setups with paid models worth wile again. Would they screw contributors? Sure they would, but so would other shareholders as soon as they realized that growth is never exponential forever.
Mentioning Apple - we´ll see what happens if Apple returns to a more regular growth. Their problem will be that they just had been too successful in very short time. That´s never a good idea in the time we are living in as strange as that might sound. Shareholders will demand the same exponential growth forever, or they´ll be disappointed. That´s just plain stupid and the company should be really happy with a 10% loss over the next five years too because that´s still very very high level. Just the people that invested their money to proliferate it without ever adding a single idea or workhour won´t be and demand cost reduction. Which means screwing employees and suppliers. That´s the way it is.

In a perfect world there would only be one Stock agency, paying their contributors good money and having a lot of well paid and satisfied employees. The photographers will pay their models a fair fee and buy new equipment produced by people that are getting paid well. Models and stock agency employees would buy fair trade food and goods. The well paid farmers on their end would buy fair produced products in factories that care about the environment,... In the end everybody would be happy and live a comfortable life. Sounds like real communism, does it? But this is never going to happen because humans are never satisfied with the things they have. They always want more, even if they can never ever spend the money they have. Am I different? Perhaps a bit - but not really.

Same here, very disappointing. Even considering that we already had 4 weekend days.

Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2011, 13:57
(Ha, I might have been a customer last week. I needed photos to illustrate common photography mistakes, e.g. shooting between two subjects, the difference between camera shake and subject movement, under/over exposure etc. Of course, I had to go and shoot them myself.)

Hahaha, I was thinking exactly the same and had to shoot the same two weeks ago. I bet there is a market for that! It can´t be coincidence that just we two are looking for that within a very short period of time.

Quite the opposite here - very even, but bad.