|
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 - increasingdifficulty
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 74
101
« on: August 03, 2019, 02:31 »
Hi All. I have been a Pond5 contributor since 2012. While I do not have a ton of clips up there (300 or so), I have some unique clips. 2017 I averaged over $400/month (with less footage up there).
Those are actually very, very good numbers for Pond5 only. I don't think many (if ANY) contributors actually make much more than $1.50 per video clip per month (not animations) at Pond5. You must have unique clips indeed, but keep in mind that for each month that passes, the risk of those clips not being so unique anymore goes up, up, and up. People copy anything they see is selling. Your $70 for 300 clips would be considered more normal P5 numbers. Most contributors don't even make anything close to that. For me, 2019 is pretty good, if I extrapolate Jan-July it would be my best year ever (since 2015), but pretty close to 2018.
102
« on: July 31, 2019, 12:33 »
Most of my sales show LLP but until that all have been 50% then 40% of the set selling price.
This one is substantially lower.
I've had some $2.xx LLP sales, but most of them have actually been substantially higher than my Pond5 sales, sometimes more than double. So, I suppose they can be at any level. I don't mind, as long as the majority of all sales aren't $2.xx sales. A $2 sale still brings your clip up the search rankings above all clips with 0 sales. And since the vast majority of all clips have earned $0, that's a very good thing.
103
« on: July 09, 2019, 13:49 »
I don't see why the 100% wouldn't be the total subscription revenue.. or why they wouldn't share 60% of the total subscription revenue. Sure, SB have a bunch of content that they already own or have licensed, but in the instances where one of their clips is downloaded rather than a contributor's clip... then it will be treated just as if it was one of your clips or my clips that had been downloaded. So they'll just get the share instead I.e. my clip... I get 60% and SB get 40%. Their clip... SB get 60% and SB get 40%.
So yeah, if all downloads in a month are from SB's existing collection... they'll be sharing 0% of the total subscription revenues. But if all downloads in a month are from member library partners... they'll be sharing 60% of the total subscription revenues. I can't see how else they'd do it without just 'making stuff up'.
That would be the logical way to do it, and hopefully how it is. But they did just make up a number during the testing period, so the positive testimonials and "3x earnings" statements mean absolutely nothing. 
104
« on: July 09, 2019, 13:02 »
I would like to see numbers $$ from people who opt in. I know there are some on this forum...
The old numbers mean nothing and the new model hasn't started yet so we will have to wait a couple of months for that I suppose.
105
« on: July 09, 2019, 12:49 »
POINT #1 - 60% is NOT of their TOTAL revenue, but rather an ARBITRARY random number they pick out of thin air
the "membership pool" is NOT "60%" of storyblocks ENTIRE membership base. They make about $30 million+ year.
It is NOT a portion of that.
RATHER. It is some arbitrary number they pick out of the air to decide what to split amongst authors. RIGHT in their text, it says:
"Instead of members paying for clips a la carte in the Marketplace, they pay for a subscription to access content in our Member Library. We then create a Member Library Earnings pool, which we divide among all contributors who participate in the program based on how much of their content is downloaded."
So out of that $30 million, maybe they pick $50,000 to split amonst all authors. Maybe less. Maybe more. Chances are - they are
will use simple math to figure out what is the bare minimum they can pay people to get them to participate. But its REALLY important
to note, the 60% is NOT part of that "$30 million" in revenue.
I think this bit's wrong. Sure, the wording isn't exactly the best, but I'm pretty sure the 'we create a member library earnings pool' refers to the amount of money that's left after they've taken their 40%. I.e. the 60% is the pool. If it doesn't mean that, then why would they leave out the 60% cut part? As it stands, there's nothing in the description about that, so it gives the impression they distribute 100% of the earnings pool. The only thing that would make their description accurate would be if the pool is the 60%. I mean, I could be wrong... but you just seem super certain without any kind of supporting evidence other than your interpretation of a couple of sentences.
I don't think even Storyblocks would go so far as to have an earnings structure that's based on an amount of money they've just completely made up.
This membership library is a bit unique, since a big part of it consists of clips they have already paid for - so they will absolutely not share all their membership revenue. It has been a fixed pool (just decided by them, yes, as crazy as that sounds, they based it on how much marketplace clips earned at some secret point in time), at least during the testing phase, but who knows how they will calculate the pool from now on. The 60% of what 100% is a mystery, but we can be very sure it's not 60% of their entire subscription revenue, just a small part, either based on the amount of clips vs. buyouts, or simply something they decide. Again, in short form: In the testing phase they just decided on a fixed sum of $ so that the beta testers would be happy. Now, it SOUNDS like they will calculate from the entire subscription pool, and if that is the case, in reality, the portion that actually goes out to this new type of membership content will be quite small since there are so many buyouts already. So, most of the 60% just goes back to them. It's not entirely clear, however...
106
« on: July 08, 2019, 07:44 »
The time lapse you linked to on Dreamstime definitely has frame rate problems and if that's what you uploaded to Shutterstock, then they were correct in rejecting it...Dreamstime should have rejected it also.
I downloaded your Dreamstime timelapse and looked through it frame by frame and there's duplicate frames.
You need to look at your final footage in a video player app that lets you step through it frame by frame is see if there's any duplicate frames. I use a Mac and the default Quicktime Player works fine for that, just use the arrow keys to step through frame by frame. If you see any duplicate frame, they you're screwing something up. I'm not sure what an equivalent app would be on a PC.
You didn't say which app you're using to process your time lapse, but you need to make sure the frame rate of your source matched the frame of your comp or project and that matches the frame rate of your output.
If you're having to do any kind of frame blending or Optical flow, then you're definitely doing something wrong.
That is really wide analysis of my work. Thank You for that! I will definitely try to fix this problem. The problem probably is that I'm not matching my source videos with my composition. I'm using Premiere for that. For stitching timelapses I use LR timelapse, but main problem really could be in main composition in Pr... I will write when I will try to fix it...
Yes, like FB said, you have 1 duplicate frame every 5 frames. This means you have dropped a 24p (23.976p) video into a 30p (or 29.97p) timeline without changing the speed. If you want a 29.97p output you need to "Interpret" the file first so that it plays faster, and then drop it into a 29.97p timeline. Or just sell it as 23.976p.
107
« on: July 07, 2019, 09:49 »
I've been using Microstock group keywording tool for more than, well, I don't know, 5-10 years, I from the beginning.
Unfortunately, it is becoming useless thanks to the horrible algorithm at Shutterstock that pushes a bunch of similars from a few amateur photographers to the front page (which is what Microstockgroup keywording tool uses for keyword selection - the page one, I think), I just can't pick up proper keywords using the tool.
Can you please recommend some good keywording tool that extracts information from, for example, Adobe, and not Shutterstock?
Thanks in advance!
This is also to moderator Leaf - can you improve the keywording tool by using Adobe, because Shutterstock Relevant is ridicuolus at the moment?
I recommend your brain and common sense.
108
« on: July 07, 2019, 09:41 »
Well, first of all I would just look at the automatic in-camera time lapse video as a preview, not something to sell. You will get MUCH better quality if you take the RAW files and make the time lapse yourself. It will also take much more time of course, but that's what customers pay you for. Regarding your actual question, should you color grade? Well, in general, yes, but of course it depends on how it looks. You should ALWAYS color CORRECT and fix noise issues. Color GRADING is more of a creative choice, but usually something customers are looking for. You have many fun hours (weeks, months) ahead of you to learn all this.
109
« on: July 02, 2019, 13:08 »
I'd be surprised if many corporate website makers are using Elements for their content... seeing as there's no support included. I have an Elements subscription but I bought my last Wordpress theme from Themeforest. Didn't want to risk it if I need support. And if I was making something for a client, I definitely wouldn't want to risk it! Sure, others might look at it differently though!
Haha, my first thought was the exact opposite. That inexperienced personal buyers would need the support, but someone who buys themes and makes websites for clients would know their way around Wordpress (and probably even how to make their own themes) and therefore wouldn't likely need support, and could pocket more money for themselves. Anyway, we could guess all day, which is fun, but surely they wouldn't make the change if they didn't feel that way too much bonus $$$ were going to the wrong authors. So, many will likely make substantially less, and others substantially more. The question is who? I hope not me... 
110
« on: July 02, 2019, 12:32 »
Haha, ok! Did you have the "p" word in the tags somewhere? Well, glad it's been fixed anyway. No capping.
111
« on: July 02, 2019, 09:35 »
i searched via filename in contributor uploader. And yes, it has been uploaded about a half a year ago.
I can find it now. Clearly a database issue/bug right?
112
« on: July 02, 2019, 04:46 »
I'm not sure if the WordPress authors are going to make loads more money like everyone seems to be predicting. Yes, a theme counts for 9 points and a video counts for 3... but it all depends on what people are downloading. So they may get a higher percentage split per download, but if somebody needs one video-based Wordpress theme and 20 videos to go on the site, then a bigger share is going to the video side of things rather than the theme side of things.
As for the 'boost up to $1000 or so', that would mean a total bonus of around $1300, as the average bonus currently is about $300. It's far too early for me to do anything more than rudimentary math... but I know that for 50% of contributors to now get $600, then the other 50% need to get $0. Anyone know what percentage that needs to be for them to get $1300? Not sure if you can figure it out without contributor numbers... my head hurt. Anyway, I can't see that happening unless there's a bunch of people who are only downloading WP themes and nothing else.
I mean, people usually need lots of images, videos and graphics... they don't usually need dozens of WP templates every month. Who knows! My point is, it's too early to say and virtually impossible to predict at this stage. Time will tell!
Of course it's impossible to predict (without access to numbers), but isn't it fun to speculate? I'd rather prepare mentally for a pay cut and be pleasantly surprised, than the other way around. But that's just me. There are currently around 1,600 Elements authors, so let's say 1,500 shared the last bonus. That would put the bonus pool at roughly $450,000 (out of $900,000 total unused subscriber fees). The average number of authors in each of the 14 main categories in the Elements menu would be 107, and an educated guess would be that there are many more Motion graphics/Stock footage authors than WP authors, but that could be wrong. Of course, there is some crossover with authors in multiple categories, but roughly. Anyway, my first thoughts were that not many would want to miss the bonus, thus trying their best to meet the minimum requirements, but maybe there are many inactive authors who won't upload enough? That would of course change everything, if only 1,000 of the 1,600 now shared the bonus. --- And by the way, I believe most WP buyers don't buy the themes for themselves - they buy them for clients, so they might buy several per week. And I don't think too many corporate website makers suddenly need a bunch of space videos. Different people. If marketplace numbers are anything to go by (which they might not be, Elements might have completely different customer behavior), both users and item downloads are much, much higher at ThemeForest, and specifically the Wordpress section, than any kind of video. If WP buyers needed 20 videos per theme sales at VH would be astronomic. But they're not. Judging by the enormous $900,000 unused subscriber fee pool, I think it's safe to assume that most customers actually only download stuff they need, when they need it. Not a bunch of things just for fun, because they can. Furthermore, I think it is much more likely for a customer needing a WB template to only download that, than a customer only needing one, or a few, video(s). This means that WP earnings are more likely to be even higher, as the point value is determined by all the usage from one customer account.
113
« on: July 01, 2019, 12:49 »
"Through" is not keyworded on that footage.
It doesn't have to be in the keywords.
114
« on: July 01, 2019, 12:47 »
So, is Pond5 capping my search results? Must I go through all 15000 files to confirm that all files are visible to buyers? I crap you not this is very depressing.
99.9% more likely a bug, which happens from time to time. I have sorted out a few myself. E-mail them and they will help. I find 14,936 of your files, and the other cat videos. But not that particular one. Also, as you probably know, it can take 24 hours to index, but I see this file is older.
115
« on: July 01, 2019, 10:13 »
And even more to put them in competition for bonus.
Well, the customers pay for all of that so it's more fair. Video and photo contributors will earn less, but it's more fair, even if we don't like it.
116
« on: July 01, 2019, 04:28 »
---messed up an edit---
117
« on: June 29, 2019, 13:36 »
Finally, everyone sees that the other shot is Las Vegas and the old MGM is front and center, so not a skyline.
Uhm, the point of a skyline is exactly to see what city it is... without putting any particular building in focus. Of course you will see what buildings there are in a skyline shot (that would NOT need a release), that's the point. They can't copyright the entire landscape. Logos should of course be removed, yes. I only see a potential problem with image number three (not taking logos into consideration as the images are too small).
118
« on: June 18, 2019, 14:35 »
Yes, in general most of the buyers at the big agencies want ready-to-go clips, as evidenced by the thousands of sales. But, at smaller boutique libraries more experienced buyers look for ungraded footage. I would say the demand is 100 to 1 at least for graded, finished footage though. As for depth of field, well, whatever fits the situation. A really shallow depth of field isn't more cinematic, it's just something that started happening more and more as people started to film with DSLRs. Most real cinematic shots from films have deeper depth of field.
119
« on: June 18, 2019, 13:27 »
Well, that stinks.
RevoStock still makes my stomach turn... Learned my lesson there to never leave more than necessary at any agency.
120
« on: June 15, 2019, 10:15 »
How is this mathematically possible if not by a controlled sales system? Isn't this beyond a coincidence?
Everything is mathematically possible, especially when you pick and choose the numbers that fit your theory. It's a good way to get fired if you're a research scientist. I guess it's too much hard work to actually do what douglas suggested, use a VPN and search for your images over two months. That way you might actually get some usable data. When you reach 80 (or your actual number) next Wednesday, show us that your portfolio can not be found, or that it's impossible to make a purchase if you find it. The range of likely sales numbers of any given portfolio is not unlimited. When I walk out the door at the same time every Wednesday, I am likely to see, say, 20 cars. I'm not likely to see 100 cars, or 0, unless something special is going on. Sometimes it's 18, sometimes 22, and if I note down the number 8 weeks in a row, it's quite likely that 4-5 of those Wednesdays will land on 20. Then I write to the government and tell them something strange is going on... And one last thing that people seem to have trouble remembering: Search rotation is not the same as capping.
121
« on: June 14, 2019, 13:46 »
To me, that is evidence of a cap.
...but, we were just told that video sales weren't capped. That's what Fairplay said. It only applies to selected image sellers. So... ...confused. :| Anyway, going to go read up on the Loch Ness Monster.
122
« on: June 11, 2019, 10:28 »
I think David K's question was intended for the OP, not for me.
But for me, your answer is 100% accurate!
Ah, you're right, of course! Haha, anyway, if going for a paid solution, I would recommed FCP X for any Mac user. Download the free (fully functional) trial why don't you? The color correction tools are now really good (wasn't that way until recently). And did I mention it's fast? DaVinci is of course very good, but also slow compared to FCP X, and while you can do "After Effects stuff" in there, that learning curve is a steep one... Very steep. For simple edits and color grading, FCP X will do the trick.
123
« on: June 11, 2019, 09:39 »
Hi Marthamarks, do you believe that iMovie is an ok starting point for a newbie? All I do is trim any movies down to 10 seconds, lose the audio and maybe a slight colour balance check, then export in 1080p.. What would Final Cut or Premiere offer that iMovie can't for very simple edits
Instead of that why don't you just use DaVinci Resolve.
Because FCPX is much faster and she already has it.
124
« on: June 11, 2019, 05:08 »
And it does not matter if they are single, double, triple or whatever. Oh, it doesn't? Well, that tells me everything I need to know... (hint, it matters one heck of a lot). Comparing the needs of tenths of thousands buyers across the world with the need of a single person regarding supermarket needs is non-sense. Not at all. And if you read the post the habits of one person (but maybe instead of milk, the next likes tomatoes) stretches out to the entire population, which is why a store doesn't sell 1,000 cartons one week, and 23 the next. And they always, every week, sell more candy on Saturdays than on Mondays. Coincidence?
125
« on: June 11, 2019, 04:43 »
And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right 
This happened to me recently in a period of 3 or 4 weeks. Can someone explain?
Well, first we need to know how many downloads we're talking about. Single digit? 3, 4? Double digit? 44, 45? Triple digit? More? When the average person goes grocery shopping every Monday, they might buy two cartons of milk and one pack of eggs. They don't suddenly buy 5 cartons of milk and 4 cartons of eggs. No, it stays the same. And, on average, this is true for the entire population. And then we see a change over certain holidays like Christmas, or if they're having people over, but then the guests would probably buy a bit less since they didn't have to cook that night. This is why the store roughly sells the same amount of milk and eggs every week. And not 1,000 cartons one week, and 23 the next. Unless it's Easter, but that's reflected in image sales as well. --- I'm not saying it's IMPOSSIBLE that they shift around the search results based on previous sales (although that would be quite stupid, since it would be better to reward high sellers), but also that wild swings as well as even sales are both normal.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 74
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
