|
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 - Zephyr
2
« on: March 01, 2012, 23:52 »
Well Christian, you have certainly livened up this thread and kept us all entertained 
- His personality is so magnetic, he is unable to carry credit cards.
- His words carry weight that would break a less interesting mans jaw.
- His blood smells like cologne.
- If he were to mail a letter without postage, it would still get there.
are these yours or did you borrow them? they are brilliant. I love your post
Oh yes, he is the most interesting man indeed. His legend precedes him, the way lightning precedes thunder. His hands feel like rich, brown swede. He speaks fluent French, in Russian. Hes won trophies for his game face alone.
3
« on: February 02, 2012, 12:19 »
4
« on: January 18, 2012, 14:34 »
or maybe it's a third situation I haven't considered.
Well maybe Herg is legit or not. Who knows? If not, that is smart spin. If so, I apologize Herg. ETA: Deleted the rest. It doesn't matter either way.
5
« on: January 18, 2012, 13:44 »
Hmmm....Anonymous people will say anything around here. 
Below is an example what an average day at SS looks like, I mean the ratio between subs, ODs, SODs and ELs. RPD is 88c, if I got an EL (which I obviously haven't) results wouldn't be as realistic. So if you count in the occasional ELs and you have lots of ODs and SODs (procentually), you could get RPD over 1$. Not to mention the volume that's so much higher at SS.
DLs subs ODs SOD Daily earnings
32 9.36 13.50 - - - - - - - 5.32 $28.18
I get it. I just find it hard to believe that Herg is shocked that his/her 11 downloads has only amounted to $2.75 ( $.25 /subs) at SS. I don't understand how you can upload 300+ images to IS, become exclusive, then drop exclusivity and upload 300+ images to SS without ever knowing that subs pay 25 cents.
6
« on: January 18, 2012, 12:55 »
You may be right but IS images have averaged around $2.95 for me per download. SS for 11 downloads has only got me $2.75 so far. How can anyone say this is better than IS ?
Before you uploaded 300+ pics to SS you didn't look at what they pay per download? Hmmm....Anonymous people will say anything around here.
7
« on: January 18, 2012, 12:16 »
And what is reality for you now ?
I feel everyone in the SS pool was shouting "Come in the water is fine". When I jump it's freezing cold and my trunks have fallen off.
I am looking at Stock Cube's blog which is interesting as she hasn't got that many files up but making good revenue with most sites for the amount she has. I have nice images that are exclusive to my location so I hope they sell.
It doesn't matter what their reality is. You have to decide where you are going to sell your work based on how you think your agent(s) will perform in the future and will treat you as a supplier in the future. Anonymous people on this website will say anything. There is good info and bad info. Good sales for one contributor would be a catastrophe for another and every portfolio is different. On the brighter side and in light of recent events, you might have made the same decision at a later date anyway.
9
« on: January 16, 2012, 13:13 »
ugh - what is with sales (or the lack of)....?! awful start to the new year
I hear you! With the exception of the last two weeks of 2011, the 14 weeks before that were strongest of the year. So far this year, I'm down 20-30% of that weekly average.
10
« on: January 16, 2012, 13:06 »
@luissantos84 Thanks! I just need to modify that into a property release and I should be good.
I'll be using the property release the most for sketch reference but I'm glad to hear that generic property / model releases are acceptable. That will be a huge time saver.
11
« on: January 16, 2012, 11:28 »
Where can you find a generic property and/or model release out there that all of the agencies accept instead of have to use each agencies different version?
I'm exclusive with vectors and non-exclusive with photos and I just upload raster illustrations to the other sites. One big difference I've noticed for illustrators, specifically Istock exclusives, is that you can't just upload a jpeg of your reference file. You have to upload a completed property release. This isn't asked for all files but it is something you need to anticipate.
The different releases and keywording add up to a lot of time.
12
« on: January 08, 2012, 15:01 »
Another problem with the salesman analogy is that Istock is not rewarding the multi-talented contributors.
You can have a photographer that barely gets 40k RCs and achieves 35%.
You can have a photographer/illustrator that gets 35k Photo/ 40k ill and gets only 30% despite nearly doubling the RCs of the other contributor.
There are not a lot of people that fit the multi-talented category but those that do are, more often than not, highly talented.
13
« on: December 14, 2011, 22:10 »
I always "get in at the right time ... ", and .... I always get out
Aldra, you have the heart of a lion. No doubt the alarm bells and flashing lights are going off at Istock HQ. I doubt the accountants factored this scenario into the "Ten step plan to 20% payouts". Best of Luck! You have an amazing portfolio!
14
« on: December 10, 2011, 14:35 »
After 5 loyal years, I just ended my photo exclusivity.
While I truly hope I will still stay exclusive for vectors for a long time, I have to run my own business and want to be prepared for the worst. I'm simply too disappointed with their latest decisions at the moment, so I'm gonna test the waters for photo.
I dropped photo exclusivity in September. I think you'll be impressed by the volume of sales at SS but I remain unconvinced about dropping vector exclusivity. However, if other big time contributors start testing the waters things could change very fast. Interesting times for sure.
15
« on: December 08, 2011, 01:41 »
@retrorocket ... collection growth, portfolio growth and sales dilution are genuine issues not just for SS but for suppliers to all agencies. However, they have nothing to do with upset customers.
(Calm down SNP, it's bad for the blood pressure)
I agree that's why I added the quote from Gostwyck to point out structural issues that will be problem in the future. I believe the uber positive sales reports given by the independents will continue for a time but not in the long term without changes. I'm also not defending Istock's customer service or website problems. However, I do think higher priced collections like Vetta provide an answer to future issues now rather than later. There might be a better answer out there. We'll see. ETA: Yes, I strayed from the original topic about the slider but the conversation became about business models.
16
« on: December 08, 2011, 00:43 »
...I'm staggered that neither you nor TPTB at Istock seem to be able to grasp such a simple concept __ that the original concept actually worked. Shutterstock, who have largely remained true to the microstock model, with all images priced the same, are cleaning up here at Istock's expense. It's like Istock are just willingly handing over the family silver __ for free! I can't believe they're not even making a fight for the business. Are Istock totally stupid or deluded or what?
I think you guys are being naive in regards to Shutterstock and it never having to adjust its business model. Even if its volume of sales overtakes Istock by a huge margin there will come a day when even the highest producing contributors won't be able to keep up with the growth of new competing images if nothing changes. SS will have to raise standards so high that the amateurs struggle to get anything accepted or they will have to create special higher priced collections to keep the top talent from losing money because of dilution. Higher standards without higher prices could hurt the photographer's bottom line all by itself. If SS stays true to its original microstock model and just raises standards the majority of contributors, who are not superstars, could become enraged at Shutterstock because of low acceptance rates. I think there's already been a thread at MSG about low acceptance rates. We can acknowledge it or not but this industry has a supply problem and Vetta is one answer to that problem. Hold on while I make sure my helmet is strapped on properly. 
17
« on: December 02, 2011, 10:00 »
2. I too thinkstock is going to need propping up -- but to appease Sean and other big contributors, I suspect that they'll somehow manage to keep diamond level or a certain RC-credit level opt-out in place.
I don't think he or any of the other superstars will get any special treatment. They calculated the tremendous effort it would take for someone with 11,000+ files to upload, re-keyword, and modify model releases for all of the other sites before they implemented the RC system. I'm sure they are betting that he'll stay exclusive regardless.
18
« on: December 02, 2011, 09:17 »
There's an 800lb gorilla on Getty's back called H&F and it wants more now. Vetta, Agency, Getty owned, and Getty partner content to dominate the front of the search at Istock with all main collection files getting mirrored at Thinkstock.
That seems to be the best way to maximize short term profits in my opinion. There's no need to do anything complex.
19
« on: December 01, 2011, 15:02 »
IS Vector Exclusive
When the missing days sales are added in it will probably be the BMY and be close to my BME. The foundation appears to be cracking and sales are up. I don't know what to think but I'm happy sales are up!
20
« on: November 30, 2011, 22:42 »
They removed 1979SUCKS finally.
21
« on: November 30, 2011, 11:02 »
If I decide to upload my nearly 1400 files to 10 agencies, I'm done. I might consider image exclusivity somewhere but that's it. I would imagine as portfolios keep growing larger the idea of agency exclusivity anywhere other than Istock will be considered a waste of time.
22
« on: November 29, 2011, 16:19 »
What's disturbing to me is the fact that the broken Istock works similarly to the correctly working Thinkstock and Getty Images in regards to sales reporting. Instead of transparent reporting of sales when they happen, everything is now opaque. I know I'm being a conspiracy theorist but its tough not to be these days.
Actually, I was thinking along these same lines. Remember when we used to have live stats on our DLs and that went wonky? Well... we never got that back did we? I may just be a matter of time before iStock stops giving daily updated stats and we have to wait for an end of month report like Getty. They seem to be moving towards alignment in other areas so why not in this one?
Long gone are the days when iStock was its own company or at least allowed to operate independently of Getty even once they were bought. Now iStock is just another portal for Getty and it probably makes sense to them to bring their reporting practices in line with the rest of the "family". They probably think that passing it off as a bug initially will break us in to the idea easier than if they just announce it. Bah... who knows, but it does sound like something they might do.
When did live stats end? My member date (April 2006) is not my contributor starting point. I started uploading in November 2006 and managed to get a whopping 70 files up by August 2007. Then I didn't upload again until May 2008 and I've been consistent since then. I don't remember anything different in the early days though. Back on topic: I will certainly drop my crown if we get pushed into monthly reporting like the rest of the"family" or if we are forced into the PP. I dropped photo exclusivity when they forced independents into the PP so I could establish accounts at the other sites. If the other shoe drops, I'm totally done with exclusivity.
23
« on: November 29, 2011, 14:35 »
I'm worried that they have to calculate royalties. I'd hoped they were being tallied automatically somewhere in the back end at the correct royalty percentage. just means a whole bunch of accounting work to make sure I'm receiving the correct royalty difference.
What's disturbing to me is the fact that the broken Istock works similarly to the correctly working Thinkstock and Getty Images in regards to sales reporting. Instead of transparent reporting of sales when they happen, everything is now opaque. I know I'm being a conspiracy theorist but its tough not to be these days.
24
« on: November 29, 2011, 12:58 »
That's the only way. You can create links and other modifications in Deepmeta but it doesn't support vector uploading yet.
FYI- In the help forum, it is being recommended that no one upload until the site gets fixed.
25
« on: November 29, 2011, 12:27 »
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=159
looking back, interesting read.....
I have no idea what his options were when Bruce made that decision but I wonder if he regrets it now or not. The easy answer is he had his share of 50 million reasons not to regret it. However, seeing what is happening to Istock now has to sting. Very few people have ever created a business that created a fundamental change in a market, and I bet its tough to see your business go from being an innovator to, potentially, a regressive business model.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
