MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 48000000 images  (Read 30425 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Semmick Photo

« on: February 10, 2015, 08:23 »
+9
I joined Shutterstock March 2012 and they had 23.000.000 images. 23 million !

Shutterstock was founded in 2003, it took them 9 years to get 23 million images. Its 2015, and now they have 48.000.000 images !! They more than doubled the library in exactly 3 years.

At their current rate, they will be reaching 100,000,000 images in 2.5 years, around July 2017. 

Seriously W.T.F.


« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2015, 08:35 »
+5
744,917 sunset photos. I wonder whether the world has enough sunset pictures yet.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2015, 08:53 »
+14
By March I believe it will be 50 million

Here, I posted this before, maybe it was lost or buried in some thread about sales dropping.

Shutterstock Milestones:

September 21, 2006 - Shutterstock surpasses one million stock photos
Feb. 20th, 2009 -Shutterstock reaches 6 million photos, (5 million 2.5 years)
February 14, 2010 - Shutterstock reaches 10 million Photos (4 million 12 months)
June 19, 2012 - Shutterstock reaches 20m stock Images (10 Million 28 months)
October 30, 2013 - Shutterstock reaches 30 million images (10 million 15 months)
Aug. 4, 2014 - Shutterstock celebrates 40 million images in it's collection. (10 million 10 months)
December 31, 2014 - 46.8 million images in the collection. (1 million new files per month)

In other words, every month, there are as many new images as there were total in 2006.

And people wonder why earnings are dropping? Hey, it's easy, one word: Competition!

Doesn't matter if you had the best darn Cheese burger photo on the planet in 2009, it's just not going to sell like it did back then.  Cheese Burger = (24,488) And these aren't from people snapping with a P&S. Now they are dressed and positioned, shot in a studio, with expensive lighting and full frame cameras, top level lenses.

And people wonder why their sales aren't what they used to be?

« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2015, 09:13 »
0
And that's why I dream about traveling in time with my private top secret vehicle! I would take my HD with images and just enjoy mass downloads that days... Old days gone, a lot has changed... unfortunately   :'(

Semmick Photo

« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2015, 09:18 »
+2
They are adding around 1.700.000 images per month at the current rate.

« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2015, 09:18 »
+9
I'm not impressed mate.

Instagram averages 70 million a day. Also, SS has 583,000 images of cats and dogs, 434,000 images of roses, 1.3 million images of pretty girls smiling but less than 10 images of the Duck Billed Platypus.

« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2015, 09:29 »
+4
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2015, 09:33 »
+13
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

Snow

« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2015, 09:34 »
+9
By March I believe it will be 50 million

Here, I posted this before, maybe it was lost or buried in some thread about sales dropping.

Shutterstock Milestones:

September 21, 2006 - Shutterstock surpasses one million stock photos
Feb. 20th, 2009 -Shutterstock reaches 6 million photos, (5 million 2.5 years)
February 14, 2010 - Shutterstock reaches 10 million Photos (4 million 12 months)
June 19, 2012 - Shutterstock reaches 20m stock Images (10 Million 28 months)
October 30, 2013 - Shutterstock reaches 30 million images (10 million 15 months)
Aug. 4, 2014 - Shutterstock celebrates 40 million images in it's collection. (10 million 10 months)
December 31, 2014 - 46.8 million images in the collection. (1 million new files per month)

In other words, every month, there are as many new images as there were total in 2006.

And people wonder why earnings are dropping? Hey, it's easy, one word: Competition!

Doesn't matter if you had the best darn Cheese burger photo on the planet in 2009, it's just not going to sell like it did back then.  Cheese Burger = (24,488) And these aren't from people snapping with a P&S. Now they are dressed and positioned, shot in a studio, with expensive lighting and full frame cameras, top level lenses.

And people wonder why their sales aren't what they used to be?
It is not because of the quality of the competition, it is because of the quantity of the competition which are two different things.
I don't know about you but I still sell my first images from 4 years ago, those I applied with and on a regular basis and they are still amongst the most popular. It's the new files that get no exposure because they get lost in the pack. You make it sound as if we suddenly forgot how to shoot/create stock?
Lack of exposure is the issue here, not the lack of talent or gear.


Snow

« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2015, 09:38 »
+8
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

EXACTLY!

That is what many do not understand. Those who praise doing unique content. There is either no demand for it or buyers think the library lacks that content and don't even bother searching for it.
Again, LACK OF EXPOSURE is the issue here!
What sells best, your most artistic or unique images or your plain (same old) content? I bet I already know the answer to that.

« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2015, 09:41 »
+4
Lack of exposure is the issue here, not the lack of talent or gear.

+10

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2015, 09:43 »
+2
I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.
But how could you know something wouldn't sell before you uploaded it?

Semmick Photo

« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2015, 09:46 »
+2
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.


I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.


EXACTLY!

That is what many do not understand. Those who praise doing unique content. There is either no demand for it or buyers think the library lacks that content and don't even bother searching for it.
Again, LACK OF EXPOSURE is the issue here!
What sells best, your most artistic or unique images or your plain (same old) content? I bet I already know the answer to that.



Sold 2 times


Sold 735 times

Semmick Photo

« Reply #13 on: February 10, 2015, 09:50 »
+2
I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.
But how could you know something wouldn't sell before you uploaded it?

I am sure you can find a photo of everything, a gap doesnt mean zero images, it means its not well covered. If I search for something and I find 3 photos, I get suspicious. Why are there only 3 images? The image I was talking about proved it. I searched the library and found zero images, I wondered why and thought my image would be downloaded by the bucket-loads. So I uploaded my image, waited in great anticipation for the flood of DLs, and nope. Sold 5 times or so.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2015, 10:01 »
+2
It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

No Free Lunch

« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2015, 10:13 »
+1
I wonder if someday, like GL stock, they will stop taking anymore images? How many images do you really need for the buyers? This does concern me about how rapid the libraries are growing.

Snow

« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2015, 10:15 »
+1
It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

Oh so an experienced contributor has ancient gear then? We don't upgrade?
New contributors either found the secret formula or have access to high tech gear we don't know about yet?
With all due respect but I think "speak for yourself" is the more appropriate thing for me to say to you then.



« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2015, 10:25 »
+3
One can never have enough tomatoes 698,000, coffee beans 149,000 or Piles of Wood 54,000


Semmick Photo

« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2015, 10:28 »
+3


You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?
Depends on the competition, if its about mileage per gallon the VW might actually win it ;)

Snow

« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2015, 10:44 »
+8
Pete, if you upload a top seller cheese burger (lets assume it would be in normal circumstances) and the next minute there's a 100 more uploaded that drop your file to the bottom of the search (new) do you really think buyers will dig it out?
Same with unique content. If it holds well known keywords it will drop and never be seen again.
Lack of exposure is the cause of this, not lack of talent, gear, props, models, etc...
Not to mention search rotation or whatever they pull off these days to get their bottom line up and ours down.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2015, 10:47 by Snow »

« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2015, 11:01 »
0
Collection number is exponential now, but eventually the growth will flatten out in %. When there are 100 million images, 1 million images per week is only 1% growth. It will never be as easy as in 2005 but if you can do well with your new images today, it means you can survive when the collection doubles. Talented new contributors will thrive as they have more realistic expectations, on the other hand it'll be hard for veterans to get used to more realistic returns. Specially true for those who live in expensive countries.

That said, many of the new images are similars. I saw a set from a guy with the very same icons but in different positions, and it occupied about 7-8 whole pages of the "new" search. That's not going to sell well at all, but the problem is that your good images are buried instantly. To have exposure, your images must rank on top of the search and money will flow into your account. That's getting harder, but at least the number of buyers is increasing as well.

« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2015, 11:08 »
+1
The rate of growth may level off, but growth is a given. What's everyone doing to pivot?

« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2015, 11:38 »
-2
It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

Oh so an experienced contributor has ancient gear then? We don't upgrade?
New contributors either found the secret formula or have access to high tech gear we don't know about yet?

With all due respect but I think "speak for yourself" is the more appropriate thing for me to say to you then.

+1
« Last Edit: February 10, 2015, 11:40 by gbalex »

Tryingmybest

  • Stand up for what is right
« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2015, 12:11 »
+1
One can never have enough tomatoes 698,000, coffee beans 149,000 or Piles of Wood 54,000

Sounds absurd, but it's very true according to my experiences. Cartoons of a pile of boulders and twig that I made in 2010 sell almost dailysometimes more than once in a day. I've found that if you keep making better and better drawings/photos/video/audio, you'll keep up with the competition. Make sure you're enjoying doing it, however. Oh, and you don't need Adobe'$ Cloud or the latest hardware to be creative, by the way. 8)
« Last Edit: February 10, 2015, 12:15 by Striving »

Rinderart

« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2015, 12:32 »
+2
One can never have enough tomatoes 698,000, coffee beans 149,000 or Piles of Wood 54,000

Sounds absurd, but it's very true according to my experiences. Cartoons of a pile of boulders and twig that I made in 2010 sell almost dailysometimes more than once in a day. I've found that if you keep making better and better drawings/photos/video/audio, you'll keep up with the competition. Make sure you're enjoying doing it, however. Oh, and you don't need Adobe'$ Cloud or the latest hardware to be creative, by the way. 8)

I agree. I believe "Common" stock or reality Images outsells everything else . Also a bazillion Images added this week is a promotional tool, for the Stock market and investors to think "Im going with the biggest and the one with the most Images" regardless of what that does to individual Submitters. Why they need a million tomatoes ETC, is beyond any comprehension I have. We are buried in 30 Minutes. #1 issue But.....The search...That mysterious thing, "The search" why do my Oldest Images sell better and much more frequently. That is a huge Issue and really makes me think about why do I upload. Because those too will be old images soon? Probably.  This whole thing is off Kilter. IMHO. And why have other Licenses OD,EL,SOD  dropped Big time. Those are what makes a month at least for me. Subs don't get it done for me. regardless of How many.

dpimborough

« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2015, 12:41 »
0
I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.
But how could you know something wouldn't sell before you uploaded it?

I am sure you can find a photo of everything, a gap doesnt mean zero images, it means its not well covered. If I search for something and I find 3 photos, I get suspicious. Why are there only 3 images? The image I was talking about proved it. I searched the library and found zero images, I wondered why and thought my image would be downloaded by the bucket-loads. So I uploaded my image, waited in great anticipation for the flood of DLs, and nope. Sold 5 times or so.

Nope don't agree I check for lots of items and there are zero photos.

So I shoot them and they start selling especially the local stuff suited to certain geographical regions .  ;D

Lots of chumps out there copying the "best sellers" and they just bury themselves with similar  submissions from their competitors.
1,420,590 business man shots
1,066,326 business woman shots
657,158 coffee (single keyword) shots
74,000 latte coffee shots
84,000 pizza shots
53,000 hamburger shots and so on and so forth


Plus the quality of a lot of submissions are poor or dire and doomed to be undiscovered .  ::)
« Last Edit: February 10, 2015, 12:48 by Teddy the Cat »

« Reply #26 on: February 10, 2015, 12:55 »
0
In 6 or 7 years some of the sites listed to the right will be boasting billion image libraries.  The race is on.  I expect most contributors return per upload stats will reflect changing market conditions...     


« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2015, 13:06 »
0
The rate of growth may level off, but growth is a given. What's everyone doing to pivot?

Now THAT is the question.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2015, 13:09 »
+3
I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.
But how could you know something wouldn't sell before you uploaded it?

I am sure you can find a photo of everything, a gap doesnt mean zero images, it means its not well covered. If I search for something and I find 3 photos, I get suspicious. Why are there only 3 images? The image I was talking about proved it. I searched the library and found zero images, I wondered why and thought my image would be downloaded by the bucket-loads. So I uploaded my image, waited in great anticipation for the flood of DLs, and nope. Sold 5 times or so.

Nope don't agree I check for lots of items and there are zero photos.

So I shoot them and they start selling especially the local stuff suited to certain geographical regions .  ;D



I have plenty of local geographical stuff, and they are good images, but what is the demand for View from Slievebawn to Croaghaun, or Road passing Maamturks and Killary Harbour, or Stone steps on Diamond Hill. I am the only one with these images. They dont sell. But the Giants Causeway is covered plenty, because it is in demand.

« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2015, 14:16 »
+5
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

I agree that all large libraries need much better subdivisions of their content, done by humans, not software. It is the next challenge in the industry and those that do it best and first will have a living, breathing in and outflow of content that is generated, curated and bought by the crowd.

« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2015, 14:59 »
0
old images are not shown, if u write sunset and you go page 4000 or 6000, they show alot of new images. there is no "old" images, at least on popular,

i also notice if u browse category, there is image shown on page 4 then is shown again on page 17, am i correct?

« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2015, 15:04 »
0
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

Agreed, there are still some serious holes.  I also agree with Uncle Pete that some holes just are worth filling, but there are still lots of potential for good images of missing subjects.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2015, 15:19 »
0
I can assure that I wont be any competition, but what are those serious gaps? What subject matter is high in demand and not covered well? I am not asking to give away your secrets but I find it hard to believe that there are high demand subjects which are not covered. Unless it is a inaccessible niche, like diamond cutting, which I doubt will be high in demand either.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2015, 15:25 »
+6
Funny, I just checked "diamond cutting" on Shutterstock and it pulls up 12,229 images, of which there are 7 images of diamond cutting, the rest is spam.

« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2015, 15:41 »
+2
One of the biggest differences between Fotolia and Shutterstock is that Fotolia has a much, much bigger library of local european content. Food, workplaces, the right mix of ethnic groups in business images. styling, or simply that we simply dont smile as brightly at the camera the way our US counterparts do. And I am sure if you try to find genuine, localized asian or oriental content, or south america, you will find similar huge gaps.

Just think of how many different recipes does the whole world have? There must be millions of local dishes and variations. How many jobs exist on the globe? etc...

Of course some markets will grow slowly, I dont know how many people in china and India are active stock buyers, but I am sure the market in china alone will outstrip anything else. Or japan? 130 million, big market? does shutterstock really have enough content to fill the japanese market? And you can hire japanese, ethnic indian or african models anywhere, you might not have the right outdoor location, but there is always enough that can be done indoors or studio.

Many artists also have a portfolio mix with everything from handshakes, travel images, a few models etc...but I am sure if someone does a lightbox with 1000 handshakes really well, he or she will make more money. There are so many variations on that simple theme - old and young people, children with adults, doctors with patient etc...but most portfolios that I see are not specialized enough. This means they get less repeat traffic.

The strategy to work in a library with maybe a billion files one day has to be different to the strategy you use when the agency just had 1 million images.

repeat traffic is what you want, so you need to decide on a few main subjects and become king or queen of that very specific niche, whatever it is.

the agencies have to encourage that as well. Some agencies still reject saying "you already have too much of that content in your portfolio". which is really stupid. they should do all they can to encourage specialization.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2015, 15:46 by cobalt »

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2015, 15:46 »
+4
I've found a few niches. Sometimes it's because I read an article about the dearth of certain images in stock, or images that are unsuitable, or there's a topic that interests me and when I look it up I'm surprised to see how few images there are. But I find that those subjects are not super popular, though there is enough demand for me to sell a decent number of images sometimes. Sometimes it's a complete waste of time, though.

One thing I avoid is drawing images the stock sites say they need...because thousands of others are reading that same blog post, and then that subject is flooded with images. I had a whole bunch of good-selling images on page 1 of a certain subject, and then SS noticed they didn't have a whole bunch of images in that subject matter and blogged about it, which led to a big influx of images, which pushed me off the first page. GRRRRRRRRR.  >:( Kinda wanted to slap them for that.

Rinderart

« Reply #36 on: February 10, 2015, 16:11 »
0
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

I agree that all large libraries need much better subdivisions of their content, done by humans, not software. It is the next challenge in the industry and those that do it best and first will have a living, breathing in and outflow of content that is generated, curated and bought by the crowd.

+1000


« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2015, 16:29 »
0

One thing I avoid is drawing images the stock sites say they need...because thousands of others are reading that same blog post, and then that subject is flooded with images. I had a whole bunch of good-selling images on page 1 of a certain subject, and then SS noticed they didn't have a whole bunch of images in that subject matter and blogged about it, which led to a big influx of images, which pushed me off the first page. GRRRRRRRRR.  >:( Kinda wanted to slap them for that.

I read them, but I create the content maybe 6 months after that blog post. So you avoid the first rush but of course if it is really a needed theme it is worth looking at.

The other option: read it on a huge micro agency...then upload your content to a high quality small macro agency ;)

« Reply #38 on: February 10, 2015, 16:48 »
0
Out of all those images only 69 pages are "crap". Literally or course. 

Batman

« Reply #39 on: February 10, 2015, 18:05 »
0


You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?
Depends on the competition, if its about mileage per gallon the VW might actually win it ;)

You bought a 6D and shoot raw because it doesn't make a difference?

« Reply #40 on: February 10, 2015, 18:07 »
+8
The issue with many of those unfilled niches is not that they do not exist, but that the demand for those images is only small.

It's nice to have the only 10 images for a specific topic - so you can get all the five sales per year they generate.

That simply does not make economical sense at microstock prices.

Batman

« Reply #41 on: February 10, 2015, 18:07 »
+1
Inspite of the volume a lot of content is still missing. I tried to find images of the local beer and i think only two pictures were apprpriate. Once you drill down to more speliazed and local stuff there are huge gaps in the collection.

Also many subjects need to be reshoot in regular intervals, think of all the business images with brick like mobile phones. Or business meetings with tablets instead of laptops, mobile fitness gadgets etc...

so there is still is hope for us if you dont specialize in sunsets.

I am the only one with a particular photo of a certain structure in the SS library. Its not selling, even though its not an uncommon or rare place. There is a reason why there are gaps, some stuff has no demand.

I agree that all large libraries need much better subdivisions of their content, done by humans, not software. It is the next challenge in the industry and those that do it best and first will have a living, breathing in and outflow of content that is generated, curated and bought by the crowd.

+10,000

Uncle Pete

« Reply #42 on: February 10, 2015, 18:55 »
+2
Look, it wasn't a personal attack on anyone, and that's what you've turned this into. I'd bet you added new equipment and better lighting and shoot better work, than you did when you started. Is that some kind of insult?

Well the competition, aside from adding half a million new images a month is also taking it up a notch. That's an observation, not an insult. Heck most of the people on this thread are anonymous. You could have 100 photos or 10,000 I don't know. You could be doing this since May of 2014 (or not at all, just writing on a forum) no one knows. Or you could have been with Micro since 2005?

As for "speak for yourself" I do. Who do you speak for? It's an open forum, or am I not allowed to have a free will and personal opinion of anything, unless it's approved by you? (and the Princess gbalex) So you two start twisting what I wrote, making personal attacks instead of discussion the opinion?


It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

Oh so an experienced contributor has ancient gear then? We don't upgrade?
New contributors either found the secret formula or have access to high tech gear we don't know about yet?
With all due respect but I think "speak for yourself" is the more appropriate thing for me to say to you then.

« Reply #43 on: February 10, 2015, 23:14 »
+1
I would call it a personal attack when you call a grown man a princess!  You never miss an opportunity to sneak in those sideways jabs do you.

Give it a rest Pete, I have grown weary of your games and insults.

marthamarks

« Reply #44 on: February 10, 2015, 23:27 »
+2
but less than 10 images of the Duck Billed Platypus.

And only two images of the Olive-sided Flycatcher. Both of them mine.  :)

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-77146492/stock-photo-olive-sided-flycatcher-during-spring-migration-in-the-texas-panhandle.html?src=&ws=1

And they actually do sell every once in a while, too!
« Last Edit: February 11, 2015, 00:38 by marthamarks »

« Reply #45 on: February 11, 2015, 01:14 »
+3
Uncle Pete, I don't feel insulted when you say the newbies have stepped it up a notch, but I also have not seen that.  Mostly the new works looks like the same amateurish junk lots of us started with. 

Difference is that us who stuck with it have grown and got better skill and equipments and the beginners won't probly make enough money to help them upgrade and get better, or even keep interested. 

« Reply #46 on: February 11, 2015, 01:15 »
+1
I can assure that I wont be any competition, but what are those serious gaps? What subject matter is high in demand and not covered well? I am not asking to give away your secrets but I find it hard to believe that there are high demand subjects which are not covered. Unless it is a inaccessible niche, like diamond cutting, which I doubt will be high in demand either.

There doesn't have to be a high demand, just a little demand.  When you are the only person with images you'll get all the sales.
Even a very simple subject like a male flipping a pancake, there is only 4 photos of this (flipping an american fluffy pancake) search terms: man flip pancake
If you take 15-20 shots on that subject, it isn't going to earn you $10,000 but I'm guessing it would pay back your time and model fee investment + a decent amount on top of that if it was aprt of a larger shoot where you did 10 other similar subjects.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #47 on: February 11, 2015, 04:22 »
+2


the agencies have to encourage that as well. Some agencies still reject saying "you already have too much of that content in your portfolio". which is really stupid. they should do all they can to encourage specialization.

Photodune told me exactly that, and basically killed off my landscape submissions. Funny coz I shoot landscapes. Basically I have no content for them any more. For them a photo of Connemara or Wicklow are the same, for locals its the east or west of the country. Completely different areas, Photodune didnt want to hear it.

dpimborough

« Reply #48 on: February 11, 2015, 04:33 »
+2
There is more to Ireland than landscapes Ron, I guess you live in Ireland and have access to all things Irish bearing in mind there is a huge ex-pat Irish community in the U.S.

There's more to Ireland than leprechauns guiness and the giants causeway

But anyhoo before I shoot anything I always check to see what's available if it's more than a couple of hundred images (disregarding the spam) then I don't bother shooting.

Cripes some of the subjects I shot were so blatantly obvious I could not believe no one had ever shot them!  Not a single one!  So yes they don't make $10,000 but a couple of 1000 images making sales through the year all adds up.

Snow

« Reply #49 on: February 11, 2015, 05:20 »
+1
Look, it wasn't a personal attack on anyone, and that's what you've turned this into. I'd bet you added new equipment and better lighting and shoot better work, than you did when you started. Is that some kind of insult?

Well the competition, aside from adding half a million new images a month is also taking it up a notch. That's an observation, not an insult. Heck most of the people on this thread are anonymous. You could have 100 photos or 10,000 I don't know. You could be doing this since May of 2014 (or not at all, just writing on a forum) no one knows. Or you could have been with Micro since 2005?

As for "speak for yourself" I do. Who do you speak for? It's an open forum, or am I not allowed to have a free will and personal opinion of anything, unless it's approved by you? (and the Princess gbalex) So you two start twisting what I wrote, making personal attacks instead of discussion the opinion?


It's the competition and the number of photos. I didn't write that it was all about gear. Read it again please.

There are 40 million new images, which by the way, are taken on newer cameras, better equipment and with better setups. You can try to discount that fact but it's real. I didn't say anyone had to use bigger equipment or have a studio... just that our competition does.

You drive your VW Jetta in a competition and someone else has an Audi Quatro. Tell me who has the advantage?

Oh so an experienced contributor has ancient gear then? We don't upgrade?
New contributors either found the secret formula or have access to high tech gear we don't know about yet?
With all due respect but I think "speak for yourself" is the more appropriate thing for me to say to you then.

Keep your knickers on Pete, no personal attack and I respect your work.
It is far too easy to blame it on the competition and that is what concerns me. If you have been doing this full-time (+10h a day) for many years you know there is a lot more to it.
But I will leave it at that if this upsets you too much.

ps. thanks for letting me be the prince in this play, I hate wearing a dress.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #50 on: February 11, 2015, 06:09 »
+3
There is more to Ireland than landscapes Ron, I guess you live in Ireland and have access to all things Irish bearing in mind there is a huge ex-pat Irish community in the U.S.

There's more to Ireland than leprechauns guiness and the giants causeway

But anyhoo before I shoot anything I always check to see what's available if it's more than a couple of hundred images (disregarding the spam) then I don't bother shooting.

Cripes some of the subjects I shot were so blatantly obvious I could not believe no one had ever shot them!  Not a single one!  So yes they don't make $10,000 but a couple of 1000 images making sales through the year all adds up.


Ireland is known for its landscapes, its called the Emerald Island, tourism is a big part of the economy. For expats what better than to see their beautiful Irish landscapes? But there is more to Ireland, I agree, Guinness sure, Leprechauns never been able to photograph one. St Patricks days, Halloween, etc, would need to be editorial. Dublin / Irish architecture / landmarks, I could do more of that, sure. Dublin Airport, got it. Then ghost estates maybe, whats the demand for that? Social issues: Gambling, alcoholism, poverty, unemployment, hobo's, property bubble, banking bail out, protest marches etc, plenty of that covered because it isnt a typical Irish thing and it would all be editorial.

Maybe this sums it up :)

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ailbhemalone/the-most-irish-things-ever#.ua1rOj1Xp

But I am not complaining I have no subjects to shoot. I love shooting landscapes and cityscapes and all other agencies take my images. I was merely agreeing with a point made by Jasmine.  ;)

« Reply #51 on: February 11, 2015, 06:13 »
+4
 i work every day, every photo must earn at least 10$,  i will not work stuff that will not bring 10$, i rather make handshake, i have one  with 3 dl/day i will not shoot flip pancake.  8)

i made some niche industrial images in 2013, they sold about 50 times, then stoped after half year, image is old search algoritm, not copied by other contributors.

so i try to make only high selling images.....

the main problem is , subs are too low to make exotic image, 5x time sold is too low, price are too low for niche, sorry.
spend tho whole day with costs for one or two  images and not earn 200$, no go.


I can assure that I wont be any competition, but what are those serious gaps? What subject matter is high in demand and not covered well? I am not asking to give away your secrets but I find it hard to believe that there are high demand subjects which are not covered. Unless it is a inaccessible niche, like diamond cutting, which I doubt will be high in demand either.

There doesn't have to be a high demand, just a little demand.  When you are the only person with images you'll get all the sales.
Even a very simple subject like a male flipping a pancake, there is only 4 photos of this (flipping an american fluffy pancake) search terms: man flip pancake
If you take 15-20 shots on that subject, it isn't going to earn you $10,000 but I'm guessing it would pay back your time and model fee investment + a decent amount on top of that if it was aprt of a larger shoot where you did 10 other similar subjects.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2015, 08:19 by Cesar »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #52 on: February 11, 2015, 09:00 »
+3
Question for you and Snow. Here's your opportunity to shine.

1) What is the cause of the problems both of you say are causing lower sales and income.

2) What is your solution.


I would call it a personal attack when you call a grown man a princess!  You never miss an opportunity to sneak in those sideways jabs do you.

Give it a rest Pete, I have grown weary of your games and insults.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #53 on: February 11, 2015, 09:04 »
0
Well stated. There are holes and filling them, might not be worth the effort. There will not be big sales or returns on many of the niche subjects, but you will have the advantage of less competition. The only way I can see that strategy working out, is if someone falls into a subject or has it easily available, and knows there's a vacancy. Then why not?

Or if you shoot something and it sells. Make more but don't tell anyone else.

I wouldn't advocate shooting unwanted subjects that will get few if any DLs as a business plan.  :)

The issue with many of those unfilled niches is not that they do not exist, but that the demand for those images is only small.

It's nice to have the only 10 images for a specific topic - so you can get all the five sales per year they generate.

That simply does not make economical sense at microstock prices.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #54 on: February 11, 2015, 09:09 »
-1
Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(87)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(2)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(4)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(7)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(66)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(1)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(15)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(2)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(25)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(3,778)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(3,408)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(3)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(7,605)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(15)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(300)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(14)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(928)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(146)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(0)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(307)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(83)

Stock Photos, Illustrations, and Vector Art
(36)

Of all the searches above which are very famous they just have so many images on the site that the buyers don't need to go anywhere else chit SS has 48 million images but hardly any of the ones I as a buyer could be looking for to use because no one has shot many of them yet but they are there and they are very popular.


Uncle Pete

« Reply #55 on: February 11, 2015, 09:10 »
0
And I wonder if like some places, they will stop taking new contributors? Same logic, why do they need more? Have applications once a year, based on portfolio, not a few images as samples.

SS Members by registration year rounded.
2005 - 4300
2006 - 3900 = 8200
2007 - 3800 = 12,000
2008 - 5500 = 17,500
2009 - 7200 = 24,700
2010 - 5000 = 30,700

I don't have data for years after that. I will make an assumption (without proof) that other agencies had similar growth in new members.

What I'm getting at is this. Not only has the volume of images increased greatly, the number of competitors has also grown.

I wonder if someday, like GL stock, they will stop taking anymore images? How many images do you really need for the buyers? This does concern me about how rapid the libraries are growing.

For this one I'd say - shoot them and don't tell anyone else what you found.

Of all the searches above which are very famous they just have so many images on the site that the buyers don't need to go anywhere else chit SS has 48 million images but hardly any of the ones I as a buyer could be looking for to use because no one has shot many of them yet but they are there and they are very popular.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #56 on: February 11, 2015, 09:17 »
0
There is a post from Jon Oringer that states there are now over 70,000 contributors.

And I wonder if like some places, they will stop taking new contributors? Same logic, why do they need more? Have applications once a year, based on portfolio, not a few images as samples.

SS Members by registration year rounded.
2005 - 4300
2006 - 3900 = 8200
2007 - 3800 = 12,000
2008 - 5500 = 17,500
2009 - 7200 = 24,700
2010 - 5000 = 30,700

I don't have data for years after that. I will make an assumption (without proof) that other agencies had similar growth in new members.

What I'm getting at is this. Not only has the volume of images increased greatly, the number of competitors has also grown.

I wonder if someday, like GL stock, they will stop taking anymore images? How many images do you really need for the buyers? This does concern me about how rapid the libraries are growing.

For this one I'd say - shoot them and don't tell anyone else what you found.

Of all the searches above which are very famous they just have so many images on the site that the buyers don't need to go anywhere else chit SS has 48 million images but hardly any of the ones I as a buyer could be looking for to use because no one has shot many of them yet but they are there and they are very popular.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #57 on: February 11, 2015, 09:46 »
0
Well stated. There are holes and filling them, might not be worth the effort. There will not be big sales or returns on many of the niche subjects, but you will have the advantage of less competition. The only way I can see that strategy working out, is if someone falls into a subject or has it easily available, and knows there's a vacancy. Then why not?

Or if you shoot something and it sells. Make more but don't tell anyone else.

I wouldn't advocate shooting unwanted subjects that will get few if any DLs as a business plan.  :)

The issue with many of those unfilled niches is not that they do not exist, but that the demand for those images is only small.

It's nice to have the only 10 images for a specific topic - so you can get all the five sales per year they generate.

That simply does not make economical sense at microstock prices.

This has been my point throughout this thread

« Reply #58 on: February 11, 2015, 09:59 »
+2
I've said this before but the difficulty in this business is how to extrapolate any useful data from these numbers - without being able to drill down.

SS has 48m images but how many of those actually sell more than once. How many are cats and dogs? Or landscapes that are basically mud and grass with bits of trees sticking out of them.

They have 70k contributors - but how many of those people are active? How many images do people upload by month and what is the distribution of uploading i.e. what percentage upload >100 or >10 or less than 10.

I use Stock Performer and my own records and I make my decisions based on these numbers and my own additional research....Otherwise all I would have to go on are these meaningless top level statistics and personal anecdotes.

I don't expect the agencies to produce that data because of the competition but this is why I rarely read the "doom and gloom" stuff  - there is nothing there for me.

PS. There is no doubt in my mind that some of the people who joined in 2011 to 2014 when we were saying the exact same things are absolutely raking it in. Great ports, contemporary style, creative concepts and compositions, market savvy and a huge work ethic....I envy them.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2015, 10:13 by Red Dove »

cuppacoffee

« Reply #59 on: February 11, 2015, 10:13 »
0
...how many of those actually sell more than once

When the subject of having an agency automatically delete non-sellers after a period of time comes up everyone revolts. "But my old images sell now and them, I want to decide what to delete not have someone else decide, old subjects may become popular again, etc." One can't have it both ways.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #60 on: February 11, 2015, 10:15 »
+6
100% agree. I post this "stuff" for perspective, not because it has some deep meaning. People can get what they want for it. But it's better than being totally in the dark about how things have changed.

I'd love to see the agency total on the percentage of files that have never sold. And same as you, how many people joined, failed and went away. Or how many of that claimed 77,000 joined, finally passed and have a few hundred images and will potentially never make payout - and they went off to do something else.

We can only hope that more people discover that it takes long hours, hard work and years to make any decent returns, and that new people stop dropping in, because they heard there was good money in Microstock.

I've said this before but the difficulty in this business is how to extrapolate any useful data from these numbers - without being able to drill down.

SS has 48m images but how many of those actually sell more than once. How many are cats and dogs? Or landscapes that are basically mud and grass with bits of trees sticking out of them.

They have 70k contributors - but how many of those people are active? How many images do people upload by month and what is the distribution of uploading i.e. what percentage upload >100 or >10 or less than 10.

I use Stock Performer and my own records and I make my decisions based on these numbers and my own additional research....Otherwise all I would have to go on are these meaningless top level statistics and personal anecdotes.

I don't expect the agencies to produce that data because of the competition but this is why I rarely read the "doom and gloom" stuff  - there is nothing there for me.

« Reply #61 on: February 11, 2015, 10:20 »
-2
Question for you and Snow. Here's your opportunity to shine.

1) What is the cause of the problems both of you say are causing lower sales and income.

2) What is your solution.


I would call it a personal attack when you call a grown man a princess!  You never miss an opportunity to sneak in those sideways jabs do you.

Give it a rest Pete, I have grown weary of your games and insults.

Maybe Snow would like to entertain you and your passive aggressive games pete. I have come to realize over time that the "questions with no simple answers" that you frequently put forth are largely conscious one-upmanship banter. I am not interested in wandering down one of your strategic rabbit holes, so that you can lead the subject wildly off track and attack my viewpoints.

I simply agreed with Snow viewpoint using a +1, that many of us who have been contributing for years have equal or superior equipment to those who are new and that if you have old equipment you should speak for yourself. I will leave it at that.




Uncle Pete

« Reply #62 on: February 11, 2015, 10:27 »
+1
Typical for you, complain and shout conspiracy, say that SS lies, call me an agency parrot, and when someone asks for specifics or a straight answer, you back up and shoot another personal attack at me? Nice evasion of the questions, because you don't have any answers, just your negativity and crying.

At least I voiced a personal opinion, which I was told to "keep to yourself". Thanks a bunch.  ???

Question for you and Snow. Here's your opportunity to shine.

1) What is the cause of the problems both of you say are causing lower sales and income.

2) What is your solution.


I would call it a personal attack when you call a grown man a princess!  You never miss an opportunity to sneak in those sideways jabs do you.

Give it a rest Pete, I have grown weary of your games and insults.

Maybe Snow would like to entertain you and your passive aggressive games pete. I have come to realize over time that the "questions with no simple answers" that you frequently put forth are largely conscious one-upmanship banter. I am not interested in wandering down one of your strategic rabbit holes, so that you can lead the subject wildly off track and attack my viewpoints.

I simply agreed with Snow viewpoint using a +1, that many of us who have been contributing for years have equal or superior equipment to those who are new and that if you have old equipment you should speak for yourself. I will leave it at that.

Rinderart

« Reply #63 on: February 11, 2015, 10:45 »
0
I joined Shutterstock March 2012 and they had 23.000.000 images. 23 million !

Shutterstock was founded in 2003, it took them 9 years to get 23 million images. Its 2015, and now they have 48.000.000 images !! They more than doubled the library in exactly 3 years.

At their current rate, they will be reaching 100,000,000 images in 2.5 years, around July 2017. 

Seriously W.T.F.

When I joined, I think they had 350,000 we thought that was huge at the time. Jon was the reviewer.LOL

« Reply #64 on: February 11, 2015, 11:11 »
+1
I joined Shutterstock March 2012 and they had 23.000.000 images. 23 million !

Shutterstock was founded in 2003, it took them 9 years to get 23 million images. Its 2015, and now they have 48.000.000 images !! They more than doubled the library in exactly 3 years.

At their current rate, they will be reaching 100,000,000 images in 2.5 years, around July 2017. 

Seriously W.T.F.

When I joined, I think they had 350,000 we thought that was huge at the time. Jon was the reviewer.LOL

We tend to forget that most of the new images are really "old images" uploaded from the IS migration.

Bruce found iStockphoto in 2000 and it took the IS exclusives who are defecting up to 15 years to build up those ports.

« Reply #65 on: February 11, 2015, 12:07 »
-2
There you go Pete, your true motives revealed. I refuse to play your games and yet you still attempt to portray me in a negative light and more importantly attribute comments to me that I never made.

You are the only one playing mind games and hurling personal attacks here. No one told you to keep your comments to yourself, they asked you to "speak for yourself".

Typical for you, complain and shout conspiracy, say that SS lies, call me an agency parrot, and when someone asks for specifics or a straight answer, you back up and shoot another personal attack at me? Nice evasion of the questions, because you don't have any answers, just your negativity and crying.

At least I voiced a personal opinion, which I was told to "keep to yourself". Thanks a bunch.  ???

Question for you and Snow. Here's your opportunity to shine.

1) What is the cause of the problems both of you say are causing lower sales and income.

2) What is your solution.


I would call it a personal attack when you call a grown man a princess!  You never miss an opportunity to sneak in those sideways jabs do you.

Give it a rest Pete, I have grown weary of your games and insults.

Maybe Snow would like to entertain you and your passive aggressive games pete. I have come to realize over time that the "questions with no simple answers" that you frequently put forth are largely conscious one-upmanship banter. I am not interested in wandering down one of your strategic rabbit holes, so that you can lead the subject wildly off track and attack my viewpoints.

I simply agreed with Snow viewpoint using a +1, that many of us who have been contributing for years have equal or superior equipment to those who are new and that if you have old equipment you should speak for yourself. I will leave it at that.

Rinderart

« Reply #66 on: February 11, 2015, 21:00 »
+8
C-mon Kids......STOP! Please. let this crap go. Just ignore if ya have to. this bickering is simply Not needed here or anywhere. Do you know what Nickname this site is called by some? "The Hate club" It doesn't have to be that way guys. I've done my share of bickering over the years and said some pretty stupid stuff, trust me.


We need more, New people with with good Ideas of discussing our options in this business and this just turns them off. Lets not be like many others sites. Also some moderation would be helpful. enough of he said,she said stuff. OK, My Friends. I appreciate all viewpoints good and bad. But, theres a limit. Good talk going and then BAM, it stops.

I used to tell My EX wife, Ya wanna argue? go look in a mirror. lol
« Last Edit: February 11, 2015, 21:18 by Rinderart »


« Reply #67 on: February 11, 2015, 21:39 »
+3
ha anyone taken a look at the ads on youtube???
they are worse than amateurish. ppl talking about degrees and changing the world, and each one of the models stammer and stutter like the valley girls of yesteryears.  how can anyone pay for such ads???
microstock is the same. it's not for us to decide whether it is fair that a 2015 ansel adams genius cannot earn any more than some dude who shoots absolute rubbish.
if anyone ever worked in marketing, they too will tell you, just do your job and give the clients what they want. no one asks you to be a genius here, we are asking you to sell an idea the clients are happy to pay.

so what is the problem???  are we all too prima-donna to accept the fact that we should not make those stinking images that clients want?

so, we come back here over and over again, whining why our masterpieces don't sell.
well, we can die and hope our posthumous microstock will suddenly gain value,
or we can just shut up and shoot what the client wants.

how difficult is that??? esp when you get a copy for the sales stats which ss provides us so kindly.
if my dog crap sells, i will shoot more dog crap. if my rembrandt night watch pefect copy has not sold nuts, i won't waste my time trying to do another rembrandt. (no, i did not do a derivative of night watch, just using it as example).

or is it just much easier to whine and whine and whine???? like rinderart says, c'mon kids, stop!!!
i am guilty of causing a few waves here , but it is more to stir up the other guys and gals to write something here . leaf has a good forum here for us, and hopefully we don't waste it over
character assasinations , or start another hate club or territorial dogshit.

let's all remember we are fighting the same battle. why are we killing each other???

Rinderart

« Reply #68 on: February 12, 2015, 00:15 »
0
ha anyone taken a look at the ads on youtube???
they are worse than amateurish. ppl talking about degrees and changing the world, and each one of the models stammer and stutter like the valley girls of yesteryears.  how can anyone pay for such ads???
microstock is the same. it's not for us to decide whether it is fair that a 2015 ansel adams genius cannot earn any more than some dude who shoots absolute rubbish.
if anyone ever worked in marketing, they too will tell you, just do your job and give the clients what they want. no one asks you to be a genius here, we are asking you to sell an idea the clients are happy to pay.

so what is the problem???  are we all too prima-donna to accept the fact that we should not make those stinking images that clients want?

so, we come back here over and over again, whining why our masterpieces don't sell.
well, we can die and hope our posthumous microstock will suddenly gain value,
or we can just shut up and shoot what the client wants.

how difficult is that??? esp when you get a copy for the sales stats which ss provides us so kindly.
if my dog crap sells, i will shoot more dog crap. if my rembrandt night watch pefect copy has not sold nuts, i won't waste my time trying to do another rembrandt. (no, i did not do a derivative of night watch, just using it as example).

or is it just much easier to whine and whine and whine???? like rinderart says, c'mon kids, stop!!!
i am guilty of causing a few waves here , but it is more to stir up the other guys and gals to write something here . leaf has a good forum here for us, and hopefully we don't waste it over
character assasinations , or start another hate club or territorial dogshit.

let's all remember we are fighting the same battle. why are we killing each other???



Well said. But......And a big but. My name is on it and because of stock I've been contacted to do some amazing, Very profitable jobs through the years. Thats a saving Grace By doing the best you can.

My Mentor told me many Years ago. "It is not our job to determine the value of our work, It IS our job to keep it ours and to simply do the best work we can"''Ya might wanna read this.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/life_as_a_photographer.shtml
« Last Edit: February 12, 2015, 00:24 by Rinderart »

« Reply #69 on: February 12, 2015, 09:08 »
+1
C-mon Kids......STOP! Please. let this crap go. Just ignore if ya have to. this bickering is simply Not needed here or anywhere. Do you know what Nickname this site is called by some? "The Hate club" It doesn't have to be that way guys. I've done my share of bickering over the years and said some pretty stupid stuff, trust me.


We need more, New people with with good Ideas of discussing our options in this business and this just turns them off. Lets not be like many others sites. Also some moderation would be helpful. enough of he said,she said stuff. OK, My Friends. I appreciate all viewpoints good and bad. But, theres a limit. Good talk going and then BAM, it stops.

I used to tell My EX wife, Ya wanna argue? go look in a mirror. lol

I agree with Rinder that this is a very important discussion. Maybe not so much for those who use MS as "extra income" but for us who have a much bigger plan for MS it is mission critical.  For me, niche is nice if I'm there and see it in my mind.  But the saturation has forced me into video. Personally I see no way out of the quick sand. Tomorrow it will be more challenging than yesterday. Some in here brought up the question, what can we do?  I'll tell you that last year when this tone of discussion started, agencies exposed for their cheating, misleading ways, I took action. Am I happy about it? Yes that I did, but no on the return. Video is just like stills in that you have to have good, usable stuff and a plan.  Maybe 300 videos is too soon to tell, probably. But while I shoot the videos, I'm snapping pictures as well to keep that part of my work alive. In a nutshell that's my plan.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #70 on: February 12, 2015, 09:44 »
+2
Maybe the time has come to pack up and leave Micro RF? (not directed at Mantis, in general)




« Reply #71 on: February 12, 2015, 10:27 »
+8
Maybe the time has come to pack up and leave Micro RF? (not directed at Mantis, in general)

I am feeling the same way. Very few topics here are good news......very few inductry milestones are favorable to the contributor.....in fact i cant think of one. Very demotivating.

dpimborough

« Reply #72 on: February 12, 2015, 10:58 »
+5
There is a post from Jon Oringer that states there are now over 70,000 contributors.

And I wonder if like some places, they will stop taking new contributors? Same logic, why do they need more? Have applications once a year, based on portfolio, not a few images as samples.

SS Members by registration year rounded.
2005 - 4300
2006 - 3900 = 8200
2007 - 3800 = 12,000
2008 - 5500 = 17,500
2009 - 7200 = 24,700
2010 - 5000 = 30,700

I don't have data for years after that. I will make an assumption (without proof) that other agencies had similar growth in new members.

What I'm getting at is this. Not only has the volume of images increased greatly, the number of competitors has also grown.

I wonder if someday, like GL stock, they will stop taking anymore images? How many images do you really need for the buyers? This does concern me about how rapid the libraries are growing.

For this one I'd say - shoot them and don't tell anyone else what you found.

Of all the searches above which are very famous they just have so many images on the site that the buyers don't need to go anywhere else chit SS has 48 million images but hardly any of the ones I as a buyer could be looking for to use because no one has shot many of them yet but they are there and they are very popular.

That figure from Jon Oringer is an exercise in BS I checked the forums from 2005 and does he realize how many of those original contributors have not uploaded a single image in over 5 years?  Plus there are lots of contributors who never made it through the initial 10 image acceptance plus SPAM accounts and accounts with a handful of images.

It would be more interesting if we could see how many contributors were still active in the last two years.

« Reply #73 on: February 12, 2015, 11:28 »
+5
I guess this is where crowdsourcing finally leads, and how it ends up. 

They now have a business model which all but guarantees that no individual supplier can make a profit.   They'll never get another new photo from me, and I'm guessing I'm not alone.  Where do they go from here?  Is it like the typical overcrowded health club, with bright-eyed new members signing up as fast as discouraged old members leave?

« Reply #74 on: February 12, 2015, 11:43 »
+4
I have less than a 1000 images at FT and I'm at around position 3.000 in weekly ranking.
SS may have a bit more, like 4.000 active contributors with more than 1000 files.

The insane image volume is from factories and similars, not from excess of contributors.
If things get really bad, there will be less uploads. The market always balance itself.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #75 on: February 12, 2015, 12:16 »
+3
. The market always balance itself.

I too am waiting for that too happen. Might be a long wait, but I have time.

« Reply #76 on: February 12, 2015, 13:22 »
0
I have less than a 1000 images at FT and I'm at around position 3.000 in weekly ranking.
SS may have a bit more, like 4.000 active contributors with more than 1000 files.

The insane image volume is from factories and similars, not from excess of contributors.
If things get really bad, there will be less uploads. The market always balance itself.

My weekly rank on Fotolia is depended on my uploads and has been anywhere between  2600 and 11500. My total rank is at around 10800, so I overtook over 200 000 "photographers" in 18 months.

Unfortunately, especially with the growth of smartphones, i dont believe we will see less images coming in. I think we will keep seeing many,many more images going online as more and more people get connected to the internet and have a smartphone with enough quality to upload directly from the phone without extenisve post processing or maybe relying on apps only. The attraction of making 200-500 dollars a month can be a full time income in some countries,especially when several family members live at home and share costs. 4 people earning 400 dollars each can live a comfortable life in some places without working full time.

The only advantage old timers have is experience, which means our content will sell much faster and we can see trends sooner.

An interesting number to watch is for instance how many people attend online agency seminars, organized shootings or even the microstock expo etc...if we really had 40 000 people doing stock mostly full time or more than half their time I think all these events would have a lot more people attending and taking part.

Or look at the numbers of people in these private facebook groups for stock. Most groups have a few hundred people and you keep running into the same faces everywhere.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2015, 13:25 by cobalt »


« Reply #77 on: February 12, 2015, 13:44 »
+6
They can't possibly sustain the costs of reviewing millions of mediocre, repetitious cell phone photos.  Even saying "no thanks" will be expensive.

All these clueless newbies thinking they'll make hundreds per month off of their phone won't even spend the time keywording them - which would be a pain on a phone anyway.

It seems to me like the end result, for SS, will be an absolutely enormous archive with ever-worsening search results.   The amount of junk will overwhelm them, unless they rely totally on past-sales-based ranking.   What am I missing in this picture?





« Last Edit: February 12, 2015, 13:47 by stockastic »

« Reply #78 on: February 12, 2015, 14:01 »
0
They can't possibly sustain the costs of reviewing millions of mediocre, repetitious cell phone photos.  Even saying "no thanks" will be expensive.

All these clueless newbies thinking they'll make hundreds per month off of their phone won't even spend the time keywording them - which would be a pain on a phone anyway.

It seems to me like the end result, for SS, will be an absolutely enormous archive with ever-worsening search results.   The amount of junk will overwhelm them, unless they rely totally on past-sales-based ranking.   What am I missing in this picture?

u may be right !!! but stressing on look we have so many new images everyday we can stretch to the moon from here , could be like the landlord of an old bldg planning to sell his apartment portfolio take the money and run... stressing the same ploy on look all my apts are filled with old tenants
and new tenants i am overcharging them with increased rents you can make big bucks buying over this bldg.

or ss could just be moving into traffic like dt with ads or whatever those social media earn their keep sustaining boredom pop of nerds airing their dirty laundry.

what dya think???

Semmick Photo

« Reply #79 on: February 12, 2015, 14:06 »
0
They can't possibly sustain the costs of reviewing millions of mediocre, repetitious cell phone photos.  Even saying "no thanks" will be expensive.

All these clueless newbies thinking they'll make hundreds per month off of their phone won't even spend the time keywording them - which would be a pain on a phone anyway.

It seems to me like the end result, for SS, will be an absolutely enormous archive with ever-worsening search results.   The amount of junk will overwhelm them, unless they rely totally on past-sales-based ranking.   What am I missing in this picture?

I keyworded, titled, described and submitted a photo once on the SS app, never again. Submitting one image with 20-50 keywords on a phone is horrible, I dont even want to think about submitting 100 smartphone images.

« Reply #80 on: February 12, 2015, 14:54 »
+1
They can make the entry exam more difficult, it is already more difficult to get into ss than elsewhere.

But more People getting connected and armed with smartphones or tablets means more people coming in.

The apps will improve to make uploading easier, just like the Upload interfaces of the websites improved...

There will not be less competition.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #81 on: February 12, 2015, 15:02 »
+1
SS smartphone contributor app works fine, easy to describe and keyword and when done if you need to make changes you can do so on the site from your computer.

Nothing to it especially for those with kids that do lots of texting.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #82 on: February 13, 2015, 08:53 »
0
The app works fine, the process of typing on a smartphone is cumbersome. I have a 10 finger blind typing diploma (got it when I was 12 or so, lol) at 160 strokes per minute. Nothing special, but I cant do that on a smartphone, not even with Swift Key.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #83 on: February 13, 2015, 09:12 »
0
Large smartphones make it easy and after a couple of letters the site throws up all kinds of different possible keywords that could be possible for what you are typing.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #84 on: February 13, 2015, 09:13 »
0
I have an Samsung S5, one of the biggest smartphones out there. Each to his own, I dont like and I wont use it.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #85 on: February 13, 2015, 09:55 »
0
You can also use the microphone button to speak the words instead of typing.

Dook

« Reply #86 on: February 13, 2015, 11:07 »
0
Do you guys know if smartphones pictures at stock agencies are labeled with some note that they are actually produced with smartphones? Because, if not, it's really bad for buyers to buy low quality pictures without knowing it. And if they are labeled, noone will buy them for any serious project, at least not in the next few years.
I'm with Semmick here, I just don't take smartphone pictures seriously.


« Reply #87 on: February 13, 2015, 11:13 »
0
My point was that they'll be getting tons of smartphone photos from people who don't understand keywording and won't even bother with it.  They'll add a couple and click 'submit'.

Milinz

« Reply #88 on: February 16, 2015, 10:37 »
0
There is a post from Jon Oringer that states there are now over 70,000 contributors.

And I wonder if like some places, they will stop taking new contributors? Same logic, why do they need more? Have applications once a year, based on portfolio, not a few images as samples.

SS Members by registration year rounded.
2005 - 4300
2006 - 3900 = 8200
2007 - 3800 = 12,000
2008 - 5500 = 17,500
2009 - 7200 = 24,700
2010 - 5000 = 30,700

I don't have data for years after that. I will make an assumption (without proof) that other agencies had similar growth in new members.

What I'm getting at is this. Not only has the volume of images increased greatly, the number of competitors has also grown.

I wonder if someday, like GL stock, they will stop taking anymore images? How many images do you really need for the buyers? This does concern me about how rapid the libraries are growing.

For this one I'd say - shoot them and don't tell anyone else what you found.

Of all the searches above which are very famous they just have so many images on the site that the buyers don't need to go anywhere else chit SS has 48 million images but hardly any of the ones I as a buyer could be looking for to use because no one has shot many of them yet but they are there and they are very popular.

That figure from Jon Oringer is an exercise in BS I checked the forums from 2005 and does he realize how many of those original contributors have not uploaded a single image in over 5 years?  Plus there are lots of contributors who never made it through the initial 10 image acceptance plus SPAM accounts and accounts with a handful of images.

It would be more interesting if we could see how many contributors were still active in the last two years.

How is there a spam account if they chack id?

Semmick Photo

« Reply #89 on: February 16, 2015, 11:07 »
+1
You can open an account without any ID and even post in the forums. You can only get an online portfolio with an approved ID.

dpimborough

« Reply #90 on: February 16, 2015, 11:34 »
0
Just as Ron said

I have a contributor account and a sales account too.

The sales account didn't require ID or credit card details. 


Snow

« Reply #91 on: February 16, 2015, 11:40 »
+3
Oh yes lots of images coming in BUT...

I've noticed another pattern lately that will surely shake things up a bit in the coming years.
The more successful photographers and designers, those with their unique quality, style and concept are barely uploading anymore so either are moving elsewhere or have already done so. Once and a while they will upload their leftovers to the greedy bunch but that's about it. These people have realised or starting to realise their work and talent is worth far more then pennies and it shows in their sales outside of microstock. Not only the lack of sales but the treatment by agencies and their staff is what makes this even worse. This has gotten a lot worse in the past years too. So to me those numbers are not equal to success, especially not long term.

Anyone else noticed the same pattern? more people being fed up, especially in the past few months?

ps. this is not just about SS but overall.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2015, 11:47 by Snow »

« Reply #92 on: February 16, 2015, 11:47 »
+1
Oh yes lots of images coming in BUT...

I've noticed another pattern lately that will surely shake things up a bit in the coming years.
The more successful photographers and designers, those with their unique quality, style and concept are barely uploading anymore so either are moving elsewhere or have already done so. Once and a while they will upload their leftovers to the greedy bunch but that's about it. These people have realised or starting to realise their work and talent is worth far more then pennies and it shows in their sales outside of microstock. Not only the lack of sales but the treatment by agencies and their staff is what makes this even worse. This has gotten a lot worse in the past years too. So to me those numbers are not equal to success, especially not long term.

Anyone else noticed the same pattern? more people being fed up, especially in the past few months?

I can see that happening just from what I've read on MSG in the last year.  Many of the most talented people have moved on to other things, leaving the toothpaste-smile factories and the herd of newbies.   The one-size-fits-all pricing has eliminated the market for niche subjects and any offbeat or unusual work that takes time and investment.   

There are actually lots of things I'd submit to SS if I could get $1 per subscription download.  But at 36 cents, deal me out.   

« Reply #93 on: February 16, 2015, 11:56 »
+2
Oh yes lots of images coming in BUT...

I've noticed another pattern lately that will surely shake things up a bit in the coming years.
The more successful photographers and designers, those with their unique quality, style and concept are barely uploading anymore so either are moving elsewhere or have already done so. Once and a while they will upload their leftovers to the greedy bunch but that's about it. These people have realised or starting to realise their work and talent is worth far more then pennies and it shows in their sales outside of microstock. Not only the lack of sales but the treatment by agencies and their staff is what makes this even worse. This has gotten a lot worse in the past years too. So to me those numbers are not equal to success, especially not long term.

Anyone else noticed the same pattern? more people being fed up, especially in the past few months?

ps. this is not just about SS but overall.

Yes I noticed the same pattern that you see. People moving from Microstock to elsewhere. I don't think Microstock cares about quality now just numbers and money. Fed up people have been leaving for years, that's not new.

« Reply #94 on: February 16, 2015, 12:03 »
+1
My point was that they'll be getting tons of smartphone photos from people who don't understand keywording and won't even bother with it.  They'll add a couple and click 'submit'.

so much the better, the more the merrier. u know and i know that keywording is the key to success in microstock, that's why top-sellers are top sellers. we only start to earn $ when we learn keywording, as too many keywords or too little will only end up with your pix buried and forgotten.
so let the smartphone come in.
the clients already know who has the stuff they need. i am sure they already bookmarked those ppl, (like myself, lol), and they come back to see if we have new stuff for them.
even if they, like pixelbytes fear, clog up the new images page, clients i am sure do not look at the new page like we think they do. if they did, we would not be getting those dls that someone else here mentioned of old forgotten pix of ours.  it only means the clients come back to your /my port to buy and buy from us. i know it is so because the dls are from the same area on the map.

bam bam bam ba da boom... same spot on the world map.. dl dl dl..
smartphoners will like all those newbies lose interest once they see no dls. and they will go back to play games on their smartphones and go back to texting their friends to death as before.

Snow

« Reply #95 on: February 16, 2015, 12:46 »
0
My point was that they'll be getting tons of smartphone photos from people who don't understand keywording and won't even bother with it.  They'll add a couple and click 'submit'.

so much the better, the more the merrier. u know and i know that keywording is the key to success in microstock, that's why top-sellers are top sellers. we only start to earn $ when we learn keywording, as too many keywords or too little will only end up with your pix buried and forgotten.
so let the smartphone come in.
the clients already know who has the stuff they need. i am sure they already bookmarked those ppl, (like myself, lol), and they come back to see if we have new stuff for them.
even if they, like pixelbytes fear, clog up the new images page, clients i am sure do not look at the new page like we think they do. if they did, we would not be getting those dls that someone else here mentioned of old forgotten pix of ours.  it only means the clients come back to your /my port to buy and buy from us. i know it is so because the dls are from the same area on the map.

bam bam bam ba da boom... same spot on the world map.. dl dl dl..
smartphoners will like all those newbies lose interest once they see no dls. and they will go back to play games on their smartphones and go back to texting their friends to death as before.

I think just the opposite will happen, more noobs and smartphoners as you say and the others moving out. Agencies are already promoting filtered images, selfies and what not.
With all due respect but your success might be just trying to survive in this market, that's far from being successful. I highly doubt anyone can claim huge success in this market anymore, it has all levelled out, especially in the past couple of years.
Also I never considered keywording key to success. The most successful contributors keyword the same as everyone else. It's your style, quality and concept that is key to success. But now even that seems to become irrelevant to the agencies.
If you are still making success, then congrats and keep it up!

Semmick Photo

« Reply #96 on: February 16, 2015, 13:39 »
+1
I dont see how too many keywords can bury an image? And too few keywords dont bury an image either.


« Reply #97 on: February 16, 2015, 13:50 »
0
Also I never considered keywording key to success. The most successful contributors keyword the same as everyone else. It's your style, quality and concept that is key to success. But now even that seems to become irrelevant to the agencies.
If you are still making success, then congrats and keep it up!

u know the saying, when the scallop and the skpe battle each other, the fisherman is the only winner???
all this doom and gloom is to get u to skip away so the fisherman is left with a big catch. u flood the market with selfies, u say crap will bury my work . all this is those gurus painting a grim picture so no one comes in every one leaves. 
reading the experienistas  /ppl who sell and have been in the race from the beginnig /
here and u see that their earnings have not dwindled. they do not come here whine.
only the handful of territorialistas keep pushing the rumor that the end is near.
ooh i am so scared, don't join ss , the scenery is no good anymore there/ go join stocksy etc where they are more fair and neo-age.  if u read between the lines, that is as the saying goes .
there is still money to be made. no, not as good as before. but what is good as before???
as we already mentioned, we made more money in one day during the 35mm and medium format age
than one month in the digital microstock dailies.
so what??? we pack it in ???  yes, do that and the fishermen will sit and sip their beer that u fell for it.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
7906 Views
Last post April 30, 2012, 14:45
by pancaketom
20 Replies
9796 Views
Last post January 07, 2013, 08:53
by Lotti
32 Replies
31636 Views
Last post March 02, 2014, 11:17
by Uncle Pete
989 Replies
197276 Views
Last post March 18, 2014, 08:32
by KimsCreativeHub
1 Replies
4948 Views
Last post June 05, 2014, 18:17
by BaldricksTrousers

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors