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 - 1001

Pages: [1]
1
I can sometimes make $800-$1000 a (week)day with 10,000+ clips, but $200-$400 per day is more likely for me.

February, 2018 was my BME, averaging $5,000 per week during that month.

So, it can be achievable with hard work.


That's amazing... 10,000 clips is also a really big portfolio. How long did it take you to build it?

It's not possible to make this sort of money from microstock. Some people will claim it is, however most contributors are earning less than $500 a month. At the very best it can earn you a few expenses. Definitely keep the day job and only do micro if you enjoy the hobby of shooting stock.

That's not an encouraging view, but it's certainly useful to know where the ground if you're trying to climb up.. Yeah, the dayjob is still here for the moment haha

But the more produced (and potentially more lucrative) clips with models posing and creating some situation will be more expensive to produce. So the 800-1000 should also include the "after paying how much you spent producing the clips)..

Thanks niktol. I would still like to here people's input on this one.

Making illustrations certainly has the benefits of having very few expenses, but I wouldn't plan it around what's expensive, but more around who is going to pay for that and how much.

Illustration is a very interesting world. I messed around a bit with it but wouldn't there to go and sell it, i would need to improve really a lot more. For the moment my chips are in footage. And yes, sometimes if in a shooting session you get 10 clips and a total of 3-5 sales you almost paid for the expense, so it probably is a good idea not to be (too) cheap on production.

2
Yeah, i figured some answer like that haha. Thanks!

Also, of course the ocean view or the beautiful mountain only require that you ARE there, and have a camera on you. But the more produced (and potentially more lucrative) clips with models posing and creating some situation will be more expensive to produce. So the 800-1000 should also include the "after paying how much you spent producing the clips)..

Thanks niktol. I would still like to here people's input on this one.

3
So, let's say you want to sell (almost) exclusively stock footage. Assume 800-1000$ monthly would be enough for you to live without a day job (either because you live in a cheap country or have other passive sources).

Roughly how many clips (port size) in how many agencies (assume agencies from the top 10...) did you need to upload in order to reach (more or less) that kind of value? How long did it take to reach than monthly average?

Are there many people here in that stage? Is it reasonable to assume those goals, or really a fantasy except if you are a world class videographer?

Beginners like myself do tend to try to see down the road, even in the middle of the thick fog of uncertainty that this business presents at the beginning...  :)

ps - i know the "depends on how good you clips are" will be the obvious (and correct answer), but let's assume a competent portfolio, not genius, but solid.

thanks for the answers?

4
Adobe Stock / trouble with FTP upload to Adobe Stock
« on: June 03, 2018, 12:23 »
Hi,
Just traying to upload my first batch of HD videos (8, total 850mb) to Adobe Stock.

I'm using Filezilla, but i already tried Cyberduck and the following problem happens just the same:

I use the personal credentials provided by the site, but neither filezilla nor cyberduck seem to quite accept the password. The message is "unsafe server doesn't support FTP over TLS". Anyway it starts to upload just the same, but it will eventually reset, going to 0% on the download bar, and the message "ECONNRESET" shows up, connection will fall and the process restarts...

Really could use some help, this is the first time i try to upload to adobe stock. So far i have been able to upload to Shutterstock, Pond5, Envato and Dreamstime (although these last two haven't showed up in the website yet.. is it normal to take more than 2 days for the clips to be ready for edit and complete in the website?)

Thanks a lot!

5
I agree with Pauws99, but will add some personal experience.

Years ago, when I was first starting with iStock, I had a shot of a balloon salesman on the beach in Cabo.  You could see nothing of him but the lower part of his legs, as he was totally covered in balloons.  iStock rejected it for trademark.  Well, sure enough, several of the balloons had trademarks on them.  I was just learning Photoshop in those days, so asked our group's artist for some help in removing them (since my first attempt was a total mess).  He did so, and I learned some PS in the process.  But... iStock still rejected the image.

They wrote me a real, honest, personalized email (I was impressed!), apologizing, but hoped I would understand.  Given the surroundings (beach, with recognizable hotel), and the nature of the sales, they said it would be possible for that salesman to look at that image and identify himself in it. As such, they still had to decline the image.  I was bummed out, but avoided pretty much all people for years after that.

Fast forward to this past year. I learned about Editorial, and started to submit a lot of images (some rather old) in that category.  All have been accepted (except for those with focus or noise issues). These included several images of closeups of hands doing various things (cooking, sewing, weaving, etc -- things I came across in my travels).

Multiple agencies (not ShutterStock, but I can't really remember which), actually bumped them over to Commercial, saying they thought they would sell better there. Even though I know these are images of the type that iStock would have rejected a decade ago. (I no longer submit to iStock because of their insanely low royalties, so don't know their reaction today to those images).

So...  it is a moving target.  Both regards the agencies and regards time. What is accepted or rejected today may be the flip next year.  Just because one agency rejects it as commercial, doesn't mean another won't accept it.

My advice... submit as commercial to each of your agencies.  If any particular agency rejects for editorial reasons, just resubmit as editorial.

That's a really interesting situation... I'm really impressed that they wrote you a personalised mail (I wonder if they would still do it today). And it actually makes some sense their justification to not allowing your photo to be sold for commercial purposes...

Anyway, i'm gonna lay back a bit on that subject, and just see what they will tell me! thanks for the useful answers!

6
Hi everyone. I'm learning the theory behind stock footage upload workflow. A question raised, regarding model (and for that matter property...) releases.

So, it's pretty obvious that a recognizable face must have a signed release by the model in question. But... when there is a model (or many like in a street scene) but not recognizable, can it be uploaded as a commercial clip even without model release? What about (for instance), a close-up of, say, two hands writing on a keyboard (no face). Would that require a release?

So, for instance, i thought this shot would need a release, but it turns out it's being sold as a commercial clip stating clearly that it has NO model release. I know the model is seen from behind (no face), but still:

https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/134920/ibiza-dancer-gogo-woman-club-disco.html

This next one shows parts of 2 different bodies, IS sold for commercial purposes, and has NO release:

https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/73505213/tatoos-artist-using-needle-and-dabing-colour.html

I'm a bit confused. The same questions go to property (example... shooting a known city square where one can recognize buildings in background...)
You are right to be confused policy varies from site to site as does the interpretation of inspectors. "Recognisable" is a bit of a subjective term. Probably the only way to go is submit and learn from experience.

Oh "nice". Ok, i'll pass on this subject for the moment. Thanks for the clarification. I suppose Pond5 is more permissive, since all the "doubtful" clips i found were uploaded there.

7
Hi everyone. I'm learning the theory behind stock footage upload workflow. A question raised, regarding model (and for that matter property...) releases.

So, it's pretty obvious that a recognizable face must have a signed release by the model in question. But... when there is a model (or many like in a street scene) but not recognizable, can it be uploaded as a commercial clip even without model release? What about (for instance), a close-up of, say, two hands writing on a keyboard (no face). Would that require a release?

So, for instance, i thought this shot would need a release, but it turns out it's being sold as a commercial clip stating clearly that it has NO model release. I know the model is seen from behind (no face), but still:

https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/134920/ibiza-dancer-gogo-woman-club-disco.html

This next one shows parts of 2 different bodies, IS sold for commercial purposes, and has NO release:

https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/73505213/tatoos-artist-using-needle-and-dabing-colour.html

I'm a bit confused. The same questions go to property (example... shooting a known city square where one can recognize buildings in background...)

8
thanks for the very helpful answers!
Yeah, based on your experienced advice, i think i won't try to update my laptop which will anyway keep struggling, and in a year or 2 most would have to be changed.

SpaceStock! thanks, i was checking some machines with that kind of power. I really have a thing for apple, i'm not religious about it :D but i've been using macs in my day job (i'm an architect...) and since i started using them (7-8 years ago) i never thought about pcs again :D

but, if i ever loose my faith :D i may go back.

9
Hi everybody!
after consideration, i decided to invest in a 4k capable camara, to try my shot at Video Footage (thinking about the future, where 4k will probably become standard).

So i decided based on much research, budget considerations, etc... to get the Sony A6300.

Now the problem is that my laptop where i have so far made my 1080 editing will not take it, it's far to old. So, the question is to decide whether i buy a new machine (probably a Imac, i'm a mac guy...), which means a bigger investment right now or if it's worth to update my macbook pro i keep it going a couple of years more (smaller investment). So my macbook is:

-mid-2010 (2,66 i7; 4gb RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M, with VRAM 512). I have a 500gb SATA Harddrive.

So... if i update this and get 8gb RAM and eventually a new hard drive, would it be able to deal with 4K files (Basic clip editing for stock...) or would it be too painful/impossible? Thanks in advance for the help!.

Pages: [1]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors