I hope you are right about Adobe, but I fail to see why they wouldn't - at a certain point in time - start dropping prices and commissions too either to match competition (and gain market share) or just to optimize their own earnings, or ... both.

Because Adobe is not in the stock photo business, they are in the CC and Software business. This is just a side benefit to attract customers to the other products. I'm happy to see what we get, while some others are just going to find things wrong, no matter what.

It's hard business, not charity.

Good to see someone else picking up on this stock supplier fact of life. 

The stock industry is consolidating faster than I thought only a few years ago. I think most players are irrelevant already that were still on the radar not so long ago.

Small players are already totally wiped out and sending anything to them is a huge waste of time and an opportunity that your content lands in the wrong hands. Middle tier have also mostly slipped down. Alamy 123RF, Dreamstine,Envato,Deposit are a shadow of what they were and in a few years will join the low ballers if they aren't already.

Mostly agree. I think Alamy will hold on because of their different position in the market. At least for people who have the right products to send them.

I'm actually surprised that the elimination of the parasites could have been faster. I think the reason why that hasn't happened is the huge profit margins from under paying artists, and artists who are happy to indiscriminately upload their images to anyone who will throw some change into their tin beggars cup. Total loss of control or knowing where your work is or who has it.

Unfortunately I don't think things will consolidate or get stabilized as fast as you see this changing. When the small ones start dropping, one after another, I'll jump on that train with you.

I've compared this to the software industry before. Much the same boom to bust. Independent little companies had nice products, useful and well made. But they couldn't hold up to the growth of the market or the demands and changes. Some got bought, some just went out of business. Some big players also went out at the same time.

Until we lose more of the agencies who got in while this business was hot and growing, for the short term profits, riding the wave... we'll still be scattered and getting the lowest pay, during an agency price war.

There's a point where the race to the bottom ends. Usually with a nasty crash, minimal profit from low margins, can't keep the small agencies in the black. This is a natural kind of business situation, which is usually even worse with anything involving a boom of a new technology or market.

Look to history for the answers. Anything from the railroads to airlines to computers or software. I won't go into railroads, but there's a long interesting history in the US. Airlines I hope most here are old enough to see what happened. Let me say Pan Am? Compaq (bankrupt - sold), IBM left the consumer market, Apple only survived because of the MAC, many others are just names on a long list of boom and bust. Software, Lotus 1-2-3 anyone, Wang word processing, America Online, Prodigy?

And for people here, right at home, Kodak and Polaroid. 

Adapt and innovate or perish. The simple point being, just another stock agency is dead. The new ways to market and license, will take over.

Good luck everyone, being in the right places, moving up along with them. Bottom feeding, small agencies, in my opinion, are not the future. They are history.

Quote from: pixel8 on January 05, 2021, 20:44

Maybe stockphoto.com is linking to photos on other stock sites and then makes affiliate commissions if someone comes to his site and buys the photo?

No, they are not linking to other sites. That's the strange thing, you purchase the images - that have watermarks from Depositephots - on theirs site.

Right, still working on that part. No good answers yet, why DP watermarks on the majority of the images. If I find something, I will promise to share.

But at least we know they aren't owned by DP like some other people pulled out of the air, (or someplace else) as an answer. An I think your conclusion makes sense, they might be a partner, but the images aren't just linked from DP. I'd say, otherwise, why would SP have the section on be a contributor?

I still don't see, digging for obscure sites, as the answer to stabilizing income. There are essentially five sites that matter and then "the irrelevant rest". Exception for that of course is, if people work exclusive agencies, specialty sites, or unusual niche markets.

And of those five agencies I'm not convinced the number isn't only three for photos. Adobe, SS stock in general, plus Alamy for things that apply there. Then one for video Pond5. Simple and easy, hit the highest return sites.

The alternative plan should be, upload everything, everywhere EVERYWHERE using submitting software and work on volume. Why bother picking or discrimination from one pit of penny stock over another. The game changes into just make the most from the minimal return. I'm not interested, but anyone else can see how volume alone can be a solution.

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 03, 2021, 09:21

Quote from: Firn on January 03, 2021, 01:26

Quote from: kall3bu on January 02, 2021, 14:54

So fast signed as not available? I guess Deposit is driving that Stockphot.com not someone else.

I am not so sure about that, acording to the legal information Stockphoto.com is loated in Australia, but Depositphotos doesn't even have an office in Australia. I rather think it's a partner site, just a bit strange that you can't find any information about that on Stockphoto.

Not really hard to find. https://blog.stockphoto.com/how-to-ask-your-wife-for-permission-to-spend-250-000-on-a-domain-name-c27a3c2852e1
https://blog.stockphoto.com/
Worried that he had pissed away the best years of his professional life and never getting around to doing that web startup thing he pencilled in his Bucket List, Jon Yau spent $250,000 on a domain name, quit his job and now runs Stockphoto.com full time.

I am sorry, I still can't find the information. Where does it say that Stockphoto is associated with Depositphotos?

Nothing says StockPhotos is associated with Deposit, did you follow the links?

I guess Stockphoto.com is a reseller for Deposit or Deposit owns this site.

No, they don't own the site. Bad guess. "I launched Stockphoto.com in 2013 with money I had saved." Written by Jon Yau Shopkeeper at Stockphoto.com (owner)

I am not so sure about that, acording to the legal information Stockphoto.com is loated in Australia, but Depositphotos doesn't even have an office in Australia. I rather think it's a partner site, just a bit strange that you can't find any information about that on Stockphoto.

What information did you want? He says he bought the domain name and he owns the site? Does any site actually say "we're a partner site for agency 1, agency 2, agency 3, Etc."? The way we discover that, is seeing images, with referral links to an agency. Or someone sees their images and guesses by the image number, what site is feeding the partner. Stockphoto is no different.

I just cut Medium because it's a pay site, where you get three reads a month and then they wanted me to subscribe. Nice, people running a pay blog on Medium = no thanks. I won't be reading his blog posts on Medium.

https://www.domainsherpa.com/jon-yau-stockphoto-interview/#:~:text=About%20Jon%20Yau%20Jon%20Yau%20is%20a%20business,StockPhoto.com%20%2C%20a%20marketplace%20for%20purchasing%20royalty-free%20photographs.

I hope that clears up what the partial answer from someone else was saying. Deposit does not own Stockphoto.com and most sites (none I have ever see actually) say who they are partners with to get images. Nothing hidden or unusual.

To all the artists...


The agencies call us Artists, and then the SS supervisor arrives and rejects the file, for similarity.


In this crazy world of MicroStokers, which is supposed to feed the planet with ideas, we innovate, we create, we get ahead of the advertising agencies and we decide what is trending, I can assure you that the passage in 2021 has been uneventful.


You can pass without fear or distrust to 2021. All clear.

I hug everyone and you, Pete, very especially.

May we have spectacular sales this year.

Remind me, Pete, to give you a discount on the new Stock Selling Platform.

For a real recognition of our work and decent salary. For the dignity of our profession, I light a candle to Saint Narcissus of Gerona. Santo of MindsWorld.info, Tenebroso.es y  MindsPlanet.es ,  from where we will launch the new 5 microstock sales platforms. To be able to be this year.

The first Platform is free, only 30 per year, 100% commission for the artist. If someone can't afford 30 a year, I'll give it to them.
It is not open at the moment, NOTHING. Just one project.
Hug everyone.

Long live 2021, fuck 2020.

Tenebroso


Hug everyone.
Do not take it as spam, I do not need advertising.
To the admin of this forum, I need a verification stamp, like Matt's.
Happy New Year from the heart, everyone crazy.

When I win the lottery and open the co-op, by invitation only agency, you're invited.  It's only going to pay 40% because I understand operating costs, not because I want to be rich on others work, or snobby and lord over the "artists".

We are artists in a way, but what is art? The eye of the agency, isn't necessarily the same as the buyers and not the same as each of us. I make things that are admittedly not good stock and won't sell much. But, I do what I like. Anyone who wants to make money, needs to learn to do what other people like. I'm not interested.

Another way of putting that is, I choose my own path, and if others don't like that, I might suffer financial loss. The choice is usually one or the other, in a rare case, some people can do both. I can't, I'm fine being myself, even if people don't like what I do.

Sometimes I get lucky or strike a middle point, where what I do and enjoy is also pleasing to others. Most of the time, not. I don't care, I don't do this for the money. I choose to make photos, most of them, for what I see. People who work for the income have to look at things from a different perspective and ambition.

Stock isn't "Art", but it still takes an artist to make good stock and there is an art to making good stock photos.

I have probably printed 10 of my own photos since 2005 (I don't own a color printer anymore I have a B&W laser printer) if I have something made for the wall, it has a place.

There are people, stock people and artists that do creations like this, daily. They will do more tomorrow, and not only that, they do them better and hit that spot that buyers want. That's stock for commercial production, sales and income. I'm not that.

Are you replying to the wrong person... or are you just putting Pete on the stand to answer for the crimes of all Americans?

Wow I have no clue what he was ranting about. I went straight down the middle, both sides are too extreme, special interest groups are only asking for their special rights, news and talk are polarized and feeding people one sided information, from their limited fairness, and suddenly? I'm not going to answer, it's impossible to make sense of what he wrote. I think there's some kind of translation issue or language barrier going on.

Happy New Year everyone, lets hope for a better 2021.

Etsy sales are slow anyway, why give up such an important term, I doubt it really affects your sales?

No Sales!

I was thinking maybe the re-use was causing that? The prices I have are reasonable and more than I get at AS or SS most of the time, but I also don't think allowing someone to re-use for a product that they resell is what I want. If people want to make 100 Christmas Cards, just making that up, I'm fine, but if they want to make cards to sell to others, what's the use?

Etsy is reasonable and people who have nice craft products, seem to do well. Mine aren't that. Maybe I'm in the wrong place?

I don't know why the USA feels so distant to you. We are the ones who have been living on the continent the longest, except for the natives. And they still have trouble defining ethnicities and races. Now they call us, not white. However, it is clear that the country is divided in two. The closest definition is that half follows the news from the media, and the other half follow Trump.

Actually if you look at it, half don't like one side and the other half doesn't like the other side. Not many like anything. 

Besides that, anyone who is outside and looks at the news, is just as misguided by polarized agendas as the simplistic view that, there are two ends. The actual alignment is much more in the middle, but the extremes talk the most and shout the loudest.

Part of the ratings game has become, leaning towards one side or the other. What ever happened to impartial? So people go to the stations and the news and the talk, that agrees with their views the most. Then they get confidence and rewarded by hearing people that agree with them, and avoiding people that don't.

Anyway the main honest point is, don't believe the extremes or that they actually represent the people in the United States. The far left is just as "out there" as the far right. Some of the most racist groups are racial advocacy groups. Not a pretty picture, but also not much different from many other countries in the world. In some ways better, because there's actually some openness and discussion, where other places, you can have freedom of speech, but the next day, you might never be heard from again. 

Free speech is good, even if I have to listen to people I disagree with. I support freedom of expression, for everyone, on an equal basis.

@Uncle Pete:
Are you using stocksubmitter for entering your copyright name, keywords and so on?

I just got a reply from wirestock that their reading system even not read the copyright name and of course not use them or submit them together with that files - with other words: Similar with with remove, just not read it from the ITPC data.

So it COULD be a problem by reading ITPC data from Stocksubmitter.

If you (Uncle Pete) also uses stocksubmitter for keywording and have no issues with the wrong transfered keyword order, then wirestock and me are still confused why it happend to my images.

Sorry no help. I use BreezeBrowser to enter keywords into metadata and that's the XMP file way. Different software does work in odd ways. I'll have to find one of my images that Wirestock has distributed to check the word order, which is odd, but no disagreement, they could be reversing somehow. I'll add, I looked for my images, found a couple, and I can't see the keywords on any of the sites, so I have no idea if they used mine, or reversed them. 

I don't use StockSubmitter so I can't answer any of that. I use online through the agency sites or I use ftp.

My situation is kind of different, maybe I should explain. Wirestock, I only check Pond5, DP and 123RF. The rest I upload myself. So old photos, throw-aways and things I don't care about, go to WS. New files and better images (IMHO) I upload directly myself to SS, AS, some to DT, depending on restrictions and what they are. Some go to Alamy, also specific kinds of images.

I don't like the Instant Download on WS where some free site gets to use my image forever for one download fee. They can have the unsold and leftovers. The other side is, I'm selective about what goes to what agency, because they all do better with one kind of product, than another and also they all take different kinds of files, that another might not.

I just uploaded an image with copyright field and also image editor field filled and it went through? Although there have been some "Upload error" messages for over a month, but the image shows up in my files to edit. I checked and I have files with the copyright field filled in, and they were received and accepted. Is it possible that something else is causing the problem?

Am I killing sales by having this in my terms? Seems like others are undercutting my prices for downloads of digital products, but also they have smaller versions, less quality and more in a pack. Maybe I should close and stop wasting time? But here's the question part:

Because of the unique version, adaptation and editing this image is not available for making products or resale by anyone except myself. � 2020 If you want to make postcards for personal use, collages, scrap book, home projects... please enjoy.

No returns on digital downloads, sorry.

I assumed the no returns is standard for digital downloads, but restrictions on products for resale?

Quote from: Uncle Pete on December 25, 2020, 12:35

...
Google isn't the end all, there's also Bing, which isn't the largest but does have some dedicated and default search users. Nearly half of the US searches on Bing, does everyone here want to ignore half the people in the US? Bing controls 36% of the US desktop search market. Would you ignore 1/3rd of the potential buyers?...

bing # seemed high - here's another view

In October 2020, online search engine Bing accounted for 6.18 percent of the global search market, while market leader Google had a market share of 88.14 percent. Chinese search engine Baidu's market share was 0.59 percent.
Ever since the introduction of Google Search in 1997, the worldwide market share of all search engines has been rather lopsided. Google has dominated the search engine market, maintaining an 86.86 percent market share as of July 2020.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/216573/worldwide-market-share-of-search-engines/

Maybe my numbers came from Bing?  I wouldn't doubt a bit of anything that Google is the largest and has the most users. I looked at another site and it has Google at 92% November 2020. Here's one that looks reasonable:  https://www.oberlo.com/blog/top-search-engines-world
Partly because Bing is actually behind others website and search, they are using Bing, not their own technology.

Obviously Google is the master and the largest, just not the only one. Some of us points collectors use Bing? Every few weeks (I think it's that?) I get $5 from Microsoft, in the form of an Amazon gift card, which is fine with me.

The number I found for the US was 36% of the desktop market belongs to Bing, not the world.

Quote from: Noedelhap on December 29, 2020, 05:49

I suggest you don't click the link because it seems fishy (or...phishy.) If you really have to do an ID check, it should be accessible via Envato Verify. You should double check with support to see if the link is legit.

The email is probably OK when I found the Envato Verify webpage it confirmed I needed to submit an ID.

https://help.author.envato.com/hc/en-us/articles/360038865632-Author-ID-Checks

Wow, yet another one that instead of sending from the site or linking from the site, is using some outside agent that looks suspicious.

Quote from: zsooofija on December 28, 2020, 12:36

It's not about accusing anyone, it's about asking a question. I don't see any problem with that, especially because in very few cases they did have the proper license (like 5% or something).

Just check the policy of each agency. iStock certainly takes a dim view of contacting buyers or abusers ourselves, it's in the contract:
"iStock reserves the right, at your expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter otherwise subject to indemnification by you, and in such case, you agree to cooperate with iStock's defense of such claim." (non-exclusive agreement)
The only contact I ever made with a buyer was within the past year when I found my image, exclusively sold on iStock. being used as a book cover, but credited to Shutterstock. I did a quick search on SS and couldn't find it, but it was at a time when a lot of stolen images were being found on SS and reported here on msg, so I contacted the publisher and said I only sold the image via iS, and I'd be interested if they could tell me where they had found it on SS. It was a genuine error by an outsourced image researcher, but they volunteered the iS receipt anyway.

Not that it matters much, because image theft and misuse is everywhere and we are pretty much unprotected legally.


Shutterstock Contributor Terms of Service 12 b

Copyright Infringement Claims

    You hereby grant Shutterstock the right and authority to take such steps as Shutterstock deems commercially reasonable to protect Shutterstock's rights in the Content.
    In the event that you believe that a Shutterstock license to your Content is being misused, you shall take no action against a Shutterstock licensee without providing notice of such misuse to Shutterstock and receiving Shutterstock's prior written consent to such action.

https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms?language=en_US

Also for the RF license: You can�t use the photos in products that you will then resell on a retail model, like a POD site. Someone would need an EL for POD sales. However as in the earlier posts, someone can advertise a product, lets say a large print, using our SS images (and many other sites that have API partners) to display the product for sale, and must pay for the license if they sell that product.

Like it or not, we have to understand that someone legitimately using our images as a partner re-seller, can't sell them, if they can't show them to a customer? The same as a website licensing our images, has them all displayed, people making a product also are allowed to show samples and examples.

The complication of that is, for PODs how do we get notified and how does a partner get monitored for sales? What? Trust? Ha!, nope it's a loophole and complication. They can't sell if someone can't see it, they don't have to license in advance, so we can't track sales. Hopefully they only have small size example until they get an order and then pay for a legal download. We can hope that the websize examples aren't good enough or large enough to make finished products.

Thanks for asking, I'll make a note. I just work from the 1099s so I never noticed the small variations. But good to know.