|
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 - SpaceStockFootage
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 97
176
« on: February 05, 2022, 22:30 »
I made a dollar a day once. Them were't days.
177
« on: January 29, 2022, 18:13 »
No GraphicRiver?
178
« on: January 27, 2022, 01:05 »
Yes, that's the one! It was essentially exactly the same as a charity auction... just that none of the money went to charity!* But you get all of the below, plus the NFT and the physical display/box etc. It went for $177,777 in the end.
"In the case of Murray's NFT they also get two tickets to Centre Court for the 2022 men's Wimbledon finals, a chance to play tennis with the 34-year-old and signed souvenirs".
*JUst seen this bit, so some of the money went to charity: "WENEW will receive a portion of the proceeds, but the majority will go to the people involved in making the moment".
179
« on: January 26, 2022, 18:52 »
One NFT was by a tennis person and you got to shoot some tennis with them on the Wimbledon pitch for an hour or so. Can't remember who, I don't know the names. Maybe the Scottish one. Or the slightly older English one.
181
« on: January 26, 2022, 13:16 »
Who cares what Shutterstock are paying, because whatever it is, anyone with half a brain can see that Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovskare are ripping off those who upload.
Ask yourself 10c, LOL, even in the deepest recesses of the lowest paid people on Earth this is unacceptable.
Personally, I don't give my talent away for FREE, but, many people still do, STOP UPLOADING and get that inner satisfying feeling that you are doing the right thing.
Ok, I'll ask myself. Is 10c acceptable? Well you need to qualify it with a timescale to start with, or it means absolutely nothing. But hey, that's not important right... who cares if anything we say works or makes sense... as long as we can proudly shout our anger from the rooftops to anyone who will listen, right?! But I digress... ok, 10c a second are we going for? That works for me! 10c a sale after expenses? Well that generates Coca Cola billions of dollars a year... so 10c sounds wonderful! But let's go out on a limb and assume you're taking about the most common lowest denominator when it comes to earnings... per hour. Ok... so full time that would equate to $17.33 month. That's a pretty terrible salary. But we don't get a salary. You know that, right? Also, hardly anybody earns less than $17 a month (unless they have a super small portfolio or only submit to all the wrong agencies), and SS aren't paying us 10c an hour. Or anything 'an hour' to be fair. You can pull out your false equivalencies all you like, and you're welcome to hate SS and not submit to them, but there's no need to keep banging on about it at any opportunity. You're like the stereotypical embodiment of a vegan... Me: Hello, do have the time? You: Jon Oringer is a Crook Me: Erm... what?! I think you should remove all your content from SS to reduce your stress levels and avoid being seen as a hypocrite. Take up yoga, try some meditation, cut down on your Microstock Group visits and you'll probably reduce your odds of hypertension considerably. *I've not really encountered this stereotype and I think there's nothing wrong with being a vegan... just to be clear.
182
« on: January 26, 2022, 03:53 »
BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.
I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion.
Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.
AND in five years time . . . . . You will have realised to late, it's simple, just like the thousands of contributors on Shutterstock's Forum who have stopped uploading.
Personally I'm just leaving my Portfolio on SS as I have put thousands of hours and over ten years into it, I made Level 1 in eight days, I really don't care about the money and have never been governed by it.
If you want to wast your time . . . carry on uploading . . . Ha, Ha, Ha
You still have your portfolio on SS?! My God, man... I can't believe you're contributing to the wealth of Jon and Stan and are supporting their criminal ways by allowing them to sell your content and get richer off it. Where are your morals... your ethics?! You should be ashamed of yourself.
You still haven't explained to me where to find these special companies you were talking about where by working for them you don't contribute to the wealth of your superiors and the company owners.
We all know and agree with you that the money contributors get from Shutterstock is not a fair share. But you really need to get this strange notion out of your head that Jon and Stan are the only people in the world that get rich off other people's work and that this wasn't basically how every single company in the world was run. People at the top of every company always get the most money and live fancy lives while people at the bottom work their ass off for as little as minimum wage. Yes, their are companies that pay their employees more than others. They still work to make the CEOs and company owners richt. So stop pretending like this was some Shutterstock-unique evil sheme and Oringer any worse than every other CEO. Every CEO's goal is to get his company and hismelf as much money as possible. You have some sick obsession with Oringer and sound like some bitter dropped ex-girlfriend.
You don't want to support this and talk about morals and ethnics? The only way to get around it is by being self employed. You will not find an employment job where your boss pays you equaly or more than he gets himself. But not everyone can work like this. I tried the self-employment route for many years, it didn't work out for me. But microstick works for me.
Most of all, stop slandering every contributor who still contributs to Shutterstock. You sound incredibly bitter, because other people still make decent money with Shutterstock, but apparently you don't. What's the point in telling people who make decent money there to go to some other place where they will be exploited in the same way? I could quit my microstock job and go to McDonals to flip burgers. I would still make someone else incredibly rich, I'd get less money and have a goss job. Why should I?
I really do hope that's aimed at H2O!  I had hoped the severity of the comment would make it clear I was being sarcastic, while also giving H2O a 'dose of his own medicine', while also highlighting the irony of his severe aversion to SS even though he still sells his content there!
183
« on: January 25, 2022, 18:13 »
Oh and I made Level 1 instantly. What can I say... I'm just that good!
184
« on: January 25, 2022, 18:12 »
BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.
I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion.
Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.
AND in five years time . . . . . You will have realised to late, it's simple, just like the thousands of contributors on Shutterstock's Forum who have stopped uploading.
Personally I'm just leaving my Portfolio on SS as I have put thousands of hours and over ten years into it, I made Level 1 in eight days, I really don't care about the money and have never been governed by it.
If you want to wast your time . . . carry on uploading . . . Ha, Ha, Ha
You still have your portfolio on SS?! My God, man... I can't believe you're contributing to the wealth of Jon and Stan and are supporting their criminal ways by allowing them to sell your content and get richer off it. Where are your morals... your ethics?! You should be ashamed of yourself.
185
« on: January 24, 2022, 09:41 »
To be fair, they've mathematically engineered it so you don't get less than 10 cents (i.e. if a Level 5 is still getting 10 cents, that means a Level 1 should be getting less than 4 cents if they're purely going on percentages). While that's far from a positive thing, I guess it is... well... something.
186
« on: January 23, 2022, 13:08 »
What I would be interested in and where NFTs would make sense to me is if the contract is written that every time the NFT is resold I get a percentage.
Then it would be interesting to create unique NFTs/images/art and include in the contract everytime a collector resells it I get 30%. or 50%. Or 10%
The money should of course be sent over to me automatically.
Then it would really make sense to create unique images, charge accordingly and if the collectors NFT market really grows, watch my files get resold.
You would basically be avoiding auction houses, galleries etc as intermediaries.
Could also be interesting for unique editorial.
But it needs a marketplace that is professionally run, with real copyright protection.
That's how most of the marketplaces do it... the original author gets 10% of any future sales, so it can amount to several times the original cost of the item. Especially if they increase in value over time. 'With real copyright protection...' would be the thing though. Unless there's something going on that I've not heard about, that doesn't really exist at the moment. The much-vaunted decentralized nature of the blockchain, and the lack of oversight, regulation and middlemen might be a good thing for financial freedom and impartiality... but it means that anybody can easily mint and sell anything, whether it belongs to them or not.
187
« on: January 20, 2022, 21:31 »
188
« on: January 19, 2022, 18:09 »
About 25%, give or take.
189
« on: January 19, 2022, 18:08 »
Yeah, second best month of the year for me... was quite surprised as December and January are usually my worst months.
190
« on: January 12, 2022, 03:38 »
Fighting fraud with fraud... that's the way to do it!
191
« on: January 12, 2022, 03:34 »
I don't submit to thieves so I could care less what level I am on!
You couldn't care less... i.e. it would not be possible for you to care any less, about what level you are on, than you do currently.
192
« on: January 09, 2022, 22:12 »
What's odd about it?
193
« on: January 09, 2022, 13:52 »
I watch someone's videos on YouTube where he looks inside large abandoned houses in Canada that had been empty for years. He never seems to run out of houses to explore.
I wouldn't take that to mean anything significant though. Is it Abandoned Urbex Canada? If it is then I mean, 14m houses in Canada, 86 videos total... that's 0.0006% of total houses in Canada.
194
« on: January 09, 2022, 13:40 »
That's a hell of a lot better! The thing with deep fakes though, is you're applying an actual face into an actual scene... I'm not sure they've ever done it with a CG face. The reason it can look so real, and will continue to improve until it's indistinguishable in a very shot period is that you're just cutting out a real face and sticking it on someone else's face. To create an entirely new face out of nothing is a lot harder. But yeah, 10 years might be overly pessimistic. or optimistic... whichever way you look at it!
195
« on: January 09, 2022, 05:47 »
They look impressive, but only from a distance! Strange hair and wonky eyes. While it's heading in the right direction, and I have no doubt they'll be indistinguishable from a real human in ten years or so, they're not quite there yet. And you'd have to add fake shadows when comping them in a scene which is notoriously difficult to do well. Interesting stuff though.
196
« on: January 05, 2022, 22:49 »
While plenty of people are making money from EFT's, I'd say the majority aren't. If you're famous, or have 100k plus followers on IG, then you might do pretty well.... but I really can't see the average guy on the street making all that much, if anything, from them. Aside from maybe a handful of rare exceptions.
197
« on: January 05, 2022, 03:42 »
I think you'll find it's 0.02 to 0.25 ETH... which would make it $90 to $950.
198
« on: January 04, 2022, 13:17 »
Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.
Well the last full year of revenue before they were shafting us... was $623m. And the first full year of revenue after they started shafting us was $666m. Not to mention the totals for 2021 are looking to be even higher. So did these agencies and designers not get the memo, or are they just still willingly buying from a company that shafts their contributors?
199
« on: January 03, 2022, 08:16 »
I may be the anomaly, but the reality for 99% of contributors to SS is that they earn money from being on SS... and 100% of those that aren't on SS, don't earn money from SS.
If you think that there's been some kind of, or will be some kind of, mass exodus of buyers from SS due to a relatively small percentage of contributors leaving (or that lost earnings from SS will automatically be made up elsewhere), then you might be the one who is being naive. Sure, my earnings might dwindle over time... they might at any agency, and that can be reviewed on an ongoing basis, but in the meantime I'm earning money from the time I'm spending uploading, so nothing will come back to bite me. And they're not dwindling now... I made a decent amount more last year then I did the year before.
And if you think my post was 'talking up' SS then... well, that's just strange.
200
« on: January 03, 2022, 02:47 »
Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.
I completely agree, anyone who is still uploading to help these two might very well be insane. But you'll find that the majority of people are still uploading to help themselves (rather than those two)... which is considerably less insane. Them getting rich is only a side effect of something I do that benefits me, it's not why I do it.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 97
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
