|
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 - weymouth
101
« on: September 17, 2015, 12:52 »
Apart from a general lack of ELs right accross the board actually. There are some things I find rather strange and I am far from alone in this. How can it be such differences, from one day to another? the differences in sales are just unbelievable from day to day, it can be $.100 one day and the next. $. 15. just a very strange pattern. In the mornings, sales can be raining down from heaven and then suddenly it stops dead in its tracks and nothing for four, five hours. This doen't make any sense. Sure, nothing makes sense in micro I know that  but this is an ongoing pattern for month's on end.
102
« on: September 16, 2015, 10:28 »
No way you can upload similar/identical shots to IS and GI. I have just had a terrible row with GI, they ended up deleting 145 images, they found them in something called picture-scout.
Having said that, I don't know what type of contract you have with GI? but if you belong to the House, PC or any of their RM/RF collections. Its out
Standart contributor agreement, nothing special. How does this picture scout work I wonder... How long did it take to find those similar images? Thing is, almost 2 years ago I have uploaded several images at GI, iS and few other stocks that are similar, at the very beging of my career when I was a total newb. And completely forgot about them. Since that I havent had any notifications or something. Just been reviewing my content and found that out.
Believe me sooner or later they will find the identical or similar images. I also know that they are doing a drive finding any pictures in other agencies. Everyone I know within GI have suffered the same. So you know be careful. The only reason I didn't get in to trouble was the fact that I have been with them for 13 years.
103
« on: September 16, 2015, 10:06 »
No way you can upload similar/identical shots to IS and GI. I have just had a terrible row with GI, they ended up deleting 145 images, they found them in something called picture-scout.
Having said that, I don't know what type of contract you have with GI? but if you belong to the House, PC or any of their RM/RF collections. Its out
104
« on: September 16, 2015, 03:27 »
Look upon it this way. DT, is the only one of the main four agencies which haven't had a multi million dollar offer. Now either they have had offers but turned them down or they simply haven't, in which case it must be very frustrating for the management.
So what do they do, well instead of making things better for regular contributors, making sure at least most members are kept happy, they do the kardinal mistake of dollar chasing, desperation, pushing subs, packages all the way. What happens? in the end everyone is unhappy, hence threads like these all over the place.
Not too clever an advertisment!
105
« on: September 16, 2015, 03:14 »
For me just one word. Brilliant! its my number two site and closing in fast on number one. Its not just all money thinking though, the site is working perfectly, the search promotes new files instantly and mixed with old content.
The people seem to know exactly what they are doing and thats half the battle.
106
« on: September 16, 2015, 01:06 »
Shutterstock is all messed up. What a bunch of amateurs running that place.
Kids...More like it. there a lot cheaper.
LOL! city slickers with lovely Armani suits and Gucci shoes, Prada handbags. 
107
« on: September 16, 2015, 00:57 »
Have four so far this month and a couple of single-sales. It's all the ODs that have vanished.
108
« on: September 15, 2015, 02:26 »
All very well but on the whole they are selling and promoting old material. Playing it safe of course. They have to answer to a bunch of share-holders and heaven forbid if there is a penny short.
As far as we are concerned one might ask what's the point in uploading fresh material when it's not given a fair chance to be seen.
109
« on: September 14, 2015, 14:05 »
Mantis is right. You simply have to get in to SS and Adobe/FT. Thats the only two places where the money is. Sadly so.
I have thousands of files with DT, most regrettably and they are performing worse then the only low-tier agency I ever joined. I don't blame you at all! I have yet to come accross somebody with a large portfolio at DT earning accordingly. They are pushing subs packages.
110
« on: September 14, 2015, 06:38 »
Not sure this is a stock-agency? looks more like a creative service, design service? but they have some good content. I like the automotive part.
111
« on: September 13, 2015, 09:19 »
weymouth, I know what you're saying, direct licenses from my site and even a couple of high-value licenses via Alamy can earn me much more than 60+ DLs on SS - but until recently that was less predictable than SS.
I just rejoined FT a few months ago and am earning more there with a handful of files than I did in the past. I plan to upload the rest of my microstock portfolio there over the winter and have also started uploading some iPhone photos there via the Fotolia Instant app. The stock photography market keeps changing - I just wish I'd built up my portfolio back in 2008-2011 when the money was good but I was just dabbling. Adobe seems to be aggressively marketing Fotolia - it pops up every time I open Photoshop and their ads are all over the internet, so it certainly seems like a good place to focus my energy in terms of my microstock portfolio - but I'm also a firm believer that a strong midstock/macrostock presence is needed these days, and my direct licensing efforts have paid off far more significantly than anything else for me.
I'm curious, is your 25% increase at Fotolia due to adding a lot more files or has it just grown due to Adobe taking over?
With Adobe/FT I keep uloading steady, not too much but around lets say, 30-40 files per month but my material is extremely niched and perhaps thats one reason they are selling well, especially at Adobe/FT, among the micros that is. SS is still producing good earnings but they are going down, in fact the agency is slowly going downhill, old people gone replaced by new and without any experience. Its turned to nothing but a subs agency and thats really sad. Yes if I were you, I would invest heavy and upload as much as I can to Adobe. I don't favorise any agency but so far, they are the agency that is getting it right. Time will tell. 
112
« on: September 13, 2015, 01:39 »
Between the years 2011-2014, I could easily make around $.4000 a month at SS, no problem, around $.2000 at FT and around $ 800 at DT, and also at IS. Thats with a portfolio of close to 8000 files.
However, today with the new Adobe/FT things are looking very bright, last month around $.2500, SS. $.2000, and so on. Having said this, just six sales at GI, netted me almost as much. There is just no way of telling.
My views is that SS is slowly becoming just another subs site, they treat people like vermin and survive exclusivly on the lower level of royalty members, pushing subs packages all the way. DT? well thats another sad story, they seem to have stagnated in mid-air.
Adobe/FT is the big surprise and I will be spending 2016 building up exactly what the want and sell.
all in all the micro-stock market is edgy, shakey and very unpredictable.
113
« on: September 12, 2015, 07:15 »
I really wish there was a way to opt-out of subs at SS but of course there isn't. Its a subs-site after all. Last four days have produced an average of 84 subs per day. Crazy!
OD's and credit-sales have just completely vanished.
I'm afraid this is the one single stock-agency model that destroy this whole business.
114
« on: September 11, 2015, 02:16 »
Yesterday Adobe/FT outdid SS by miles, almost three times more, not the first time either and the majority was in fact proper credit-sales. hard to believe but ever since that drop on the stock-market, SS is on a real decline.
115
« on: September 11, 2015, 01:17 »
I nearly fell off my chair this morning! 83 subs in a row, eighty-three!! here is the scary part, almost all old files. Can't believe it. What ARE they doing over at SS.
116
« on: September 10, 2015, 14:05 »
Yes and lots of other agencies are selling for anything between, 0.20c - 0.38c. I rather have the fiver.
117
« on: September 10, 2015, 07:24 »
Its quite laughable really. They are pushing subs, packages all the way. They will earn more and we less. Since day one of that 30% drop on the market, the desperation shines through. Thats all it takes for the bean-counters in the admin to totally freak out.
In all the years with SS, never seen the place in such a state, such a mess.
When giving a broader look its little wonder that Adobe/FT is closing in like an express train.
118
« on: September 09, 2015, 06:15 »
They are pushing subs, packages, same as SS. Thats why credit sales are scarse. They earn more we earn less.
119
« on: September 09, 2015, 06:00 »
When I submit images to GI, I cannot select whether it should goes under RF or RM. However, most of my accepted images are sold under RF, while others are under RM. Do you know on what basis GI categorise images into RF and RM?
I think you can only choose when you are a house contributor. Not through Moment etc.
From the other images, I believe Getty is mostly putting images into RM where it's a great image but it contains some unreleased elements that would prohibit licensing as RF.
Given that the majority of sales today are happening as RF, it is commercially more attractive to have images offered as RF. While there can be huge sales through RM - licenses for $10,000 and more are being reported every now and then -, those big sales are distributed amongst a mass of million images and it's more like a lottery ticket. On the other hand you are losing most of the advertising sales with RM which on average sell at higher prices than editorial uses.
Correct! you can only choose when you upload to the house. However I would imagine most photographers will upload as Royalty-free, selling much more often. Those giant sales of thousands and thousands, well once upon a time maybe but today they are few and far.
120
« on: September 09, 2015, 03:10 »
To me it's all about collections. One good image can be priced 1$ in one collection and $1000 in another, but this is not valid for weak photos
We can find thousands of images in microstock exactly looking like this in the Stocksy's curated collection(or Offset...),but to find all them together will cost for one client so much time that he will always pay more but to look at tightly edited collection.
Good point but I don't believe there are any so called curated or special collections anymore. I know of at least three smaller agencies that are producing exactly the same content as Stocksy and offset and they have been in business for over fifteen years. To the contrary I think GI would do very well in droppping all collections, aggregators and so on and go back to the original blueprint of having just three, The house, Rights and Royaly-free. The rest is just all bewildering to buyers looking for images.
121
« on: September 09, 2015, 01:59 »
Been with GI since 2002 and I agree with Cobalt here. They have come right down in prices and not even the so called house collection seem to fetch much more.
Personally I think GI will have to sit down and revamp the whole strategy, marketing and everything.
122
« on: September 08, 2015, 07:22 »
Depends a lot on the agency search algorithm. When a buyer search under relevance it often show up lots more spam then any other search.
I saw a picture of a car and the photographer had written every single keyword he possibly could find relevant to a car, even words like spanner, tork, wrench, sparkplugs and so on. Nothing of this could be seen in the picture.
This is why many buyers find it frustrating in some agencies having to go through page after page before hopefully finding the picture.
123
« on: September 08, 2015, 01:19 »
They don't want us to contact them anymore.
they certainly don't . No people involved.
True. Some contributor relations nowadays?
124
« on: September 07, 2015, 14:11 »
I was getting worried somebody had pulled the curtains and then found out its Bank holiday in the US. No wonder.
125
« on: September 07, 2015, 06:14 »
Although I have been doing stock photography for years and years I have no experience in building your own platform as a stock outlet.
My homepage and photoshelter, not a stock agency as such bring in good sales and for proper royalty-free pricing. I aimed my photoshelter pages at two specific markets and its paid off very well.
one way of doing it I suppose.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
