|
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 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 14
76
« on: December 14, 2020, 15:12 »
While empowerment is always desirable, the only real power we have is to choose to accept their terms or leave. Or stay but stop uploading new stuff.
Ok. How about everyone who has images with Bigstock removes all but one of their images? It's owned by the SS. It costs money to keep the company operating yet few of us make any real money contributing to the agency. BTW, and yes, I was one of those who kept my portfolio with the SS but hasn't contributed since the changed rates. Empowerment is protection against unfair business practices.
77
« on: December 14, 2020, 10:13 »
This title make remember me the Dollar Tree Store, in that store all is selling for one dollar! 
That's right....and my last ten RPI images with the SS was $0.23. It should be called the "$0.23 store"  . Dreamstime's RPI is $1.67. Which begs the question, why are people still contributing to the SS? Here's another idea I'm going to toss out there while sticking to the subject of empowering contributors. What about the idea of hiring a legal council? Everyone contributes 1% of their image income to maintain a legal consulting team hired to provide advice when agencies change or alter their legal agreement with contributors. Seven years ago the SS used a "bait and switch" tactic to lure contributors into submitting more images. They told us at the time that the least you would make would be $0.33us a sale and the more you make the higher that base rate would climb. Seven years later they pulled the rug from under every contributing photographer and arbitrarily changed the agreement whereby the base rate is now$0.10us. Legal perhaps for the new contributors signing up - but was the bait and switch tactic legal when contributors signed up long before the change? A legal council would look at those sort of "contract tactics" and let us know if it's legal AND provide legal methods of retaliation. Another idea. Empowerment is essential for every contributor.
78
« on: December 12, 2020, 23:09 »
What works? What doesn't work? Dialogue is good while we collectively
anticipate our next $0.10 commission......
79
« on: December 12, 2020, 15:39 »
The "Contributor's Union" would have their own website whereby they submit
exclusively to that site. They manage and adjust operations based on a collective vote.
Maintaining and controlling the site would be derived from "union dues". If say,
you sell an image for $2.00us, $1.00us goes toward union website operations.
Someone would have to be hired to manage the website. Someone with strong
union background skills. Insuring that "scabs" aren't submitting to other sites would
be a major issue. That, and gaining the initial confidence of contributors that more
money can be made by joining the union.
80
« on: December 11, 2020, 11:30 »
Thank you, Martha for sharing your story. It's a valuable example for us
all that we are more than a collection of funny hashtags. We are real people
who all do a very honorable thing....We capture the fragility and beauty and
essence of life on this beautiful planet. Your deeply poignant story is a
reminder to me that life is a precious gift. A precious gift that I want to capture
and share with others. Thank you, Martha.
81
« on: December 11, 2020, 11:12 »
It is very much the race to the bottom because most contributors accept the terms agencies
give them. And with 8+ million contributors what do they care about you or me? I've said it
before in posts and I'll say it again....The only way we can resolve this problem is for contributors
to create their own agency and collectively go "exclusive". And that's never going to happen
so someday down the road all images and clips will be free to the agencies but "you will retain rights and be given credit".
82
« on: December 08, 2020, 16:56 »
I'm very late coming to this discussion because my husband has been in the hospital (not for Covid, thank God) almost since the thread started. He's not doing well, so obviously my attention is there, not here. Amazing similarities with stock photography, Martha! Wishing both you and your husband a successful passage into 2021....I've always enjoyed the distraction photography provides and submitting to agencies over the years especially when dealing with personal difficulties. As far as nature photography goes, I'd encourage Mynameisnotearl to cruise the net. There's lots of forums specifically geared toward "nature photography"......
83
« on: December 01, 2020, 11:39 »
Can't log in at all today. After a dozen Captcha things I have given up. Twice. Anybody else got this?
Yup. Me too.
84
« on: October 20, 2020, 13:50 »
Thanks for the info. It looks like a war that will last for years.
I have always watched over my privacy and intimacy, anonymity has been my reference for years. Now that I'm going to move on to the other side, to websites, associating contributors, Google is my new best friend.
They are the owners of the planet.
An interesting statement that pretty well sums up the decline of modern civilization.
85
« on: October 15, 2020, 08:09 »
Just another example of why we have to start our own agency and stop contributing to agencies that ignore the amount of effort we put into our work.
86
« on: October 11, 2020, 08:32 »
"The actual winner of that "debate," IMHO, was the fly that spent a minute or more gazing out at the world from atop Pence's sleek silver head."
I'm not claiming to be an Entomologist but flies have a tendency to land on places that stink, don't they?
87
« on: October 08, 2020, 13:17 »
Way back in the 1840's when Marconi invented the first digital camera I started uploading to Dreamstime, 123RF and Depositphoto. Ever since, almost since day one, I started selling a cow grazing in the meadow. Nice shot. A little different. Low angle and close. The image has sold steadily ever since. Never a big 3 or 4 digit sale but consistently throughout the years (yes, even during the Civil War  ). All told, a little over $2000 and still counting. Second on the list was close on a special electric pavement saw. About $1500.
88
« on: September 26, 2020, 09:50 »
Speaking of payout, this will mark the first time in 9 years that I've been with the SS that I won't reach payout in one month. Dreamstime was the first agency I joined way back in 2009 and its always been very consistent and predictable. Feathers never ruffled. Always judging my images in the same consistent way it did since day one. Not a big seller but with 10,000+ images payouts are now consistently 4 times a year.....No surprises or radical changes. That works for me.
89
« on: September 18, 2020, 09:19 »
SS video clip sale for $0.77. Really. Are clips now joining the SS photo mantra....Fill your pockets, boys! They will take anything!
90
« on: August 29, 2020, 10:29 »
And just out of curiosity, Mat, any idea what the ratio of "pictures taken to pictures displayed" was? When I'm out cycling I usually come home with about 100 images taken. From there approximately 5 are submitted to agencies. It would also be interesting to learn what kind of gear you're using. Regardless, thanks for sharing!
91
« on: August 19, 2020, 16:32 »
I can report two subscription sale refunds in one day with 123clawback. This is while my total hovers at $49. Refunds appear to be a popular action with this agency. I'd keep an eye on them.
92
« on: August 14, 2020, 21:45 »
My apologies. I know this is a bit of a stretch. But on the subject of "getting new equipment" is anyone selling HD anymore and how much longer do you think 4K will run before it joins the HD archives museum?
93
« on: July 17, 2020, 10:12 »
I would also dismiss Depositphoto. Their payout is decent at $50 unlike Dreamstime at $100. Something to consider if you're just starting out but you rarely get anything more than their standard $0.31us. My last 30 sales ranging from "small" to "extra large" and "subscription" to "on demand" are the standard $0.31us. They pocket the profit but they don't reward the supplier.
94
« on: July 15, 2020, 19:14 »
Not to mention the SS dangled a carrot in front of our noses a few years ago promising that if you work your butts off and sell more images your commission would rise and the minimum payout would increase from $0.33 to $0.36us and so on. They obviously thought their trained monkeys could easily be manipulated. Hence the $0.10us minimum.
95
« on: June 30, 2020, 14:22 »
Maybe I just have respect to my self ...
No sweetheart. If you work with the SS you're an amateur. Pure and simple.
96
« on: June 14, 2020, 16:32 »
I've been in this business for more than 10 years
and when I started no agency gave contributors less
than $0.30 commission for a sale. That changed about
5 years ago when 123RF, IStuck, Fotolia and other major
agencies dropped commissions to as little as $0.19us.
And did it hurt their business and contributor participation?
No. Did Shutterstock take notice? Of course they did.
If the trend in the microstock business is $0.15us commission,
then that will be the benchmark for all agencies.
Shutterstock, like other agencies assume that the vast majority
of contributors have no benchmark. We'll accept whatever
pittance the agency doles out. Frankly, I stopped submitting
to any agency that thought my body of work was worth less than
$0.30us. Thank goodness a benchmark has been found and we
are finally united......
97
« on: June 05, 2020, 22:36 »
Dreamstime was the first agency I joined more than a decade ago. I've always felt that I've been treated fairly. It's always felt like a partnership since day one.
98
« on: May 07, 2020, 06:40 »
IF you're willing to submit your clip to an agency with its' specific stated terms then stop your whining. You agreed to the terms. If you don't like the terms, remove your footage.
99
« on: March 23, 2020, 07:51 »
Pure and simple, the virus is the result of 8 billion humans crowded on a very small, blue planet. And what's the answer? Live a more orderly, safe lifestyle so we can try to handle 16 billion people? 20 billion? As long as we think we can continue to consume and expand and take, Mother Nature will try to interject and balance the negative effects we're having on this planet.
100
« on: March 01, 2020, 10:04 »
Nice at least to see someone share my own frustrations. I've written Dreamstime with no response so they literally don't give a *. And I found a "work-around" submitting to Depositphoto. Agencies are wearing me down. I've been submitting now for 10 years+ and the motivation for continuing is razor thin. If they aren't dropping commissions, rejecting perfectly good images, ignoring problems with their own infrastructure, changing rules, changing site protocol, never consulting with photographers, etc.....and its much worse now. What then is the motivation for working with companies that have no respect for their suppliers?
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
