|
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 - Brightontl
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38
776
« on: March 10, 2017, 08:27 »
This is probably a very stupid question, I am a bit ashamed...
I generally submit video only to the usual 5 or 6 agencies.
I do all the titling and keywording in Lightroom, then upload with FTP and then manually copy and paste titles and keyword to each agency. Huge waste of time.
I was just considering trying some software like Stocksubmitter to save a lot of time.
Today I gave a try to upload some still images, as usual keyworded in LR.
To my surprise I have noticed that the titles and keywords are already populated in every single agency. A lot of time saved and apparently no need to use an extra software.
So, does it work just for still images and not for video?
Am I doing something wrong with video (perhaps I need to save metadata to file)?
777
« on: March 06, 2017, 07:42 »
Of course, only if they sell, it's good.
I believe you are asking about video (since the thread is in the video forum). Alamy never took video seriously and I have never heard of anyone selling video successfully there. As far as I know they do not accept video anymore, at least from new contributors
778
« on: March 06, 2017, 05:55 »
Sorry, could anyone explain what this "Global partner program" is about?
It's a sort of distribution to a group of resellers with lower (I guess) pricing.
Why not simply read the info about it on the P5 website rather than speculating - and getting it wrong?
Because speculating is great fun :-)
 of course - I knew there would be an obvious reason!
By the way, couldn't find any info on P5 website
779
« on: March 05, 2017, 10:38 »
Sorry, could anyone explain what this "Global partner program" is about?
It's a sort of distribution to a group of resellers with lower (I guess) pricing.
Why not simply read the info about it on the P5 website rather than speculating - and getting it wrong?
Because speculating is great fun :-)
780
« on: March 05, 2017, 05:32 »
Their upload system did used to be brutal, unforgiving, medieval and apocalyptic... but they've been rolling out the new uploading system which is a lot closer to most other sites now.
Upload via web, ftp or Dropbox, auto population of file size and duration, upload multiple clips at once, auto generation of thumbnails, watermarks and preview videos etc.
I hope they will get out of the lower middle age with their uploading system. From their forum I have the feeling that they are not really interested in stock footage: four months and counting for review, plenty of files refused for apparently no reason (they seem to have only 1 reviewer!!!), no communication with artists in any way. When reviews time get that long it is a bad, bad omen...
781
« on: March 04, 2017, 15:52 »
Irina,
congratulations!!!
So you are a top seller
782
« on: March 04, 2017, 15:49 »
I stopped uploading to VH before I even started 
One look at their prices & uploading process was enough.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your opinion on their prices is irrelevant to the question above.
But I completely agree with Harvepino. I also have zero sales there, but that's because they don't have any of my content:)
So Mantis, what is your experience there? Have you tried to go through their brutal, unforgiving, medieval, apocalyptic uploading system?
783
« on: March 04, 2017, 11:43 »
I did not receive the mail either.
Also, nobody is talking about it in the P5 forum, which is strange
784
« on: March 03, 2017, 18:27 »
Going back to your question, I cannot reply at the moment.
I have to wait for curation and from what I read in their forum it might be a very long wait
785
« on: March 03, 2017, 18:24 »
Irina,
the only people in this forum (or anywhere else) uploading to VH that I know are you and Space Oddity (who will certainly materialise soon).
Never heard about anyone else.
As I said I am trying to give them a shot, but the first taste is really tough: their uploading is brutal and an insult to man intelligence, it dates back from Neanderthal times.
Plus all I read in their forum.
I have no idea how can you batch process their totally insane upload procedure, all I know is that uploading a dozen of files there brought me to strange visions, horrible nightmares and a nervous breakdown, don't know if I will ever recover. The doctor tells me that I should rest for a few months.
Still, if every file I upload there generates several hundreds sales a day, then I might consider going again through the horrible torture
786
« on: March 03, 2017, 13:42 »
I just started with them and uploaded only a dozen of files to test the water.
It must be said that their upload system is the worst torture that a man has ever inflicted upon another man, the biggest apocalyptic nightmare, a survival test, only the strongest and bravest can survive. They must have made months and months of meetings brainstorming upon new perverse ways of making the uploading experience the biggest pain in the neck anyone can imagine.
I also have read on their forum that reviews of footage takes about 4 months (!) and that they refuse a lot of files.
So I am a bit on the fence at the moment, waiting to see what happen.
It must be said that the volume of sales has to be gigantic to make worthwhile the incredible pain of uploading, the waiting time and the extremely low commissions
787
« on: March 03, 2017, 02:51 »
Sorry, could anyone explain what this "Global partner program" is about?
788
« on: March 01, 2017, 16:30 »
Welcome to the Dollar shop sir.
No, we really apologize, but you cannot buy here the gold Rolex watch you are looking for
789
« on: February 28, 2017, 03:08 »
How do the keywords get incorporated into a video file format like .mov?
I do everything with Lightroom, would be totally lost without it. You add all the rendered video files to the catalog, then you handle them in exactly the same way as photos
790
« on: February 26, 2017, 06:18 »
Most people doing serious video stock use After Effects, a few use Premiere (more suited for mounting several clips with sound,, rather than single clips) or Final Cut on Mac.
Don't know much about DaVinci Resolve, but I understand that it is used mainly for color correction rather than as a all in one solution (maybe I am wrong).
Keep in mind that video is very complicated and a lot of people coming from photo, try video for a while and then let it go.
Maybe a solution to start with a cheap stepping stone would be Premiere Elements. The interface should be rather similar to After Effect where you eventually go after a while
791
« on: February 24, 2017, 05:23 »
If you really can't afford the hit stop uploading, work hard on other sites. You can delete later when income is no longer significant from IS. If people refuse to take their s**t their markets share should slide eventually resulting in a bump from better paying sites, but either way I won't be giving them any more of my work to give away.
Are you referring only to photos , or the same apply for footage as well? I have never uploaded to istock, just curious to know how footage is doing there
792
« on: February 23, 2017, 12:28 »
I have never been with them.
But there is something I don't understand: everyone says they are evil and nobody should work with them.
But then 8 threads out of 10 here (and the more popular ones) regard istock, suggesting that almost everyone uploads there
793
« on: February 22, 2017, 05:00 »
Been trying to figure out why some of you are make a discussion about Envato about VB, misrepresenting my thoughts as me trying to tell anyone what to do, attempting to compare incomes with zero information to back your theories, and getting all fired up and defensive about it. You're trying to convince yourselfs, not me. I've said it before, we're on the same side. I want contributors, you and me, to be getting a bigger piece of the pie, to take some pride in your own hard work. But some of you just can't seem to comprehend my intentions, and actually have instincts that lead you against your own best interests. That's not me telling you what to do, that's me describing my observation based on the information you have provided.
From my perspective, I see companies taking advantage of contributors, offering nothing more to our business than a gradual devaluation and decreasing shares of profits. I try to chime in to encourage my fellow contributors to have the confidence in their own work to not squander it, and all I get is grief and defensive pivoting. All the effort you guys make to try to convince me, or yourselves rather, should really be focused on the agencies with their hands in your pockets and contempt for their contributors. We are on the same side, well except the guy who works for Envato. I'm really starting to understand more and more why so many others have stopped posting in forums like these.
I used to agree with you on avoiding low paying agencies and try to keep footage commissions for artists above $20 for download. But now it is not possible anymore, P5 membership have made it impossible. You believe that the danger is Videohive, but VH was such a small niche thing that until a couple of months ago I didn't even know it existed. Even VB in my opinion is not such a big threat9 Although subs are always dangerous): they are a relatively new entrant and their membership collection is not that good at all. What ha really changed the game and started the race to the bottom Is P5: the best established footage agency in term of quality that decided to cherry pick 2000.000 extremely useful, non repetitive , good quality files from within their collection and started giving them away for peanuts
794
« on: February 21, 2017, 09:54 »
Not exactly sure what the relevance is there, I don't participate in the subscription program at Videoblocks. I make $47.16 a sale, and don't compete against myself by accepting $2.88 elsewhere instead.
It's extremely relevant since you were concerned about hurting the business as a whole.
Uploading to VB means you support them and help them in their marketing to get membership customers who download thousands of clips for next to nothing. Much cheaper than VH.
Those membership customers don't have access to my clips. I do not participate. Of course I'm not a fan of the sub programs. It's called picking battles. Just because I state that getting punched in the face by VH is bad, it doesn't mean I think getting kicked in the stomach by VB's sub program is good. The world isn't that black and white. IF my clips were included, I would not support them. And much like Pond5's sub, often the better clips are not included, so my $50/100% clips are there available for purchase.
Sorry, but I do not understand your battle, although I was with you until a year ago.
VH I believe sells their clips for $10, P5 for as little as $4.
VH pays a royalty to artists for each sale, I believe in average more than 30%, which is not bad compared to others.
P5 as far as I know doesn't pay anything to artists for each sale, just half a peanut per month per file, regardless of the tens of thousand of sales
I don't and wouldn't participate in Pond5's sub program. My HD/4K clips are not available at that $4 price point, and I make 50% a sale. All I can personally do is be responsible to myself as to where I choose to sell, and do my best to offer my reasoning. We all have to make our own decisions.
Well, if you don't have files in the membership, then you are standing for your ideas and I appreciate it. I was thinking just like you until the membership started and hoping that we could enjoy nice prices for another few years. I cannot afford it anymore after the price dumping of P5 and I am under the impression that single digit for a file is now the new normal
795
« on: February 21, 2017, 09:01 »
Not exactly sure what the relevance is there, I don't participate in the subscription program at Videoblocks. I make $47.16 a sale, and don't compete against myself by accepting $2.88 elsewhere instead.
It's extremely relevant since you were concerned about hurting the business as a whole.
Uploading to VB means you support them and help them in their marketing to get membership customers who download thousands of clips for next to nothing. Much cheaper than VH.
Those membership customers don't have access to my clips. I do not participate. Of course I'm not a fan of the sub programs. It's called picking battles. Just because I state that getting punched in the face by VH is bad, it doesn't mean I think getting kicked in the stomach by VB's sub program is good. The world isn't that black and white. IF my clips were included, I would not support them. And much like Pond5's sub, often the better clips are not included, so my $50/100% clips are there available for purchase.
Sorry, but I do not understand your battle, although I was with you until a year ago. VH I believe sells their clips for $10, P5 for as little as $4. VH pays a royalty to artists for each sale, I believe in average more than 30%, which is not bad compared to others. P5 as far as I know doesn't pay anything to artists for each sale, just half a peanut per month per file, regardless of the tens of thousand of sales
796
« on: February 21, 2017, 06:31 »
I don't know about photo, but regarding video they just seem unable or not willing to review them.
Either they want to concentrate on still images, or they are having serious financial worries
797
« on: February 21, 2017, 05:55 »
Well said SSF.
The most important attribute you can have working in almost any industry is the ability to accept and adapt to change, and open your eyes to the world around you.
I'm willing to bet most "old pros" know and care little about the biggest market in the world for stock music, footage, and AE templates: it's called YouTube. And the buyers are independent creators. That's 19-year-old Adam who wants to do things legally but under no circumstance can pay $790 for 10 stock clips to use in his YouTube video. There are thousands (tens of thousands) of Adams for each company happy to pay $199 for a 4k clip.
If you don't adapt you will be the last guy selling physical CDs for $19.99 wondering why everyone is listening to music through tiny white earbuds.
Shouldn't you be more mad that you're getting $24 for a clip from Shutterstock used in Doctor Strange with a budget of $165 million?
Good points. And it is not only Adam the youtubber. Once P5 started to offer excellent clips for single digits, even the professional buyers are little by little moving to the membership thingy. They were happy to pay $400 for an excellent clip, but why pay that much when now you can have one almost as good for $5?
798
« on: February 20, 2017, 10:11 »
Envato is a garbage company. It's been fairly obvious for years. Even some of the voices here that shamelessly defended them in the past, their loyalty rewarded by having their image portfolios deleted and a middle finger. This is why it's bad to support garbage companies, even if you're making a few bucks in the short term. I don't think there's anyone not part of the Envato employees and volunteers team defending them anymore.
What's really sad is that tons of people will come right back to whatever the next pile of crap they try to pull happens to be.
Anything specific that makes you think they're garbage? Aside from the recent PhotoDune thing of course, as I'm assuming you felt that way before that.
1. Their "niche" (with Videohive) is undercutting the leading stock videos sellers, devaluing stock videos in general in the process.
2. They are intentionally misleading potential new contributors by first stating flat out that "Our author fee to non-exclusive authors is 55% of the item price." then going on to show a pie chart that shows "net author earnings" are actually as low as 36%. Working with a company that feels comfortable to unnecessarily convolute the math this way is certainly suspect.
3. Their method of dealing with their own failures in the stock photo business is to kick most of their loyal contributors to the curb, regardless of the time and effort put forth by those contributors. Again, just evidence of their lack of care towards the ones creating and keywording the content that makes up their library.
We all know iStock is a terrible company. We should know by now that Envato isn't much better, by their behavior and lack of ethics. Contributing to them as an individual isn't going to end the world, of course, much like throwing your fast food trash out the car window into a pristine forest isn't going to either. But both show a lack of respect for the greater good, your fellow humans, and should be discouraged.
Yeah, yeah, I know some people make a few bucks there. So do people that rob old ladies on the street. Doesn't make a * difference in determining if these companies are good or bad for the industry as a whole.
Encourage and promote the good companies, and let the bad ones fail. This is our only power.
I was thinking exactly like you until last May and I always refused to upload to agencies that pay less than $25 commission to artists. Now things have dramatically changed: Pond 5 has introduced their bloody membership plan where excellent files are given away for almost nothing. 200.000 files wisely chosen cover almost every subject and what is more, without garbage and without repetitions. Artists non participating have been squeezed out by P5, as they have pushed participating ones to the top of the search engine, so it is impossible to get any sales or even any views. Sales in the marketplace area of P5 are disappearing very quickly and even some of the participating artists are feeling the pain, in spite of being rid of the competition of non participating. Sales of footage in other agencies have gone down, as customers move more and more to the all you can eat buffet of P5 membership. Very soon SS and FT will have to respond by offering similar prices. The new normal for price of footage is going to be single digit in 2017. P5 has started the race to the bottom, while we could have enjoyed another 3-4 years of decent prices in the video stock market. The only hope is that will widen the market a bit by attracting a few bloggers. In other words, thanks to P5 membership, footage market is going to be very similar to still images very soon and Envato/Videohive is very well positioned. At the moment, rather than uploading new files in P5, where I get absolutely no visibility, I am rather concentrating in uploading my portfolio everywhere, even for $1 for file
799
« on: February 19, 2017, 09:48 »
I only do video, so what I say doesn't necessarily relate to the photo market.
I have been in this game for less than two years.
Sometimes what looks like complaining from newbies or people relatively new to stock is just trying to understand the rules of the game.
It must be said that a lot of strange things happen here, and in particular there is a huge level of manipulation in sales byagencies.
Understanding how things work is extremely important in order to survive in this game, it is not easy at all and the only way to get any clue is through this forum
800
« on: February 19, 2017, 07:13 »
There was similar thread about photos. We have about $0.56 average per clip a month for 12 stock sites. $0.17 for Shutterstock only (January). Started in early 2015. SpaceStockFootage can ruin all the stats as always, but his numbers are welcome too 
Irina, you have 12 stock sites??? That is a huge number, I have less than half of that and I am actually interested in increasing them. Could I ask you what agencies you work with?
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
