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 - wds

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 22
Even the people who are being paid to put their images in the free section may not be winners because they are hurting their own non-free content sales as well. The free stuff may be chosen more than anticipated vs. their non-free content.

I am not making light of this at all, this is how I felt after reading first post announcing the free program:

Okay, what is the "membership video library"?

Pond5 / Re: Pond 5 for still photo sales?
« on: September 29, 2020, 08:40 »
most of my p5 sales are stills, very few video - ranging from $4-40/sale, a few per month

How would you compare the sales volume between say POND5 and SS for stills?

Pond5 / Re: Pond 5 for still photo sales?
« on: September 28, 2020, 17:02 »
I have not seen any significant sales of stills on POND5.

56 / Re: SS: What is the final goal of the protest?
« on: September 15, 2020, 17:01 »

I'm also concerned that, with easy price comparison through Google, I am cannabilizing my better-paying sales working with SS.  Last month I made $19 on a sale on 20twenty.  The same image would have netted me $.10 on SS.  Takes a lot of sales to make up that difference in RPD, and the volume wasn't there for me on SS to make it worthwhile to stay.

a frequent claim w little to back it up - first, how many buyers spend time analyzing google for lowest price - esp'ly when  the difference is minor?

how many people have subs at multiple sites?

finally, there's no indication that one site cannabilizes another and more (admittedly anecdotal) evidence that different images sell on each site.

i buy & sell (non-photo) on ebay & amazon - based on my sales i can see that people don't compare prices - even on the same site, people don't look - else why would they pay $25 for a comic that's also listed at $10?

Buyers absolutely do compare prices. This is the main reason I dropped being exclusive at iStock years ago and removed most of my portfolio. I had buyers contacting me through my personal website asking for pricing for their client projects where their budgets were hundreds or thousands of dollars. Because of exclusivity I had to point them to my iStock portfolio where they'd save a ton of money and I'd lose a ton of money. So I dropped the crown but left my portfolio there.

Then buyers would contact me and I'd give them a quote.  More than a few times they responded "what's the difference between your quote and the pricing for the same images on iStock that are way less". Answer was, there was no difference. So I pulled most of my portfolio so I was no longer competing against myself and I could set whatever pricing I could get.

Keep in mind many of these buyers are at large companies and are sourcing dozens or hundreds of images for large client projects. Clients always balk at pricing forcing the company to look for cheaper options by comparison shopping. Just because they only buy one image from you doesn't mean they aren't spending a ton of money on a bunch of images.

Why did you ever sell on micro's in the first place?

It would have to be clear that you would make more money by going exclusive from the "get go".

General Stock Discussion / Re: RPD in SS and AS
« on: August 04, 2020, 07:52 »

The only way "there is no going back" may not be true is if ultimately, the agencies find they have pushed pricing so low that they themselves can no longer sustain a business.

whole point is they HAVEN'T reduced prices, just the amt paid to contributors - they continue to make the same as before

I  understand that. But "big picture"wise generally speaking, it's a lot cheaper for someone to purchase stock photography than it was 10+ years ago. That's really the root of the problem in addition to the agencies very low payouts. The agencies are responsible for that decline in value via their pricing policies and they themselves may ultimately fall victim to it...pricing themselves out of business.

General Stock Discussion / Re: RPD in SS and AS
« on: August 03, 2020, 21:23 »
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.

The only way "there is no going back" may not be true is if ultimately, the agencies find they have pushed pricing so low that they themselves can no longer sustain a business.

Here's an idea: Why don't they charge customers a bit more for the product.

Where does higher priced stock fit into all this? I submit it's mostly a matter of curation. There is great quality stock at most microstock houses, just really hard to find it. Its seems like the magic of the curated agencies in commanding a higher price, is 90% curation and 10% content quality. Does this make sense?

Is Adobe really undercutting the competition from a pricing standpoint?

Software - General / Re: Video Content Management
« on: July 15, 2020, 21:05 »
I used to always recommend Media Pro by Phase One, it was nearly perfect in every respect. Sadly they have discontinued the product.

And THAT is why I typically stick with the front-runner.  Over the decades, I have tried way too many "gee this looks good, and the xxx feature that yyy is missing" products.  In the huge majority of cases, the cool little tool became discontinued, leaving me with thousands (and sometimes hundreds of thousands) of files that no longer had support.

No more...

I use Adobe Lightroom.  The clear frontrunner in the image cataloging field.  It also has top notch image editing tools, and every one of my 277,924 images has been processed by it.  They also have an excellent keyword / title / description / etc, etc, etc field support.

For video, they are not suitable for editing, but still have all the metadata support.  I have roughly 3000 videos in the catalog.  I do all the editing of metadata inside Lightroom, then can copy/paste to any website that needs it (since video does not support metadata).

Actually video does support metadata (at least for .mov files, not sure about others) . If you use Bridge, it will put the metadata in the file, and interestingly enough, LR will read that metadata even though it can't write metatdata into video files.

Try Google image search

Pond5 / Re: Pond 5 for still photo sales?
« on: July 01, 2020, 21:02 »
I have not seen good results with POND5 regarding still photo sales.

Pond5 / Re: Why is it so painful to upload to Pond5?
« on: June 29, 2020, 08:31 »
You can drag and drop  to POND5 upload page multiple files simultaneously. No slower really than FTP.

They've responded.. Sort of:-

Your video download count looks correct to me. As somebody else pointed out, "Past month" is May. Only "Year to date" includes the current (in progress) month.

As far as the volume of these video downloads over a day or two - I can see that they are from one of our API partners. Customers who purchased these licenses can only use the clips on that platform. They can't save or download them, or re-use them. However, I agree it's odd to see so many on one day.

We've reached out to them to make sure there hasn't been an error.

This has happened to a lot of people.  It looks like SS is spectacularly unaware of things going on with their own platform and partners.  Or theres been a huge security breach.  The APIs are horrific.

Or it's just a low level person responding who really doesn't have a big picture view of what's actually going on.

Adobe Stock / Re: Payout Interval for Adobe
« on: June 09, 2020, 21:45 »
Thanks! I suspected that may have been the case the wording seems ambiguous.

Adobe Stock / Payout Interval for Adobe
« on: June 09, 2020, 15:39 »
I just saw the following message on my Adobe page:

"To request payment you need at least $25 in available earnings. Additionally, you should not have other pending payouts, and 45 days must have passed since your first sale."

The "45 days since your first sale" part...does this mean that you can't get monthly payouts?

I still don't understand why none of the agencies don't charge more for images that sell well. If an image sells well, it is more desirable by definition. If it's more desirable, charge more for it, like every other product on the planet.
Doesn't DT do this with levels

Not on DT, I don't know

I still don't understand why none of the agencies don't charge more for images that sell well. If an image sells well, it is more desirable by definition. If it's more desirable, charge more for it, like every other product on the planet.

Pond5 / Re: Pricing photos on P5
« on: June 07, 2020, 15:44 »
I haven't had luck with P5 selling stills.

I agree, exclusivity is key. It is the only way that agencies will compete and pay us more for content. It has to be done in such a way that there is a clear advantage for going exclusive. And then there is the question of image vs. artist exclusivity.

I wonder what would have happened if instead of royalty cuts to boost revenue, SS raised their prices? This is so contrary to the ingrained and  pervasive "race to the bottom" that all agencies are currently doing. Maybe, just maybe it would have worked. They would make more money and contributors would make more money. Contributors would be motivated to produce more and better content. Would they be so bold as to even try? Sure, the royalty cuts boost revenue, but as we all know, long term that is a dead end. SS, be bold!

75 / Re: June so far
« on: June 01, 2020, 08:13 »
On SS message board, they are saying that the changes will go live this afternoon New York time.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 22


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle