Why pull the plug?  You've done the work of uploading and submitting, so why not leave it alone and collect whatever pittance they can produce?

I categorize sites three ways: those that get new work as I produce it, those that get uploads when I get sales but I ignore otherwise, and those where I am actively but slowly removing my content.  That last category is for sites that have abused our relationship: iStock and Fotolia.  StockFresh is in group two with Veer, Yay, SignElements and a few others; they don't produce much, but I'll let them earn what they may.

As nice as the idea is of a fair trade agency they often don't produce the income to cover the costs of uploading.
As the bigger agencies gain more traction they'll produce even less revenue in the future, all of the lower earners on the Poll are wasted energy if you ask me.

I'll never understand this logic. What do you expect? That a company like Stockfresh is going to magically acquire enough images to be competitive and then you'll upload? Images have to come from somewhere, and we have to be willing to assume some of the risk if we want to ever see a fair-trade company succeed.

And how do you think the bigger agencies gain more traction? Because everyone keeps uploading to them, growing the collections and giving them more to work with, more to offer buyers. Small companies don't stand a chance if too many people have your attitude about them.

Anyone having any luck on sales with Stock Fresh? I am ready to pull the plug on them....

Not sure that you photos will give you a fresh income there�

I thought I read that Stockfresh was going to start to advertise the site to potential buyers - but maybe that was a joke too.

If Stockfresh curated the images it has into a collection and raised the prices of those image slightly, even on a non exclusive basis it would be much more appealing to buyers. Wading through millions of dated images is a drag for any designer.

If you guys went for a mini macro collection I'd be much more interested in uploading.

It's good in theory, and I've advocated for one of the larger agencies to move in this direction. At the same time, these places do have customers, and they run the risk of alienating them for a gamble that may or may not work for them. Unless you are in desperate times, then you almost have to launch with that mission statement because you probably won't naturally evolve into it.

Quote

I wasn't crazy about the somewhat low prices.

Have you seen the Dollar Photo Club?

Jokes aside, it's not easy for a small agency to balance between impatient contributors who often expect sales levels they have on hundred million dollar businesses and customers who are conditioned by the top 3 agencies to want everything for almost free, but we're doing what we can. Stocksy for example is a fantastic idea. I don't think it will turn the entire industry on its head just yet, but it has a very solid potential in its niche. It won't be able to take on board all the photographers who are struggling with the lowered royalty rates though, so there have to be other players fighting the big guys...

I have been with stockfresh since the beginning. Is it fair to still consider me impatient?

I still like Stockfresh and hope for them to succeed, but I've definitely moved on from them as my preferred site and the place I try to get buyers to go to.

I still feel like they squandered that golden opportunity a few years back when iStock was losing a lot of buyers and the market was in the perfect position for a new company to emerge that satisfied both buyers and contributors. That was Stockfresh, with fair and simple pricing, no credit shenanigans like iStock was/is doing, and 50% royalties. If only they'd bought some ad space in a few design magazines or promoted that they even exist, who knows where they'd be today. Meanwhile most of those buyers leaving iStock fled to Shutterstock instead.

That was their chance, and I doubt they will ever get another one like it.