|
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 - SNP
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 54
1
« on: February 05, 2022, 15:51 »
same here
2
« on: November 28, 2016, 17:46 »
so I didn't make tens of thousands today? booo
3
« on: October 30, 2015, 16:01 »
anyone doing well on IB? in the Premium accounts section? Just curious. I don't have much up, but also can't buy into the paying for premium membership thing. I'm trying it out and probably should get more up, but is it worth the effort? interesting model but not sure if I like it as it is being implemented.
4
« on: March 01, 2015, 02:27 »
ha...I like it ^ .
5
« on: February 23, 2015, 21:26 »
Shelma - I'll thank you not to post you inaccurate assumptions about me. I don't know you, and you certainly don't know me. I didn't leave one job for another. I made a very difficult and very unplanned departure. It was only at a later date that I was presented with an opportunity.
I think there is a lot of data out there about the various agencies for those who want to know more. Shutterstock has never required exclusivity, and I certainly feel free to discuss other agencies where my work is also for sale. You can easily see the files I have for sale elsewhere.
I'm a contributor, I want to make good and fair money, and I want to be involved in the community and to help other contributors if I can, and to continue learning from other contributors too. Where those things are possible, I submit work.
6
« on: February 23, 2015, 21:16 »
after a few years of placing files on Alamy, in short, I would say not worth it.
7
« on: February 21, 2015, 13:17 »
well, I'm not sure that is an accurate or productive statement. but you're entitled to your opinion. I think maintaining a willingness to adapt with the industry changes and work with our peers is a good approach to staying successful in stock photography. I'll stick with it and keep on keeping on.
I would like to think that many contributors would speak to my unwavering willingness to help anyone in our industry. I help contributors almost every day to navigate their work, the industry, and to help them with their stock portfolios. I have been fortunate enough to participate in shoots with our colleagues all over the world. the opportunity to learn by osmosis is remarkable in stock. we have so many incredible, generous people in our community, the community is very much alive and one thing that has always kept me invested has been the opportunity to work alongside so many wonderful people. that hasn't changed.
8
« on: February 21, 2015, 12:27 »
Stocksy has some incredibly talented contributors, many of whom I call friends. I wish them all the success that they well deserve. In the meantime, it's all about working hard and smart as contributors, and having our agencies working for us and with us to keep us making money in the years to come. in our ever-changing marketplace; there is much opportunity to be had.
9
« on: February 21, 2015, 12:10 »
hi guys - thanks for the concern  . we've all made decisions in our careers based on current conditions. I made a difficult decision, one that I had not planned, in leaving Stocksy in January of last year. Let's call it irreconcilable differences. I have strong opinions about how contributors need to be treated. At 9 years in the industry, like many of you other veterans, we have all been around the block a a few times and we know what we want. There is a lot of opportunity to be had in our industry, but it takes creativity, hard work, and a good working relationship with the agencies where we sell our work. It requires that agencies listen to their artists, the very fuel of our industry. I am very active in our community, something that has always been important to me. I am indeed very happy to be Canada's Community Leader for Shutterstock, a role I have embraced since March of 2014. I am also an enthusiastic Offset contributor. I read here regularly and always glad to have so many canaries in the coal mine at MSG. I think we're all in this industry together. Cheers, Stacey
10
« on: May 02, 2014, 15:59 »
very excited about Spaces Jonathan :-)
11
« on: May 02, 2014, 14:32 »
Invitations were meant for those in and around Toronto, but it was a lucky error in that it is terrific to see the international interest that has been expressed. There are community leaders in other countries too that will be planning similar events, we're communicating with one another to share info and ideas. Doing these in-person events is such a good way for contributors to get to know one another regionally, to visit one another abroad, and to gain firsthand advice, input, and information about local content needed by city/region and/or by country. This first event in Toronto is designed to be in-person, with idea exchanges, introductions, and socializing between local Shutterstock/Offset contributors and aspiring contributors. Live streaming and video is a great idea, particularly for events that are more internationally-focused. More events are in the works that we hope to make accessible to anyone interested, in various regions across the globe. But, actually attending is always the best way to experience these group events. We have someone arranged to take video of ShutterTalk Toronto, and certainly all information is going to be made available to any interested contributors. What is said about the need for local content is certainly applicable to producing local content in your region of the world. Those interested in this event are very welcome to connect with me if you think you'll be in the Toronto area around May 23rd. For Canadian contributors - we do have a Facebook group started. Please join the group for discussions, information and to know about future events. https://www.facebook.com/groups/693250827405065/
12
« on: April 30, 2014, 14:49 »
That sounds great, I got the invite as well. To far for me, but I wish I could be there!
Jasmin - I certainly wish you could be there as well!!! :-)
13
« on: April 30, 2014, 14:39 »
I'll be running this event in Toronto as a Canadian Community Leader. It is for Canadian contributors and primarily focused on Canadian content. But, as Scott said, there will be events like this happening around the world, in the US, and other parts of Canada too. Building the Shutterstock community, making information about creative briefs available, and helping new and existing contributors connect with meetups, workshops and events is the goal.
Anyone in the Toronto area, looking forward to seeing you there. Even if you're not a Canadian contributor, you're certainly welcome. The information will be relevant for all stills and video contributors.
14
« on: April 25, 2014, 11:22 »
ideally I would love to see a Frankenstein agency that has bits of each of them. But in the meantime, I am impressed by Shutterstock the company. As for establishing the low price for images, well, yeah. that's been my argument against supplying for subs too. but I also believe in adapt or die. if the volume is there, and the licensing structure for subs downloads is such that it is limited - therefore prompting non-sub licensing like PAYG usage/extended licenses, than I'm learning to make friends with subs a little more.
There are individuals that I've worked with at iStock and Getty who are still some of the best people I know in the industry, but as a company...there's obviously no one at the top at Getty with any regard for the artist community, and that sucks.
15
« on: April 25, 2014, 09:36 »
By reputable I mean: established, selling licenses, communicating with contributors, working with contributors openly and honestly, in a supportive manner.
Yes, I would support that definition of reputable. And I am not convinced that I know a microstock agency that would fit that description. 
microstock isn't the be-all and end-all either. important to branch out, get into mid and macro....and other avenues of photography. I love ImageBrief as a sales opportunity, it is one of the models out there that I think is clever and apropos for the market today. but giving credit where it's due, Shutterstock impress the heck out of me in terms of treating serious contributors well. if only the amount per download wasn't such pittance, but the volume is nice. would love to combine my iStock sales best years with Shutterstock the company. I hope they'll develop more of the non-sub license sales, and I like Offset.
16
« on: April 25, 2014, 00:29 »
no. but, I have a number of friends and colleagues who are, and I always hope they're doing well.
17
« on: April 24, 2014, 14:22 »
Michael - my apologies. It is actually a quote from Sean's blog. I read his and yours back to back from Sean's earlier post. Following is the section I am in agreement with, and seems it is Sean's, and not your statement. Sorry to have attributed the quote to you.
No problem but thanks for clearing it up. I wasn't really sure. It didn't really sound like something I remembered saying. But you know, over time you can change opinions while learning new stuff...
Quite frankly, the "reputable" part made me wonder most. I have problems attributing this word to any of the microstock places these days. I don't trust any of them to actually be my "agent".
By reputable I mean: established, selling licenses, communicating with contributors, working with contributors openly and honestly, in a supportive manner.
18
« on: April 23, 2014, 16:05 »
I liked MichaelJay's comment about keeping his work with a hand-picked number of more reputable agencies (my words, not his, but paraphrasing). I have taken the same approach. there are too many small guys out there and the ROI just isn't there.
Ummm... I guess "there is no bad PR as long as they spell your name right". But I am just wondering where I might have said something like that. Not saying I didn't as I talk a lot.
Factually I started out with the big names ("reputable" is a different story) when I went non-exclusive. It's just quite bothersome to prepare your old images with new keywords, find the model releases, get used to the editing at other places etc. If someone asks me today for advice when quitting iStock exclusivity, I tell them to limit themselves to the top 4 listed on the right for the start. All others are "additional" at a later stage. Once you have your new workflows, you can easily add some of them.
But part of my advice usually also is to find places with higher prices for a subset of your images. If it's Stocksy, Offset, Getty, Alamy or some local agency. Putting everything from iStock across all microstock agencies is probably not paying off. There are just too many images that do well on iStock at higher price points and you won't make nearly enough money from Shutterstock & Co to replace the royalties earned with a good selling Vetta or S+ image.
Michael - my apologies. It is actually a quote from Sean's blog. I read his and yours back to back from Sean's earlier post. Following is the section I am in agreement with, and seems it is Sean's, and not your statement. Sorry to have attributed the quote to you. "Since iStockphoto completely dropped my portfolio last April, I dont have the benefit of that income stream. All of my stock income comes from Stocksy United, and the several other agencies listed on my portfolio page. I have kept my list of distributors small, as I dont particularly trust all the smaller agencies, and I dont have the time to maintain so many accounts."
19
« on: April 21, 2014, 19:49 »
I would guess that everyone's experience is different. What is a great site for one person is bottom of the earnings list for another.
I don't think it would be quite so polarized; but basically you're right. every agency has its preferences in terms of aesthetics, its own culture, and its own upload/keyword/category systems. How you work with any one agency will be an individual thing. the reason I keep my work on just a handful of reputable sites is that I'm concerned about my work being spread out in so many places that I can no longer control it. I was 'raised' as an exclusive on iStock, having one or two major places through which to sell my work has always been my preference. I like to promote my images, and to facilitate new clients into buying by directing them to my preferred agencies. I strongly believe that contributors and agencies must work as a team. I try to maintain some illusion of exclusivity too, by keeping my work in certain collections like Offset (they have all my aerial work) even though they don't require true exclusivity. My personality is social and community-oriented. I like being involved in our stock photographer community, meeting and working with other photographers, and attending and working on events. This is much easier when you work with a small number of hand-picked agencies. again, this is only what works for me. we're all different.
20
« on: April 16, 2014, 15:04 »
I haven't been on this board in awhile. I have been exclusive at istock since 2005. I finally gave notice last week that I am going non-exclusive. Does anyone have any advice for me? Any warnings? What do expect?
congratulations. it isn't easy, but going non-exclusive was the right move when I did the same well over a year ago now. get your files organized and do your homework on the agencies. and diversify. that has been my strategy. we're in an industry in flux right now. it's difficult to plunk any move or agency into "good" or "bad". the variables are different for each of us. all in all, independence works and is liberating if you work hard and keep your expectations realistic. I liked MichaelJay's comment about keeping his work with a hand-picked number of more reputable agencies (my words, not his, but paraphrasing). I have taken the same approach. there are too many small guys out there and the ROI just isn't there. be your own hero. sounds cheesy, but I mean it.
21
« on: April 16, 2014, 12:57 »
Hi,
4 weeks ago one of my employees made that joke and the whole team were laughing their heads of:
"Wait a while - soon SS will ask for a PR of the tatoo-artist if you shoot a portrait and the person has a tatoo."
Oh boy - what a laughter....
You should never make jokes like that............
Rejected:
"TATTOOS-We require a property release from the tattoo artist for all prominent tattoos"
Example: http://www.axellauer.de/wp-content/uploads/slider-paula-mandy.jpg
And for this one i have to send you 12 PRs???
http://www.axellauer.de/wp-content/uploads/slider-anna-just.jpg
What comes next....??
PR from Dolce & Gabana if a model wears a D&G coat?
Oh no, i am sure it will be like this:
You need a PR from the farmer who owns the sheep D&G made that coat from the model wears on your shooting.
Thats the future.
Strange that its always SS which makes these "special" rules.
Why dont they invent something useful instead?
BTW:
I heard there will be a new agency with 90% split for the photographers in the first year and not less than 75% forever , no subsystem and you set your price yourself and they have a big print-company in the background as financial sponsors.
Does anyone knows more about that?
what's the big deal? just get a property release. problem solved.
22
« on: March 14, 2014, 16:56 »
after ten years in this industry, the only thing I know for sure is that it's never as clean as just heroes and villains. the industry winners are those working with contributors, listening to them and cultivating them. promoting new models, growing new ideas, involving and encouraging active members. there's no place for bottomline greed at the expense of artists, nor for blinding egotism and only a handful of agencies today seem to get that. sometimes the grass is greener where we least expect it to be.
23
« on: January 31, 2014, 20:22 »
When your hunky everyman husband starts modeling for Sean, you're in trouble 
LOL! I seriously doubt Sean is prepared to offer the same fringe benefits to him that I do. 
made me laugh Lisa :-)
24
« on: January 30, 2014, 12:52 »
IB deals in RM only, so you shouldn't be submitting images on briefs that are sold elsewhere as RF.
also on some briefs there is a requirement of image exclusivity, but not all...as per this section of the IB Terms of Use:
"(5) Image Providers should be aware that the grant of a right of exclusivity in respect of an image generally means that the copyright owner cannot use the image itself as well as not licensing it within the scope of the licensed usage, territory and license period. An Image Provider must ensure that it complies with any exclusivity or other condition attached to an Image License to which it is a party. It would be prudent for the Image Provider to avoid any form of dispute or complaint regarding exclusivity or other relevant condition by not licensing similar-looking or end of roll image within the scope of any exclusivity or other condition affecting a licensed image. "
25
« on: January 29, 2014, 17:54 »
the IB model is pretty fascinating. while sales are not predictable, which I guess can be a deterrent to photographers looking for steady income, the potential is very cool. IB gives designers an apropos alternative to RF stock vs. custom....it's a great compromise, allowing companies to outsource to professional stock shooters for specific image requirements. photographers get 70% of fairly priced licenses.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 54
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
