pancakes

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 - charged

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 13
1
General Stock Discussion / Re: new site/top post/etc
« on: June 17, 2020, 18:00 »
Project Giving
---------------

1. Setup a company. This company will sign an irrevocable agreement that the maximum it can earn per year is $1million USD. Extra earned money will be divided back to the contributors as dividend. So, the founder of this company is only meant to make a maximum of USD1million per year.

Just my idea. What do you guys think? Please criticize as much as possible so I can give up thinking about it :)


That's crazy. As a company you would NEVER EVER impose a rule like that. It doesn't make any sense. Then it would be a charity, a non-profit organization basically. With the commercial mission of the company in mind (selling microstock licenses), that's a practically unworkable situation. You have countless costs running a company, so a good financial buffer is important to make this company viable and financially healthy. Self-imposing a limit on the amount of revenue totally goes against that principle.

The irrevocable agreement will be the sacrifice one made for getting the contributors support, fund, and trust. And the founder (company) will still be making 1 Million USD every year, which is enough for many. The earning of 1 Million USD have already deducted all the operating cost and will only serve as the reward for the founders for making the company successful.

If the site cost hundreds of thousands to setup, then no one will accept the 1 million dollar offer. The risk to reward ratio would be out of step with where else that money could go with much less risk. I realize some people don't think it will cost hundreds of thousands to setup a professional stock site. That is just my opinion.

2
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock keywords query
« on: June 09, 2020, 18:58 »

2. I dont keyword in Lightroom, I use Bridge. Never had a problem using Bridge. The title field in Bridge is called Headline. Headline is the real metadata field name embedded in the IPTC.


Just curious why you prefer Bridge to Lightroom. I've only used Lightroom all these years.

I've always used Bridge would the main answer. I have seen how Lightroom does keywording and it looks no where near as easy as Bridge. I have thousands of pre-saved keywords in Bridge, when I need a keyword on a subject matter, I just do a search and find it in the keyword tree in Bridge.

3
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock keywords query
« on: June 06, 2020, 13:18 »
1. Yes you have to use iStock only keywords, otherwise it wont be translated into other languages. So you should just build a list locally on your computer with the words they use.
2. I dont keyword in Lightroom, I use Bridge. Never had a problem using Bridge. The title field in Bridge is called Headline. Headline is the real metadata field name embedded in the IPTC.
3. You should contact iStock and ask them about this particular situation. For example if I am sending in photos of myself, I still reuse the same model release I signed 4 years ago. It is accepted because that would be a self portrait, dates dont matter in this situation. Thus since you are the parent of the child, dates perhaps might also not matter here. But best if you ask them directly.

4
I really don't understand this attitude.

I'm a fellow SS contributor who's also affected by this cut of royalty, but i still fail to see how SS is responsible for the current economic hardships of that alleged single mother or anyone else here. SS is a business not a charity. We are not employees, we are just contracted freelancers, and SS as an organization has zero responsibility towards us. They never made any promises and you are free to terminate your contract any time. The only reason you don't is because the rest of the agencies are just as crap or worse. A few agencies who are committed to fair trade, like pond5 or alamy, don't sell sh*, so it doesn't matter that they give you 40 to 60% of nothing. SS remained the only big one that actually sells and now it's gone too. I don't count istock/getty. The business landscape keeps shifting.

Let's face it: creating stock is a skill of very little added value, at least according to the market. No one cares how long it took you to learn photography and how much you spent on gear. Photography is extremely hard to sell even outside stock, otherwise we wouldn't bother selling for 20 cents a pop. As for me, i just stopped uploading and don't care any more.

It's not SS management's mistake that the single mother failed to obtain more marketable skills. We are all free to move on. Why would you rely on a single source of income, especially if it's known to be very unreliable?

Shutterstock can do whatever they like, but they can't control the consequences. Such as mass turning off of portfolios. Massive amounts of people taking offense and refusing to add new fresh work to their collection. Massive amounts of people determined to tell all their friends to not buy from Shutterstock. The shaming they are getting on social media. There is also the issue that 10 cent royalties means it is not worth it to create new work for Shutterstock.

5
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: June 05, 2020, 20:20 »
I'm glad that you're interested in stocks and stuff, I really am but, Wall Street is mostly a place where people lose money

Not necessarily true, and in fact most likely quite incorrect most of the time. Anyone that have bought almost any US equity since mid March when the market hit the bottom would have made a killing. Depending on the stock, such as airlines or cruise-lines, they could have double or tripled their money. The Nasdaq is already back to all time highs. Most of the big tech stocks are all at all time highs. A total market fund such as VTI will over the decades return on average 10% per year. The fact you need not lift a finger to get 10% blended back is incredible. My own portfolio is up 61% year to date. Anyway, this is quite off topic, but wealth can and should be built in the stock market, by dollar cost averaging into a total market fund, such as VTI.

6
SS Wall Street stock is going up today...I wonder why...

You don't understand the stock market at the moment. Most stocks are moving at a value of 0.8 correlation. Versus, 0.35 in normal times. Meaning most stocks are moving up and down fairly correlated to each other at the moment. It has nothing to do with the fundamentals of each stock. Basically stocks move based upon news that are related to the reopening of the US economy. Also watch any stock over days and weeks and months, they move up and down. That is just what stocks do. Even absent news that would move a stock.

7
Content creators, please go to this page to report this users for copyright violation to Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkhq8AcpDOSofeAvemHi0Tg/about

8
As someone else already pointed out, the new CEO has tons of stock options that only vest if he meets target goals, hence, why they are now robbing you lot so the company can increase profit and the CEO will have millions of dollars of options vest and get a great deal of money. CEOs being paid in stock options based upon meeting metrics is pretty common practice. In this instance, it is to your detriment.

9
Keep pulling your ports, while some of you think it won't make a difference because of how big their library is, it CAN make a difference. Especially if a lot of the best work is pulled. I use to buy images for work and I went to several stock sites to search. I worked for a big enough agency that it made no difference to the company where we sourced the images from. The only thing that matter is that our clients liked the options of images we show them. So following that logic, graphic designers will over time remember which stock sites have crappier images and go there less.

10
iStock still has a ton of exclusive content. All my images are exclusive with iStock. I regularly see late night American TV shows use my images. But yes, I agree it is super important for a stock website to have exclusive images. I remember years ago when microstock was very young and I use to work at a very large ad agency, I would browse several legacy stock websites to search for images. At the time, everyone knew you had to look at several websites because everyone had different images. If I didn't look around, how could I know I got the best image for my project?

11
I don't sell on Shutterstock but I do find the new rates incredibly offensive. I've made a post on my own personal FB page to ask my friends whom buy stock photos, that if they have a Shutterstock account, please do me a personal favor and cancel their account and go buy somewhere else. All you guys should do that same.

12
I don't have a dog in this fight, because I don't sell on shutterstock, but what they did is pretty crappy.

Why don't the folks that contribute to stocksy talk to the owners of that site, Bruce and ask him to consider launching a new site, for the masses. Just like iStock use to be when he owned it? Bruce knows how to build and launch and run a mega large stock photo site. I doubt anyone else here is going to know how to launch a site and run it properly, because it takes a great deal of knowledge and it takes a great deal of money. Since stock photos pays nothing, following that logic, I know most of you don't make any real money, therefore you guys can't afford to launch a site without someone like Bruce. I could be way of, but based upon my days in a previous life working in digital advertising many years ago, to launch a mega stock site can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Personals websites are cheap, professional websites built for corporations are mega expensive.

actually, getting a site set up is not that expensive, nor that time consuming. a skilled programmer (depending on what complexity you want) can put something together in as little as a couple hours, to a couple months.

the challenge is effective marketing, & converting customers to sales, etc...

How many professional websites have you built? In my past career in digital advertising, I've worked on teams that built the Coca Cola website, New York Jets website, micro sites for Toyota, American Express, Canon, and others. You would be surprised just now many different hands touch a project and how it is easily thousands of billable hours, where every hour is billed at hundred of dollars to the client. This was over ten year ago. The cost to build a professional website is vastly different than building someone's personal blog. I don't know what the staffing is like at Shutterstock, but I can make an uneducated guess. I would guess there is at least 1 if not 2 UI full time person. There would be at least 2 or more full time graphic designer. There would be at least 2 full time developer. There is probably a data scientist that crunches sales data for insight. Then factor in that they are in NYC. You are looking at $700k in salary just to maintain the site. Never mind literally the hundreds of other staff that work there. A professional site is very expensive.

13
I don't have a dog in this fight, because I don't sell on shutterstock, but what they did is pretty crappy.

Why don't the folks that contribute to stocksy talk to the owners of that site, Bruce and ask him to consider launching a new site, for the masses. Just like iStock use to be when he owned it? Bruce knows how to build and launch and run a mega large stock photo site. I doubt anyone else here is going to know how to launch a site and run it properly, because it takes a great deal of knowledge and it takes a great deal of money. Since stock photos pays nothing, following that logic, I know most of you don't make any real money, therefore you guys can't afford to launch a site without someone like Bruce. I could be way of, but based upon my days in a previous life working in digital advertising many years ago, to launch a mega stock site can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Personals websites are cheap, professional websites built for corporations are mega expensive.

14
Adobe Stock / Re: Mat Hayward - My new best friend
« on: May 26, 2020, 22:50 »
You are making the assumption that Adobe would not follow along at some point.

15
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Latest sales - down quite a bit
« on: May 26, 2020, 12:41 »
Not a great month. Less than the previous month. Still enough to pay the bills.

16
If it can't be fixed, another option is for you to buy an external hard drive and find some cloning software and clone your entire old machine, then boot it up on your new machine via the external hard drive and use your software there. Or you could replace the OS on your new machine with the OS on the old machine.

I use a mac, so the cloning software I use is superduper. No idea what options are available on PC. I clone my own machine every few months just as a backup.

17
For commission work $60 is obviously sweat shop labor. But if you already have the images then you'll need to figure out what is the likely life time value of those images on stock. And how easily can you create new versions that are similar but different for stock once you've sold those images for $60 each.

18
Hi
and you also find this image out of focus?

In my opinion it is in focus, however, you have an issue with color balance. There is an red-ish tint that is unnatural looking. The composition is also off centered, making the image quite a bit less useful. You cropped off the edge of the plants for no good reason. The verticals and horizontals of the word tiles are not straight. Having seen this image and your previous, I think you still have a lot to learn about shooting stock for advertising purposes. You need to pay attention to what images that are used in advertising look like. That is how you need to shoot. You need to shoot for the customer's needs.

19
Photography Equipment / Re: best paint for photo studio ?
« on: May 22, 2020, 12:21 »
Think about the end user, ie the customer. What color is easiest for them to use your photo? The obvious answer is white.

20
Foreground being out of focus is extremely uncommon. Almost never do you see an image like that in any advertising. There is no clearly no demand for such a shot. Think about your time, you spend time doing something that no one is going to buy. You want to study the market and see what kind of landscape photos buyers actually use. Let that be your guide. Otherwise you just learn the hard way.

21
General Stock Discussion / Re: More or fewer keywords
« on: May 20, 2020, 10:44 »
Another thing which I didn't see being mentioned here is that on Adobestock for example the maximum keywords you can insert is 50, however it's advisable to use maximum only 49, other way the keywords won't get weighted separately (the first few being more important) but every single one of them gets the fraction of the "total sum" equally.
Only 49 keywords. ??? How do you know that? Can I read these instructions somewhere?

Adobe people mentioned is in their webcast last year. I don't think it is written down anywhere.

22
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Latest sales - down quite a bit
« on: May 20, 2020, 10:43 »
Terrible month. *sigh*

23
Never mind folks. I see on their site now they only allow Getty releases. Kinda ridiculous.


Not true. They allow generic releases. I use Yuri Arcurs's generic version and I upload to iStock. Never ever had a problem.
http://arcurs.com/2008/05/what-is-a-model-release/

24
General Stock Discussion / Re: More or fewer keywords
« on: May 14, 2020, 08:20 »
The more relevant keywords the better. Because you actually have no idea what words different customers use for searching. On iStock you can see which keywords are used most often to find each image by looking at the keywords order on their individual landing page. Clearly that website runs A/B testing on each keyword and see if it leads to click throughs.
Where do you see keywords order? Can you show me a screenshot?  I find Related Searches useful on Dreamstime. I can see that iStock has this option too.

On iStock you need to click into the landing page for each image, then scroll to the bottom of the page to look at the keywords. If all the keywords are in alphabetical order, it means they haven't done enough tests to figure out which keywords are testing better for that image. Otherwise you will see the first few keywords that are clearly out of alphabetical order and the rest are in alphabetical order. The ones in front out of order are the ones that through testing, they have seen customers use those keywords to find that image.

25
General Stock Discussion / Re: More or fewer keywords
« on: May 13, 2020, 16:52 »
The more relevant keywords the better. Because you actually have no idea what words different customers use for searching. On iStock you can see which keywords are used most often to find each image by looking at the keywords order on their individual landing page. Clearly that website runs A/B testing on each keyword and see if it leads to click throughs.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 13

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle