|
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 - pics2
51
« on: August 07, 2020, 05:37 »
Thank you for this valuable post. What a mess and what scary environment to work in as a contributor photographer.
52
« on: August 01, 2020, 04:08 »
Thanks for sharing.
Im in the same boat but I stopped uploading to SS even before June because of their buggy reviews (be it human or AI) and now Adobe is picking up. Not as much as I would have liked but still its progress.
In my situation where I provide very few agencies Adobe is the only one worth going forward with. P5 to me is the most contributor friendly in every aspect but no sales makes them obsolete. Alamy is macro with micro pricing and SS is on on its way out.
Did anyone ever imagine saying this about SS? This was the top performer for practically every non exclusive contributor out there no?
I'm accepting the new reality also very slowly. Who would say that just a few years ago. I still think it will take much more time for a transition (from SS being number one to not being), it will take years. These empires don't go down over night, they go down slowly.Something is eating them from inside and they don't recognize it, so they could make an immune system.
53
« on: July 28, 2020, 02:43 »
"Will the actions achieve the goal." In the end I think it it comes down to whether you believe what is happening is an inevitable result of the business model and the way markets in a capitalist environment work or collective action can change that. My view is this is inevitable and the seeds were sown from day one. Its not as if SS are the first to reduce commissions they've just done it in a particularly brutal manner.
Thanks for the clarification. I agree with that, too.
54
« on: July 28, 2020, 02:10 »
The second question is a nonsense, if you read it carefully. Are actions realistic? Did she mean are expected results of these actions realistic? Or did she mean are actions real? Actions are real, few millions of pictures are disabled and the number of weekly submitted pictures is halved.
On the other hand, I don't agree with the statement - I don't work for 10c. First of all, it is not 10c that you earn for an image, it is a download. An image can still make a lot more. Secondly, how can one work for 25c or 38c at the first place? It was already ridiculously low. The same way there is a lot of negativity about people still supporting SS by accepting to work for 10c download, there was a lot of negativity about all of us working for 25c-38c by the majority of photography community in the world in the previous years (macrostock photographers, fashion, automotive, real estate, wedding etc photographers). We made this happen. It is our fault. We made this monster called SS. And now we are blaming the ones that are still playing by the rules that we came up with.
I think we know what was meant unless you read it to try and punch holes in it.
Well, I don't know. Which of the two did she mean?
55
« on: July 28, 2020, 02:02 »
The second question is a nonsense, if you read it carefully. Are actions realistic? Did she mean are expected results of these actions realistic? Or did she mean are actions real? Actions are real, few millions of pictures are disabled and the number of weekly submitted pictures is halved.
On the other hand, I don't agree with the statement - I don't work for 10c. First of all, it is not 10c that you earn for an image, it is a download. An image can still make a lot more. Secondly, how can one work for 25c or 38c at the first place? It was already ridiculously low. The same way there is a lot of negativity about people still supporting SS by accepting to work for 10c download, there was a lot of negativity about all of us working for 25c-38c by the majority of photography community in the world in the previous years (macrostock photographers, fashion, automotive, real estate, wedding etc photographers). We made this happen. It is our fault. We made this monster called SS. And now we are blaming the ones that are still playing by the rules that we came up with.
57
« on: July 21, 2020, 14:33 »
I find his move anything but sad. He is making tens of thousands $ a month. It doesn't have to sustainable for ages, 5-10 years is enough for him to retire. Actually, I think he already can. He is not doing it for community's higher cause.
How do you know? Tens of thousands a month sounds like a lot, but if you have staff salaries and high equipment, model/actor and location costs to pay, youre not making all that much yourself. People who live in expensive areas like New York and make 20K per month are just managing to pay their sky high rents or mortgages and property taxes.
because I know few of them that are in the same category like he is. It is of course their private matter and I don't feel like making it public. I just wanted to point out to you that your estimate is far far away.
My estimate? I didnt estimate anything.
"What I find sad about the article is that he lost income, then ramped up production in order to regain his earnings...how long is that sustainable? There'll come a point when so many images are being produced that there's simply no way to keep up any more. (I think that point has been reached already.)"
58
« on: July 21, 2020, 14:11 »
I find his move anything but sad. He is making tens of thousands $ a month. It doesn't have to sustainable for ages, 5-10 years is enough for him to retire. Actually, I think he already can. He is not doing it for community's higher cause.
How do you know? Tens of thousands a month sounds like a lot, but if you have staff salaries and high equipment, model/actor and location costs to pay, youre not making all that much yourself. People who live in expensive areas like New York and make 20K per month are just managing to pay their sky high rents or mortgages and property taxes.
because I know few of them that are in the same category like he is. It is of course their private matter and I don't feel like making it public. I just wanted to point out to you that your estimate is far far away.
59
« on: July 20, 2020, 11:07 »
I find his move anything but sad. He is making tens of thousands $ a month. It doesn't have to sustainable for ages, 5-10 years is enough for him to retire. Actually, I think he already can. He is not doing it for community's higher cause.
60
« on: July 17, 2020, 09:16 »
If you have just started, and as you can see from the previous comments, there are not any more good earners except Adobe, I would suggest Istock exclusivity. Adobe and exSS were in line with Istock exclusivity, and now, I think Istock exclusivity is better option. For a newbie especially, since you don't have a big portfolio yet that you have to remove from all the agencies prior becoming exclusive. For an old contributors with a large portfolio it is almost not an option, since you are left without your monthly earnings overnight.
61
« on: July 07, 2020, 07:10 »
Hello,
Hi - Has anyone quit iStock in the recent times? I understand from this thread (started a year ago) that iStock would pay any remaining earnings in the account even if it is less than 100 USD. Could anyone please confirm? Thanks. I quit my IStock/Getty in October 2019 an got my little dollars without any problems (payout was not reached).
They also payed me sales which occured after my account cancellation im may 2020 (without asking them), beause the deletion of all files can take up to 6 months.
Such a nice people! I should go exclusive there 
62
« on: July 07, 2020, 04:33 »
You are replying to 3 years old thread.
63
« on: July 04, 2020, 14:50 »
I've been talking to many photographers lately and none of them stopped uploading. I honestly expected the contrary. What I want to say is that this forum is not reflection of reality at all. It is occupied by contributors who promorte boycott and agressive measures and the majority that still uploads is silent. The more realistic reflection of reality would make this forum much more useful for all of us. I blame promoters lf boycott for this, they (we) are too hursh on the ones who have different opinion. Let them talk and let not be even worse than SS itself by not listening or caring about others opinion.
64
« on: June 25, 2020, 07:14 »
65
« on: June 25, 2020, 07:14 »
66
« on: June 25, 2020, 07:12 »
Great feature!
Can you please make cutting longer lists of keywords to 49, not 50. Because you explained in that video that only if there are 49 keywords the first ten will be more relevant. And if there are 50 keywords all fifty will have the same importance. This way I have to remove the 50th keyword manually by scrolling down the list. Because Adobe already automatically trims to 50 longer lists, can you just trim to 49 and save us extra work. Thank you!
What? Where is this thing about 49 and 50 keywords relevant thing? I never heard of this before.
They have video calls during corona. I will find the link and share here
67
« on: June 25, 2020, 06:36 »
Great feature!
Can you please make cutting longer lists of keywords to 49, not 50. Because you explained in that video that only if there are 49 keywords the first ten will be more relevant. And if there are 50 keywords all fifty will have the same importance. This way I have to remove the 50th keyword manually by scrolling down the list. Because Adobe already automatically trims to 50 longer lists, can you just trim to 49 and save us extra work. Thank you!
68
« on: June 24, 2020, 12:39 »
Uncle Pete, I have no idea why would anybody not believe me. I'm 55 years old, professional photographer, feeding my family, high school educated. Why would I come to a forum with a fake news?
Anyone paying attention we resolved the misunderstanding.  Like two adults.
Of course we did! 
69
« on: June 24, 2020, 09:29 »
That is HUGE!
These big guys deserve props for taking decisive action - it would be so much easier for them to leave their ports on and just stop submitting, and try to wring whatevers left!
Makes me wonder if SS DIDNT make any special deals with ANYONE.
They really are taking a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT stance.
It is not how big productions work. They can't stop working just like that. They have a lot of expenses, employees, models,
photographers, contracts, offices, debts for equipment, props, vehicles etc. They are better finding another agency, My guess they will go Getty exclusive now.
Oh, Im sure they didnt just stop working. Im sure they will be flooding the other agencies now. And making more than $.10 an image.
Yes, they will. I don't see a problem with that. If they are capable to produce enormous amounts of pictures, congratulations to them. It looks like everything and everyone is going on your nerves. And congratulations to them for making such a brave move!
Everyone is going on my nerves? LOL Because you arent a native English speaker, somewhere along the line you have interpreted my comment as some kind of slam. Its not. Stop reading into stuff when its not there. 
You see - you HAD to point to the fact I'm not a native English speaker. First, because it goes on your nerves, and second to demonstrate your superiority. And you HAD to reply, because you are the more important one.My English is perfectly good to spot a bad person easily. Not knowing a language perfectly has some benefits, you can say thing to people straightforward, like a little naive child. So, I have to tell you this - you are a bad person.
70
« on: June 24, 2020, 07:49 »
Uncle Pete, I have no idea why would anybody not believe me. I'm 55 years old, professional photographer, feeding my family, high school educated. Why would I come to a forum with a fake news?
It wasn't not believing, it was a matter of making it easy to see that 0 = zero. Just like the screen captures of Jon's tweets. For the record, in case anyone went to look... they don't have to go look. I went and searched all over Twitter, found nothing. So lets say something changes? OK here's a picture of what it looked like. Nothing personal.
I know, don't worry, not a big deal
71
« on: June 24, 2020, 07:47 »
That is HUGE!
These big guys deserve props for taking decisive action - it would be so much easier for them to leave their ports on and just stop submitting, and try to wring whatevers left!
Makes me wonder if SS DIDNT make any special deals with ANYONE.
They really are taking a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT stance.
It is not how big productions work. They can't stop working just like that. They have a lot of expenses, employees, models,
photographers, contracts, offices, debts for equipment, props, vehicles etc. They are better finding another agency, My guess they will go Getty exclusive now.
Oh, Im sure they didnt just stop working. Im sure they will be flooding the other agencies now. And making more than $.10 an image.
Yes, they will. I don't see a problem with that. If they are capable to produce enormous amounts of pictures, congratulations to them. It looks like everything and everyone is going on your nerves. And congratulations to them for making such a brave move!
72
« on: June 24, 2020, 07:36 »
That is HUGE!
These big guys deserve props for taking decisive action - it would be so much easier for them to leave their ports on and just stop submitting, and try to wring whatevers left!
Makes me wonder if SS DIDNT make any special deals with ANYONE.
They really are taking a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT stance.
It is not how big productions work. They can't stop working just like that. They have a lot of expenses, employees, models, photographers, contracts, offices, debts for equipment, props, vehicles etc. They are better finding another agency, My guess they will go Getty exclusive now.
73
« on: June 24, 2020, 07:26 »
Ja, that's what they tried to sell us, right? The word "boycott" did not appear in that article. They went pretty quiet after that. Did you note that the second article by chance did? I managed to forward that on my profile no problem. It's still up on my FB account - no auto algorithm stuff there.
Try it for yourself.
My guess is that they worked overtime to squash the story that way. Nah, guys, it was just these fools not knowing how our automatic algorithm works . . .
Note that the whole thread disappeared on our FB page? That was after I asked them some really hard questions.
Spooky stuff.
You are right, really spooky. Thanks for gathering all the info.
74
« on: June 24, 2020, 07:22 »
Uncle Pete, I have no idea why would anybody not believe me. I'm 55 years old, professional photographer, feeding my family, high school educated. Why would I come to a forum with a fake news?
75
« on: June 24, 2020, 07:10 »
It's huge news. Other big players are joining in. Buyers will be annoyed as hell.
Jon says he does not want our content on Twitter. That goes for the big players too.
My conspiracy theory is that Facebook is about to buy Shutterstock and wants the prices pushed down so that they can give our stock assets away to their advertisers.
That's why FB was so quick to gag the Inside Imaging article. Also would explain why SS seems to have lost the plot wrt to dealing with their contributors. It's FB pulling their strings now.
How do you know that? It is interesting. Because I got an impression that FB blocked that article automatically alerted by word boycott. Regarding AfricaStudio, it is big news indeed. I wanted to compare it with YuriArcurs decision to leave years ago, but I think it is even bigger having in mind the sensitivity of the situation.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
