|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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 - bad to the bone
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
1
« on: April 28, 2015, 17:33 »
? 99% interisting number, tell me more
2
« on: April 28, 2015, 16:10 »
Adobe can't lower prices, because all professionals in Microstock market uses Adobe Software. They can't because that would cause an image problem for Adobe.
Payouttime is still the same as ever (too long, 3 weeks in averrage).
In my case something changed a lot! The balance between credit- and subscription sales changed from 1:2 to nearly 2:1. At a level of roundabout 200 sales at month this change can completely change my strategy with all other agencies.
Will say, more pictures exclusively to FT, less effort with others, more earnings at FT. Some years ago i owned position 118 in overall ranking.
Maybe, FT has duped their contributors and also Adobe by announcing more subscription sales than there are. After the acquisition it is unusual that Adobe does a change, it has to be done by the old management.
If i had the new numbers and earnings in the past, i hadn't gave so much pictures at so much other players.
Hope this will getting a consist status.
3
« on: June 17, 2013, 23:11 »
If they raised the commission for distributors they would get more of both. Quality and Quantity.
It's the last try to avoid the inevitable step...raise contributors earnings.
it will happen...
4
« on: March 22, 2013, 21:57 »
As expected and written, the market has found it's deepest level. Now anyone is starting new ideas for higher prices.
This next wave will kill the RM-agencys.
5
« on: February 26, 2013, 19:23 »
I got the invitation and looking through the contributor aggreement, i dont see image exclusivity mentioned anywhere.
I can't imagine it not being image exclusive. If, by the very nature of a co-op, a contributor is essentially a part-owner why would you compete with yourself by having your same images elsewhere?
I allways prefered the exclusive Image concept. I started by FT what had them. I prommissed them to gain marked shares, but FT kicked this concept. When i started there was no need to distribute to others, only with crap. But then FT lowered Comissions and as an add on lowers good selling pictures by price/comission. For posting against this concept i was kicked out of the forum. In the last months SS gain the same profit than FT for me with 2/5 the images + all other agencys added on... so i ask myself why FT is doing something stupid? After 3 years in this business i know two things: picture regret textes make non sense. Agencys communication is the same The GAP between someone who gains millions and the people who constribute was never higher, but bouth have to learn, what will take time. Good for the players in this game, bad for the i
6
« on: February 26, 2013, 19:06 »
Big purposes, but we talk about some millions to break the scene. Database is not the limit!
7
« on: February 26, 2013, 18:57 »
I have just sent my 10 pictures last night and got a negative answer this morning too, "Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection. It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist. We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
" .
So, I don't know what they are looking for because I've sent very different types of photos.
It seems that most of us expect an agency like all the others what pays better.
It seems also that Stocksy has an other concept. High Quality pictures for those who need them was also a concept by veer. The hype was the same the result was not the best.
Bread and butter sells the most, lately SS offered companydata, if i had invest all of my earnings in 2012 at SS-Stocks i had gained 100%.
It looks like actors in this business are "arty" orientated or by profit.
I see a big gap in the middle who will fill this out?
If i was a leader in stile, i never ever need to join a microagency ... I'm able to be stylish in any needed way... but i'm a follower, not a leader in this business. I'm proud to fullfill the needs of my customers ... i'm no artist.
btw. i get an invitation, but how to react without none information about the concept?
8
« on: February 26, 2013, 18:42 »
I have just sent my 10 pictures last night and got a negative answer this morning too, "Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection. It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist. We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
" .
So, I don't know what they are looking for because I've sent very different types of photos.
It seems that most of us expect an agency like all the others what pays better. It seems also that Stocksy has an other concept. High Quality pictures for those who need them was also a concept by veer. The hype was the same the result was not the best. Bread and butter sells the most, lately SS offered companydata, if i had invest all of my earnings in 2012 at SS-Stocks i had gained 100%. It looks like actors in this business are "arty" orientated or by profit. I see a big gap in the middle who will fill this out? If i was a leader in stile, i never ever need to join a microagency ... I'm able to be stylish in any needed way... btw. i get an invitation, but how to react without none information about the concept?
9
« on: February 26, 2013, 18:16 »
Istock seems to behave like a virgin but communicate like a pro.
A hint to all headhunters, buy out the communicators, forget the rest!
Neverever touch the programmers or the management.
10
« on: February 14, 2013, 22:01 »
Seems like those inconsistencies in the TOS create loopholes big enough for a decent lawyer to drive a Mack truck through.
I'm sure that was perfectly intentional.
A lot of iStock's behave and a lot of their terms aren't legal, but none of us costributors can fight against this robbery alone. Also why some of us needs the income by them. If stocksy is only nearby the idea they offer, the whole situation and market will change. I waited since more than a year for any of the marketplayers to come up with this simple idea ... but none of them moved in the right direction. There's no way to offer pictures for nearly less then nothing and gain money. And no customer cares about prices between dollars or Cents. 5 years ago they bought them for a hundreds or thausands of Dollar. Internet defines new ways and new possibilitis of efficencie... but nothing is not the answer or the price for creative work. The wave that all development in society inherents stopt at 0,09 Cent per Picture, reached by Istock. This record woudn't be beaten anymore. They pay for this record by their own termination. Gratulations to IStock. Rest in peace.
11
« on: December 21, 2012, 23:33 »
this is one picture...what else do you send them?
12
« on: December 20, 2012, 18:38 »
I will close some accounts in 2013 because i saw that the more i spread my images the less i get earnings.
depositphoto, 123 and leftovers at Stockxper/Thinkstock will be the first in 2013. Also cancelled subscribers at FT since 8.2012.
Any agencie with lower prices i served to, lowered my income at all.
13
« on: December 20, 2012, 18:12 »
I start my microstock career by illustrations, then after 20 years of no foto taken i bought a Nikon 300 D from my earnings to test my foto skills. I got that camera at januar and it was cold and snowy outside. I run out as mad and tried to take a usefull picture. There where no sun, only cloudy sky, i don't know nothing about the camera handling, nothing about RAW-picture format. I took 5 pictures at the end, in .tiff format, from a non remarkable tree without leaves, 50m away from my office. I spend an hour in PS to develop out of this crap an image. But you can't make gold out of crap Meanwhile this first "foto" sold over 20 times in three years. I'm laughing out loud at any sale. Second: Ten month later i take a picture of an appletree, meanwhile in Raw, but the sky was also cloudy, no light, no colours ... just a snapshot. Meanwhile i had upgraded from PS10 to CS5.1 (without any experiences). The appletreepicture got a total renovation with any feature i found at the new PS. It looked horrible overfiltered...only SS accepted it - by failure i think. It sells and sells since then. Inbetween i tried to stop this phenomenon by uploading a lot of appletreeimages what are much nicer none of them sell at SS - only this really bad first appletree (66 times meanwhile) http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=69150568
14
« on: December 05, 2012, 21:57 »
Income raises in 2012 +41% by gain of portfolioimages +20%, will fall down to 35% commision in 2013. I stay with them because the site is running well, the upload is easy and they accept the most pictures of any agency.
15
« on: November 17, 2012, 20:44 »
maybe he put the pictures by his Iphone ... i don't belive anyway in this story.
16
« on: November 16, 2012, 03:22 »
LOL, what a funny thread. If someone raised his income during the last two years from 3.5K to 8k by sparetime image production i would say:
if the agencys continue to cut rates like in the last two years he will be the last man standing in 2020 and will serve all pictures for all agencys all around the world. What a joke.
17
« on: November 10, 2012, 22:19 »
I stopped uploading a few months ago. They aren't worth it for the money they make. This cutting commissions policy doesn't seem to of worked for istock, FT and DT. They can get away with it to a certain extent because leaving them would hurt but 123rf could get in to serious trouble. If I do see a cut in earnings, it wont hurt to leave them.
...same here, stopped uloads.
18
« on: October 13, 2012, 19:26 »
Reached a middle of 1K$ in 2011, dropping since Februar 2012 over 60% in income. Sales also drop, but only 40%. This phenomenon only happens at FT. My overall ranking as shown is nearly stable (lost 4 places). All the numbers make no sense to me.
- i lost more income than sales
- i lost more sales than ranking places
- i lost extremly more at FT than on the second bad agency, what is called Istockphoto (at Deposit btw. i gained over 100%)
I stopped to upload at FT and started to shift my portfolio from FT to all others. But it takes time.
Meanwhile i'm looking at the SS Shares, looks like if i put all my Microstock income in SS-Shares i maybe able to gain more income than by upload anymore.
19
« on: September 09, 2012, 00:27 »
FT tend allways to be worst for customers and constributors. They start (by accident) very good, until then they start any possible action to avoid this success. They work on their ruin until now since 3-4 years ... i expect next time they would insert a charge for uploading at distributors and a charge for costumers for getting the ability to view the portfolio. If this wouldn't help to crush the company in 2012-13 the plan B is that any distributor have to spend his images for free and customers pay the double and more for Image rights and get a constribution receipt for that.
So FT will get, as first, the Tom Sawyer Price for the biggest company with the most stupid employees all over the world.
20
« on: September 08, 2012, 23:57 »
Any suggests why i should change my D300?
21
« on: September 02, 2012, 19:17 »
I dont't think quality is the point. It's a question of look and stile ... nobody prefers definatly a phone picture ... but good pictures what look alike. That's a great differerence.
22
« on: September 02, 2012, 18:44 »
Hey, I lost 2 places in FT overall rank... and 2/3 in income meanwhile. But at the rating, here at MSG, FT is still at 3thd position! How's this possible? I never was there exclusive but i gave them a lot pictures exclusive, now i have to shovel all of them to the other agencys ... urgs ...
23
« on: August 01, 2012, 19:51 »
completly argree in your thoughts.
24
« on: August 01, 2012, 19:46 »
SS continued to perform as my best reseller, is just nearby to met my FT income, what is falling like a stone since 12 months. June was really bad, but in July they're back by Earnings and with best Average by Image. And SS have only the pictures i gave to any other agency, FT has tripple the images and most of them exclusive.
Looks like it's time to shift. How i hate this moment and this decision. When picture management takes more time and earns more profit than make good images...
Blame on you FT, you had all of my hope and support...you treat it like crap!
25
« on: July 14, 2012, 18:53 »
Grats to you, makes me remember my first in June 2008, had three of them during the month. 1$ revenue for each. 10 Online.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
