|
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 - yuriy
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
1
« on: Yesterday at 11:58 »
Was it $4 for the year last time around? I honestly dont remember.
used to be $5 and there wasn't a "perpetual" option
2
« on: Yesterday at 10:02 »
fair point, i guess it depends on whether the free one fits their needs. the way i see it, it won't be a lot of images and it won't be much of what i consider my best so i don't mind participating.
3
« on: Yesterday at 09:23 »
I don't and won't participate in the free collection, but for those who do, cutting the annual payment seems like a low blow to me
Well, maybe people who give their content away for free, deserve this.
Adobe pre-selects content that already sold in the past, so I never got the point of contributors giving it away for free.
the majority of the images selected have sold very few times (i think the criteria is 4 or fewer sales in the last year). with current trends, at least for me, most of the images have little to no chance of earning $10 total ever. i'm fine "giving away" a few images for $10 while i can still earn something for them. they will only accept 10% or less of the nominated images so it won't be a huge loss and in many cases i have other similar images that will still be in my port available for sale. i won't nominate images i think have better earning potential or are better earners on other sites.
4
« on: May 10, 2025, 09:34 »
Hello, I am so pleased to hear of others success on SS, but here I am wondering if it is all worth the effort.
This year for me, I have sold a mixture of over 80 videos and photos, including a red-hot topic in the UK, 'The Reform Party' photos
and yet have only earned $36.52
The wages here are disgusting.
My portfolio, contains320 images and 177 videos.
are you seeing much better earnings elsewhere? honestly with a portfolio as small as yours those returns are pretty good... by today's standards. most people who see decent returns have 1000s of assets though i know of a few who do well with less because they have super rare/niche assets. hard to say if it's worth it for you specifically but i'd work on producing a much bigger portfolio and see.
5
« on: May 06, 2025, 09:53 »
nice work and i like your thumbnail photo. have you gotten monetized yet? nice consistency and thanks for sharing.
6
« on: April 24, 2025, 10:40 »
when i worked in retail many years ago they did all their holiday prep in july
7
« on: April 16, 2025, 23:04 »
despite above average number of downloads and decent number of video downloads it's the worst month for me out of the last 6 or so. very few decent sales and nothing big. istock is very much like shutterstock. largely tiny meaningless sales that add up to nothing and the once in a rare while big sale that totally skews the numbers.
8
« on: March 27, 2025, 16:44 »
let us know, seems like others tried too and it worked for them as well. its frustrating because i can tell some of the words being flagged and just fairly generic place names and not company ip. a few seem to be places named for a person. guess it'll have to be "a bridge" from now on, wish me luck.
9
« on: March 20, 2025, 12:26 »
getting closer...
10
« on: March 19, 2025, 13:46 »
cobalt- why don't you contribute there anymore?
11
« on: March 18, 2025, 18:46 »
not a great month, but not terrible. a little below the recent average but 15500% increase from feb, 2024 (that is the actual percent increase, not an estimate).
12
« on: March 02, 2025, 17:39 »
same sh*t here ... zero downloads in 10 days ... before Shitterstock i was at 350-400usd a month ..
let's thank Shitterstock for the great destructive work done on pond5 ... 
what i wonder is where those sales have gone. my hunch is demand for stock video isn't down, it's just the sales volume on pond5 appears almost gone. the only place i sell video reasonably well is adobe even if the revenue is low.
13
« on: March 02, 2025, 17:35 »
14
« on: March 02, 2025, 17:27 »
speaking of ai, i haven't had a "contributor fund" payment in ages. have others been getting anything? ss has been terrible for me for 3 months now.
15
« on: February 18, 2025, 21:28 »
pleased to say its my best month ever by a small margin. one really big sale otherwise it would have been pretty underwhelming. to my surprise it was a video.
16
« on: February 17, 2025, 18:59 »
i heard you guys like metrics, well i've got a new one:
days of less than $1 in sales.
adobe so far in feb had 2 while shutterstock has 8. definitely winning.
(yes i know one day of $10000 sales is better than 9999 days of $1 sales but it's not a trend i'm enjoying, i haven't had a bigger sale on ss in months anyway)
17
« on: February 13, 2025, 22:12 »
you're right, rpd by itself doesn't matter but rpd times volume is your bottom line. for me and i think many others volume is a little higher on shutterstock but the rpd is so low that the bottom line is much less $ than adobe. i think we can all agree that $ in the bank is what matters at the end of the day.
18
« on: February 11, 2025, 19:43 »
shutterstock sales have been pathetic lately, are others seeing the same thing? adobe is currently 3x for me in feb, same thing in jan.
19
« on: February 02, 2025, 14:35 »
@cobalt i too would like to hear from the ss>as folks. for me adobe sales in jan were about 2.5x shutterstock. ss was my #1 agency for about 2 months last year though with a few big image sales i the fall. let's hope they stay competitive but dec and jan were pretty underwhelming for me at ss despite many new images added.
20
« on: January 30, 2025, 18:30 »
decided to revive this oldie not because i want to complain again but because i made a small discovery based on a suspicion. after this original thread and with mat's help the ducks i was waiting 5 months to be reviewed were reviewed and approved (probably, i didn't even care anymore but they are no longer in "in review"). at almost exactly the same time i also uploaded some images of a bridge. these images are currently waiting to be reviewed for 10 months. they were uploaded, tagged and submitted 10 months ago. i have about 100 files that are stuck on 3+ months along with them. they are not amazing images but a smaller, less famous bridge that isn't well covered in the agencies. images like this don't sell a lot but do get a few sales here and there. in fact these images have sold on other agencies already in the last 10 months since no agency lets images sit that long without review and the other agencies accepted them no problem. about 3 or 4 months ago i uploaded the same images again with the same metadata. they are also stuck. a few weeks ago i uploaded them again, a 3rd time but wrote the minimum number of words in the metadata fields. they have been reviewed and approved. my suspicion was metadata caused some of these files to get flagged and put in the "we'll get to it in 10 years" pile. in this particular case i used specific name places (like the name of the county, etc) that this bridge is located in. if you have images stuck forever try re uploading with minimal metadata and fill it all in once they get reviewed. as for the original images... it seems i will soon find out what comes after "1 year ago."
21
« on: January 22, 2025, 14:01 »
The S+ files cost 3 credits, the normal files 1 credit. So S+ is three times more expensive. And in addition it gets mirrored on Getty.
Not quite, Signature, and Signature Plus cost 3 credits sometimes*.
Sig+ get mirrored to Getty, and the plussing seems to depend solely on which inspector randomly inspected your batch, I can't see any other reason why some of mine get plussed and why some others, which IMO are better, not in the same batch, don't (we can't nominate files to be plussed nowadays, though for a while we could).
Sig+ files, and Signature editorial files get mirrored to Getty, where we all get bumped down to a 20% commission. Some of these sales are high value, more are very small,: whichever, we get 20%.
*However, they only cost three credits if they buyer is on a Basic plan.
If they're on a Premium plan, all stills are one credit, but the credits cost more.
If they're on a Premium Plus plan, all files, stills and video are one credit, but the credits cost more still.
https://www.istockphoto.com/plans-and-pricing
do only exclusive contributors get into signature? are all exclusive images automatically signature? i've seen some sales through getty (i believe) though i'm not exclusive.
22
« on: January 20, 2025, 23:45 »
i'm with cobalt on this one. i don't see why i would want to be exclusive with the 3rd best agency. maybe the higher rate will make them the 2nd best agency and it'll be slightly less effort to upload to 3 agencies but there's no reason to believe they will do well enough to cover the earnings from AS/SS.
23
« on: January 18, 2025, 11:44 »
not a bad month per se but first month in my istock career that i earned less than the year before.
24
« on: January 07, 2025, 18:31 »
first time inside the top 10k. little over 4k files.
25
« on: January 02, 2025, 10:50 »
None because I think (and this is just a theory) you need sales to get refunds. I've given up on Alamy, little to no volume most months.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
