|
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 - Asthebelltolls
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14]
326
« on: January 03, 2014, 15:08 »
I guess I'm in the minority here but DP has been good to me and grows in earnings the more I contribute. No one ever includes their specialty when complaining about an agency's lackluster performance making it difficult to understand why you're doing poorly and I'm finding success. My portfolio is a potpourri of subject matter - from landscape to industry and everything inbetween. What I like most about DP is that they sell images that stagnate untouched by others. About 5% of my portfolio sells daily with SS while the rest rarely sell. SS is my best earner but that would change if I didn't have that 5% buyers gravitate to. DP meanwhile sells daily and always something different that hasn't sold before. I have about 2000 images with DP. About 500 with SS.
327
« on: January 01, 2014, 17:39 »
The only thing predictable about microstocking is its unpredictability.
I have no Christmassy stuff to offer buyers. No mistletoe.
No wreaths. No red cheeked Santa Clauses so my expectations were low leading into the month....yet, SS, DT and DP tripled in earnings over last year and for the first time since the start of submitting my #1 earner was Pond5 beating out SS by $30.
328
« on: December 31, 2013, 13:45 »
To test the SS waters I took a simple "nature" shot. Nothing Pulitzer Prize winning but a few potential sales down the road nevertheless. The image was rejected for the obligatory reasons: "poor lighting", "Poor composition", "Your image is out of focus or not where we feel it should be"....
Without readjusting framing, focus or lighting, I submitted a video clip as well. It was accepted.
The simple truth is: SS doesn't want my image because they know it won't generate high demand which makes me wish they'd adopt DP's approach: "We don't feel your image is commercially acceptable". The simple truth instead of technical
garble is a far more truthful approach that I can live with. If you don't think your agency can sell the image then don't accept it but don't apply erroneous/untruthful reasons for rejecting my submission.
The image BTW was accepted by DT, DP and 123RF.
329
« on: December 28, 2013, 15:08 »
I agree 100% with Massimo. 123's contributor setup looks like it was designed by a wannabe web designer that will never be.
How much cr@p do I have to swim through before I can see my earnings? HELLO! 123! Have you ever heard of a homepage that has all the info you need to know with one click? Could you make the experience anymore cumbersome, sloppy and amateurish?
And as far as sales go 123 is my only agency that stagnates in sales. Same number of sales this year as last yet twice as many images. I never compare contributor with contributor. You're doing well? Great. For me, as with all the other agencies I deal with, if I contribute, sales should grow. If not, abandon ship and try another agency. And BTW I'll never pull my images. Let the sales trickle in. Too much time and energy has been applied to wipe the slate clean. But as far as growing my portfolio with 123....no thanks.
330
« on: December 25, 2013, 21:09 »
My success comes with Pond5. They allow you to set your own price. They give you 50% commission. They'll cut you a check for $100 or more. Their uploading for video clips is smooth (I use Filezilla). And SS.....? Low commission. Poor uploading system that's tediously slow. And now you need a minimum $500 before they'll cut you a check. And Pond5 checks arrive more than 3 days earlier than SS. Both agencies accept just about everything and anything and that's where Pond5 has a perfect set-up. The better the clip, the higher the price. SS wants to punish. Pond5 wants to share success equally and despite being far lower on the totem pole, I generate far more clip sales with Pond5 than I do with SS. That's why I don't bother with SS anymore.
331
« on: December 20, 2013, 11:23 »
I got paid 13th December (Paypal) so I think the payment date problem in sporadic and not across the board. However RPD/ income on 123RF has declined significantly for me in most recent months so not happy with overall performance.. its like the more you upload the less you make on RPD. 
Pity.. when I first started with 123RF few years ago I was so optimistic about this site!
Same here. Last three months has seen a massive slide in sales culminating in this month's most pathetic results since signing up with 123. 1000+ images and two sales. Meanwhile DT, SS and DP will easily be BME. Do you think with the recent PP debacle their system isn't properly reporting sales?
332
« on: December 14, 2013, 14:54 »
Judging by the reaction to this topic.....I too am dealing with the current SS rejection onslaught....I'm wondering if this current practise is also inflicted on the wannabes who are trying to qualify. Is this a case of far too many contributors and far too many uploads to deal with? I'm now at the point where I'll compare my image to similar subjects on SS's first page and try to be non-biased in my assessment. Is my image as good as or better than what I see on the first page? If not, I don't bother uploading.
333
« on: December 09, 2013, 13:20 »
Generally speaking Shutterstock is staying the course. Not up and not down. But combining all five agencies sales are way up. Surprising since I don't have anything "seasonal" to offer buyers. Goes to show the only thing predictable about microstocking is unpredictability.
334
« on: November 10, 2013, 17:40 »
"Self-Hosted" maybe one effective means of keeping the traditional agencies in line. Why submit to an agency that continually drops commissions  and you can earn far more self-hosting your portfolio? 
335
« on: October 27, 2013, 09:01 »
A brilliant article. Thanks for sharing. I hope all those photographers out there who somehow think they're gaining valuable exposure by giving away their images for free to agencies like IS will read this article and come to their senses. Not only are you delusional in thinking that somehow your free images will prompt potential buyers into seeking out your portfolio and pay real money for your images, but you're also hurting all those contributors who refuse to degrade or cheapen their body of work.
336
« on: October 12, 2013, 14:24 »
Thanks for sharing.
I have a wetplate from 1862. A woman, very starched looking,
in a studio.
The gold frame is stamped Worcestor, 1862.....I assume then
that she lived on the American east coast. Perhaps an immigrant
fresh off the boat.
337
« on: September 19, 2013, 21:58 »
Yes Herg, me too...out of 30 submissions, 3 maybe accepted. I now submit no more than 5 pix. I wonder if SS is trying to reduce submissions. Lets face it they're the only agency still making money for contributers. I wonder if they're now inundated with submissions.
338
« on: September 03, 2013, 22:04 »
My thoughts as well....my game plan is to visit a local camera store, try on a 2x extender and if it works.....buy it through [email protected] $300.
339
« on: September 01, 2013, 18:44 »
Looking over to the right shocked me....has DP really dropped off the map???For me it's always been a steady earner.....but what sets it apart from the others is that DP sells images that don't sell with other agencies.
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
