|
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 - stockastic
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 160
151
« on: May 03, 2018, 10:27 »
I think what they're doing is basically "renting" images without paying royalties. The client uses the photo for internal purposes - design mockups, presentations, sales pitches for ad campaigns, or just to develop ideas - in exchange for a sort of "restocking fee" from which we get nothing.
152
« on: April 30, 2018, 14:36 »
I've decided this deal means nothing. None of these photo sharing/sales sites are investing in improvements, upgrades, new development. They have no new ideas to try and the creative people in the organizations have moved on. They're just spending their cash on acquisitions and blabbering about synergy.
153
« on: April 30, 2018, 13:48 »
Yes they use any number of print suppliers and never give out any information about them.
154
« on: April 21, 2018, 14:01 »
I've been hoping that something will eventually start to compete seriously with FAA for 'art' photo sales. Neither Flickr nor Smugmug have done that, but maybe there's some hope for the combination. FAA obviously feels threatened by this deal - someone started a thread on the FAA forum to disuss it, and the moderator immediately slammed it shut.
155
« on: April 18, 2018, 09:53 »
Long story made short - I still sell now and then on FAA but it's heading downhill. A few weeks ago they really, really screwed up the search presentation and as a result I'm expecting even fewer sales in the future. They're slowly turning it into another Zazzle.
If there's a way to market on 'social media' that isn't actually just a waste of time, I have yet to find it. Those channels are beyond saturation. Others still claim success but never seem to say exactly how they do it.
156
« on: April 08, 2018, 11:19 »
I do no 'marketing' but somehow sell a print on FAA once in a while. I've had photos there for about 5 years and during that time have seen probably 100 threads in their forum on the "need to market yourself". Some enthusiastic artist starts it, talking about how Twitter just brought them another sale. Lively discussion follows, and it always ends with these conclusions:
1. You have to market your work.
2. The main tools for that are Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest.
3. Twitter no longer works, it's just a big waste of time.
4. Facebook no longer works, it's just a big waste of time.
5. Pinterest no longer works, it's just a big waste of time.
6. Hey, all the kids are on Instagram now. You need to be there!
158
« on: April 06, 2018, 14:31 »
My take on SS is that they completely sold themselves on the idea that they're a super high-tech company with an R&D group that will work miracles. So they decided they no longer need incoming inspection, because very soon now they'll be able to do it all with "AI". It won't matter how much junk they have in the archives because their amazing software will identify all aspects of quality and relevance and push that out in the search.
Another reason they love this idea is that it means they can cut all the reviewing costs and instantly show some better numbers to their investors. And to those execs whose bonuses are tied to profit targets for this year.
As with autonomous vehicles, they're now finding out that the devil is in the details, it isn't quite as easy as they thought. Months turn into years and they're still putting pages of junk in front of buyers. But hey, that AI breakthrough is right around the corner - next quarter for sure...
159
« on: April 04, 2018, 16:10 »
So what did I miss? The e-mail starts "In light of recent events..." Did I miss something? What big event took place the brought this on?
The events around #MeToo, presumably.
It's particularly focussed on an ethical way of using models.
So carefully worded that most people won't even know what it means, but presumably gives them a fig leaf of cover in case of lawsuits going after their deep pockets. A masterpiece of corporate-speak.
160
« on: April 02, 2018, 12:07 »
I've learned something about Google advertising recently because I tried running some ads for print sales. And I've had exchanges with people who know more about it. Many advertisers have concluded that it's a waste of money and that Google is running all sorts of games. You have no way of knowing what you're actually getting for your money, Google can show you any numbers they want, you can't verify anything.
161
« on: April 01, 2018, 11:21 »
Interesting! They'll get nothing, of course, but at least suits like this will start to expose Google's real business practices to daylight. And I think when that happens, Google will make Facebook look like a bunch of choir boys by comparison.
162
« on: March 28, 2018, 16:43 »
I used to sell regularly there, a few every month with 500 images. No more. They're busy bringing in big corporate sellers like Conde Nast and Getty, and a bit player like myself is buried deep. Their keyword search is a dumpster fire, and the site pushes products like phone cases and shower curtains.
2 sales so far this year.
Unless you have your own marketing campaign, or a very successful keyword niche, I'd say FAA is just another waste of upload time.
163
« on: March 12, 2018, 19:10 »
. And all this redundant uploading is waste of time. Couldn't we keep all our work on single a cloud server and give multiple agencies access to it?
(...)
I have no ideas to offer (...)
Actually that's a great idea. Upload to the cloud, allow access to specific agencies with a unique key and then it's up to the agencies to adapt their infrastructure to present the images from the cloud to their customers.
But this idea could only work with sufficient support from big agencies. I know ToonVectors uses Dropbox to sync uploaded files to their system. If more (and bigger) agencies would hook up to this idea,it could (and should) become an industry standard.
Well it could at least reduce their storage costs. And if an agency p!ssed me off I could shut them off in a heartbeat, not waste my time begging them to close my account.
164
« on: March 12, 2018, 13:01 »
Just noticed this thread. I won't repeat what's already here, but have one thought to add.
It's no use trying to do just what numerous other sites already do, only pay the contributors more and market it harder. Some sort of fresh approach is needed.
Contributor returns are so low that even if you don't feel like a fool, it isn't even worth the time and effort to upload hundreds or thousands of photos. Obviously that has to change - we need to get a few bucks on a sale. And all this redundant uploading is waste of time. Couldn't we keep all our work on single a cloud server and give multiple agencies access to it?
And maybe the whole idea of 'marketing' belongs in the past.
I absolutely agree that the big micros like SS have made everything 10x too complicated for both buyers and producers.
I have no ideas to offer - but I never saw the web coming, either. Somehow the whole path of "I need an image - how would I find one - how would I pay for it" needs new alternatives. Maybe - text some keywords to an AI that responds with a link to some pages of images... and its an iterative process, you text back "no, too many people, I just want one face" or "more of a closeup of that one building on the right" and the AI tries again...
165
« on: March 10, 2018, 11:39 »
What is "non numeric media"?
166
« on: March 07, 2018, 12:24 »
Oh you're thinking prices are still too high? And you'd like to support a couple more sites, competing on nothing but price, to drive it down even further? I get it. But I think you're too late, it's been done to death already.
167
« on: March 07, 2018, 12:22 »
Not exactly news.
Whatever happened to the guy with 30,000 photos of a bag of pot? Is he still there?
168
« on: March 01, 2018, 18:37 »
I think the 'brief' concept could work, but in today's market the money has to flow in the other direction. Along with their photos, photographers would submit a bid for what they'd pay a client to use their work.
169
« on: February 27, 2018, 17:13 »
As i recall, the new owner posted here and was quite candid about a realistic timeline for redeveloping the site. I'm not sure we're really that far beyond his hoped-for date.
That's true but the feeling here, which I shared, was that it would be extremely hard to get buyers back or retain. I guess there's still time.
No one has been able to start a new image sales business for years - SS controls the market, and they've destroyed it. The next window of opportunity will be when significant numbers of buyers stat to get disenchanted with SS and with searching its endless archive of repetitious junk. And on another track, the whole concept of 'stock imagery' will inevitably change, and what SS has will go out of style. What comes after that, I have no idea.
170
« on: February 27, 2018, 10:53 »
Got contacted by yet another vulture asking for free images in trade for name credit. You can't blame them for trying. If I walked into a gas station and said "LOVE your gas. It's amazing. Could I fill up my tank and in exchange I'll put your company logo in my car window?" and almost all gas stations said yes, I would ask every gas station I went into.
Good analogy except these image parasites don't actually give your name any exposure - even if that were worth something. They're basically panhandlers. Hey buddy would you help us out? Tryin' ta start a business here....
171
« on: February 27, 2018, 10:10 »
At this point in history, I'm not handing my intellectual property to a Chinese company.
172
« on: February 27, 2018, 10:06 »
As i recall, the new owner posted here and was quite candid about a realistic timeline for redeveloping the site. I'm not sure we're really that far beyond his hoped-for date.
173
« on: February 18, 2018, 15:28 »
Used to trade used photo gear on eBay until 2006. Up until then it was fine. Then they started charging commission on the postage and later making it so that only buyers could leave negative feedback on sellers but not the other way around.
In the old days eBay was fun and easy now it's so burdenened with rules and regs that coupled with their policy of stealing the cash off your Preypal account and giving it to the buyer if the buyer claims they never received the goods, I never ever sell there now.
Got scammed once by a guy in China who gave an address in France (he bought miniatures of booze in France so it was probably a mate's address). Then he claimed never to have received it but he changed his eBay address to China the next day after I sent it to France. Had a screenshot of the two addresses but it made no difference to eBay/Paypal....they just removed the full payment from my account and gave it to him and then charged me all the fees on top.
Lost more than 200 on that little scam and have never used them to sell anything again.
I will still buy small things on eBay because the whole place is heavily weighted towards the buyer but they definitely don't deserve anyone's business as a vendor.
Good summary. Today, I wouldn't sell anything of significant value on ebay. Especially cameras. When it's time to upgrade, I either sell the old one cheap to a friend or relative, or just trade it in at the store. Ebay isn't worth the risk and the hassle.
174
« on: February 18, 2018, 12:14 »
But have they actually closed iStock to new contributors? Nobody's answered the original question.
It's like if a drunk asks you to help him find his car keys. You try to discourage and distract him.
175
« on: February 16, 2018, 14:53 »
They're doing you a favor. Just walk away.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 160
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
