Interesting read. I pulled my portfolio of 1.000+ files from fotolia two or so years ago because of their subscriptions. They called me twice and asked me not to if only I had a little patience. Well, my patience lasted 6 months, and several email reminders.
If they wouldn�t have acted like that I might start uploading again. But they just don�t seem to be a fair and honest partner. Who knows - maybe they just want to gather more clips in a rush and then they reduce royalties again, or introduce new subscription plans. For me they never made enough money to even justify the time it takes to upload the videos.

Good to know.. I am skeptical..

I dont trust them either. I just thought that it was odd that i didnt actually recieve any email notifiying all of the changes and then all of a sudden i was earning less for HD subscription downloads. It was only by chance that i came here and saw that someone had posted it. To be honest i think they kept that part quiet on purpose. Anyways, i found the option to opt out and did so because i draw the line there.

Thanks for listening.

 Where is the option to opt out? I was trying to find it..

Just thought i'd bump this thread because it appears that the ridiculously low comission rate of premium subscription HD video downloads has gone down from $3.6 to $2.7.

If you are opt'd into this you may of already noticed this change.

I would advise everyone to opt out and spread the word to your fellow videographers.

Of course you may be perfectly happy with that commision, but I for one am not and if you feel the same please pass the message on.

Thanks.

I just got this email, saying that they have done away with the subscriptions for Video.. Unless I am reading this wrong..

---- email ----
- HD videos are no longer available in subscription plans, but web resolution videos are available, and count as 5 downloads.

We encourage you to create and upload HD quality videos to maximize your revenue stream. That's because HD resolution videos will only be available for purchase through the credits system.

---- end ---

Quote from: tubed on March 11, 2011, 11:46

Quote from: lagereek on February 22, 2011, 06:15

4277. not bad.

 Ha, I almost spit out my coffee.. I remember when Yuri anounced he had broken 1000 in a day.. I hope your kidding, or did I miss something?

My max was 60 - 65 if I remember correcly..

Sorry mate, typing error,  I meant 427,  still,  not bad.

 No, absolutely not.. That is a great number..

Quote from: tubed on March 12, 2011, 22:16

Quote from: visceralimage on March 12, 2011, 22:13

does sorting the keywords by importance really help; i do my keywording in photo mechanic but it does not sort according to importance

That's what they say..

It's another 'microstock myth' unfortunately. It makes no difference. Try it for yourself by unloading a couple of images of the same subject, 'optimise' the keywords of one image and not the other and then, when they are approved, see where each appear in the default sort order. Sales, views and age define where your image will appear, not the order of the keywords.

Another example of how abysmally poor the keywording is and tragically how the search egine responds to it ... is the results of pretty much any seach you try.

Not that I'm questioning your research or knowledge, but I do remember a few years ago reading from someone at fotolia, say that they do have keyword wieghting and that if someone knew how to do it correctly could have a big advantage.. Although they never would give out the secret formula.. Maybe that is no longer the case?

Quote from: tubed on March 12, 2011, 22:16

Quote from: visceralimage on March 12, 2011, 22:13

does sorting the keywords by importance really help; i do my keywording in photo mechanic but it does not sort according to importance

 That's what they say..

Would love to hear others experience; if this is the case, then I have more things to keep me busy on rainy days.  What a monumental task to go in and resort all the keywords on Fotolia, uggg

 Seems from other discussions and my experience that resorting once already submitted doesn't help much.. Should be done before submitting to get the best results..

I keyword all images the same way in the iptc data.  I automatically put the most relevant words first.  Have done so for years. 

 Yeah that was what I meant, is if you keyworded by importance. Just curious since you seem to do so well there.. Some people don't bother with the keyword sorting.. I did it in the website at the beginning, but wised up a few years ago and also sort when I do the keywording on the image..

 They are consistently my #2 selling agency.  

 Lisa, I'm curious, do you spend the time to properly keyword for fotolia?

$1 per image per month would be pretty good.. $4 is VERY exceptional.. Your wildlfe images are good, so it's obvious you know how to use a camera.. Can that translate into a studio setting? well that depends on your knowledge of lights, picking good subjects etc. Studio stuff is a lot different from wildlife outdoors.. I think average photographers are closer to $0.50 per image or maybe less, better photogs with more detail and attention to composition and props will be upwards from there.. Like was mentioned before Yuri mentioned he makes about $3 p/image and he also mentioned that those numbers are in decline as well, so take that into consideration..

Quote from: tubed on March 11, 2011, 15:28

how come you can only see sales stats for shutterstock and fotolia??

it's alpha - relax

 Sure thing boss, sorry for asking a question.. sheesh..

Quote from: gostwyck on March 11, 2011, 14:41

Quote from: SNP on March 11, 2011, 01:55

^ yes, but a large migration would surely influence the future attitude toward contributors. in the short-term they might be treated like heroes. but then they're at the mercy of the other agencies who want to make a buck as much as the last guy. if anything is to actually affect positive change for artists, it has to be bigger than simply dropping exclusivity and going to another agency.

In Fotolia's case that would definitely be a concern. Much less so with Shutterstock/BigStock especially and not so much with Dreamstime either (IMHO).

Agencies that have a track record of systematically squeezing contributors are those that are not looking long-term and have their exit strategies clearly in mind. H&F's ownership of Istock is an obvious and extreme demonstration. I reckon Fotolia are now operating mainly for profit rather than growth too.

In sharp contrast Shutterstock have actually invested further into the industry in buying BigStock. My income from Shutterstock+BigStock together is now about 37% of my total (against 30% for IS) which makes them for me the biggest player in microstock by some margin. I can only see them growing further but that does not worry me. Oringer has been playing the tortoise to IS's hare but, by not attempting to screw his customers or his contributors, he is slowly, slowly winning the race.

interesting numbers. yeah, it's hard not to look at Oringer as the pioneer these days. he's stuck it out and continues to nurture his baby. instead of giving it up for adoption to abusive parents.

 Pretty good analogy I must admit.. The thing is that if you look at history, and watch what has happened to companies over the years (all companies) if they re-invest in their industry, treat their suppliers and clients with respect, and practice good business they usually will be the long term winners and become a staple of the industry they are in.. Companies that come in squeeze every last drop they can out of something and piss everyone off doing it will make a quick profit maybe, but will soon become a thing of the past.. I am pretty sure Istock is headed in that direction unless they have some things hidden we don't know about or are able to turn things around.. the road they are traveling at the moment is a short dead end IMO.

I had this long shot conspiracy theory in my head that maybe somehow they are trying to dump the microstock industry to try to get better macro market sales (but I have no idea how or why) it was just a thought that crossed my way when I was trying to understand what the logic could be behind their current crazyness..

4277. not bad.

 Ha, I almost spit out my coffee.. I remember when Yuri anounced he had broken 1000 in a day.. I hope your kidding, or did I miss something?

My max was 60 - 65 if I remember correcly..

^ yes, but a large migration would surely influence the future attitude toward contributors. in the short-term they might be treated like heroes. but then they're at the mercy of the other agencies who want to make a buck as much as the last guy. if anything is to actually affect positive change for artists, it has to be bigger than simply dropping exclusivity and going to another agency.

 Agreed.. The only way to affect that is through collective negotiations although unfortunately I don't see most microstock people commiting to that. I think there are too many people that don't care enough to make the effort and are willing to take whatever is offered to them, so it leaves any professionals in a much harder position to bargain as the companies know there is a bunch of wannabe's sitting at the door waiting to fill a slot. Tougher standards are closing that gap some, but it's not there yet.