MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - briciola

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Image Deactivation Tally for iStockPhoto
« on: February 02, 2013, 17:43 »
i deactivated my small port of around 200...i'll cash out when the PP has finished and close my account.  Easy for me, this is a hobby - I'm full of admiration for full timers doing the same thing...

2
Shutterstock.com / Re: Captcha Back?
« on: July 12, 2012, 18:48 »

3
Well...Spain Portugal wasn't the goal fest I'd hoped for.  Hard to say if the right team won, by the 2nd half performance probably...though Ronaldo is definitely something special.

4
iStockPhoto.com / Re: a new personal worst
« on: June 12, 2012, 09:55 »
Just got the second 9c sale in a few days :o . What's going on, where are these ancient/mega discounted credits coming from?
I had 2 in the last couple of weeks too - knowing how greedy they are I guess they're probably just skimming a bit off the top ;)

5
123RF / Re: 100MB sale for $11.58 wow
« on: May 29, 2012, 20:28 »
Download your stats at 123rf and look at the commissions you have received for each sale.  Compare the commission amount to the size of the file and the price they charge.  Can anyone in this forum claim a full price sale?  

Right now you should receive...

50 cents for a Small
$1 for a Medium
$1.50 for a Large
$2 for an XL
$2.50 for an XXL Jpeg
$5.00 for an XXL Tiff

If they were paying us that it is still demoralizing and grossly undercutting the other sites for the same content.  Take a look at your stats though...they aren't paying that.  The closest I came was $1.41 for a large sale.  Makes me feel dirty.

Mat
F&ck me I've been well screwed, 1.74 for my last XXL tiff. Every single sale I have checked is below your numbers, rip off *insult removed* - they can f*ck off, same as veer

6
123RF / Re: 100MB sale for $11.58 wow
« on: May 29, 2012, 19:18 »
Quote from: Alex for 123RF.com
Hi Everyone,

Great news!

Yeah, really great   ::)

Sounds like: Great news! You have cancer!

The bin in my avatar is almost full, I need to fit Veer and 123rf there too...
just out of curiosity, who will you be left with?  Seems to me the only ethical company out there is Alamy...

7
Veer / Re: Your Veer portfolio on Alamy
« on: May 28, 2012, 11:18 »
Alamy accepts RF. You shouldn't be uploading the same images as RF and RM.
yeah I knew that - I'm pretty sure I read in Douglas Freer's book that while some people put the same images on Alamy as the micros, it's frowned upon because of the different price points, so it's better to have seperate ports

8
Veer / Re: Your Veer portfolio on Alamy
« on: May 28, 2012, 10:36 »
I was always under the impression that it was bad form to submit micro images to Alamy, but if they will accept ms images via Veer then I suppose I should just submit them directly - thanks Veer for the idea.

9
I love the fact that you explain you were exclusive and now independent, etc. as if any of us might not know who you are! :)

I certainly don't see long term stability with IS, and I certainly wouldn't trust them on their word (just need to look at the grandfathering fiasco, if Lisa for example had went for that she might have been royally screwed) - I guess I was just thinking out loud that sales are so dire at most places other than SS/IS, and with the added incentive of E+ going over to getty, it might be woth a punt for a while - certainly I don't think I'd miss DT anymore than I miss FT...

10
I have to admit, with DT falling off a cliff, 123RF mainly subs, I dropped FT, stockfresh is dead in the water, veer seems a crock...I'm seriously thinking exclusive is the way to go for me - SS has never exceeded IS for me by any real margin, so these benefits are enticing...just so hard to get my head around submitting only to a company that i regard as incompotent and so bloody greedy

Don't do it. You will so regret it within a couple of years. The writing is on the wall, loud and clear.
I think you're probably right.  It does seem tempting though when you read of some people having decent GI sales month on month...then I see 123RF XL sales for a frickin' pittance :)   

11
...with the changes in pricing for exclusive vs. nonexclusive the differences have been enhanced a lot.  You would probably make a minimum of 4x what you make on IS as a nonexclusive, plus more for Vetta/Agency files, plus I think about 50% more for TS and the PP, plus mirrored Getty Images sales, and now the new E+ mirroring which on the face sounds good (we'll have to see how that plays out, I don't know if anything sells there but to me the E+ collection looks better than the Stockbyte collection). 
I have to admit, with DT falling off a cliff, 123RF mainly subs, I dropped FT, stockfresh is dead in the water, veer seems a crock...I'm seriously thinking exclusive is the way to go for me - SS has never exceeded IS for me by any real margin, so these benefits are enticing...just so hard to get my head around submitting only to a company that i regard as incompotent and so bloody greedy

12
Veer / Re: Refunds at VEER
« on: April 27, 2012, 05:23 »
had my first refund, from March 22. Refunded April 20.

13
Shutterstock.com / Re: Sudden March drop sales
« on: April 04, 2012, 04:45 »
Now that the month's nearing it's close, I feel in a better position to respond to this thread.

It's been a very varied month at SS.  Sometimes a series of days with terrific sales, followed inexplicably by a series of exceptionally quiet days.  At this stage, iStock has overtaken SS in sales this month for me, which is not a situation I'm used to seeing (usually SS sales are at least three times the amount I make on iStock).  

This is just based on normal incomes, and doesn't include Thinkstock.


Here's what some others are saying:  8)

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=121438


Congratulations to all of them. And congratulations to the buyers who used to pay $250 for an image but now can get 750 images for $250.

I wonder how long the sales volume can last to make BMEs out of peanuts? How much longer will subscription last before it kills the other sites and then itself?


applying to IS exclusivity this minute, thanks!  ;D


Wait, let me get my referral link for you.

At least IS is trying to raise prices.


yeah, they're great, aren't they?  Raise prices, cut commissions - that just makes them greedy *%*$*%

14
123RF / Re: We still have 50% of royalties?
« on: March 22, 2012, 19:47 »
I might be misunderstanding, but...  if it is "billed as a part of 123RF's Advertising and Promotional budget," or "the cost comes directly out of 123RF," wouldn't that mean credits aren't devalued to the contributor?  Sounds to me like costs are coming from the contributor.

That is exactly right.  We are expected to eat the cost of their promotional credits.  Looking at my sales stats it is extremely disproportionate with the overwhelming majority of my sales coming at a discounted rate.  I just uploaded my first new batch of images to SS, DT and FT in recent weeks and for the first time made a conscious decision to omit 123 from the process as a result of this unfair practice.  They will not be getting any more of my photos in the future.  The intent of the upcoming change appears to be motivational but that and these freebies we are forced to give away have had the opposite affect on me. 

Nothing they do surprises me anymore. They're crooks. Ripping us off wherever they can. Their rates are beyond pathetic already without being discounted
I must admit, I tend to agree.  They do seem like rip off merchants.  Also, reading comments from Alex makes me think he's been through the KK/JJRD school of communication...which doesn't exactly inspire me with trust ;)

15
I agree, especially that DP is nearly all subs...but then again so was FT for me before I pulled my port

16
...Now, with most sales being subs,
funny, I hadn't bothered with Fotolia, when I did a year or so ago nearly every sale was a sub.  (Glad I canned them)

17
Site Related / Re: Moaning Arena?
« on: March 06, 2012, 17:40 »
moaning about flaws in site functionality is entirely justified given the massive percentage sites take from contributors - it's their frickin' job to sell our photography, so if they screw up uploads, search or any other facets of the sites I'd say we have every right to moan as it affects the money we make from photos we've taken the time to shoot, keyword, upload, etc.  
ETA - personally I try not to moan...no point being negative and I don't imagine the sites care much what I say; but I respect other people's right to do so ;)

18
123RF / Re: Wow - the 123RF site really is up the creek!
« on: February 28, 2012, 07:21 »
Well, with the commission changes and now the site problems, I guess they're trying to emulate Istock in every way.  
;D maybe they both need to reduce rates so they can save up for decent developers...

19
I will sit out the year, then remove my portfolio. Screw you and your greedy crap.

That makes two of us bud!!! ;)
another here.  If 123 loses customers (in the way IS/FT did) I wonder if finally sites will think it worth treating contributors fairly...probably not

20
Depending on the result, I might have room for one more logo in my avatar.
lol, I must be blind because I hadn't realised until now the significance of your avatar - it's great.

21
just me that doesn't find it at all funny then I suppose - sorry!

22
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Best Match shift 27 Jan 12
« on: January 27, 2012, 17:29 »
whatever they have done, it has killed my sales
Like most best match changes, it'll be ephemeral

23
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Exclusive for Another Agency But...
« on: January 27, 2012, 12:12 »
true - any second now mr Locke will be along with:
http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/youve-been-accepted/
(see 9)
;)

24
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Surprise, Surprise, Credits Reset to 0
« on: January 27, 2012, 10:15 »
iStock. Worst I.T. Department Ever.

I don't suspect that their IT crew is any worse than any other microstock IT dept. But they're not sufficiently capable enough to handle the complex system istock HQ wants to employ. If they want to have the most complex and feature-rich site in the business, they need to have the best talent available for this sort of thing. Obviously they don't. Their IT folks may be good, but they might also not be of the caliber required to pull off the vision HQ has had for the site for years.

It's more an issue of knowing your limitations and working within them. Aside from the fact that such a complex site is probably not even giving them a competitive advantage anyway, a smart company knows when they're in over their heads and when to pull back on an aggressive development plan. istock will never admit that they can't do everything they want and keep things humming along smoothly, so they'll always stumble along like this with constant bugs and an almost monthly major issue cropping up.
I'm not sure that they aren't worse, from what I've seen, the IT dept in IS couldn't implement the changes we've seen over at SS - the map, tracking your sets, the darkroom features - certainly not smoothly and without a ton of new bugs being introduced. 

25
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Layoffs at istock
« on: January 21, 2012, 11:46 »
ditto. i could care less about hearing answers to jameses questions. they would just be platitudes again anyways.

I guess you mean you couldn't care less?

Off topic - I came across David Mitchel speaking on exactly that point a few days ago -
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw[/youtube]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle