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 - StanRohrer

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16
52 sales in the past year. Only 5 were Distributor. One of those Distro sales was for nearly pennies. A couple others were big enough to keep me in the game.

General Stock Discussion / Re: Maybe a stupid idea.
« on: November 18, 2019, 09:43 »
Consider the auction idea from the perspective of the customer/buyer. If the buyer is working on a project such as a calendar or book with a need for a lot of images, the auction buying would get very cumbersome. I.E. place bids on 12 images. Wait days or weeks, pay for a couple of winners but then search and start bidding on replacements for the losers. Wait days or weeks. Repeat until the image need is filled. I cannot think that image buyers have the available time line in their projects to buy images in this open ended timeline (may be multiple bidding failures to buy the last image for the project), if the sales auction bidding covers many days. If the bid cycle is, say, one day, then there is not sufficient buyer competition in the market to run the price up.

With a long bidding cycle, the buyers will have to track and juggle a significant database of images to be bought. Then eBay style sniping software will have to be generated to make those last minute high bids automatically. I can see buyers getting lost in what is bought, in bid, and failed such that their projects are chaos. It would take live databases for major buyers to track the auction buying status.

A newsletter editor may write a newsletter article today for the newsletter that goes out tomorrow. With a long bidding cycle the newsletter editor cannot be in the photo auction market due to time constraints.

In the end, after the image is used on something like a calendar or newsletter, the buyer likely has no need to hold copyright. So perhaps they set up a secondary sales site of their own and auction off the used images and try to recoup some of their costs. Now "my" images are competing against me.

I'm not sure the auction idea will play out well in this form. But keep working on the ideas - we certainly need them.

General Stock Discussion / Re: What's happening with Yuri Acrus?
« on: September 04, 2019, 14:52 »
Not much activity since 2017 on the links I know. https://www.facebook.com/yuriarcurs/ or http://arcurs.com/  I think he moved to Cape Town, S Africa back then and started new businesses there.

Tondaxxx, did you actually press the camera button to start the recording every single one of those 21,320 videos? How many months has it taken to process and upload them all? This certainly is a big impressive portfolio. Your fingers must be tired.

I use iMatch by Photools.com. I needed a Digital Asset management system long before Lightroom was on the scene and this does a very good job for my 160,000 current images. It has a bit of a steep learning curve but is incredibly capable of indexing, searching, categorizing, and keywording. The thesaurus can be set up for pulling out a common keyword and then also bringing your added synonyms. For example, if I add Dayton as a keyword, I have the thesaurus set to also bring out: city, Ohio, USA, United States. I always select all images from a given shoot and add the common and "generic" keywords and description. Then I come back to smaller groups and individual files to add specific keywords and description sentence for that image. This will enter the detail into the database and another click will set in motion the write-back to put all the IPTC fields into the actual image files (JPG) and/or side-car files (raw). iMatch is worth a review for your use.

The livelihood of the average paparazzo is threatened by major changes in the publication industry. The photographers manage idiosyncratic risk by forming unstable alliances, but the larger systematic risk that could wipe out their jobs is harder to manage. They could form a union and demand better terms from the agencies, but historically they struggle to cooperate with one another. And the paparazzi are not the only ones who face the risk that their jobs will no longer be viable.

Sounds like our discussions here in other threads when trying to figure out how to apply pressure for higher photographer income.

Put up some of your "benign" or "less controversial" work and maybe people will contact you for commissioned images for their projects. Perhaps you would feel better suited for fiction use as opposed to political commentary. You would have more control with a commissioned work than just anybody that could by from a stock agency. If your work is controversial, then commissioned work is against the project and maybe not so much your personal boundaries.

I am RF Exclusive at iS but also report Alamy RM. So my numbers may not be helping the iS Exclusive counts over to the right.

On another note, I didn't reach iS payout for January. (There were months back about 2010 where I was getting between $1500 and $2000 some months). February just came roaring back (ha!) to be about triple my ugly January (met payout with Jan included in the account - but still not great for today). So my very aged portfolio (since 2003) is struggling but still buying a few Cokes and hamburgers for this month.
ETA: fix monthly $ - too many zeros.

General Stock Discussion / Re: The Getty debt
« on: March 19, 2019, 09:01 »
The article sidebar notes are a bit interesting.

"Hellman & Friedman bought most of Getty Images in a 2008 deal that valued the targets equity at some $2 billion, with around $400 million in debt."

"The Getty family is paying $250 million for Carlyles 51 percent stake, according to the Financial Times, which first reported the deal. Getty Images has more than $2.3 billion of debt." "The deal puts the enterprise value of the company at slightly less than $3 billion..."

So I don't know if the reported "equity" and "value" are the same net numbers. If yes, then the size of the company grew from $2B to almost $3B. If no, then we are dealing with apples and oranges comparisons but implying a bigger value company.

The real significance to me (not being in the banking or investing business) seems to be the increase of debt load from $400M to $2.3B. The helpful private equity "investors" have stripped a lot of value out of the company.

Indeed the second paragraph of the article says "Tuesdays deal values Getty Images equity at just a quarter of its worth when Hellman & Friedman bought it in 2008. One major reason for the decline is that before selling it to Carlyle four years later, the buyer saddled it with additional debt, some of which was used to finance dividends." So the actual equity value of the company has nearly crashed via the investors, who seemingly grabbed the money and ran.

So is this a severe detriment to Getty Images? Is this just a bankers ruse to move around money to the benefit of the top players and game playing organizations? Are the gamers * just enough blood out of GI to not kill it - but to use the blood for some other corporate games?

I think these financial moves are all a big shell game among the GI people who are bankers (not photographers) at heart. I doubt they want to kill, or let die, their cash cow GI. But the situation certainly puts the squeeze on finances and certainly on payments and percentages to us photo suppliers as they milk this cow.

Does someone with better accounting knowledge and Getty history have a better thought?

Site Related / Re: Leaf, cant move spam to garbage
« on: March 11, 2019, 09:21 »
Add to the above I couldn't submit monthly poll vote either. Tried twice and it just took me back to an unfilled page for February. Obviously a few site issues tonight.
I can pull up the Poll screen successfully (February). I still cannot view the History Graph (blank).

Alamy.com / Re: Alamy exclusive - Is there a filter?
« on: February 20, 2019, 12:00 »
I think I worked by Submission groups. Click a group. Go down a few groups and Shift-Click a group to get the whole range. Check the selected file count at top right. Click the Only On Alamy box and Save. Worked pretty quick. I later came back to search and find a few individual files that were not exclusive and reset the box.  You will have to eyeball the number of files in each submission and do the mental math so you don't exceed the file count capability.

iStockPhoto.com / Re: 2018 1099 anyone?
« on: February 06, 2019, 15:53 »
Somebody pointed me to the download. Go find the Tax Interview and the statements are below the Start Interview button at the bottom.  Account Management / Profile / Tax Interview.

iStockPhoto.com / Re: I don't like iStock but...
« on: January 28, 2019, 12:52 »
After the site changes a while back the images no longer have accessible descriptions. All is sold on the title and the image. It dawns on me they are just trying to make iS more of a "clipart" cheap site. Tomatoes on white. Check. But they don't want images that interfere with other Getty collections.

Got it Stan. I don't know about clipart or descriptions? You mean my file descriptions are not used in the search or just invisible for any purpose.

Just like the rest, my view, my main sites, every one has better and worse sales for different kinds of images. Mine runs like this, SS Photos and Editorial; iStock (after they wiped out 3,657 Editorial images) a mix, but mostly old photos: Adobe illustrations are first, photos come in second. Each place is different for what does best for me. For Me   :)

Not only that, my best selling image on AS, and I haven't been there long as a returning artist, has only one download on SS in the same years. I think it has more sales on iStock also. One of my top images on SS has only 3 DLs on AS.

What I'm getting at, is some of the comments about best site are not about the site but about what we personally make and upload. The same images don't bring the same returns at all sites equally.

ps I don't do vectors, my illustrations are rasters, not the "real thing".

IS is a love hate relationship for me too. I'll take the money but they are one of the least friendly sites in the business.

I don't know if descriptions are used in searches or not. Because of the controlled vocabulary that translates the keyword tags, I suspect the search does not include descriptions. I've not tried to suss this out.

Many of us complained back when iS made the current page layouts that there was no description. I sell some city skylines but a buyer now cannot know the date of the skyline and whether it is no longer current (e.g. with a new building).

I've made a few quick reviews of the data in DeepMeta. I don't have full proof but it certainly appears that editors are adding and removing keywords so they are different than what I submitted. There are now keywords that I know I would have not considered (because I didn't think of them - not because they are necessarily wrong) and there are missing keywords that I'm sure I would have included to describe the image. I used to sell a lot of clipped car images. When iS quit accepting cars they didn't remove those already in the collection. So my good sellers are still there - albeit I'm seeing keywords removed for make and model of the car. So if a buyer is looking for a 1968 Chevrolet 396 Convertible, only keywords 1968 and Convertible appears to exist. Fortunately the search might get them from the title. Unfortunately Convertable is a wrong spelling in the title and I would have to open a ticket to get it fixed. The keywords displayed on site don't even include Red (I will have to go back and see if I included Red when uploaded). So people won't find my image even searching for the generic Red Car.

iStockPhoto.com / Re: I don't like iStock but...
« on: January 27, 2019, 20:19 »
After the site changes a while back the images no longer have accessible descriptions. All is sold on the title and the image. It dawns on me they are just trying to make iS more of a "clipart" cheap site. Tomatoes on white. Check. But they don't want images that interfere with other Getty collections.

Site Related / Re: Does anyone use tapatalk
« on: January 09, 2019, 17:23 »
I've seen footers suggesting the use of TapaTalk but I never investigated. I don't need another app taking space on my phone.

Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock very bad results
« on: January 09, 2019, 07:53 »
Figure out which of your images are best selling. Then do a Google Image search (as well as other image search engines). If you can find where your images are used you can determine how they were used and why your image was significant to the buyer. This might help you "think like a buyer".

Where do I see the 2019 rate card? I don't know the answer yet.

Newbie Discussion / Re: What do u think about FEMALE PHOTOGRAPHER?
« on: November 21, 2018, 15:49 »
It appears the OP, Christ2237, has checked out of this forum. Toss in a grenade and run away to watch from a distance.

OLD THREAD ALERT!!!!  This discussion is over 1 year old. The info might still be very valuable but may be out of date.

iStockPhoto.com / Re: New conspiracy theory! Hooray!
« on: October 01, 2018, 17:57 »
Downloads by month:
2014-01   59
2014-02   59
2014-03   57
2014-04   64
2014-05   55
2014-06   57
2014-07   52
2014-08   49
2014-09   47
2014-10   45
2014-11   56
2014-12   39
2015-01   24
2015-02   19
2015-03   42
2015-04   28
2015-05   47
2015-06   29
2015-07   24
2015-08   23
2015-09   31
2015-10   26
2015-11   35
2015-12   21
2016-01   20
2016-02   31
2016-03   25
2016-04   21
2016-05   20
2016-06   19
2016-07   12
2016-08   17
2016-09   8
2016-10   9
2016-11   10
2016-12   6
2017-01   48
2017-02   73
2017-03   69
2017-04   83
2017-05   70
2017-06   75
2017-07   73
2017-08   73
2017-09   74
2017-10   66
2017-11   73
2017-12   69
2018-01   60
2018-02   66
2018-03   65
2018-04   72
2018-05   65
2018-06   66
2018-07   65
2018-08   66

iStockPhoto.com / Re: New conspiracy theory! Hooray!
« on: October 01, 2018, 17:54 »
I report both Alamy and iS (Exclusive).

iStockPhoto.com / Re: New conspiracy theory! Hooray!
« on: October 01, 2018, 11:21 »
I would consider your theory but with one change. I think they cap the number of downloads, not the earnings. I'll have to go back to my log to check that I have been between 67 and 69 downloads every month for many months. Somebody must have bought a couple of pricey images as my earnings were almost double in the last payout - but the downloads count was incredibly still consistent. Of course, capping the downloads count will have the effect of also controlling the earnings as there will be some general averaging among sales. Has anybody else checked there downloads from month to month? My port is not seasonal material. How about somebody with heavy seasonal material - do you have steady download counts or does it follow a seasonal cycle?

iStockPhoto.com / Re: Confused by the 2 Merge
« on: September 06, 2018, 10:07 »
Getty bought iStock. iStock was run as a separate entity for a bit and then Getty merged them into the Getty database and system. ESP is the name of the portal that iStock people can use to upload and check their account. Off the top of my head I no longer remember the steps if you have an old iStock account and need to access via ESP.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle