|
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 - PowerDroid
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15
251
« on: January 03, 2010, 10:48 »
DT has been holding steady for me. In fact, today as of 10 am, I've already had my best Sunday ever, thanks to a huge amount of DT downloads... various times, sizes and types of DLs so it's clearly not from just one or a few buyers. Maybe pent up demand after holiday down time? People getting back to work early?
252
« on: January 02, 2010, 12:35 »
The original post in the "2009 Year in Review" thread lists Crestock as one of the agencies that (may have) bit the dust in 09. Anyone hear anything about their status? I stopped uploading there about a month ago when my queue reached 98 images, and there's been no reviews of my submissions in about two months. I wouldn't care, but I've still been earning about $1/day there for the past few months, so it bugs me to think I'm earning them money and they're doing nothing to earn it, and who knows if I'll ever get a payout when I'm due if there's no one minding the store.
253
« on: December 30, 2009, 11:45 »
Hi Powerdroid,
excellent numbers if this is your first year in micro! But your RPI should be around 3 something, dividing your grand total of 20.51 for the six or seven agencies you are in... as mentioned above, RPI/year should be accounted for dividing the total by the agencies where you have photos (not summing it up). Of course stats as this are made also for fun, but analyzing them can bring out some interesting aspect regarding your future course of action. In my case, one is to try to find out why at DT my RPI is so low and another is to keep SS RPI at least where it is.
Thanks for the compliments! There's a hundred different ways to break this stuff down, and all methods seem to have their flaws. Here's how I prefer to look at it... I have a total of 790 images that I have processed and sent out for approvals at all the sites. Some got approved at all sites, some at just certain sites, but I use the number of all processed images for my calculations. I track my stats daily and I know that my average daily RPI for the month of Dec is $.101. (Was running much higher, but of course Christmas week clobbered me.) That means I'm earning 790 x .101 = $79.79 per day (average for December). Since I know my daily RPI has held steady at 10 cents per image per day for the past year, I feel I can project with some confidence what I'll be making as my portfolio grows. For instance, I expect to be at 1000 images sometime in spring, and if my RPI holds, I'll be doing $100 per day, or $36,500 annualized. Things get even more interesting when I project hitting 2000 images and $73,000 annualized... just have to hope that RPI holds steady. Knocking all the wood I can find...
254
« on: December 30, 2009, 10:47 »
Here are my totals... this was my first complete year in microstock, so I'm only showing 2009...
SS = 7.62
IS = 5.55 (just started there in Nov 09)
FT = 3.42
DT = 3.08
BigStock = 1.09
StockXpert = 3.87
Total for 2009, including the other oddball sites, = 20.51 (total of all revenue divided by port size at the site that accepted the most images, so it's not a grand total of the numbers above. I only started at IS in November, so that skews thins as well.)
The thing I'm most pleased about is that I began the year with a $.10 daily RPI, and ended the year at the exact same number. I was expecting my "honeymoon" in microstock to end and see my RPI plummet, but it has held steady. Knocking on wood and hoping that continues into 2010.
255
« on: December 28, 2009, 20:59 »
The whole "feed the beast" mentality is what's wrong with microstock these days. There's a glut of "same old, same old" shots. (I'm also speaking as someone who buys microstock... it's getting really frustrating as a customer to find real creativity in action.)
So many contributors are sending in shots that are so similar to what's already there, that the only way for them to get noticed is to be near the top of the "latest added" search results.
This is not a strategy for long-term success in microstock. People who just keep sending in the same old stuff reach a point where no matter how much they're adding to their portfolios, their revenue stays the same. Don't fall into this trap. Find subjects that aren't oversaturated, develop your own style, and keep your portfolio diverse, and you won't need to "feed the beast" nearly as much as the people here are saying.
256
« on: December 24, 2009, 01:10 »
Just wondering what the bottom trend line in your chart is. Is it RPI?
RPI is my biggest concern in tracking my data. I can control how many images I submit, but RPI is the factor outside my control that will determine my growth, so it's the number that I care most about.
In forecasting future growth, all I can do is make assumptions on RPI based on what has happened to me to date. I've tracked RPI for the past 13 months, and it has held steady (between $.09 and .11 per image per day) but I imagine it will start decreasing at some point due to the age of my images. So far though, it's been flat, and I'm thrilled with that... just hoping that stays true for a long while.
A question for disorderly and the other veterans in the forum... how long did your RPI remain steady before decreasing (if it all), and how much of a decrease in RPI should one expect over time, in percentage terms?
257
« on: December 23, 2009, 16:09 »
About the prices, i think they should not be more expensive than the other micro agencies.
For it to be successful, prices would have to be dramatically lower than the other micro agencies. For any new product to get market share from a well-established product, it has to offer a big benefit to the customer. The three areas to look at are quality, selection and price. On quality... a co-op upstart could only strive to be on par with the big players, so no reason for the customer to switch on that point. On selection... by definition a new site will have a tiny fraction what the big players have, so we'd get clobbered there. Which leaves price... it's the only place in our control where we could make a compelling case for a buyer to get images from us and not the big players. If a co-op offered images at half the price, maybe even a third of the price of the agencies, and only a few percent went back to the co-op for operational costs, perhaps we'd come out ahead. A nice idea, but I'm afraid it's a pie in the sky. Still, if anyone wants to take up the cause, I'd be willing to explore it.
258
« on: December 23, 2009, 13:14 »
Good tips here about cropping, focus, background, etc.
But the best possible advice a newcomer can hear is this: research what subjects are already being oversaturated by pros who have been doing this for many years. The odds are stacked so high against you that you should not bother attacking those topics... and business people in generic poses fall squarely into that category.
The best plan in this business is the best plan for any business: find a need that isn't being met and fill it. Find a niche that is underserved and approach it differently than anyone else. Create your own style that is difficult to imitate.
Microstock has become swamped with photographers who think that since other photographers have had luck shooting certain topics, they can as well. The pool is too full for "me-too" microstockers. You'll immediately drown unless you're unique and savvy to the needs of the market.
Make these your words to live by and you'll do well. Best of luck!
259
« on: December 23, 2009, 12:49 »
I think building a website for something like this is putting the cart before the horse.
The real question is, who would be in favor of setting up a co-op? Once a group of people take up the cause, lay out a mission and action items, and begin the recruitment process, then things like setting up an official website and how it would be paid for could be considered.
Myself, I'm skeptical of unions or trade groups. I'm open to considering a proposal should someone want to put some time into it, but I've always preferred exercising my power as an individual. If I feel that any of the agencies are treating me unfairly, I'll walk. (This isn't my main source of income, so I can afford to take this stand... but I can see how others might have more vested interest in seeing something like this happen to protect their livelihoods.)
260
« on: December 23, 2009, 11:00 »
Since others are posting dollar targets, here's mine... to work up to $4,500/mo which I would hope to hit next Dec.
261
« on: December 22, 2009, 08:02 »
My goals would be:
- Double size of current port (uploading at least 2 pics a day)
- Maintain current RPI (by adding diverse new topics so I don't cannibalize my existing pics)
- Double overall income
- Keep having fun!
262
« on: December 20, 2009, 20:59 »
I'd say the Christmas slump in downloads officially started Friday night, and boy are my numbers in freefall.
OK, I was expecting it, but it was still quite a drastic fall-off from the past Mon - Fri (Dec 14 - 18) which was my BWE. My downloads for this weekend (Dec 19 - 20) are about one third of what my weekends have been lately. I'm guessing that buyers were in a mad rush to complete projects this past week, buying a lot of images for things that had to be done by year's end. And from now till sometime in January sales will be in freefall.
Is this what you're experiencing / theorizing right now?
(I started at microstock in Nov 08, so I've been through a Christmas slump before, but I guess since my port was so small and all my uploads were pretty fresh, I didn't notice such a pronounced fall in downloads.)
263
« on: December 17, 2009, 10:52 »
The commission rate cut really stinks, but isn't it possible that it will be balanced out by the increased price the customer is paying? And if we take Fotolia at its word that it will continue to aggressively market itself to buyers, it's possible that sales will increase. It's not outside the realm of possibility we'll see increased downloads X increased prices X a reduced rate = a net gain for contributors. I know I'll get flamed by all the FT haters here, but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt as they've been a solid performer for me for my 13 months in microstock. I won't be leaving FT anytime soon.
264
« on: December 17, 2009, 07:07 »
I went ahead and removed my StockXpert portfolio.
I've never understood why contributors remove portfolios from micro sites, unless going exclusive on another, or as a sign of protest against new policies. Why remove your port if it's selling even a little bit? Seems like you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. Sure, stop contributing to a site if you feel it's a waste of time, but what's it hurting to keep it there? (Again, if you're taking a stand against a site, I sort of understand... but unless contributors do it in a big organized fashion, the micro will not notice or care about your sudden absence.) Myself, I've seen a pretty nice spike in StockXpert sales this month after two months of slow decline. Really hoping it's allowed to live on, even if it gets no future development.
265
« on: December 17, 2009, 07:01 »
Anyone else notice a burst of sales at Veer? After about a month of little to no activity, I saw a big spike in sales for the past two days. This is now the third significant spike for me since Veer's launch... wondering if these are tied to promotional pushes on Veer's part.
Also, is anyone else having to log in nearly every single time you pull up your Dashboard? I've had to do this ever since the security lapse this past weekend.
266
« on: December 16, 2009, 14:31 »
Count me as another nowhere near the fence. I don't see the logic in going exclusive... I don't have a big port right now, but even if I did, I don't expect IS to ever grow to be more than 50% of my total revenue, so I would have to make double what I make as a non-exclusive to make sense to go exclusive. So a question to the IS exclusives out there... did the added exposure and/or increased upload limits get you anywhere near doubling your revenues on IS?
267
« on: December 16, 2009, 14:25 »
I'm seeing a very slight increase in sales at 123RF the last few months, but I wouldn't have even noticed if your question didn't prompt me to do a quick check of my 123RF stats (just comparing the first 15 days of each month) which are:
Aug 1-15: $23
Sep 1-15: $25
Oct 1-15: $25
Nov 1-15: $32
Dec 1-15: $35
268
« on: December 16, 2009, 13:20 »
It's been down again for me for a while... but it just came back up, and it appears I had another 6 or 8 downloads during the time I couldn't see the site, so I guess the good news is that at least some buyers can see it and the downloads are being tracked through to my account.
269
« on: December 16, 2009, 12:16 »
Now I'm seeing it again. Maybe I just had to vent and it magically was fixed. I wonder if between FT and BigStock experiencing downtime, maybe the sites think this is a good week to do maintenance, anticipating lower activity from customers. But I'm seeing the opposite... this is my BWE so far! I hope the downtime on the sites is kept to a minimum, at least for customers!
270
« on: December 16, 2009, 12:12 »
The site is down today, making changes. Wonder if it is related to the merger?
I saw a message that the site (mainly the uploading portions of it) would be down today for a percentage of contributors. So it can't be a major overhaul... probably a server issue. Unless they're rolling out something big in phases, but I don't think that would be too wise.
271
« on: December 16, 2009, 12:10 »
Anyone else having trouble seeing Fotolia today? Seems like for the past two hours I've been able to see the site about 1 in 10 tries. No error message or anything, just a blank screen. If buyers are seeing the same, there goes today's dl's!
272
« on: December 15, 2009, 07:39 »
I had a great November on BigStock (I made a post about it). I really thought some changes were happening, perhaps due to the SS purchase. But December has stunk so far, with half the revenue of the first 14 days of November. Otherwise, I'm seeing an increase on all the other sites.
273
« on: December 13, 2009, 23:31 »
No complaints here. December 09 is my BME so far. It's my 14th month at microstock, with about 750 pics on most of the sites.
274
« on: December 10, 2009, 09:31 »
I'm of two minds on this.
Yes, the article mentioned is just the latest in a growing list of moronic "You too can get rich from all those snapshots on your hard drive" diatribes. Anyone who falls for that and invests the considerable time it takes to process, keyword and submit those generic, inferior pics deserve the rude awakening in store for them.
At the same time though, last year I was simply a microstock buyer and took a careful look at what I was buying and did calculations on what those submitters must be making, and decided to try it for myself. Yes, my goal was to "rake in the cash." I didn't simply send in my vacation snapshots, but instead did careful research on what sells, what topics aren't being covered to death already, what I could produce with minimal or no cost, what style could I create to build a "brand" for myself, and guess what... it's working. I set clear goals, daily upload quotas, and forecast where I would be 6 months out, one year out, three years out, etc. I'm on goal so far and having a great time.
The lesson here is to take what you read with a grain of salt, but also look around... many contributors (including myself) would not be doing this if there weren't real financial rewards. You can do it too if you understand a simple rule of business: find a customer with a need not being met, and fill that need before and/or better than anyone else can.
275
« on: December 09, 2009, 13:03 »
Clearly this is a gray area, one that would require specific examples to review.
The example of a generic handshake is clearly one that should NOT be considered infringement. But if you had two businesspeople shaking hands on top of a big blowup of the word DEAL, then the image is much more specific and if someone were to create a pic with similar looking businessmen at the same angle, same colors, fonts, etc., many of us would feel that the concept of the original image was copied and the duplicates should not be allowed in the microstock sites.
I think defining copyright infringement in cases like this is similar to how a US court famously defined pornography... "you know it when you see it."
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
