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 - everest

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22
1
I hope someday you will create a too to keyword from within Lightroom Thats what I am using not and it is really very fast You stay in the LR environment until you export your images for final delivery Lightning fast workflow with all your metadata worked out in one place. Hope you might consider it in the future 🙂

2
Very few exclusives are participating in the custom content program. It has been a total failure for Getty, so they are trying to see if non exclusives might take the deal.

These are your "opportunities":
You get a briefing:

- You shoot for that client: let's say for BMW they want to se BMW cars in natural locations with families. You set up the shoot and take all the risk. You send in yout 100 images of the shoot that has cost you 1000$ to set up. From those images the client picks up 4 images at 150$ each. Your commission is 30% so you net 180$. Those 4 images are now owned by the client in perpetuity. The other 96 images you have to take out any that are similar to those 4 accepted. Those that are not similar at all can go to the library.  So yes you have lost 820$ and have worked on assignment for a client and Getty got a 70% bite.

Do you understand why of the thousands of exclusive contributors nearly nobody is participating in this program?

We receive those briefing every day that in my case go directly to the spam folder. I guess thats the place they deserve.

3
https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/26/shutterstock_getty_openai_dall_e/

Getty and Shutterstock will not need any more content of nobody in 2 or 3 years. They will scrap the content they have the same way as Getty showed the door to all RM photographers and their content providers or Shutterstock showed the door to all that did not accept their pennies.

Now not even pennies will be on the table. Time to move up that 85% to 100% share

4
Adobe Stock / Re: Adobe Stock Free Collection: Video Nominations
« on: October 21, 2022, 16:02 »
not so many seeing the desperate need of giving away his clips almost for free...adobe nominates only valuable clips seeing what they choose from my port...i mean they could choose unsold clips with low value just to fill the collection,they don't....

They monetize those videos . They have to pay 0 after those 8$. They will only select good sellers. If I would guess it will be 3 to 4x times more they would to pay in commissions to those acquired for 1 year files than if they had to pay a 35% for the sales they expect. Remember, they run the maths and they know exactly. ::)

5
Adobe Stock / Re: Adobe Stock Free Collection: Video Nominations
« on: October 15, 2022, 12:52 »
I don't want my files being downloaded in droves and then uploaded to other sites by stalkers and leechers. Much less for 8$. I would be tempted for 30$/file. But 8$ is laughable.In my case they have selected over 200 files :o

6
General Stock Discussion / Lawsuit against Shutterstock.
« on: September 27, 2022, 09:12 »
https://lawow.org/wareka-v-shutterstock-inc-et-al/.

https://lawow.org/wp-content/lawoo-pdf/Wareka-v.-Shutterstock,-Inc.et-al.pdf

Glad it is finally happening. Too much content that should not be there. SS is not doing enough because it is profiting big for doing nothing most of the time. I hope this time it hits them hard.

Wareka v. Shutterstock, Inc.et al

This is a civil action seeking damages and injunctive relief for copyright infringement and the falsification of copyright management information under the Copyright Act of the United States, 17 U.S.C. 101, et seq. and 17 U.S.C. 1202.

On or about July 23, 2021, Williams discovered Shutterstock had used the Kiana Photograph on the Website. True and correct screenshots of the Kiana Photograph, as used on the Website, with and without the time-stamp are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Williams did not consent to or authorize Shutterstock to use the Kiana Photograph on the Website.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Tamara Williams is a highly successful freelance photographer specializing in beauty and fashion photography. Williams is most well-known for her natural and clean model portraiture featured on her highly popular Instagram account @tamarawilliams1, which has amassed over 400,000 followers.

7
Crooks that partner with crooks. Nothing new here. It has always been this way why should it be different with two of the most despised companies on the creative arena.

8
Selling Stock Direct / Re: selling on Shopify
« on: August 31, 2022, 13:34 »
39.44Shopify (paid yaerly) By law I need to collect VAT if sales happen in Spain. It does not have this option in the basic account+ Pixify 39$ (without videos) with video it would be 99$+ SEO Optimizer 30$ Free Trust Badge Free +Outfy 15$ This are the ones I was looking for.


basic shopify + pixify as $29 x 2 and is all i'm starting with.  - what other apps were you considering?

9
Selling Stock Direct / Re: selling on Shopify
« on: August 31, 2022, 11:08 »
Thank you very much. Yes I was making a quick calculation Shopify + Pixify plus other compliments and it quickly turned to 120$ every month. too much for me. I think that Photodeck looks better for me at the moment but with a good amount of sales Shopify might be well worth it if a better SEO brings a higher number of high RM sales.



Here's the app store https://apps.shopify.com/
Here's an overview of selling stock photos on Shopify https://www.shopify.com/sell/photography

10
Selling Stock Direct / Re: selling on Shopify
« on: August 30, 2022, 03:56 »
Istock Getty photo exclusive. I tried ditching the crown but did not work for me. I can sell RM but not RF even on my own site.

... Specially as I need RM because I am RF exclusive so selling as RF is not an option for me. ..

where are you exclusive?  most agencies don't stop you from running your own site

11
Selling Stock Direct / Re: selling on Shopify
« on: August 29, 2022, 06:26 »
Thank you Paulie for your description and experience.

I also was with Photoshelter many years and left them. I have a similar thought of them like you described. I am now with Zenfolio but also not so happy. I went with them because the unlimited video but the clips get so compressed that they cannot be sold . I also find their site not intuitive neither the selling option so I will ditch them for sure.

I was thinking of Photodeck. Like their options, they seem quite fast. I though they were french. Yes they are a small company and the risk the close door is always there but as you say they seem committed as the post regular updates and improve their service. Also they don't take a cut of your sales like Photoshelter or zenfolio does.

You got me really intrigued with shopify. I know many people use it, and it seems it is the independent port for many small sellers. I thought it was much more complicate to sell many thousands of items (photos) there. Specially as I need RM because I am RF exclusive so selling as RF is not an option for me. I also thought that once you got all the extras and complements of shopify it would end much more expensive every month than Photodeck. Is this your experience?




I am still trying to understand what is the advantage over using Photoshelter or Photodeck?

Photoshelter - I just dropped them after having a website for over ten years. I no longer have any confidence in their longevity. Long time ago they tried to launch an agency and abandoned it. Then they did a much advertised platform update (named Beam?) which seemed half baked. Then they shifted their business away from photographers/artists to chasing corporate clients with digital asset management. Then they went back to chasing photographers/artists so I'm not sure if DAM is still a core part of their business. Then a few years ago they made a highly promoted announcement of massive platform updates. During this time my sales went from okay to nothing. Their platform isn't overly customizable and the user interface is a cobbled together bandaged mishmash of UI designs from different time periods. Now they seem to only spend time on writing posts on their blog which I really dont care at all about. They just seem to be struggling to find their way as a business but that's only my perception.

Photodeck - My main website is with them and overall I'm happy. It's a small UK based company so there's always a concern with them deciding to exit the business. However, they post somewhat regular updates about new functionality they've added. Platform is highly customizable, SEO capabilities are reasonably good and I get decent traffic and regular sales. Performance is very fast and the user interface is well organized and intuitive but probably leaning a little more toward techie than the bubbly friendly UI of Shopify. The licensing options include prints, RF and RM. I totally customized the RM configuration to meet my needs. I get a mix of higher dollar RM licensing sales and print sales. They also have a handful of print integration partners for automated fulfillment. Overall a very nice website platform for artists who are a bit more into customizing.

Shopify - Just setting up my site now. I want a platform I dont need to worry about spending a ton of time on and then them going out of business. And I want more traffic and sales. My Photodeck site gets decent traffic but I seemed to have hit an SEO wall where I'm not able to increase traffic any further. As a test I did a bunch of Google searches to see which art websites showed up toward the front. After getting past the big sites, usually next up were independent artists with Shopify websites. The Shopify user interface is very slick and intuitive with a ton of apps you can add for SEO, customer live chat, stock licensing, and even fully automated POD fulfillment such as through Printful. With Printful, Printify and other POD apps, customers can place orders and you dont need to do anything. The Shopify order automatically goes to Printful and they print and ship.

Smgmug - Tried it for a while and didn't like the platform and had zero sales.

12
iStockPhoto.com / Re: June statements are in
« on: August 21, 2022, 01:55 »
Unfortunately also a very big drop for me.

13
General Stock Discussion / Re: Is Stock Photography Dead?
« on: August 05, 2022, 17:29 »
No it is not. Is it as a profitable activity for 99% of the contributor. Yes it is. More than dead, buried under 3 feet of trash.

The only ones that make some profit are the agencies. Sure, there are contributors like myself that still sit on large portfolios that make money. But who starts today has a 99.9% of financial failure. Nearly any creative activity putting the same amount of time and effort is 100x times more profitable.

But it was a cash cow 25 years ago , a good revenue opportunity 10 years ago, and a receipt for wasting time and resources now. Things evolve and move on. So did the creative stock market. Very soon Dahle Midjourney and the likes will totally rip apart what is still left from the 2 o 3 agencies that squeeze investors money before the final collapse.

14
"The FT boycott before that and the IS boycott before that, had no effect. We can work for what agencies offer us or do something else."

I am not so sure about that With Istock/Getty hundreds of great photographers left to not return Many went full speed with Stocksy

And with Shutterstock I really wonder if there are any good photographers left at all supplying this agency I don't mean those factories that churn out the same fake smiling people but any creative and surprising photographers I don't think so Just look at what is uploaded Categorizing it is bad is being very generous.

Si yes I think it had a strong effect Will it shut down any agency Not at all They will always get content but that one is an ever repeating with the fact that the return even per shoot get longer and longer and the rip is also peanuts nowadays But still there are many photographers that don't do it for the money and happy to see their images being used low paid or for nothing. Si agencies will struggle to attract quality but quantity no problem for them.

15
Sorry to be harsh but the quality from micros has gone from mediocre to garbage The only ones that supply to micros nowadays are bad photographers that do not find any demand of their images from no clients and amateurs that they really don't care if they make a few hundred or a few thousand a year

But as a pro endeavor any field in pro photography is much much more lucrative than stock photography or video. It is what it is.

16
General Stock Discussion / Re: This month's sales
« on: July 10, 2022, 16:34 »
It seems that SS is not more relevant anymore. That's good news. Let's hope they fall so hard that we will see them under Alamy soon on the poll chart.

10 days into the month, poll results still don't have any numbers for shutterstock - not to mention the other agencies. Are the numbers for shutterstock in general so bad that nobody posts them anymore?

17
Great news. Another garbage agency that bites the dust. Bring them on.....

18
He can aquire what he wants Its his snd investors money They do not seem happy lately and I see the stock bellow 30 in a short time He increased value for a short time scamming contributors that helped his company to succeed Now its pay time Mr Oringer You are the only one for destroying your company. Thats what you deserve.

19
Pond5 / Re: Pond5 has joined Shutterstock
« on: June 07, 2022, 11:55 »
Subs was unavoidable at P5. I think nearly every client is on that page now. What I am looking is royalties and fair share. The problem with SS and the reason I am not with them is that they don't share revenue with contributors unless you think 15% or 20% is a fair share for you.

P5 exclusive is 60% now. They might to try to run this down sooner than later so I am sure the exodus will slowly begin again as it did with SS. Those crooks just don't deserve to work with artists.

20
General - Stock Video / Re: Keycutstock?
« on: June 06, 2022, 15:30 »
I got invited too. I see great contributors but I am wary as you don't have many data about them. 10.000 clips with no sales sounds awful. It might be not a good idea to lose time with them with that track record.

21
Great move from Istock/Getty. They also needed this for their survival in the video department. They lost the music market a long time ago. They are still very strong with still images but I think many clients are looking for videos elsewhere. Not because of prices but because there is not enough variety.

Do any search of any subject on any of the competitors. Many more results. That means that clients are leaving . Less royalties for exclusives that don't see the advantage of exclusivity anymore. That move is to revers those desertions and also attract some new exclusives, specially now with SS buying P5.

I have returned to photo exclusivity, as trying the non-exclusive camp was not worth it. (I did not supply SS and Adobe was much more disappointing that I thought comparing to my exclusive income)
But video is another thing. I do well being non exclusive .

I have all my editorial work as P5 exclusive , this would be not possible being exclusive as Istock does not take editorial content and that is a significant and growing part of my video revenue. So for me, I will keep being non-exclusive with video and exclusive with photography for the time being

22
Pond5 / Re: Pond5 has joined Shutterstock
« on: May 14, 2022, 09:17 »
I am waiting.......yet. When * hit the fun at SS at first, I deactivated and waited to see if they would back out or at least see if they would improve their blatant robbery. They didn't, so I quit and moved all my editorial video to P5 exclusive, while I deleted all the commercial video.

Now the SS nightmare is again at my door. Will see. If they don't change things, I will stay with P5 . If they reduce contributor commission or I start to see dollar sales, I am also out to greener pastures.

Picture doesn't look good at all. We all know what a Crook Oringer is. The new appointment on board of a second hand car salesman does not point to an encouraging direction.

23
This one will come with a newer idea never tried before and that will path the success of contributors and stock holders. Cut prices 20% and royalties 50% . He swears that with his brilliant new idea all contributors will make it up in volume.

Bunch of scavengers. Now time to rip apart P5 contributors unfortunately.

https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-appoints-paul-hennessy-chief-executive-officer

Experience with a used car marketplace and Priceline don't suggest any sort of return to the roots of a platform for the creative professional :)

Vroom announced its new CEO today as they "realign" their business

https://www.autoremarketing.com/retail/vroom-names-new-ceo

He is still listed as Vroom CEO on his LinkedIn page - I guess this was all very last minute

https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulhennessy1/

And Vroom needs a turnaround plan after Hennessy's turn as CEO?

https://www.barrons.com/articles/vroom-vrm-stock-earnings-ceo-turnaround-plan-51652197593

24
Pond5 / Re: Pond5 has joined Shutterstock
« on: May 11, 2022, 08:03 »
Yep . that makes two of us. don't want to deal with shitterstock artist's abuse on any level If they bring their stupid rules to P5 I will also go again to greener pastures. I am sorry as I really liked P5. A disgrace this news

If Pond5 ends up following the same commission schedule as Shitterstock, I will drop them as fast as I dropped Shitterstock the first time. I'll get to break up with them twice.

25
Mind blowing . Possibilities are endless. This will kill cheap stock photography like we see on micro sites in less than 10 years. Absolutely sure about that. :o

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle