pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - PaulieWalnuts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 120
76
No "exciting news" and "this will make us better" part to it all?

It's pass.

77
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS levelling up
« on: January 11, 2021, 23:25 »
Level two should be reached in another week.   ::)

I was at level 5 until December 31st not that it made any difference to the
piss poor royalties. 

My new years resolution was to cease submitting to these ass hats I've even started to submit to Depositphotos once more because at least their royalties are better than scumstock
ROFL. depositphotos lowered commissions today. But okay, still better than sh-it-terstock

So this is the point micro has reached. "Hey we just got screwed. But it's so much better of a screwing than we got from the other company."  These companies must study psychological warfare.

78
123RF / Re: 123rf reducing commissions
« on: January 10, 2021, 19:23 »
We understand that these changes have caused a lot of concern among Contributors but rest assured, the coming phase would be good news for Contributors.

OMG, bwahahahahaha they can't be serious. I can just imagine the execs sitting around the meeting table. "Okay so we need to reduce contributor commissions. Let's not tell them and when they eventually figure it out give them the old 'we have good news' line?" (everyone laughs)

Fast forward a couple months. "We're excited to announce we've launched some great changes that will benefit all contributors. We've adjusted (lowered) royalty percentages for contributors and have improved (raised the goal bar really high) contributor goal levels. This will benefit contributors (123rf) by encouraging you to contribute a higher quantity and quality work. You will make more (less) money through increased sales volumes (falling sales). We're proud to support our wonderful contributor community with these exciting changes.

FAQ

Q: How will this impact my income?
A: You will somehow miraculously against all mathematical theory make more money from reduced commissions and lower sales volume. Aren't you excited?

Q: Are my royalties being reduced?
A: Reduced is such a harsh word. We prefer to use the word "adjusted" which is much more pleasant and doesn't specify a reduction.

Q: How do I benefit from these changes?
A: There will be absolutely no benefit to you but we'll spin it so it sounds exciting like you'll somehow benefit.

Q: Can I opt out of these changes?
A: Absolutely. We believe in freedom of choice, fairness, and strong relationships with our contributors. You can request to close your account or if you prefer you can openly complain on the internet and we'll close it for you.

Humor aside, it will be interesting to see what the "good news" is.

Old response from three years ago but wanted to get an update. I made $0 last month. Was there any benefit to the good news?

79
Print on Demand Forum / Re: Etsy Terms
« on: January 02, 2021, 08:07 »
I don't offer downloads through Etsy but I don't think limiting resale is a big deal. I don't offer resale on any of my images unless it's one-off arrangement. What's to stop people from buying your images and then just setting up another Etsy shop to resell them? From my experience, most of my Etsy buyers have been homemakers. Anytime someone asks for a digital download it's usually to create a wall art print, wedding invitation, or some craft as a gift. Digital downloads on Etsy sell at micro prices mostly between $1-$5. With all of Etsy's fees of at least 8%, plus the need to handhold buyers for customer service, I think someone would need to do really high volume to be worth the effort for low priced items.

80
Oh boy this idea have been on the carpet many many times. I think the first time was when Istock started to mess us around and thats about 10 years back if I remember correctly.
The idea is great if one whants to spend 90% administration this and that and 10% photography!....just a minor detail who is going to pay for it all? advertising etc and all that goes with it?

Yep and that's the other half of the equation. You need to have a solid business plan otherwise the technology is useless.

81
Just bumping this due to some news. Photodeck just announced new functionality that provides individuals with the ability to set up an instant agency or photographer collective. I use Photodeck for my photo business website and am pretty happy with them. For anyone who wants to start an agency or collective this may be a good alternative to building from scratch.

https://www.photodeck.com/blog/2020/12/creating-photo-agency/

This will be interesting. I think many have been asking for something like this, for a long time. Off to read.

Oh I get it. Nice

"host multi-photographer accounts on PhotoDeck, with access rights management."

Five members team plan $100 a month, but it tracks individuals earnings, which is very important to any team or group agency, that the people who make the sales, get the credit for the sales.

Start your own agency, and have 5 people join you.

I skimmed over the details. So looks like the plan includes up to five people but you can contact them to request more users. Beyond the technology is all the business stuff. Content strategy, marketing, how to handle customer service, how to split the costs, attract buyers, design configuration, and more admin related stuff.

82
Just bumping this due to some news. Photodeck just announced new functionality that provides individuals with the ability to set up an instant agency or photographer collective. I use Photodeck for my photo business website and am pretty happy with them. For anyone who wants to start an agency or collective this may be a good alternative to building from scratch.

https://www.photodeck.com/blog/2020/12/creating-photo-agency/

Thanks, Paulie W., for pointing that out.

I had an account and built a site at Photodeck long, long ago. A very early user. The guy running it was nice and very helpful as I got my feet wet in self-marketing.

So I can't remember why I didn't stay with it. Maybe because I went with iStock, Shitterstock, etc?? Who knows now or cares?

But I may go back and take another look, thanks to your recommendation. It might be an idea whose time has come (again) for me.

Photodeck has come a long way. I think I signed up with a basic account in 2010 and switched to a more advanced account around 2014. I've also communicated with the founder and their support team and they've been helpful overall.

83
Just bumping this due to some news. Photodeck just announced new functionality that provides individuals with the ability to set up an instant agency or photographer collective. I use Photodeck for my photo business website and am pretty happy with them. For anyone who wants to start an agency or collective this may be a good alternative to building from scratch.

https://www.photodeck.com/blog/2020/12/creating-photo-agency/

84
Site Related / Re: Where is Everybody?
« on: December 13, 2020, 07:34 »
First time I've looked here for months. I used to ba addicted to this forum. I think it just got too depressing. I miss the Lucky Oliver days :)

Wow old school.  Haven't heard Lucky Oliver brought up in a long time. Back when micro was still like the USA Wild West and entrepreneurs had the opportunity to experiment with new concepts. Lucky Oliver was fun.

85
Very sorry for your loss Martha.

86
Site Related / Re: Where is Everybody?
« on: December 07, 2020, 15:58 »
I think once the "old" ranters and "troublemakers" either got banned or left any forum will slowly die out. They sort of keep the place alive. Some of the old ranters here was BIG contributors as well. As an example just look at the DPR forum!

I laughed and then I realized I may be one of these people  :)

87
I think nature in general hasn't sold well in microstock. Low demand and a large quantity of images. You may want to consider a different route like art POD.

88
Site Related / Where is Everybody?
« on: November 30, 2020, 20:42 »
MSG used to be pretty active. Now there's a handful or less of new posts or replies daily.

89
General - Top Sites / Re: Getty Rewards Program
« on: November 30, 2020, 17:05 »
In summary they're not getting enough brief content, or not enough of the right content, and are dangling a carrot. And the carrot is training?

Or maybe is the problem that contributors spend hundreds or thousands of dollars shooting for briefs and end up with pennies or dollars in return? I'm not feeling motivated by this program. May be just me.

90
General Stock Discussion / Re: PhotoShelter equivalent for video?!
« on: November 27, 2020, 09:44 »
Check out Photodeck. https://www.photodeck.com

I'm using both PhotoShelter and Photodeck. They're similar in offering a turnkey website platform. Photodeck is more video friendly where you can actually upload videos. It also offers templates but has way more configuration options than PhotoShelter. I know Photoshelter has been making a lot of updates recently but they have a long way to go to catch up to current offerings.

91
Alamy.com / Re: Lets Discuss: Alamy Personal Usage Licenses Misuse
« on: November 23, 2020, 10:52 »
I've stopped offering all personal use licensing on Alamy and everywhere else. On my own business site I set up lower priced personal use RM licensing hoping this would increase sales. While it did add some new sales, it was occasional and only $20 each. I then would need to contact the person to verify valid usage because I would see customer email addresses like [email protected]. Some were legit. Some were people would didn't understand licensing. Some just bought the lowest price option not caring about the terms. Too much policing and other effort needed for too little money so I recently removed it. At least with RM you are able to track usage. With RF it's a lost cause.

92
123RF / Re: Sudden decrease in sales mid-October
« on: October 28, 2020, 20:31 »
Yes massive devastating 50% drop. I was expecting $2 this month but it looks like I'm now on track for $1.

yep - with numbers as small as have been reported, it's expected there would be major swings up/down - my monthly sales charts for most agencies look like a picket fence - rolling avgs are much more predictive

Well the percentage drop part was supposed to be sarcastic humor. The earnings are accurate though. I have several hundred images there that have sold well elsewhere and I'm lucky to get a couple dollars a month.

93
123RF / Re: Sudden decrease in sales mid-October
« on: October 27, 2020, 05:10 »
Yes massive devastating 50% drop. I was expecting $2 this month but it looks like I'm now on track for $1.

94
So offering free content to compete against free content? Who will win the race to have the most and best free content? And what's the prize for the winner?

Unfortunately Adobe and other businesses are being put in this position by people like us. Creatives who think it's brave, honorable, charitable or some other noble cause to provide free content to free sites. No wonder why we're called starving artists. Hard to pay for food when you think it's a good idea to work for free.

The winner gets on month of free downloads on Shutterstock!

The only winners will be the people who download the free photos and the free photo sites. The free photos sites will still figure out some way to stuff their pockets full of money for swank offices and mansions while not paying contributors. They'll write some deceptive chivalrous grass-roots mission statement manipulating appealing to the naive charitable nature of creatives.

95
Actually, the photos are paid, with an agreement between the artist and AS. Free is for the customer. AS pays for images, whether they are downloaded or not. Logically, you will have the best of the best, they will not give away anything that is not extraordinary. At an agreed price, whether the image is downloaded or not.

If that was directed at me, that's not the point. Regardless if the people who own the free photos are paid, more free photos hurts the people like us who aren't being directly paid.

Who remembers free ad-based internet from the late 1990s? You open the app to connect and while the 56K modem takes a minute to brrrr-weeee-bing-bong you get to stare at an advertisement. For a while a I didn't pay for internet. Why would I if free internet was available? Over time the free services would go out of business. So I kept finding new ones until there were no more free internet providers and I had no option but to pay. And that's what needs to happen with free photos. They need to go away because the more free options that are available the fewer people will buy photos. One of these filthy rich stock companies needs to buy out these free sites and shut them down. Or creatives need to come to their senses and realize they're hurting themselves and the entire industry by submitting content to free sites.

96
So offering free content to compete against free content? Who will win the race to have the most and best free content? And what's the prize for the winner?

Unfortunately Adobe and other businesses are being put in this position by people like us. Creatives who think it's brave, honorable, charitable or some other noble cause to provide free content to free sites. No wonder why we're called starving artists. Hard to pay for food when you think it's a good idea to work for free.

97
Both. Have an 8TB drive I do weekly backups and store in "fireproof" safe. From videos I've seen, fireproof may be more of a marketing term. So I also have automated photo/video backup to Amazon Photos.

98
General Stock Discussion / Re: Stock Photography Future
« on: September 16, 2020, 12:59 »
Imo the future belongs to programmers. Those that can create very very realistic models/animals and scenarios using CGI without leaving the comfort of their homes.

Imagine lifestyle photography without the hassle and administration to shoot models in fun scenarios.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/28/tech/ai-fake-faces/index.html

It's already beyond that. Maybe CGI for contract work like Ikea. But the future for stock people, objects and scenery will probably belong to AI.

99
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS: What is the final goal of the protest?
« on: September 15, 2020, 16:58 »


I'm also concerned that, with easy price comparison through Google, I am cannabilizing my better-paying sales working with SS.  Last month I made $19 on a sale on 20twenty.  The same image would have netted me $.10 on SS.  Takes a lot of sales to make up that difference in RPD, and the volume wasn't there for me on SS to make it worthwhile to stay.

a frequent claim w little to back it up - first, how many buyers spend time analyzing google for lowest price - esp'ly when  the difference is minor?

how many people have subs at multiple sites?

finally, there's no indication that one site cannabilizes another and more (admittedly anecdotal) evidence that different images sell on each site.

i buy & sell (non-photo) on ebay & amazon - based on my sales i can see that people don't compare prices - even on the same site, people don't look - else why would they pay $25 for a comic that's also listed at $10?

Buyers absolutely do compare prices. This is the main reason I dropped being exclusive at iStock years ago and removed most of my portfolio. I had buyers contacting me through my personal website asking for pricing for their client projects where their budgets were hundreds or thousands of dollars. Because of exclusivity I had to point them to my iStock portfolio where they'd save a ton of money and I'd lose a ton of money. So I dropped the crown but left my portfolio there.

Then buyers would contact me and I'd give them a quote.  More than a few times they responded "what's the difference between your quote and the pricing for the same images on iStock that are way less". Answer was, there was no difference. So I pulled most of my portfolio so I was no longer competing against myself and I could set whatever pricing I could get.

Keep in mind many of these buyers are at large companies and are sourcing dozens or hundreds of images for large client projects. Clients always balk at pricing forcing the company to look for cheaper options by comparison shopping. Just because they only buy one image from you doesn't mean they aren't spending a ton of money on a bunch of images.

100
General Stock Discussion / Re: Stock Photography Future
« on: September 15, 2020, 16:32 »
Lost me at the Covid-19 comment. Future is fairly predictable because the current path has been the same probably since 2012.

  • Buyer growth is slowing forcing prices and contributor royalty percentage down
  • More competition from free sites forcing prices and contributor royalty percentage down
  • Exponential image supply growth forcing prices and contributor royalty percentage down
  • Contributor inability to consistently create a huge quantity of new images forcing earnings down
  • Convoluted secretive subscription programs forcing contributor earnings down

Pretty simple. Continue this path forward and stock sites will continue to earn a ton of money by paying contributors less.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 120

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors