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.


Topics - KevinM

Pages: [1]
1
How do folks here process their green screen video footage for stock clips?

I recently shot some green screen clips on a pretty clean, even green screen. Now editing in FCP X to create stock clips, and can't decide if I should leave the shots "as is" or if I should key them to remove subtle variations in the background on full body shots, and then add a new green background. Either way, the buyer will have to key the footage. If I do a key while processing and add back a green background, it makes for a uniform background that I think adds a subtle appeal for buyers. The downside though is that I'm simply using the "Keyer" effect in FCP X and I don't know if this will make it harder for buyers when they key it a second time themselves. Maybe it's best I leave the footage "as is" and let buyers key it for the very first time when they purchase?

I'm not great at keying footage myself, so not sure of what process will ultimately be best for buyers. Appreciate hearing from people with experience in this!

2
Usually I've had to wait days, a week or more for SS to process video uploads. Was shocked today when they processed 19 clips in under an hour, and with only one rejection (they can be very inconsistent and random on what they reject). So there's some good news - if you have clips to upload, now's the time apparently.

3
Over the last month, every single stock video sale I've had at Depositphotos (11) has been reversed. I get an automatic email that I've had a sale of a clip and here's my commission. But then a day or two later I log into Depositphotos and that sale has vanished from the records. After this happened with several sales from one day, I called Depositphotos. The Eastern European woman on the other end said she'd look into it and email me. I later received this email from "Stacey":

My name is Stacey. I am writing to you further to our phone conversation.
The amount of sales can be changed since some of you sales were returned. The payment was not authorized. Bank notified us it as a fraud. That's why we had to refund the payment and all the purchases were returned.
Kind regards,
Stacey

I guess that can happen... once. But it has continued to happen. Every single video sale gets reversed after a day or two. I have to wonder if this is a company scam, a way for them to keep all the money from a sale by telling me they had to cancel the sale but really they're keeping everything for themselves.

Is this happening to anyone else?

4
Theres been a lot of internet discussion about iStockphoto since their price/credit restructuring in September, most of it focusing on photo sales. As primarily a video contributor, Id like to point out the danger of what iStock is doing to the stock video market. They not only pay less per sale than other sites, but in the long run theyre threatening the profitability of the stock footage industry as a whole. Ill make a case here as to why its in the best interest of non-exclusive contributors to stop uploading to iStockphoto and deactivate their files as a growing number of contributors are already doing.

The unanimous opinion online of those who have looked into the data is that iStockphoto is an exploitative rip-off for non-exclusive video contributors. iStocks base royalty rate for non-exclusive contributors is 15%. Thats half of what Shutterstock pays video contributors, and far below the 45%-50% payouts of Pond5 and RevoStock. Sites like Depositphotos, Fotolia and Dreamstime all have much higher royalty rates as well, though low sales amounts and subscription rates on at least Fotolia can make those sites not worthwhile. All in all, iStockphoto by far has the lowest royalty rate for non-exclusive contributors.

So what? Why not just take whatever you can earn from iStock? Because low pay devalues our work, with the larger threat being if iStocks exploitative practices become successful and force other companies to compete by similarly lowering royalty rates. iStocks short-sighted attempt to outmaneuver competitors could trigger a race to the bottom, with us contributors being hurt the most. Its bad enough that one site insults us by paying us only 15% for the sale of our own work. If other sites follow suit, the financial loss over the years would be thousands of dollars for even small volume contributors.

So far, based on forum chatter, sales (including mine) have not responded well to iStocks restructuring. Though that hurts in the short-term, its best for the long-term that this plan fail. The money I make at iStock is unfairly low, and not worth the money I stand to lose at other companies if they adopt iStocks practices. Thats why I responded as many other contributors have in the last month I stopped uploading new content to iStock, and recently deactivated all my video files there.

Note that everything Ive said pertains to NON-exclusive contributors. iStocks exclusive video contributors are in a completely different situation. They start at a 25% royalty rate, and are eligible for the Signature collection where clips sell three times higher than non-exclusive Essentials clips. So they stand to make good money when their clips sell. Many complain that the new pricing on exclusive clips is so high its hurting sales. Regardless, the royalty is more equitable, so they dont have the same reasons to abandon iStock as non-exclusives do. It would actually be greatly to the advantage of exclusive sellers if the non-exclusives did leave. When you have a high priced clip for sale, the last thing you want is a similar clip selling next to yours for literally one-third the price.

I believe what would be best for all contributors in the long term is if non-exclusives left iStockphoto en masse, essentially turning it into a shop that mostly sells exclusive clips. Some clients will pay for a premium for that, so let the market set that price and feed those contributors. Meanwhile, non-exclusive contributors can get a much fairer royalty rate at other seller sites.

If you sell through iStock, I encourage you to evaluate whats best for your business both right now and in the long run. If you agree iStock is unfair in what it pays, consider no longer uploading to them and deactivating your files there. Send them an email that youll no longer accept an insulting 15% rate on your own work. They need to pay competitive with other companies or lose their non-exclusive supply.

You can hear from other iStock non-exclusive video contributors on the iStock forum here: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=362971&page=1

Instructions on how to deactivate iStockphoto files can be found here: http://istockfaq.gettyimages.com/how-do-i-deactivate-a-file/

Pages: [1]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors