|
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 - massman
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14
101
« on: September 30, 2009, 07:40 »
What we'll give away are images with a maximum resolution of 400px width perfect for blogs, but totally useless for anything else.
Is this a typo?
102
« on: September 29, 2009, 04:26 »
Is it just Snap Village with a new name or have you seen any increase in sales since the move?
103
« on: September 28, 2009, 07:28 »
Traveller might be onto something here. If DT has a 6 month rule to delete your photos, they should really have a 6 month notice with price changes. I have to say they give us better notice than most of the others - like FT. Oh, I forgot - they don't give notice, we just find out policy changes by accident.
In all fairness Dreamstime has done a very good job of communicating changes and giving fair warning. As most of us have experienced, there has been fairly recent history of sites making major changes to both pricing and contributors share without any warning and news of the changes only coming long AFTER the change, if at all.
And yes I like Dreamstime, but why I am not exclusive there... because it simply doesn't make sense to be exclusive. Even if I liked 100% of the things Dreamstime did, I wouldn't be exclusive. I make more money submitting to multiple agencies.
I find DT okay, but I think 'fair warning' should be at least the same as the lock-in period. You can't have your cake and eat it too (I've never really understood that phrase, surely the reason you would want cake is to eat it???).
104
« on: September 27, 2009, 15:05 »
given the overall state of the world economy, and how that affects the primary USERS of microstock, i think just staying even is a reasonable achievement
steve
Some truth to that. But what really discourages me is that I was making more money on SS in March - with 20 images - than I am now, with 100.
I think you need to, in part, put this down to 'new portfolio' honeymoon period.
105
« on: September 26, 2009, 05:18 »
As Sean said your mileage may vary. I do both and depending on the agency I get different results. In $$ terms at SS out of my top 20 sellers four are photos, the remainder are illustrations, at IS out of my top 20 sellers 12 are photos, the remainder are illustrations. My top selling photo at IS has earned me twice as much as my best selling illustration at SS, they have both been available for sale for the same amount of time. My portfolio at SS is heavily weighted to illustrations, at IS it is more balanced.
You could continue to Analise it to death, but at the end of the day wether you produce illustration or photos it's quality, concept, execution etc that counts.
If it's all about $$ do what you are good at and shoot what's in demand, if it's about fun, do what you enjoy.
Any the wiser?
106
« on: September 25, 2009, 15:03 »
They have created a new forum 'logos', there are a few topics there which may give you a better idea as to what is going on. I think IS have released this news a bit early and in typical crowdsourcing fashion are letting buyers and contributors have their 'input'.
From what I gather commission is 50%, pricing is 100 - 750 credits, credits range $0.95 - $1.50, logos have to be exclusive because of the licence (just the design, not the contributor), non-exclusives will have to apply to contribute, you will get paid $5 per upload as an incentive to create a 10,000 logo collection and a further $5 if the collection reaches 10,000 by 1 Jan 2010 + your commission if the logo sells.
It's all there if you look. You just have to plough through lots of bull to find it. It's their game, if the rules are okay I think it might be a good outlet for those who have the time and skill.
107
« on: September 25, 2009, 12:04 »
Have you read any of the logo forums at IS? I did start to type answers for you, but then I gave up.
If you are seriously interested in the IS logo idea, why not read the IS logo forum? I did.
I will gladly help you, but come on, RTFF.
108
« on: September 24, 2009, 02:53 »
Seems to be working okay with me, although I do seem to be missing a few hundred thousand dollars 
109
« on: September 23, 2009, 08:40 »
Wow, with all these announcements, this is a great time to be an independent microstocker.
Just out of interest (having never signed up to bigstock), do they have a tie-in period for contributors images?
Yes, 90 days.
110
« on: September 23, 2009, 07:38 »
I don't even draw a bloody line for $50!
Come one now!
Isn't that exactly the attitude that makes it easy for others to compete against you and provide a more cost-effective service?
It's a bit like a photographer saying "I don't even click the shutter for less than $100". You can try but you probably won't get too many takers.
Would you sell the rights of one of your photos for $50 commission?
111
« on: September 23, 2009, 03:50 »
Have you not seen the latest development over at istock? They are starting a logo section.
EXCLUSIVE, SOLD ONCE logos! Aren't you going to start your exclusive logo section?
They are offering us, designers only %50 for sold once exclusive logos!
Show us what you can do! Have you got a better deal? Remember this is exclusive. So I am ready to contribute exclusive logos to the company that comes with the best deal!
Keep in mind http://www.brandstack.com is an established place to sell and buy logos and they pay %85, giving us the opportunity to set our own prices.
So, let's see what you can offer guys. This is all exclusive. Nobody can contribute to multiple websites so whoever pays the best commission will win!
I'm sure we will see some similar activity soon from at least on of them. How have you found brandstack? A good earner? Do you think the micros are better placed to better brandstack?
113
« on: September 22, 2009, 11:55 »
On iStock, the implementation of the newest Best Match with keyword ranking is supposed to help address this issue - have you, as a buyer, found it to be an improvement?
^^ This is what I would like to know also. Today I had an image rejected by SS for the first time, for inappropriate keywords. On double checking I found a few that were marginal (copied from a previous similar image), so I removed them and now it's waiting reinspection. It's good to see that they are looking and doing something, but I fail to see how they miss some of the most blatant spamming.
114
« on: September 21, 2009, 14:08 »
DLs were going like a train right up until this weekend, it's like somebody switched the lights off.
115
« on: September 20, 2009, 15:13 »
I think this is more likley, god knows ive done it.
Your in a rush, getting a mag ready for print, download a file and S**T its to small, so download the bigger one, simple!!!
That's good info, even if the thread is well over two years old.
116
« on: September 20, 2009, 13:52 »
Categories are automatic on BigStock, Really? Is it a new feature? I don't remember that... Or are you making a confusion with CanStockPhoto?
It's a new feature. It guesses categories based on, I believe, the title.
117
« on: September 20, 2009, 07:28 »
I appreciate it's 'Off Topic' but do we really have to have a post from this chap on a totally unrelated topic every day __ like he thinks he's our court jester or something? I did bite my lip for the first couple of days. The posts are not original, most of us will probably have had them emailed to us many times before and they have nothing whatsoever to do with this forum. What's the point?
I have no problem with folk choosing to 'Ignore' me. If they're not interested in my view then that's absolutely fine with me. I'm certainly not going to hold back on my views just in case someone I don't know, somewhere on the planet, might get offended by them. That's their problem or their choice as far as I'm concerned. Even SJL is ignored by 3 people and yet he's amongst the top 4 most knowledgeable people on the planet on the subject of microstock. Why do people join a microstock group and then 'Ignore' the people that they stand to learn the most from?
I have to agree with you, but each to their own. 'There is nowt queerer than folk'.
118
« on: September 19, 2009, 12:46 »
You must sign up (regester) before you can read the terms, rules, pay, etc..
That leaves me out as I never sign up before I read ALL the terms.
Oh well,
-Larry
Why not register, read the terms and if you don't like them, don't submit anything?
Waste of time. They could put the info up front and then if the photographer likes the terms he/she could then sign up. I always feel they are hiding something if they do not put it up front. I have wasted my time on a dozen or more sites by signing up first, don't like the rules, terms, etc. ... so now I refuse.
Just me,
-Larry
Okay, i understand. Just thought it was a workaround if you wanted to see the T&Cs.
119
« on: September 19, 2009, 06:39 »
You must sign up (regester) before you can read the terms, rules, pay, etc..
That leaves me out as I never sign up before I read ALL the terms.
Oh well,
-Larry
Why not register, read the terms and if you don't like them, don't submit anything?
120
« on: September 18, 2009, 06:05 »
^ I don't agree - it depends - they may be searching for regular stock or they may be looking for something special, but the "rare and unique" stuff tends to be less popular and gets lost in the regular stuff.
So it makes sense to show off the special stuff at the top, so they can at least get a taste of it without having to wade through pages of more standard images.
I do think though that Vetta images should be more obviously seen as "different" (and hence warn the buyer that they cost more) by, say, putting a different border on them and reserving the top row or something. Sort of like iStock have done at the stock.xchng site.
Why not just put them in their own separate collection away from the standard stock? 'Click here if your looking for something extra special'
121
« on: September 16, 2009, 07:33 »
I remember seeing something on TV years ago. They tried to give fivers away on the street to passers by, not catch, over half were to suspicious to accept.
122
« on: September 16, 2009, 07:30 »
In the UK we have a TV program called Dragons Den where entrepreneurs pitch for investment from millionaires, one pitch recently was for seamless audio track merging software, and the entrepreneur said they were after 1% of the iTunes market, one of the dragons said they would be lucky to take 0.001% of an existing established market, another said they would be better licensing the software to iTunes, the entrepreneur said they would sell downloads through the website, but a few months on they have signed a deal to license through iTunes.
The moral of this is simple, this is no longer a new and growing market, and new offering thinking they will steal a share of the existing market from established sites are just wrong, the only new services that will survive will be niche or offer a new service that is not available through the established websites.
David 
Yes I saw this. I was quite surprised to see the market they achieved 'success' in and the market share they had got, not to mention the revenue. A bit of lateral thinking and some marketing $$ can go a long way. It may not necessarily been the agencies that need to look around, individual artists need to get off their arse, stop moaning about this and that, and find the new markets for their assets themselves.
123
« on: September 16, 2009, 07:18 »
I was going to apply to become an A.R.S.E. but when I looked in to it, it turned out to be a bum deal.
124
« on: September 15, 2009, 13:12 »
I hear you m@m. Yesterday I got a payment from 123rf, and today it is still showing the balance before the payment
Me too, shhh!
125
« on: September 12, 2009, 10:37 »
I wonder how many sales they make on Alamy - without doing a search?
Either way, it appears to me that Alamy sales are FAR LOWER than the MicroStock sites we're all familiar with. Sure, I'll have a presence and a collection on Alamy, but I'm having much more success on the other sites - even though they sell for much less per download.
Typical Pavlovian microstocker analysis. Success = no. of downloads. This is why 99% of you are failures in actually making a profit. You have absolutely no idea of how to analyse a business situation and make the best choices.
Let's look how a successful stock photographer might look at things:
Total downloads on Istock = 6,700
Average paid out to Istock contributors per download = $0.30
Total paid out to Istock contributors = $2,010
Partial number of licenses sold on Alamy = 47
Average paid out to Alamy contributors per license = $70
Total paid out to Alamy contributors = $3,290
Ratio of contributors at Alamy vs. IStock = 1 (Alamy) : 2 (IStock)
So not only does Alamy pay 64% more to contributors than IStock, Alamy also has at least half as many contributors competing for those dollars.
Where did you get the idea that the average commission per licence at Istock is 30c?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
