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 - Clair Voyant

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11
1
There is no knight in shining armour. The one which might, or might not, be is like a Secret Society, complete with fancy handshakes.

Sounds like you might be talking about Stocksy???

FWIW there never was a knight in shining armour. All microstock agencies are based on the servitude of minions who for some bizarre reason idolize a select few people and also think\thought they were part of a community. You are/were part of a community to supply images at your cost so that a company/corporation can profit heavily from you.

As for Stocksy presuming that is who you meant they are a bit different. I was one of the few who was offered front row seats when they started but declined because I did not see the vision and was seriously cashing in over at Istock. I 100% understood/understand the concept of Stocksy and think it is great but it was not a fit for me then and speeding up the truck to today I still don't think it is fit for me, mainly due to what I shoot.

Again presuming you are talking about Stocksy, I wish all agencies would do what they do, inspect images for content and quality and reject images because it is not what the agency wants to sell and/or just pure crap. Stocksy is a curated collection (very similar to the way it used to be when all the main agencies were hypothetically closed) and either you produce the content the agency wants or you don't. I am certain I could get my work into Stocksy, but I am not prepared to give up what I have to have 50-250 images on their site, I don't see the financial incentive.

Apart from that little rant... you are only fooling yourself if you think any agency needs you.






2
Why would you want anything to pass the Shutterstock review process???

3
I propose that you limit the maximum number of downloads to 10 photos per day, 2 videos, 5 illustrations ... and add 1 extra free per photo purchased with real money

Or have a daily random roulette wheel with 1 free photo, 1 free video, and 1 free illustration. The current menu on offer is so disrespectful to all contributors.

4
The thing that worries me is that stock is cheap enough as it is, a good proportion of sales under $1, how can clients claim that it too expensive?

It is quite sad to see how little value clients see in images.

Even more worrisome is how little the agency values its contributor base. All of the agencies. What next charging us rent for cloud storage to sell our images???

5
For me I will use my personal "equalizer".
Both parts can play the game so why should i continue to use their software when they are giving our artist work for free to clients?

Don't get me wrong it's only business so Let's play the free game:

For Premiere  i will use Da vinci  resolve  (free/better and with big community support)
For Photoshop i will use GIMP (free big comunnity support)
For lightroom  i will use Darktable (Free, recent 1 year community but fascinating choice)
For after effects  i will use FXhome HitFilm and Blender (HUGE community support)

Give it a try and you will save 61,49/month. ;)

You nailed it! ;) For video editing I all ready use Davinci. Don't like those crashing reports from Adobe.

A designer friend of mine recommended Affinity to my wife who was tired of being held ransom by "The Cloud" and has never looked back. She uses Affinity for both photos and illustration and loves it.

6
Is there any way to opt out of this travesty? I don't mind if Adobe gives my images away for "free" but I think Adobe should pay me my/our royalty and put it down as an advertising expense.

This move by Adobe makes the offering of being screwed by Shutterstock look very appealing, at least they have enough respect for contributors to pay them 0.10c

You are not opted in to the program so there is nothing to opt out of. Only the pre-selected contributors have content in the free collection. FYI, Adobe Stock does pay contributors the full royalty on the introductory free subscription downloads for new customers.

To clarify, the free collection is not available for contribution outside the initial selected contributors at this time. Your content is not in the free collection. Please review the FAQ from my initial post for additional information and clarification.

Thanks,

Mat

Thanks for your kind reply Mat, appreciated.

BTW I don't think giving away images for free does any good for contributors.

Cheers!


7
Is there any way to opt out of this travesty? I don't mind if Adobe gives my images away for "free" but I think Adobe should pay me my/our royalty and put it down as an advertising expense.

This move by Adobe makes the offering of being screwed by Shutterstock look very appealing, at least they have enough respect for contributors to pay them 0.10c

8
Adobe Stock / And the award goes to...
« on: October 15, 2020, 12:36 »
... For oxymoron of the year 2020 the award goes to Adobe Stock. "Royalty Free"


9
Free....many years ago I put an image on Can Stock as a free image. it stayed free for nearly a year. I guess I could of ask them to take it down. It was a picture of a football on fire. I think it was given away to the tune of 15,000 times. I never got any more sales by having a free picture on Can Stock. Then Can Stock is third tier at best. I really think free dose not work. If free worked the hookers down by the dock would give it away free. Good luck Adobe....

You keep forgetting that Matt works for free because Adobe gives away all their products for free. My housing is also free just as my food and other living expenses. I also take pictures with my free camera and use my free computer to upload content via my free internet.


10
I just dont know which sites to recommend to my colleagues any more. Or whether its worth doing this any more. All the sites seem to be finding exciting ways to rip us off. You pull your work from iStock because theyre giving stuff away for a penny, and you concentrate on Shutterstock. Then Shutterstock slashes royalties, and you pull your work from SS and upload more to Adobe...only to have Adobe give away competing images for free. Pond5 and Alamy must be working on their own exciting news now that weve migrated to them. But its a really fun year otherwise! Ha ha.

It's not worth doing stock any more... been like that for a while.

11
And so it starts....

12
Newbie Discussion / Re: Tax Questions (US)
« on: September 30, 2020, 11:16 »
Or do any of you report this as royalty income on a schedule E? I'm so confused since this isn't my primary source of income.

No.  And you can read why here : https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/moving-to-the-u-s-tax-questions/msg556922/?topicseen#new

or........... https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-schedule-e-form-1040

It's so simple how has this become a photo forum question?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA4AACzlhe8&ab_channel=DaveHax


13
Newbie Discussion / Re: Tax Questions (US)
« on: September 29, 2020, 23:29 »
You could try adulting and contact a certified accountant in your jurisdiction.

That said, does anyone know how to replace my transmission fluid gasket on a 69 Chevy?

14
General Stock Discussion / Re: Stock Photography Future
« on: September 12, 2020, 11:02 »
this article was written in 2020 but if you had your eye on the ball it could have been written in 2010 with a similar synopsis.

15
General Stock Discussion / Re: Percentage revisited
« on: September 04, 2020, 13:38 »

So if they can (presumably) make loads of money with such 'relatively' small fees, why do stock agencies feel they 'have to' take such a huge proportion of our sales value?


I'd narrow it down to pure greed and the fact content creators accepted the subscription model at such ridiculous pricing and unilateral contracts.

16
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Is istock exclusive contributor worth it?
« on: August 30, 2020, 17:15 »
Jo Ann pretty much summed it up.

I am exclusive and remain so for the very good sales volume. Sure, a minority of images sell for a pittance but most images sell for fairly decent coin. I am currently receiving 35% commission, and it is enough to live on, barely. In my situation, I'd be foolish to drop the crown. Being exclusive works well if you can get 15% or more of your images accepted into S+.

That said, my wife submits to multiple agencies and for where she is at in regards to volume produced and sales etc, she'd be foolish to go exclusive as she'd only make 25% commission, and that is not enough to warrant being exclusive.

If I was starting out in stock photography in the current pathetic state of the industry as a whole, I would not go exclusive with any agency.




17
Shutterstock.com / Re: We are having some impact
« on: August 23, 2020, 08:30 »
Do you think that Sean, Lisa, Monkey Business, will go against Shutterstock and leave the income behind?

If they feel 0.10c is an income that needs to be retained let it be. We pulled out 100%. It simply is not worth our time to dick around for 0.10c per download. I can honestly make more money picking up empty beer cans from the beach and sending to recycle center, and I don't even do that for the very same reason.


18
I would prefer to see a Link to your work before commenting. I've been around quite a while and Long Before Microstock. Im Personally doing Better at SS the last few months than the last few years. I won't be deleting My Port. Although, I will not add More and I do Not do Video anymore and Haven't for years. You can send Me a PM Link to your Port...But , only If ya want the truth based On experience.

Warning....I don't sugarcoat. Been shooting for a living since the late 60's and reviewed for 2 years when all this started.

We have had several PM conversations, so we more or less read from the same page as for the microstock world from an trad point of view etc. What I don't understand Rinder is why oh why you keep your work up at SS. If you are in a precarious situation and those almighty dimes mean a lot then I can understand sticking with SS, but in your situation it concerns me. You of all people should be out because you really do know that a dime is a total kick in the face.

I ask this from a position of respect.

19
Shutterstock.com / Re: So they do use AI to review then...
« on: August 11, 2020, 11:57 »
"I particularly love the folks who love calling those of us who have been in microstock for 15+ years clueless old timers.

I am clueless but not too old yet  :)

Sort of like the cool kids of microstock trash talked about us 'trads' 15 years ago?

And yet here you are, a trad, on a microstock forum. Just like all the other trads. Cant be all bad, can it? I bet youve taken your fair share of money from low life microstock sites, right?  ;D

Looks to me you so very much missed the point.

20
Shutterstock.com / Re: So they do use AI to review then...
« on: August 11, 2020, 11:55 »
.

21
Shutterstock.com / Re: So they do use AI to review then...
« on: August 11, 2020, 11:27 »
"I particularly love the folks who love calling those of us who have been in microstock for 15+ years clueless old timers.

I am clueless but not too old yet  :)

Sort of like the cool kids of microstock trash talked about us 'trads' 15 years ago?

22
Shutterstock.com / Re: So they do use AI to review then...
« on: August 08, 2020, 17:30 »

I'm of the particular opinion that breaking news editorial images take in the heat of the moment shouldn't be rejected for stupid reasons such as noise. I can't take out my tripod in a protest and have a perfect exposure/composition at ISO 100!

I agree, however SS is hardly an industry source for breaking news photos... not even a close second or third source.

23
Shutterstock.com / Re: So they do use AI to review then...
« on: August 08, 2020, 09:55 »


However, some of these can get through on an average of a third try. The maximum I've submitted to be accepted was 6 times.

[/quote]


And this is one of the problems with the whole industry today.

In today's whiny self entitled world one actually tries on an average of 3 times to get rejected work accepted and up to 6 times and eventually they will get accepted.

All that tells me is you need to up your game or find another hobby.




24
General Stock Discussion / Re: RPD in SS and AS
« on: August 02, 2020, 11:31 »
There is someone over at SS forum who is thrilled to have 33 x $5.22 clip sales and others seem to be in awe. If it was one or two clip or image sales (SOD) for that total amount then sure not bad but 33 clips. I've noticed over the years that many don't even have a clue how much they could or should be making. They even think they are doing well with this kind of performance.

The next generation of Microstockers I guess and it looks like this is the kind of contributors SS want to go forward with, the clueless.

That is how microstock took off... the clueless.

Hah I guess you're right!
But then that would make me one of them  :-\
For me it never felt right submitting to Microstock and I'm still trying to cut down on time and effort to make it still worth it. Funny thing is they expect you to do the opposite ::)

I came quite late to the party of microstock mainly due to the financial pressure it was placing on a once wonderful sustainable industry. I ended up submitting as IS exclusive selling rejects from GI and it was okay for a while considering I was selling myself short, but I could never understand why anyone in their right mind would give their work to a subscription site notably SS and sell themselves even shorter. Oddly enough... and people forget this, IS was the only microstock agency holding out for higher prices and finally succumbed to subscription pressures and racing to the bottom. IMHO the genie is out of the bottle and there is no going back. It's all way too corporate to make it beneficial to any contributor.


25
General Stock Discussion / Re: RPD in SS and AS
« on: August 02, 2020, 09:52 »
There is someone over at SS forum who is thrilled to have 33 x $5.22 clip sales and others seem to be in awe. If it was one or two clip or image sales (SOD) for that total amount then sure not bad but 33 clips. I've noticed over the years that many don't even have a clue how much they could or should be making. They even think they are doing well with this kind of performance.

The next generation of Microstockers I guess and it looks like this is the kind of contributors SS want to go forward with, the clueless.

That is how microstock took off... the clueless.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle