MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Are new images selling?  (Read 14136 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 31, 2017, 23:26 »
+1
Old content is selling normally but new uploads sales almost stopped for me from couple of weeks.
Is same happening with you guys?


substancep

  • Medical, science, nature, and macro photography

« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2017, 00:33 »
0
No. My new images sell in around 3-4 days. Some sell almost instantly. I guess it just depends on a lot of random factors.

Chichikov

« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2017, 01:49 »
0
Old content is selling normally but new uploads sales almost stopped for me from couple of weeks.
Is same happening with you guys?

I have always good sales with my old content, but my new content don't sell a lot.

As now Shutterstock accepts almost anything, our images are "lost" in the multitude and the time for the search engine indexing is surely very longer.

I just rely on the fact that my new images will become old and they will begin to sell :D

« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2017, 04:47 »
+5
Would be interesting to know if the sites push down new images from people that are on higher commission tiers.  It sure feels like that.  My new images just vanish now.

« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2017, 08:18 »
0
It's been variable - some new images sell right away, some almost never and many others seem to take a couple of months before they get discovered.

« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2017, 08:25 »
+3
Not for me. Then again, nothing is selling for me. I'm quite disgusted with Shutterstock. I suspect their search is shifted to new contributors to lower payouts and increase profits (earnings).  That's what happens when you have shareholders to answer to.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2017, 08:30 by Mantis »

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #6 on: August 01, 2017, 08:25 »
0
Uploaded yesterday and sold today, but generally it's slow going at first

« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2017, 08:32 »
+3
Uploaded yesterday and sold today, but generally it's slow going at first

One datapoint does not constitute the whole.  If we look at the population (all contributors' new uploaded content), that content does not sell "as a whole" , but there are always outliers, or exceptions.  I don't think anyone in here is saying that not a single new images sells, what we are saying is that as a whole new images do not sell. 

OM

« Reply #8 on: August 01, 2017, 08:37 »
+2
If something new sells, it sells for a couple of times and then usually disappears; never to sell again. That's not the reason I'm in microstock so I''ve stopped uploading as it seems pointless. I have sales of 2,000+ of a couple of images I uploaded in 2012 and around 30 images that sold 100+ all of which were uploaded years ago. I don't think I have anything uploaded in the past 2 years that managed above 25 sales so why bother.

« Reply #9 on: August 01, 2017, 08:42 »
+2
If something new sells, it sells for a couple of times and then usually disappears; never to sell again. That's not the reason I'm in microstock so I''ve stopped uploading as it seems pointless. I have sales of 2,000+ of a couple of images I uploaded in 2012 and around 30 images that sold 100+ all of which were uploaded years ago. I don't think I have anything uploaded in the past 2 years that managed above 25 sales so why bother.

My philosophy is that sometime down the road my new images will be old (by whatever definition SS uses to define old) and I will make sales.  I still upload but I have only just recently started back up in the studio and really have no motivation.  Incentive to shoot is tied to outcome and with MS going into the toilet I'm really focusing elsewhere, video and POD.

OM

« Reply #10 on: August 01, 2017, 08:48 »
+1
You know, it's funny but SS seems to be presenting a lot of 'Additional Resources' written by wannabe curators or film/video buffs. Many of those shots illustrating the article have that 'wow' factor (fabulous landscapes etc) but when I view the contributor's portfolio, the particular shot is nowhere to be found on the first 2 pages of popular which indicates to me that it may be a 'I wish I'd taken that' shot but it just doesn't put any money in the bank @38 cents for a sub.
I find Alamy's 'Additional Resources' much more helpful and relevant to the business of stock photography.

OM

« Reply #11 on: August 01, 2017, 08:54 »
0
If something new sells, it sells for a couple of times and then usually disappears; never to sell again. That's not the reason I'm in microstock so I''ve stopped uploading as it seems pointless. I have sales of 2,000+ of a couple of images I uploaded in 2012 and around 30 images that sold 100+ all of which were uploaded years ago. I don't think I have anything uploaded in the past 2 years that managed above 25 sales so why bother.

Incentive to shoot is tied to outcome and with MS going into the toilet I'm really focusing elsewhere, video and POD.

Absolutely. I recently finished a well-paid 2-week commission but can't motivate myself to pick up the camera again for stock. Don't know which direction I'll go in future but there's certainly no incentive to upload to SS as things are going now. Probably let the ole port wither on the vine and try to find better opportunities somewhere else.

« Reply #12 on: August 01, 2017, 10:04 »
+1
The upload age doesn't matter as much as what is the image! New and old sell if buyers want them. I have new that sell the first week and old that sell over and over for years. I also have flops that have never sold in years and some that are new that will probably never sell. It's not the age that matters, it's the what is it.

« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2017, 02:24 »
0
Thank you for those replies. Good to know that new content is selling.
I think I need to focus more on the demanding content. :)

« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2017, 03:26 »
0
The upload age doesn't matter as much as what is the image! New and old sell if buyers want them. I have new that sell the first week and old that sell over and over for years. I also have flops that have never sold in years and some that are new that will probably never sell. It's not the age that matters, it's the what is it.

Not necessary. The same image on different sites with the same keywords have a different behaviour.

« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2017, 09:28 »
+3
In short: NEW IMAGES ARE NOT SELLING BECAUSE SS SEARCH ENGINE IS CONFIGURED LIKE THAT.
Explanation: It was a part of SS fight against spam, there are exceptions from that rule like new contributors not older than 6 months.

Comments on comments:

"Is same happening with you guys?" - Yes

"No. My new images sell in around 3-4 days. Some sell almost instantly" - How long are you on SS with your current account?

"I just rely on the fact that my new images will become old and they will begin to sell" - Yes if your profile doesn't have high ammount of "spam points"

"Would be interesting to know if the sites push down new images from people that are on higher commission tiers" - Yes managers at SS called that KPI indicator

"It's been variable - some new images sell right away, some almost never and many others seem to take a couple of months before they get discovered" - new images sells right away if the buyer search exactly enough so you don't have high concurrency, rest of them sells after couple of months and even more.

"I suspect their search is shifted to new contributors to lower payouts and increase profits (earnings)" - Exactly, main KPI indicator is to raise profit, so they must cut their expenses.

"Uploaded yesterday and sold today, but generally it's slow going at first" - Editorial photos have different search engine rules, if this is editorial photo. In case it's not than buyer probably search exactly enough for you to be on first pages.

"content does not sell as a whole , but there are always outliers, or exceptions" - Yes, keep in mind that search engine rules (parameters) are very complex and could be changed on daily basis so it is very hard to recognize "patterns". Business intelligence engine with data mining could automatically change search engine parameters every single day based on daily analysis what is currently most profitable  search engine strategy, for stock holders off course.

"If something new sells, it sells for a couple of times and then usually disappears; never to sell again" - Your were lucky that buyer searched exactly enough.

"The upload age doesn't matter as much as what is the image! New and old sell if buyers want them" - Yes it matters, new content is not selling except in a few exceptions like new contributors or specific content or exact buyer search, etc...

"The same image on different sites with the same keywords have a different behaviour" - that's normal, even in a fair play buyers are not the same.

Bad Company

« Reply #16 on: August 16, 2017, 21:21 »
0
compared to Adobe Stock - No.


angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2017, 22:06 »
+2
NO, new images are NOT selling.

k_t_g

  • Always ready for you!
« Reply #18 on: August 16, 2017, 22:34 »
0
Yes they do but sometimes not right away. They don't always catch someones eye right away and then bam! I had one image that didn't sell anything for the first year and then I was getting several extended licensees on it.  :)

« Reply #19 on: August 16, 2017, 22:52 »
0
I just checked the new images and surprise to see that the approved images are not even in my portfolio after 2 days.  :o

« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2017, 00:18 »
0
No, new images are lost somewhere in the search engine. But... I stayed for a long time without adding new images and since I started to upload again,  my rate of sales of the old images have increased.

« Reply #21 on: August 17, 2017, 00:25 »
0
NO, new images are NOT selling.
Same here. Images are not selling. Only videos are selling.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #22 on: August 17, 2017, 01:12 »
0
mistake! dont know what happened here but all text disappeared!

anyway answer to sharpshots post: of course they do!  been doing for a long time now. You can test it! upload 5 shots and then ask somebody on 0.25c to upload at the very same time. You wont believe it youre shots are basically nowhere to be seen. Done it a few times just to be sure. Never fails and just to point out for the usual non believers. This is NOT a conspiracy theory its been going on since last X-mas. Sure there are exceptions but on the whole thats their strategy. Its business if they can earn more agency revenue that way why not?  I would do the same.

« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 01:18 by derek »

« Reply #23 on: August 17, 2017, 03:00 »
+1
I wouldn't mind if we could have 2 accounts and upload new images to the new account at the lowest rate.  Getting almost nothing for new images is demoralising.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #24 on: August 17, 2017, 04:26 »
+1
I wouldn't mind if we could have 2 accounts and upload new images to the new account at the lowest rate.  Getting almost nothing for new images is demoralising.

Agree its very demoralizing! Yes that would be a perfect alternative but I doubt they want that since they are reaping the profits by only promoting lower end royalty members, saving millions in payouts.
Somebody in their own forum had made some calculations based on 6 months and it was incredible the money they saved were in the tens of millions. He got banned from their forum btw not surprising.

« Reply #25 on: August 17, 2017, 06:26 »
0
It wouldn't cost them any money if we could sell new images at the lowest rate.  I would like that option.

« Reply #26 on: August 17, 2017, 06:58 »
+6
So now you're asking for a pay cut?
Why only for your new images, the same argument - they might push images from lower royalties contibutors - also holds for old images.

Better solution would be to get rid of all those levels and pay out the same rates for everybody. Preferably the rate that is currently the highest level.
Not going to happen though.


« Reply #27 on: August 17, 2017, 09:46 »
0
The upload age doesn't matter as much as what is the image! New and old sell if buyers want them. I have new that sell the first week and old that sell over and over for years. I also have flops that have never sold in years and some that are new that will probably never sell. It's not the age that matters, it's the what is it.

Not necessary. The same image on different sites with the same keywords have a different behaviour.

Also buyers on different sites are different. I have photos that have never sold on SS in years, that have 25 downloads on FT in under a year. But true same keywords on different sites, have different results, we have no control.

As for any agency pushing lower earning contributors to the front, there's has never been one letter of proof or speck of evidence that this is true. Just people on the forum making up a conspiracy that could be true.No Proof ever! And I have a friend who says so, or why do so many people say so, isn't proof. It's just believing that something that's possible is true, because we are looking for answers where their are none evident or available, except rumors, suspicion and conjecture.

For those here who repeat the conspiracy and make up financial reasons, show me proof, not inventions or personal theories.

« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2017, 03:18 »
0
In short: NEW IMAGES ARE NOT SELLING BECAUSE SS SEARCH ENGINE IS CONFIGURED LIKE THAT.
Explanation: It was a part of SS fight against spam, there are exceptions from that rule like new contributors not older than 6 months.

In addition: they are testing new anti-spam strategy called "similar images" since previous month.
It is a half automatic process: when you send new files to review, software places tahm side-by-side with most similar images from the same contributor.
After that reviewer could easily selects which images will be rejected for "similar images" reason and which not.
If it is obvious that the whole batch is a spam he could mark them all as "similar images" with one click.

Selling of a new images probably depends on a success rate of that anti-spam strategy.
If that goes well than selling of a new images could return back to normal.

« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2017, 03:27 »
0
mistake! dont know what happened here but all text disappeared!

anyway answer to sharpshots post: of course they do!  been doing for a long time now. You can test it! upload 5 shots and then ask somebody on 0.25c to upload at the very same time. You wont believe it youre shots are basically nowhere to be seen. Done it a few times just to be sure. Never fails and just to point out for the usual non believers. This is NOT a conspiracy theory its been going on since last X-mas. Sure there are exceptions but on the whole thats their strategy. Its business if they can earn more agency revenue that way why not?  I would do the same.

100% true.
One of my "experiments" was exactly like that, one old 0.35c account and one newbie 0.25c account with the "very similar" files.
Time period is also accurate, and yes, I would also do the same.

« Reply #30 on: August 21, 2017, 03:44 »
0
It is reversed with video.... we never sold any new video. Always older files sell. Whatever we upload today, if we get lucky it could get a sale in 6 months, but almost for sure after a year.

csm

« Reply #31 on: August 21, 2017, 05:48 »
0
It is reversed with video.... we never sold any new video. Always older files sell. Whatever we upload today, if we get lucky it could get a sale in 6 months, but almost for sure after a year.

Interesting.
I`ve something similar before about video, in that most video clips sell a year after they`ve been uploaded onwards.
Don`t know how true this is, I know things are more long term with video.

I started contributing to Pond5 and and everyone else at the start of the year, P5 still yet to take off and wondering if this is the reason why?...

« Reply #32 on: August 21, 2017, 06:11 »
0
Yes, it's just that there's a delay of about a month before they start selling.

« Reply #33 on: August 21, 2017, 06:39 »
+2
You know, it's funny but SS seems to be presenting a lot of 'Additional Resources' written by wannabe curators or film/video buffs. Many of those shots illustrating the article have that 'wow' factor (fabulous landscapes etc) but when I view the contributor's portfolio, the particular shot is nowhere to be found on the first 2 pages of popular which indicates to me that it may be a 'I wish I'd taken that' shot but it just doesn't put any money in the bank @38 cents for a sub.

Sure seems to me that SS is doing things to deliberately mislead us.

When you look at your own portfolio as a buyer would, looking at the "Popular" tab, you see all new stuff, right?  Wouldn't "Popular" by definition show you stuff that is actually selling?  For a moment I feel good looking at my Popular page, thinking that the work I'm doing now is paying off, but I know in reality it is not.

And when I look at my Earnings Summary for today -- the page SS "improved" a few months back with an all new and all terrible way of presenting our earnings -- they sort by image number which makes it impossible to see how well new stuff is selling vs old stuff.

Together, these tricks appear designed to hide the fact SS is burying our new uploads while motivating us to keep uploading more to protect their bragging rights of having the largest portfolio of any agency.  Very disheartening.

« Last Edit: August 21, 2017, 07:05 by stockmarketer »

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #34 on: August 21, 2017, 17:14 »
+2
Totally agree with you (stockmarketer),

"they sort by image number which makes it impossible to see how well new stuff is selling vs old stuff."

The new design is such a pain. The old way of displaying the sales was much better. I knew right away if the new images had been sold.

langstrup

« Reply #35 on: August 22, 2017, 12:38 »
+2
I have a hard time seeing that Shutterstock would push down images from high earners, to make profit! Designers are looking for good images, not cheap images.

We upload 80-150 images a week, and it usually sells right away.

If it do not sell, its usually not that good. Sorry to say, but that it my experience! It is confirmed by comparing sales on multiple sites. A good image usually sells well on all sites.

We all get the feeling sometimes probably, and then its time to up your game :)

Best wishes
Stefan 

« Reply #36 on: August 22, 2017, 12:56 »
0
You know, it's funny but SS seems to be presenting a lot of 'Additional Resources' written by wannabe curators or film/video buffs. Many of those shots illustrating the article have that 'wow' factor (fabulous landscapes etc) but when I view the contributor's portfolio, the particular shot is nowhere to be found on the first 2 pages of popular which indicates to me that it may be a 'I wish I'd taken that' shot but it just doesn't put any money in the bank @38 cents for a sub.
I find Alamy's 'Additional Resources' much more helpful and relevant to the business of stock photography.

I was featured in one of their spring blogs, "What do you shoot in spring?" They invited me to submit, so I offered two good shots of nesting Great Egrets. The editors positioned my pics at that top in the e-newsletter and the blog proved to be very popular with friends I showed it to. Unfortunately, the images themselves have hardly sold at all, before or after that blog came out. Go figure.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2017, 12:59 by marthamarks »


« Reply #37 on: August 22, 2017, 14:09 »
0
You know, it's funny but SS seems to be presenting a lot of 'Additional Resources' written by wannabe curators or film/video buffs. Many of those shots illustrating the article have that 'wow' factor (fabulous landscapes etc) but when I view the contributor's portfolio, the particular shot is nowhere to be found on the first 2 pages of popular which indicates to me that it may be a 'I wish I'd taken that' shot but it just doesn't put any money in the bank @38 cents for a sub.
I find Alamy's 'Additional Resources' much more helpful and relevant to the business of stock photography.

I was featured in one of their spring blogs, "What do you shoot in spring?" They invited me to submit, so I offered two good shots of nesting Great Egrets. The editors positioned my pics at that top in the e-newsletter and the blog proved to be very popular with friends I showed it to. Unfortunately, the images themselves have hardly sold at all, before or after that blog came out. Go figure.

Same here, I was also interviewed and featured on one of their blogs, but this has hardly triggered any extra sales. Maybe just a few.
For about a week, I was also a "featured contributor" on Dreamstime, where a selection of my port was rotated every few minutes, on their main page. Same result, maybe a handful of extra sales.
One of my photos was featured by Alamy, on their landing page, for several days in a row and I didn't see any spike in sales.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2017, 14:18 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #38 on: August 22, 2017, 19:11 »
0
You know, it's funny but SS seems to be presenting a lot of 'Additional Resources' written by wannabe curators or film/video buffs. Many of those shots illustrating the article have that 'wow' factor (fabulous landscapes etc) but when I view the contributor's portfolio, the particular shot is nowhere to be found on the first 2 pages of popular which indicates to me that it may be a 'I wish I'd taken that' shot but it just doesn't put any money in the bank @38 cents for a sub.
I find Alamy's 'Additional Resources' much more helpful and relevant to the business of stock photography.

I was featured in one of their spring blogs, "What do you shoot in spring?" They invited me to submit, so I offered two good shots of nesting Great Egrets. The editors positioned my pics at that top in the e-newsletter and the blog proved to be very popular with friends I showed it to. Unfortunately, the images themselves have hardly sold at all, before or after that blog came out. Go figure.

Same here, I was also interviewed and featured on one of their blogs, but this has hardly triggered any extra sales. Maybe just a few.
For about a week, I was also a "featured contributor" on Dreamstime, where a selection of my port was rotated every few minutes, on their main page. Same result, maybe a handful of extra sales.
One of my photos was featured by Alamy, on their landing page, for several days in a row and I didn't see any spike in sales.

I declined their offer. 

« Reply #39 on: August 24, 2017, 05:16 »
+1
We upload 80-150 images a week, and it usually sells right away.

For 25c per image?

« Reply #40 on: August 24, 2017, 07:38 »
0
We upload 80-150 images a week, and it usually sells right away.

For 25c per image?
Well its obviously not 25c is it?

« Reply #41 on: August 24, 2017, 10:09 »
0
My recent experience with SS is that a lot of my newly accepted photos get sold for the first time blazing fast (from within few hours to few days), however after that there are no sales of these assets at all. Which makes me suspect that there's something strange in this pattern. For a pure coincidence there are just too many examples with my portfolio like this, with the most recent being earlier today.

Anybody else with the same experience?

« Reply #42 on: August 24, 2017, 11:46 »
0
My recent experience with SS is that a lot of my newly accepted photos get sold for the first time blazing fast (from within few hours to few days), however after that there are no sales of these assets at all. Which makes me suspect that there's something strange in this pattern. For a pure coincidence there are just too many examples with my portfolio like this, with the most recent being earlier today.

Anybody else with the same experience?


It happens to me the same, also. In the series of last images uploaded, in the same day or the next day a few (not even the best one) are sold. And then, from that batch, no sells, absolutely nothing. I notice this for at least 2 months


« Reply #43 on: August 24, 2017, 15:04 »
0
My recent experience with SS is that a lot of my newly accepted photos get sold for the first time blazing fast (from within few hours to few days), however after that there are no sales of these assets at all. Which makes me suspect that there's something strange in this pattern. For a pure coincidence there are just too many examples with my portfolio like this, with the most recent being earlier today.

Anybody else with the same experience?


It happens to me the same, also. In the series of last images uploaded, in the same day or the next day a few (not even the best one) are sold. And then, from that batch, no sells, absolutely nothing. I notice this for at least 2 months

As someone who buys microstock images, I occasionally click on the New tab to see what is fresh. And Ive downloaded images from the new section.

When more images get uploaded, your images will no longer be on the top of the New tab, so buyers cant find them there anymore. At this point, images need to rely on good keywording to be found again and make its way to the top.

langstrup

« Reply #44 on: August 24, 2017, 15:21 »
+1
We upload 80-150 images a week, and it usually sells right away.

For 25c per image?

No ;)

« Reply #45 on: August 24, 2017, 16:13 »
0
As someone who buys microstock images, I occasionally click on the New tab to see what is fresh. And Ive downloaded images from the new section.

When more images get uploaded, your images will no longer be on the top of the New tab, so buyers cant find them there anymore. At this point, images need to rely on good keywording to be found again and make its way to the top.

What you say bears some logic and sense to me, but not entirely so as to convince. Imagine that my keywords are just fine (i.e. adequate and relevant, no spam). In addition, this image has been downloaded already once so compared to others which were not (and I assume there are tons of these with similar subject, location, etc.), it should increase its position or at least maintain in the top of the Popular and Relevant tabs (first, second, third search result pages...). In other words, following your scenario the image may get buried in the New tab if one searches only there, agree, but how about Popular and Relevant pages where this image will find its place (and it is a case as I check often my images in the search results and can often find them in the top 3-4-5 page results). So how come it's never downloaded again if it's in demand (in demand, since it was downloaded right away after upload, so people are looking up for these images).

In addition, the same pattern almost never happens on other agencies. I never get a download of a newly uploaded image until after weeks and months after on other agencies. One can say that they have different search algorithms compared to SS, and that SS has so much more newly added content each week. But I know that my images are still quite competitive within agency's global portfolios, i.e. there are no tens of thousands of similar images of the same location or subject. So they must be downloaded more often. And still, there are not, as explained above. It just seems weird to me.

« Reply #46 on: August 24, 2017, 18:15 »
+1
What you say bears some logic and sense to me, but not entirely so as to convince. Imagine that my keywords are just fine (i.e. adequate and relevant, no spam). In addition, this image has been downloaded already once so compared to others which were not (and I assume there are tons of these with similar subject, location, etc.), it should increase its position or at least maintain in the top of the Popular and Relevant tabs (first, second, third search result pages...). In other words, following your scenario the image may get buried in the New tab if one searches only there, agree, but how about Popular and Relevant pages where this image will find its place (and it is a case as I check often my images in the search results and can often find them in the top 3-4-5 page results). So how come it's never downloaded again if it's in demand (in demand, since it was downloaded right away after upload, so people are looking up for these images).

In addition, the same pattern almost never happens on other agencies. I never get a download of a newly uploaded image until after weeks and months after on other agencies. One can say that they have different search algorithms compared to SS, and that SS has so much more newly added content each week. But I know that my images are still quite competitive within agency's global portfolios, i.e. there are no tens of thousands of similar images of the same location or subject. So they must be downloaded more often. And still, there are not, as explained above. It just seems weird to me.

Depending on the subject matter. It can take as little as 1 download to get to the first page for some keywords and as many as 10-15 for others. 1 download makes very little headway in popular categories. You may have increased your position from the bottom of page 7 to the middle of page 7 in the Popular tab. In order to get to the first page, you have to keep getting downloads for that image. More often than not, when I download images, I usually find what I need in the first couple pages and rarely venture deeper. So being on page 4 or page 5 means very little for a search term.

I imagine SS's search results as a group of people in a marathon. Everyone is fighting to get to front of the group, and everyone is moving at the same time. You can move up in position if someone else tires (no downloads for a while) or if you get a burst of energy (a download). Have that happen enough times and your image will appear on page 1. SS's tab design makes it easy to switch sections compared to FT, where you have click on a dropdown menu. 1 extra click can make a big difference.


niktol

« Reply #47 on: August 25, 2017, 06:32 »
0
Old content is selling normally but new uploads sales almost stopped for me from couple of weeks.
Is same happening with you guys?

No, they sell just fine for me


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2143 Views
Last post January 20, 2019, 12:27
by Newsfocus1
0 Replies
908 Views
Last post November 30, 2019, 15:52
by fotoroad
1 Replies
1452 Views
Last post December 28, 2019, 15:11
by qunamax
2 Replies
2541 Views
Last post April 04, 2020, 16:47
by fotoroad
0 Replies
1010 Views
Last post May 29, 2020, 10:12
by fotoroad

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle