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.


Topics - KB

Pages: 1 [2] 3
26
iStockPhoto.com / Joke of the day
« on: March 12, 2012, 21:49 »
(Hard to believe this is the first iStock post in over 3 days.)

From the iStock 2012 Who's Who thread:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=341795&page=1

"[Lobo] ensures discussions are productive and keeps things on the rails and civil."


 ;D  ;D  ;D

27
Canon / Canon 5D Mark III: Official announcement
« on: March 02, 2012, 00:33 »

28
iStockPhoto.com / Large commission increase with TS image packs
« on: February 16, 2012, 13:35 »
I hope this doesn't entice exclusives to support TS more, but for independents (who don't have a choice), this should be only good news:
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1327&sp_rid=&sp_mid=4399180

29
I UL'd some clips to CD last month, and I just checked out some of the search results.

In EVERY search I checked, my clips are dead last by relevance. Every one of them.

Is there some secret to moving up in the relevance search, or does it normally sort the newest files at the end?

No sales is discouraging enough, but sort of expected based on what I'd read. But to have all my files lumped together at the bottom of every search is piling on the discouragement!

30
123RF / 5 weeks and still pending
« on: January 09, 2012, 11:07 »
Wondering if anyone else is waiting this long?  ;D

Mine are videos, though. Has anyone else UL'd video clips and gotten inspected? How long did it take?

31
General - Stock Video / Cheapest video sale?
« on: November 24, 2011, 11:38 »
What's the least you've ever gotten for a video sale on sites where you don't set your own price?

SS had the record, at $2.50 for a low-res sub sale. (I hope those are going to be higher now, with the increased prices they recently announced.)

iStock just lowered their web-size prices -- Small web was reduced by 25%! So the $2.40 commission I just received sets a new, low record for me.

Can anyone beat that?  ;D

32
Veer / How long does it take for support to respond?
« on: October 13, 2011, 13:20 »
Can anyone tell me what is a normal response time to expect from Veer? I wrote support a little over a week ago, and I haven't had a reply yet.

Thanks!

33
iStockPhoto.com / iStock finds another way to cheat contributors
« on: September 08, 2011, 10:47 »
Apparently all the ways theyve come up with so far havent been enough, so now theres another way they can cheat some contributors out of a few bucks.

From the What are redeemed credits and how do royalties work? link:
If you reach a new level during 2011 you will immediately move up to a higher royalty rate .

So I reached a new level during 2011 and waited and waited and waited.  The sale that took me over the arbitrary line happened on a Tuesday around Noon, and the higher royalty rate did not kick in until Friday morning. That was 2 complete days and one half day of sales (including, as it turned out, my best day ever for $, excluding ELs).

CRs response was that its a caching issue (notice how EVERYTHING is a caching issue?), and there was nothing that could be done about it. I think they meant it was a cash issue. So another $20 or so stolen from my pockets and into iStocks. A pittance compared to what theyve taken from me this year, but this time the theft is so blatant it even violates their own written policy.

34
Just read their recent TOS update email, and noticed this paragraph in the TOS (probably not new):

By submitting your stuff to the Services, you grant us (and those we work with to provide the Services) worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable rights to use, copy, distribute, prepare derivative works (such as translations or format conversions) of, perform, or publicly display that stuff to the extent reasonably necessary for the Service.

Happily, I don't use it to display stock photos, but if you do, you might want to reconsider that. Sorry if this is already well-known; sometimes I'm not in the loop.  ;D

35
The subject line says it all, but here are the gory details.

I've been planning to go exclusive at IS since the end of last year, when I stopped UL'ing to other sites. I (stupidly, in retrospect) planned exactly when to best remove my portfolio from each site, to maximize my income during the transition. It almost worked out perfectly.

But for the last 10 days or so, my portfolios have been off all other sites, yet I can't apply for exclusivity. Veer has messed me up.

I've always found support there to be very good. Unfortunately this time, when I most needed them, they let me down. It's been 3.5 weeks since I asked them to deactivate my portfolio. Finally, last Saturday, the images were removed from my port, and from the site's search results.

However, the images are all still on their website. They can easily be found via google, and can still be purchased. The last correspondence I had from them said this was "how it's supposed to work". They implied will be that way for SIXTY DAYS! It's in the contributor agreement.

I was very aware of this, and had written to them about that 3 months ago. I was told it was only legalese, and it generally takes only about a week to get the images offline. Unfortunately, I believed this, and now I'm really stuck.

The dangers of going exclusive? My port is gone from everywhere, my income has been cut by at least 60%, and each week that goes by I'm losing much more than I ever made on Veer in over a year.

Let this be a warning to anyone else contemplating going exclusive. Get off of the low earning sites FIRST, WAY in advance. It just isn't worth it -- hoping to squeeze an extra few dollars out can cost you BIG!

36
Bigstock.com / Is BigStock dying?
« on: May 01, 2010, 10:44 »
Rather than add this comment to one of the existing positive threads ("Increase in BigStock ...", "Rise of BigStock"), I thought it more appropriate to create a new one.

I just checked to see how BigStock fared for me in April. After a decent March (for BigStock), downloads dropped 50%, and revenues an amazing 2/3. It was my worst month there since December 2007 (when my portfolio was roughly 10% of its current size).

RPD dropped to $0.65, which is down 40% from my average of $1.08, and the lowest I've seen since my second month there (when I had TWO sales!), Feb, 2007.

Is this an anomaly, or is BigStock dying?

37
iStockPhoto.com / Congratulations, Ivan (WhiteChild)!!!
« on: April 07, 2010, 11:29 »
I just read that Ivan won the hour 10 iStock contest ($500!).

Congratulations!!!!   :D    :D   :D

38
General Stock Discussion / Subscriptions -- No stockpiling?
« on: March 22, 2010, 10:14 »
I just read on the iStock TS thread a post mentioning that TS' TOS says you can't stockpile downloads for later use. Specifically, the TOS states:
Licensee shall not stockpile, download, or otherwise store Licensed Material not used during the Term for future use.

So, that's nice. Use it or lose it. SS' TOS has similar verbiage.
 
However, I was not able to find any such restrictions in DT's or FT's TOS. It seems (though I might have missed it), that those sub buyers can download to their hearts content, then store the images for as long as they'd like, just in case they might ever have a need for them.

If correct, that's just one more piece of evidence that the DT & (especially) FT sub plans are the worst in the industry (from a contributor's POV).  >:(

39
iStockPhoto.com / Getty says "Don't buy at istock"
« on: March 19, 2010, 17:17 »
Have I missed the discussions on this? Or haven't there been any?

Two active IS forum topics:

1. Getty is cold-calling iStock corporate buyers to get them to switch to ThinkStock:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=189221&page=1

2. Getty is now advertising on iStock's website (subscription page), urging potential (and no doubt current) buyers to consider ThinkStock:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=190081&page=1

The end is nigh!  >:(

40
iStockPhoto.com / The door IS closing!
« on: December 16, 2009, 18:21 »
It just closed a little bit more.

It seems that there has been another "temporary" reduction in UL limits for independents on IS. Everyone is now limited to 15 ULs/wk, even Diamond independents.

Let's hope this temporary reduction is more temporary than the last several were.

41
Veer / Uploading -- keywords from IPTC?
« on: December 10, 2009, 21:08 »
I just tried UL'ing via the web interface, and I found that it does not get my keywords that I added in the standard "keywords" IPTC field.

Strangely, it DOES get the keywords I added in Bridge (which are there just for my own use; they aren't my "real" keywords).

Does it do better via ftp?  Has anyone else run into this problem?

Thanks!

42
New Sites - General / The 3D Studio - anyway selling there?
« on: November 28, 2009, 00:23 »
What I mean is, is anyone getting sales there?

I had 3 sales during my first month, for very nice commissions. I like that they are continuing to upgrade the photo side of the business, recently adding ELs and  web-sizes. But I haven't had a single sale now in a little over 2 months now.  :(

My port isn't huge (600 some images), but it does get regular sales everywhere else.

Is anyone having better results?

43
General - Top Sites / Commission comparison of the "Big 6"
« on: October 05, 2009, 20:18 »
When I started gathering this earlier today, I had no idea it would take so long. But the sites do not make this information easy to get.

I make absolutely no guarantees as to the accuracy of the figures below. I've done my best, but there are almost certainly some errors.

Some agencies set a fixed amount per credit, others use a variable amount. For the latter, I give a price range, but there's no indication as to which side of the range most sales will fall. (I was too lazy to check my own results.)

DT's price structure is the most complicated. The figures I give are for Level 1 images, so they are the least you will earn.  However, I really couldnt nail down what the heck the current commission structure and credit pricing is, and even if I could, its going to change very soon. So I just used the credit range from my own recent earnings ($0.32 - $0.60). It might be totally wrong, but its the best I could do.

The data is arranged by typical image size ranges:

~ 0.1M
123: $0.34-$0.50
BigStock: n/a
DT: $0.32-$0.60
FT: $0.32
IS: $0.19-$0.30
SS: n/a
StockXpert: $0.40-$0.50

~0.5MP
123: $0.68-$1.00
BigStock: $0.50
DT: $0.64-$1.20
FT: $0.64
IS: $0.57-$0.90
SS: $1.07 (more like 1.5MP, though)
StockXpert: $0.80-$1.00

4-5MP
123: $1.02-$1.50
BigStock: $2.00
DT: $0.96-$1.80
FT: $1.60
IS: $2.28-$3.60
SS: $2.48
StockXpert: $2.00-$2.50

8-9MP
123: $1.36-$2.00
BigStock: $2.00 (still 5MP; next higher bracket is 11MP)
DT: $1.60-$3.00
FT: $1.92
IS: $3.42-$5.40
SS: $2.48
StockXpert: $4.00-$5.00

15-16MP
123: $3.40-$5.00
BigStock: $3.00
DT: $1.92-$3.60
FT: $2.24
IS: $4.18-$6.60 (16.2MP)
SS: $2.48
StockXpert: $6.00-$7.50

Subscriptions (Commission; size)
123: $0.36; 9MP
BigStock: n/a
DT: $0.35; max (Level 3 images earn $0.70, level 5 earn $1.05)
FT: $0.31; 4MP and $0.36; max
IS: Best of Big 6, but few sub sales (IOW, I dont know!)
SS: $0.25 - $0.38 (depending on level); max
StockXpert: $0.30; max

I'm not sure there are any conclusions that can be made from this, but since I went to all the trouble to gather this data, I figured I might as well post it and hope someone else can see something I couldn't.  ;D

44
Shutterstock.com / The opposite of Fotolia!
« on: August 13, 2009, 16:12 »
I just received an email from Shutterstock (see below), and at first I was afraid they were announcing what Fotolia seems to do a lot -- refunding of purchases. And this email applied to ELs.

But, no, just the opposite. It was to inform me that one or more ELs will be added to my account in the next day or two!

Yea! to Shutterstock!!!

Shutterstock Images LLC recently settled a claim against one of its Subscribers. We found the Subscriber had exceeded the circulation limits of the Standard Licenses granted to it by Shutterstock.  As a remedy the client has agreed to purchase the Enhanced License for all the images it has used in this way.
Our research indicates that one or more of your images was downloaded and used by the Subscriber.
Rather than deduct the legal and administrative expenses incurred by Shutterstock in reaching the settlement, Shutterstock has elected to distribute the bulk of the settlement proceeds to affected Submitters and absorb the majority of the costs of the settlement.   We believe the settlement to be fair and reasonable given all of the circumstances surrounding the breach of our Terms of Service.
Within 24-48 hours you will notice an Enhanced License credit in your account for each of your images downloaded and used by the Subscriber.


45
Veer / Did anyone else's portfolio disappear and NOT re-appear?
« on: August 11, 2009, 15:44 »
A little over 2 weeks ago I logged in to my Veer account for the first time in a while, and found that my dashboard read all 0s (Pending, Approved, Rejected). The last time I'd looked, there were over 400 Approved.

I wrote Brian, and he said to be patient, they will get them back. It was easy to be patient when no one was selling anything yet, but now, not so much.  ;D

Anyone else in the same boat? Misery loves company, ya know.

46
General Stock Discussion / May 2009 earnings breakdown
« on: May 31, 2009, 23:17 »
I hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes by starting this thread, but I just calculated my results and I wanted to post them and forget about May as soon as possible.

May was a worst month of the year (WMY) at most sites for me, and not by a little bit.  >:( I have never experienced such a sharp drop in earnings before.

In order, from #1 to #7:

IS (40%): +23% over April, and a second-best month ever (SBME? ;D)
SS (20%): WMY, -10%
FT (14%): +8% (excluding EL) (meaningfully ahead of DT for the first time in over a year)
DT (10%): WMY, -35%! (excluding April's ELs)
StockXpert (9%): WMY, -37%!
BigStock (5%): WMY, -50%! (excluding April's special licenses)
123 (3%): WMY, -7% (Sub sales have dropped 80% here for me from their high in Mar -- anyone else seeing a drop in 123 subs?)

In total, May had the fewest DLs of any month this year, and the smallest total earnings. :-(

I'm rather amazed at the volatility of these results. It's what I'd expect with a tiny portfolio, but not so much a small one (~500 images). Guess I need to start uploading more!

(Edited to add %)

47
StockXpert.com / StockXpert deactivations
« on: May 28, 2009, 17:42 »
Ouch.

So let's see how the last week at StockXpert has gone:

1. After a nearly 100% approval rating, I have about 50% of images rejected for "not interested in this subject".

2. I look and see that revenues this month are going to be down by about 50% over last month (a BME), and will be the worst month of the year so far for me.

3. I was just notified that 22 images were de-activated today for copyright or trademark protection. These were among my very best selling images, so it's unlikely StockXpert's revenues are going to match last month for quite some time for me.

A very bad week on StockXpert.  >:(

48
I purchased a 5D Mark II recently, and now that I can create 21MP images, it has me wondering more seriously about downsizing.

On iStockphoto, a 21MP image sells for 28 credits, earning me approximately $5.50 (obviously that varies based on the cost of the credits).

The same size photo could be downloaded as a sub on DT, SS, or StockXpert, earning me $0.30 - $0.35.

So does it make sense to UL the max file size to all agencies? If not, what strategy would be best? Do buyers care when they are buying the largest size whether the image is just barely over that size boundary or do they prefer images that are 2x bigger? Does anyone really know?!  ;D

Let's look at it on an agency-by-agency basis:

123 - Max file size is "Mega High XL" > 10.1MP (10 credits). Sub sales are for files less than Mega High XL.
So a 21MP image would not be sold as a sub, but does it help to go beyond, say, 12MP?

BigStock - Max file size is XL, 11MP (6 credits). No sub sales (yea!).
But does it make sense to UL a 21MP image for 6 credits ($3 commission)?

DT - Max file size is "maximum" > 12MP (6 credits and up). Sub sales are for files of "maximum" size.
So a 21MP image would be sold as a sub here. Very disappointing. No reason to UL > 12.1MP here.

FT - Max file size is XXXL > 29.5MP (8 credits), then XXL = 15MP (7 credits).  Sub sales are for files of L size (3.8 MP).
I honestly didn't realize that FT's sub sales were such reasonably small-sized images. (Of course, $0.31 for an L is still highly unappealing compared with the 5 credits is would otherwise cost.) Still, no reason not to UL 21MP images here (or at least 15MPs).

IS - No need to discuss IS; sub-sales are size-based, and the max file size is just less than 21MP. Obviously a full-sized UL is best here.

SS - Max file size is Large > ~4.3MP ($2.48 commission at 2nd lowest tier). Sub sales are for largest size available.
In theory, no need to UL > 5MP. However, since they upsize images, I'm not at all comfortable with that. I really haven't a clue what's the best size to send, but 21MP is too large.

StockXpert - Max file size is XXL > 15MP (15 credits). Sub sales are for the maximum size available on StockXpert and JUI, but limited to XL (8.4MP) or less on photos.com (I think).
This is a real tough one, since there's a big spread between XL (10 credits, 8.4MP) and XXL (15 credits, > 15MP). If subs weren't in the picture, it would be easy. But with unlimited size sub sales really taking off there, I don't know if it makes sense to go for the XXL size or not. I'm tempted to downsize to 8.4MP here.

I know some of you probably feel I'm overthinking this, not to mention making a lot of extra work for myself. But I feel it's important not to devalue our work (or let the microsites do so with unlimited size sub sales).

What say you?

49
Veer / Attila at SnapVillage?
« on: April 23, 2009, 19:39 »
Ok, maybe "Attila" is a bit of an exaggeration.

But certainly things aren't the way they used to be at SV. Maybe they are moving into Veer mode?

Used to be, you'd upload a bunch to SV, wait 2-3 weeks, and then get all of them approved (unless you included a part of a building, in which case you'd get a rejection for lack of PR).

So I wanted to improve my chances of getting moved to Veer Marketplace by uploading some of my latest & greatest images. I uploaded 10 images, and in less than 2 hours, they were all reviewed.  :)

But to my dismay and disbelief, 6 of the 10 were rejected! Yikes! Like I said, not the good, old "we take it all" SnapVillage anymore.

So what's the story? Of the 6 rejection reasons, 1 was for "multiple technical problems".  I guess the reviewers at SV are better at discovering technical problems than the iStock inspectors, as this one was just accepted yesterday at iStock. You'd think that with multiple problems, though, iStock should've been able to find at least one of them (they seem pretty good at it, IMO).  ;D

All the other 5 rejections were for "lack of commercial appeal" or something like that. One of those 5 has been on iStock for just under a month, and has sold 5 times. Not bad to me. Another has sold only once in that time, but apparently it has at least a little appeal.  ;D Two of the others are too new to judge (a week or less), but the last is over a month old without a sale. So I suppose that one doesn't have much appeal.

But to me this is as bad as DT's "too well-covered or too specific" rejection. C'mon, guys: If it's technically ok why not give it a chance? Delete it after a year if it hasn't sold once. You'll end up with a more diverse collection of images, and you won't piss off contributors by arbitrarily (and in some cases, incorrectly) rejecting images that may sell better than you think.

50
General Stock Discussion / Username in keywords poll
« on: March 31, 2009, 22:32 »
If you include your username in your keywords:

1. Why?
2. Have you ever had rejections because of it?

I'm curious how common a practice this is.

I'll begin by saying I do it because I once read somewhere (who knows where now) that it's a good idea.  ;D I think the main reason given was to help find images of yours being sold as someone else's. Presumably the keywords are still in the IPTC data in the downloaded file (is that really true?). I've never had a problem with this until recently, when one of the sites objected. So I'm wondering if it's actually a silly idea after all.

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors