|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - tickstock
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 151
126
« on: March 22, 2019, 15:43 »
They can't police that so basically it is file exclusive
Great all my new content is going there.
127
« on: March 22, 2019, 15:36 »
That's a little confusing are they saying you have to stop contributing to other sites and all new content has to go exclusively to P5 or can you keep uploading to your other accounts?
128
« on: March 22, 2019, 15:26 »
You can now create an Exclusive Account with Pond5 and not have to delete your files! I told you this would work out. Just created mine as CraftedShutterExclusive
Anymore details on that?
129
« on: March 22, 2019, 15:10 »
So how do we react? Do we start bombarding them with mails telling them that the move is unfair? Do we hit them on instagram, facebook, twitter? Do we set up a petition? Lets actually act in a way that tells them this is not a welcome move.
You have videos on SS and get 30% for them what's your complaint about 40%? You've sent them the message that 30% is good enough already.
130
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:30 »
Because they pay a higher % and you can set your prices.
Joining their Exclusive Program is a leap in the dark, you'd lose maybe 50% of your revenue overnight (by deleting it from other sites) and there's no promise Pond5 will make up for that loss.
I'm small time in video and Pond5 is my best site. The problem for most people here is that they've accepted getting paid 30-35% so it doesn't really make sense to complain that P5 is "only" paying 40%. Will they lose anyone because of this, I doubt it.
131
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:24 »
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!
Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?
Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.
But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?
Why would you defend their greed?
It's hard to call them greedy when they pay more for nonexclusive work than sites you like (SS, Adobe for example). They still seem to be the least greedy of the bunch don't they?
A race to the bottom involves undercutting the competition, matching pricing and paying a higher royalty rate doesn't seem to me to be part of the race to the bottom, if anything I'd say contributors accepting lower rates and prices are what's driving the race to the bottom.
They paid more than other sites, yes, but will stop doing so. They weren't greedy, but now they are.
This isn't anything else than a cash grab, and their livestream didn't give us an explanation, only a unfair comparison to the 60% for exclusive members (which is a smaller percentage of contributors than non-exclusives, so it's not evenly divided).
Why should it be evenly divided they want exclusive content, nonexclusive content just isn't as valuable.
Which proves my point there not doing this for contributors, only for their own good. I.e. greed.
I couldn't even offset my prices by 20% due to their rule that it should match competitors' prices. "Suck it up or join our program", that is what it boils down to. Why would I reward Pond5 with my exclusive files after a power move like this?
Because they pay a higher % and you can set your prices.
132
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:20 »
It's not just marketing though. If you need a specific video and it's only on Pond5 then you need to go to Pond5 to get it.
Obviously. But that doesn't make it more valuable to the customer. Or us.
If they pay 60% rather than 30,35, or 40% it does.
Really? Since you have to remove your clips from every other site it definitely does not.
About 90% of my earnings comes from other sites. So would that 60% suddenly increase my P5 sales to astronomical levels? I think not.
If you're happy getting 90% of sales at 30-35% then what's the problem getting the last ten at 40%? How many people will quit uploading to a site that pays better than most? By putting the same clips at sites that pay 30-35% you've told them that is how much they should pay out.
My biggest earners all pay 50%. Which really should be the minimum everywhere. Even that is somewhat insulting.
I've been away from here for a while which sites are paying 50%?
133
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:19 »
This is a race to the bottom - of contributor share percentage.
They have seen that the others get away with 30% and people still happily send their stuff in, so they think "what the heck, why not go to 40%, then in a while, 30%".
This means a MAJOR upswing in earnings for them. 20% up on April 8th in one easy move. That is an ENORMOUS increase in earnings for a company. They know people aren't going to leave, just be angry on the forums for a while, and then it all goes back to normal. Well, except for 20% higher earnings for Pond5.
i agree. it's a ended business for 99% of contributor soon in little time..hope many won't based their earning and life on micro and have a family too i won't literally was to be in their pants...sonn they will go 30 225 20 15 and 10...i'm still surprised ss is at 38% but s soon as they will lose royalties be sure they will cut royalty.
the only ututure in photography is talent and commission. stock are less profitable than staying outside a shop and asking for a dollar to the customer who enter.
Shutterstock is not at 38%, where did you get that idea?
yes sorry i was doing the % based on subsritpition...anyway fact is that...every agency red is falling down...thats a fact. in a year we will talk about much much lower earning per download i bet y pants. free photos will be the future for most uses, only top notch production and high level creative will make a life ou of commercial photography.
That's not the % you get from subscriptions either.
134
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:18 »
It's not just marketing though. If you need a specific video and it's only on Pond5 then you need to go to Pond5 to get it.
Obviously. But that doesn't make it more valuable to the customer. Or us.
If they pay 60% rather than 30,35, or 40% it does.
Really? Since you have to remove your clips from every other site it definitely does not.
About 90% of my earnings comes from other sites. So would that 60% suddenly increase my P5 sales to astronomical levels? I think not.
If you're happy getting 90% of sales at 30-35% then what's the problem getting the last ten at 40%? How many people will quit uploading to a site that pays better than most? By putting the same clips at sites that pay 30-35% you've told them that is how much they should pay out.
135
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:12 »
It's not just marketing though. If you need a specific video and it's only on Pond5 then you need to go to Pond5 to get it.
Obviously. But that doesn't make it more valuable to the customer. Or us.
If they pay 60% rather than 30,35, or 40% it does.
136
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:10 »
This is a race to the bottom - of contributor share percentage.
They have seen that the others get away with 30% and people still happily send their stuff in, so they think "what the heck, why not go to 40%, then in a while, 30%".
This means a MAJOR upswing in earnings for them. 20% up on April 8th in one easy move. That is an ENORMOUS increase in earnings for a company. They know people aren't going to leave, just be angry on the forums for a while, and then it all goes back to normal. Well, except for 20% higher earnings for Pond5.
i agree. it's a ended business for 99% of contributor soon in little time..hope many won't based their earning and life on micro and have a family too i won't literally was to be in their pants...sonn they will go 30 225 20 15 and 10...i'm still surprised ss is at 38% but s soon as they will lose royalties be sure they will cut royalty.
the only ututure in photography is talent and commission. stock are less profitable than staying outside a shop and asking for a dollar to the customer who enter.
Shutterstock is not at 38%, where did you get that idea?
137
« on: March 21, 2019, 15:09 »
Why should it be evenly divided they want exclusive content, nonexclusive content just isn't as valuable.
No stock clip is exclusive to the customer if it can be bought more than once. It's just another way to be able to use the word "exclusive" in marketing.
It's not just marketing though. If you need a specific video and it's only on Pond5 then you need to go to Pond5 to get it.
138
« on: March 21, 2019, 14:57 »
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!
Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?
Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.
But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?
Why would you defend their greed?
It's hard to call them greedy when they pay more for nonexclusive work than sites you like (SS, Adobe for example). They still seem to be the least greedy of the bunch don't they?
A race to the bottom involves undercutting the competition, matching pricing and paying a higher royalty rate doesn't seem to me to be part of the race to the bottom, if anything I'd say contributors accepting lower rates and prices are what's driving the race to the bottom.
They paid more than other sites, yes, but will stop doing so. They weren't greedy, but now they are.
This isn't anything else than a cash grab, and their livestream didn't give us an explanation, only a unfair comparison to the 60% for exclusive members (which is a smaller percentage of contributors than non-exclusives, so it's not evenly divided).
Why should it be evenly divided they want exclusive content, nonexclusive content just isn't as valuable.
139
« on: March 21, 2019, 14:53 »
pond5 is tricking us.
let's say you have $10,000,000 in payouts to everyone non-exclusive. and that goes down to 40% so it goes down to $8,000,000. that is $2,000,000 less.
but then you have all the people who are exclusive, and the payout is $100,000. and they are getting their full share. basically what pond5 is doing is saving huge amounts of cash from non-exclusive people but that money is not going to pay exclusive people, it is going into their profit margin. the only way it might equalize is if 50% of sellers are exclusive and 50% are not, which is very very unlikely. I doubt if even 1% go exclusive.
scam
Did they say they aren't going to promote exclusive work? I would guess a small number of contributors are making the vast majority of sales. I'm not saying this won't be better for them but I don't think they need anywhere close to 50% exclusives for it to break even.
140
« on: March 21, 2019, 14:50 »
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!
Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?
Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.
But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?
Why would you defend their greed?
It's hard to call them greedy when they pay more for nonexclusive work than sites you like (SS, Adobe for example). They still seem to be the least greedy of the bunch don't they? A race to the bottom involves undercutting the competition, matching pricing and paying a higher royalty rate doesn't seem to me to be part of the race to the bottom, if anything I'd say contributors accepting lower rates and prices are what's driving the race to the bottom.
141
« on: March 21, 2019, 14:43 »
Volume though. SS/Adobe I get 20-30 image sales a day, pond5, 3-5 image sales a year.
Hows the extra royalty % going to help me pay bills, get new gear without volume?
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!
Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?
My comment was about video, other royalties aren't changing and exclusivity isn't part of the equation.
142
« on: March 21, 2019, 14:28 »
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!
Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?
143
« on: March 21, 2019, 14:20 »
Just got off the phone with them, let's see what the future holds for us long term shooters! Now I am posting a video about it on my site but I will summarize it here. I think as a business this is a good move and needed at this time in the industry. I am seeing my RPD go down and buyers shopping around as well. The 60-40 split does not bother me and I would have done something similar. If you are a serious video producer then this is a good space for you! If they keep the buyers coming this will put pressure on Getty to get more content but do be fooled Getty is the one who has shafted the artist for $$$. Pond5 has set it so I make more then they do if I am exclusive! This is the move I expected and aside from a few glitches I hope it does well! Now I did make a suggestion to add photo in the exclusive pack so we could advertise that as well! Watch the video on my channel in about 1 hour if you want more info. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwoU327B927MD49NNf16gxw?view_as=subscriber
They definitely don't sell enough photos to make exclusivity worth it, bundling it with video (if I understand you correctly) would stop almost anyone who shoots both from joining. I like the move as is, even if I don't end up doing it I hope it puts pressure on the other agencies.
144
« on: March 21, 2019, 13:51 »
That is not a problem at all the same way it is not a problem at Gettyimages. When you send content to Getty you can not send similar content to other sites. If you get caught you are out.
It says artist exclusivity some places and video artist exclusivity others. Is this just for video content? I assume it is but they license other types of media as well so just want to make sure I understand it. Time to crunch some numbers but I think pulling my video stuff off SS and iS is probably the right choice.
FWIW I think content exclusivity just won't work, too many people would abuse it by putting similar (almost identical) content on other sites, it would be impossible to police.
Getty and P5 are very different in many ways and I don't think P5 wants to deal with kicking people off or policing similars. It's much simpler and clearer for the contributor if it's artist exclusive, no gray areas there.
145
« on: March 21, 2019, 12:55 »
It says artist exclusivity some places and video artist exclusivity others. Is this just for video content? I assume it is but they license other types of media as well so just want to make sure I understand it. Time to crunch some numbers but I think pulling my video stuff off SS and iS is probably the right choice.
FWIW I think content exclusivity just won't work, too many people would abuse it by putting similar (almost identical) content on other sites, it would be impossible to police.
146
« on: June 23, 2018, 22:10 »
Is your firmware updated? I seem to remember hearing something about batteries needing to reset, like drain them completely and then recharge, something like that?https://nofilmschool.com/2013/10/canon-product-advisory-lp-e6-dslr-battery
147
« on: June 20, 2018, 23:04 »
Depends. What is earning a lot? How good are the images? Really great images could do well, average ones probably won't earn much if anything.
148
« on: May 29, 2018, 22:04 »
Thank you all for answers. It was unclear for me, is there some "universal" criteria to judge photos you upload. For example I photographed some old building with stone faces on facades, photo gets rejected. Or some statue that gets accepted on some sites, and other rejected because of possible copyright issue.
Like I said earlier it depends on which country you are shooting in. Castles in Europe may have different protections than you would expect in other parts of the world. Basically each country/locality can have its own specific rules. Where was the photo taken (country and was it on private property or somewhere that has entrance tickets for example), who was the creator, when did they make it, when did they die, who owns the building or who manages the property, etc... There are a lot of factors that go into what is acceptable or legal to license. unnonimus, US laws aren't the only ones relevant here.
149
« on: May 23, 2018, 18:05 »
There isn't one answer, it depends on the subject, the country, the age, etc...
150
« on: January 26, 2018, 13:16 »
I use the Kessler http://store.kesslercrane.com/time-lapse-system-tls-starter-bundle.html nice price now too.
I have the 60 inch Kessler Cineslider. it's heavy and too big and heavy to travel with. I love it for easy local work out of my car, but I am looking for a travel Kessler now. Have you huffed your slider around via plane? They do have modular designs but they look flimsy to handle my Second Shooter. Interested in your opinion.
Nope haven't traveled with it, I think I'd need a crew to do that. If you were going to rent a car then I guess it would be doable though, there are hard cases for planes.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 151
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
