|
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 - loop
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 44
201
« on: September 16, 2013, 10:38 »
I was gonna say for 5 bucks they aren't getting any video from me but after having a look I can see they are already selling almost 1,000 of our clips for 5 bucks each. Where did they get these clips from!!!!! Other established video producers may want to have a look for their video.
Do you mean they have stolen your work?
202
« on: September 08, 2013, 12:21 »
I'm not doing nothing special.Shooting and uploading as always. After the last change, sales have disminished, but RPD has increased a lot,because most of what a sell is S+, followed by S, Vetta and I almost don't sell Main. In the end, I'm earning the same. After many changes and downwards trends I was hoping to be able to earn more. I think that an improvement for exclusives is strongly needed.
203
« on: September 06, 2013, 10:01 »
I'm shocked that people aren't weighing in on this. When a major agency makes a significant change that impacts us, we should all take serious note.
I think the problem is... DARE I SAY IT... that Symbiostock topics are choking everything else out. There are about a dozen Symbiostock topics pushing this thread way down the list. A year ago, this thread would have gotten a lot of attention and sparked a lot of conversation. But today, people aren't seeing it because "how do I do this or that" Symbiostock topics hog up virtually all the space "above the fold."
I'm not a Symbiostock hater ... I consider myself in the "wait and see" camp ... but it really has taken over this forum and made it less useful for those of us on the fence or disinterested in Symbiostock. Not sure what the solution is, but I can see myself checking this site less and less if this continues. Just not interested in having to scroll and scroll and scroll to find items that are actually relevant to me.
I agree. Symbiostock is eating up the whole forum. Every little bit of information seems to need a new thread, an there are a score of little bits every day. It shouldn't be too hard to concentrate all in two or three threads.
204
« on: August 30, 2013, 07:24 »
What's really relevant:
New Tab = Curated (Editor's Pick) or Hot (a mix of best match and Age). I can't think of anything else.I would bet for first one.
205
« on: July 27, 2013, 05:53 »
No, I don't have a better deal. I wish I had it.
206
« on: July 27, 2013, 05:44 »
So if you got about 30 a day at SS, depending on your portfolio size, can look as very low. Certainly, I got much more at Istock.
207
« on: July 26, 2013, 07:55 »
Two good things Yuri has done: 1. Not supporting anymore the disastrous (in my humble opinion) cheap subscription model, true origin of many of our troubles. For me, subs it's not micro, but "nano-stock". 2. Putting his images at PeopleImages at respectable prices.
About Scoopt... I don't think it really will work, the same that I don't thing that Connect will, but that is just again mi hunch. I've been wrong imn the past and I will be in the future.
I wont't say nothing on the rest. Just say that I'm taking abback seeing the change of attitude of many of you towards Yuri... it seems, mostly by the fact that he has gone exclusive at IS.
I don't know why so many people ignore the fact that Getty/istock are experimenting with true nanostock. We have all these huge threads that usually aren't worth reading while this one, that I consider to be the most important in recent years had hardly any attention.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/interesting-times-in-which-to-live/
But that is just for looking at, not for buying rights. Anyway, I don't foresee Getty, neither contributors making any kind of significant income out of that. It's marginal.
208
« on: July 25, 2013, 19:12 »
Two good things Yuri has done: 1. Not supporting anymore the disastrous (in my humble opinion) cheap subscription model, true origin of many of our troubles. For me, subs it's not micro, but "nano-stock".
What do you mean Yuri is "not supporting anymore the disastrous (in my humble opinion) cheap subscription model"?
In case you're not aware, right now he has over 35K images available to subscribers at DT __ that's 10x more than I do!
Yuri has been doing microstock for about 8 years now and, in that time, literally nobody on the planet has sold more images at sub prices than he has. If you consider subs 'damaging' then nobody has been more damaging to the industry than he has. I've sold close to 400K licenses since I started but I'm sure it would probably take me well over 100+ more years to achieve the same level of damage that he has done.
It seems strange that you are giving him credit for supposedly not selling subs (when actually he is) and when he's also been selling subs for 100% of his time in the industry. Even if Yuri stopped selling subs tomorrow then that would be the first DAY in 8 years that he has not done so. Kind of like crediting an alcoholic for giving up the booze when he's still swigging away.
I mean he has deleted his portfolio at most subs site and he is in the process of doing the same with the remaining ones, as he has said. So simple. I'm no thinking in the past. I look at the future, past can't be changed, and what we need are turning points and bridges to a better future.
209
« on: July 25, 2013, 18:27 »
Two good things Yuri has done: 1. Not supporting anymore the disastrous (in my humble opinion) cheap subscription model, true origin of many of our troubles. For me, subs it's not micro, but "nano-stock". 2. Putting his images at PeopleImages at respectable prices.
About Scoopt... I don't think it really will work, the same that I don't thing that Connect will, but that is just again mi hunch. I've been wrong imn the past and I will be in the future.
I wont't say nothing on the rest. Just say that I'm taking abback seeing the change of attitude of many of you towards Yuri... it seems, mostly by the fact that he has gone exclusive at IS.
210
« on: July 24, 2013, 11:09 »
Race to the bottom at full speed. Each time someone was whinnig about how "ridicously expensive" had got the prices at istockphoto, each time that someone "informed" their designers friends where to find the stuff cheaper, a little step towards this situation was done. Look at your feet to see if you shot yourself there.
211
« on: July 04, 2013, 06:07 »
Really nice payment here. Connect or May GI, ok, it doesn't matter too much, looking at the amount.
You wouldn't rather have a reasonable chance that it was being reported accurately?
I'd be more confident if e.g. Lobo had given advance warning, e.g. "The IT guys haven't a clue how to fix the script, but we're going to dump all payments into Connect for February. Yeah, that's totally random." rather than some Facebook announcement (where is it? I can't find it on Fb.) after the event.
I'm not saying that it's definitely inaccurate. I'm just saying this sort of mess makes me 'less confident' that it's accurate.
I think we're just supposed to grovel with gratitude that we got paid 'only' four days late.
Yes, of course, but I just was looking at the bright aspect of the matter.
212
« on: July 04, 2013, 05:04 »
Really nice payment here. Connect or May GI, ok, it doesn't matter too much, looking at the amount.
213
« on: July 01, 2013, 12:27 »
For me, it's completely ok to get the comission on the real price of sale. And these "crumbs" you say, skyrockted my royalies to almost a thousand dollars in one day.
214
« on: July 01, 2013, 10:53 »
I can't understand why people are affected when getting negative votes or happy if votes are positive. It's beyond me.
215
« on: July 01, 2013, 10:02 »
Bruce made some things to increase the contributors income at istockphoto. For instance, 100% royalties day, or adding 10% to EL sales (so, if you were at 40% you got 50%). All this is gone now from IS.
216
« on: June 30, 2013, 05:16 »
Really? Basically what they are doing is to sell the same files you can buy at any other site at a price that is still higher than most of the other sites (specially sub sites) So, these files were already further devaluated elsewhere.
217
« on: June 28, 2013, 14:06 »
Shutterstock doesn't pay anything the second the buyer purchases it. You get paid once per month after the month has finished. Would you rather have Istock work that way, I would much rather get paid every week.
I don't know about him but I would rather get paid the shutterstock way, without having to request a payout..
Why on earth do I have to bother with requests everytime I want to get paid.. just bloody pay it periodically for god's sake..
It's my money and it's a given I am going to want to have it..
I prefer to request, and to be able to determine how much money of the total I want. Not very often, but from time to time, for a variety of reasons, I don't ask for all, letting a part for next week or next month. And of course, I prefer two weekly payments (istock), to one monthly (SS); and one monthly with 15-20 days average delay to one monthly with one month average delay (TS). But SS and TS are not my problem.
218
« on: June 28, 2013, 12:43 »
Istock making files cheaper it's not good news for anybody. Istock has been (I mean istock, not TS or Getty) the only agency that has been raising prices consistently, reaching a good level, far away from the cents scheme. Other agencies, although having the opportunity, never followed this trend (stocksy would be the exception, but right now stocksy is just an startup). Actually, it seemed that the main marketing weapon of the other micro sites was to sell cheaper than istock. Istock will regain customers, no doubt. And so, other agencies will be tempted to compete again in price (let's say selling for 0.5 what IS sells for 1). And if selling for 0.5 is insustainable, next thing that will suffer will be comission rates.
219
« on: June 27, 2013, 04:48 »
Hope it's a mistake. That would be the end of exclusivity.
220
« on: June 24, 2013, 11:38 »
Don't those sites also install viruses on your computer when you download from them? I wouldn't risk it even if they had a program to make my computer cough quarters out of its USB ports. Gold nuggets....well, maybe. 
Of course they do. Spyware is guaranteed, and in some cases you can get trojans. My computer tech has told me many times that he uses to have to format computers for many custumers, no matter if the had or hadn't anti-virus. Viruses nomally come from porn or from piracy sites. It is his top-seller for repairs.
221
« on: June 22, 2013, 11:34 »
That was about 7 years ago. A truck sewered a power line. Istock wasn't available for a full day.
222
« on: June 22, 2013, 10:51 »
Well, but istock (Bruce) invented microstock, and that was around the year 2000. You are talking about some private sales fo a low price now and then, but that's no the concept of microstock at all. Microstock implies an organised Image bank, open for professionals and not professional photographers --that's to say, to everyone able to provide the minimun quality--, selling at very low prices thorugh the internet.
223
« on: June 21, 2013, 05:07 »
Buyers at istock are buying there based on its original intent...microstock. They expect to NOT pay $100 or more for an image. Thats why micro was started...companies dont have those kinds of budgets anymore where they can hire a photographer or pay $100-200 for a single image.
Its a great concept for getty to think they can just, overnight, start charging those kinds of fees and get them. The reality is the economy is way different than it used to be. People make salaries today that are less than what they made 20 years ago. Why does getty imagine stock photography would be any different? Reality check.
What other industry do you know of where prices can go from $10 to $100+ dollars in a short amount of time and still retain customers. Someone is smoking the reefer.
Customers are not all clones. They are all different, with different needs and different budgets. Of course, for some Vetta could be expensive (and, btw, now, the Agency files that now are Vetta are way cheaper than they were a week ago); other with more budget may thing that 100-150 dollars is just a little drop in the whole campaign's budget (some of my photos, and, sure, some of yours, have been used in campaings where just the price of placement of the ad in magazines excedeed 100.000 dollars)
224
« on: June 16, 2013, 10:22 »
I was talking from a sales point of view. I don't know exactly if SS is going great or not, but was is sure is that it would go better without TS in the field. I've seen a lot of printed magazines and websites that were using SS using TS or both now. Customers, and specially price sensitive costumers, don't give a * about suppliers, they want content and a bargain price and TS also offer both. From a contributor's point of view, IS is still strong enough.
225
« on: June 15, 2013, 17:24 »
I think their target is weakening SS,and it's a business logic target, but not at this price.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 44
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
