Are you telling me that the two photos of the pineapple are good? Or that focus is not important?

I can't and won't comment on specific photos. I am just commenting on what I am seeing in the market.

Are you seeing in the market that in focus is irrelevant ?

I think we can't put all in one frame.
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-212884447/stock-photo-child-walking-on-railway-road-with-vintage-siutcase.html?src=isviGMKJJWkmMgm-Taa9HQ-1-8

This image have viewfinder light leaks, but it became best seller of whole my serial from London:
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-165597077/stock-photo-big-ben-and-red-phone-cabine-in-london.html?src=Kpu_C-3vKpti7_IyIIX0sA-1-0

Tried to download free images from different sites, including 500px to see and in all cases i was disappointed with quality. For usage in any way these images were not worth for further postprocessing. So for what serves this give away? From buyer POV i would be careful to buy something for enough big poster from other artists, because i already saw "the samples" proposed by the agency. Noise will not be visible on web publications, but on full size prints - it can be only as intentional effect, which has nothing to do with bad post processing

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on June 14, 2015, 12:11

Quote from: Semmick Photo on June 14, 2015, 12:03

...What I dont get is that the Stocksy packages are for sale for a lot of money. The pineapple pack cost $1300. If  were a buyer, and bought that pack for that kind of money, I would be outraged over the poor quality. Stocksy shouldnt want to sell that.

I can't imagine anyone on CM paying $1,300 or $2,800 (flower bundle) for anything, so possibly there'd be no outrage in practice?

I did once download a freebie photo pack (several months back) from Creative Market and the quality didn't look great from the thumbnails, but I thought I'd see what the 100% view looked like.

The bundle was uniformly dreadful - but it was free, so no harm done. What surprised me was a pile of comments saying "wow - great pictures" and "how useful" and other compliments. Perhaps people were just being nice? Perhaps the pixel peeping that the micro agencies have trained us to do isn't something buyers care about?

Yeah, I once downloaded a freebie vector just to see, and it was an auto trace of a photo...not acceptable to any of the big stock sites. Useless unless you wanted to just output a small jpg for the web. If you output it any larger you'd see it was just a jumble of blobs of color.

The original question was: Does anyone know how much a photographer of these images gets for each sale?

If everyone gets a fair share it can't be more than 27 cent per pack. Or 0.0035 cent per stocksy image.

Or perhaps the division is proportional to the original list price of the individual packages. And the Stocksy packages are amusingly priced at $thousands each - for a one-project license, not RF.

I've been spending a lot of time at Creative Market lately - mostly browsing potential app UI elements although the content is also potentially interesting. I haven't bought anything there but I find it interesting in terms of the trends. I like browsing Creative Market in many ways although it seems difficult to decide what might actually be any good. I cannot decide if I am wasting my time looking at it. And it would be a lousy place to search for stock photos I think.

Personally I'm not sure I am ever going to want a random grab-bag of stuff which I would then have to waste time picking through. Same as I mostly hate free stuff.

ETA: On the other hand - quality packs of style or subject themed images might do well at the actual stock sites. Stocksy started out as a great looking collection - but those packs are a poor advert for them IMO.

Stocksy is a big failure on many levels, and now it seems they are getting desperate for sales. 90% of the the failure is the curation, it is done by 12 year old hispterfan teengirls recruited from random instagram accounts. They are extremely good at picking out the useless, chaotic stuff - to be "so different"... I guess. Just look at the opening page, it has become an ugly mess.

Huh? From the inside looking out, I can tell you you are dead wrong. Substitute "big success" for "big failure" and you would have it right. Like it or not, Stocksy has been nothing but a success story. You don't have to agree with the editing and content choice, but I can assure you failure is not a word you can associate with this company.

http://www.success.com/blog/no-more-bad-stock-photos-how-a-great-image-helped-inspire-me-to-launch-stocksy

580% revenue growth is not failure to me

Quote from: onepointfour on June 15, 2015, 10:14

http://www.success.com/blog/no-more-bad-stock-photos-how-a-great-image-helped-inspire-me-to-launch-stocksy

580% revenue growth is not failure to me

Depends on your cost really.

And also on the actual revenue reported. If your revenue first year is 2000 and second year its 13600, its a 580% growth, but nothing out of the ordinary. Start ups tend to see high revenue growth. You wont see those growth numbers after 10 years of being in business.

Lies, damned lies, statistics...

What I don't understand is why RM and Midstock agencies aren't trying to be sure their images are at least technically sound.  Cover all the bases.  The standards have gotten * high in microstock; so why don't they also increase in the market that charges 10x the price?  Pay more and get less?  Oh yeah, that can be found in any market.  When you pay more for something, you're not necessarily getting more.

Many big RM agency collection images high-res have always looked noisy, OOF, or just outright laughable technically every time I've zoomed in.  Maybe it's time the technical bar was raised, across the board.  The smartphone and iphoneography stuff is now bringing the technical standards back down, perhaps.  A camera that's always in your pocket is better than no camera... but does that make the image worth hundreds of dollars, even if it was captured on a piece of crap?  I guess so.  Art is always subjective.  Feed me 3 bottles of sriracha sauce with a few beers and and bunch of old taco meat and let me vomit it on a canvas, and then I can sell it to the highest bidder as .:abstract art:.

Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

Quote from: Semmick Photo on June 15, 2015, 14:28

Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

Don't forget the emotion, a pineapple that can make your heart bleed is your minimum requirement.  No really, I once went to the Tate and saw what I perceived to be a glass of water, yet it was apparently an oak tree, and the greater the price the older and grander the oak will be.  Once you get an handle on these concepts you will be an artist for sure and Stocksy will come knocking on your door.

After the comments he left on CM I suspect it will be a long, long time before Stocksy come knocking.

Quote from: objowl on June 15, 2015, 16:18

Quote from: Semmick Photo on June 15, 2015, 14:28

Some of the images are taken with an Iphone 4. Some shots are taken in a studio at  ISO 1000. Some images taken with an 1Ds III + EF 135mm f/2L USM looking like I took them on my 450D with an 18-55 kit lens. I am still shocked. I had no idea that the micros had such high standards compared to what I am seeing now. I am a lot less worried about my technical skills, thats for sure. All I need to work on is my story telling.

Don't forget the emotion, a pineapple that can make your heart bleed is your minimum requirement.  No really, I once went to the Tate and saw what I perceived to be a glass of water, yet it was apparently an oak tree, and the greater the price the older and grander the oak will be.  Once you get an handle on these concepts you will be an artist for sure and Stocksy will come knocking on your door.

After the comments he left on CM I suspect it will be a long, long time before Stocksy come knocking.

Why? Because I question the quality of their product? Honest buyer feedback? But I guess you are right; agencies have a knack for retaliating against troublemakers. If they cant handle honest critique and reject my application, so be it. What they could do is re-review the images, and take them down.