|
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 - Megastock
26
« on: September 16, 2013, 21:22 »
My main issue has been getting files from the last 5 years on other sites. I took the approach of keeping anything SS wouldn't take as exclusive on DT. But only half my portfolio is on SS. If I could get all my files up they would beat DT.
What for? I don't think exclusive images by non-exclusive contributors get favoured in search results and you only get a little extra for these exclusive files on Dt. If I had 3k images I wouldn't keep half of them on just one site because they didn't get on ss. Plus if you choose again carefully, I'm sure a lot of the ones which didn't get on ss would get on next time, their reviewing process is primarily a human one.
I glossed over some detail - I don't have 1500 exclusive on DT... The ones I chose to leave are higher level on DT.
27
« on: September 16, 2013, 14:41 »
I think I'd argue that you are better off even though your rate of growth is the same as before, in part because you are now (a) insulated against DT losing ground and (b) positioned to benefit from growth at other sites. In particular where you earn more over time at sites like SS, you'll see your income there really go up once you get paid at the highest rate.
You don't say (and don't have portfolio links) how many other sites you now upload to - is it at least the top 4 to 6?
Yes, I'm on all the top 10 (on the right) to some extent. I've never seen a sale at Alamy so haven't spent much more time on it, and have stopped uploading anything to IS. My main issue has been getting files from the last 5 years on other sites. I took the approach of keeping anything SS wouldn't take as exclusive on DT. But only half my portfolio is on SS. If I could get all my files up they would beat DT. But that is the biggest argument for starting out non exclusive - later it takes time to build up at other sites and work through their level system. I'm up levels at DP, FT, and almost to the max level on SS, so it looks like a while before I'll jump another level... Also of interest is that a few sets I've monitored show no obvious site winning for me. One group does better on DT, the next better on SS. I find that interesting as I typically feel like new images don't do as well as they used to on DT, but my data show otherwise.
28
« on: September 16, 2013, 09:00 »
So in September 2011, I left being exclusive at DT, not because I wasn't happy, but mostly because the terms were too exclusive and there were something I wanted to do with my photography that didn't fit within the terms of being a fully exclusive photographer. At the same time, it seemed like I might see gains as a bonus. I'm part time at this, but at this point have tens of thousands of sales with over 3K images. What is interesting (in a bad way), is that looking at my year over year income (graph of the 12 previous month's of income, a month at a time) it is pretty obvious that I've lost money in the transition to being non-exclusive. The arrow below shows the month I dropped exclusivity. I pretty much sat flat in total annual revenue for about a year and now see a steady climb in income. The interesting part is that the slope of the graph is identical to before when I was exclusive. So I basically just put my growth on hold for a year  Of course, I can't say how I'd be doing if I'd stayed, but I still see positive growth on DT, if I compare to any previous non-exclusive month in the last two years. Food for thought  No guarantees you'll do better as a non-exclusive! 
29
« on: September 09, 2013, 00:16 »
I've been with DT from September 2006, and I think they are putting us down more and more every year. I don't think I will stay with them for much longer.
How about you?
My experience seems to be the opposite - they are my best agency, and growing in sales! So no plans to leave here
30
« on: September 03, 2013, 16:54 »
I'm happy to take the extra cash on TIFF credit sales, but I've never quite understood why I should expect more income than my max size revenue if the site converts my JPG to a TIFF... (I do expect to get more if the site charges more, of course, since the royalty is a %) Expecting more for a TIFF is kind of like expecting more for a small web sized jpg because the site has to convert my jpg to that format!
I don't see TIFFs via subs as being any worse than getting max sizes through subs... If we were actually uploading full size TIFFs that would be a completely different story!
31
« on: September 03, 2013, 16:24 »
Been non exclusive (from DT) for a couple of years now, but interesting to see they are still 50% of my revenue. Given that I dropped earnings by about 50% when I left, I can't see it is an obvious choice, one way or the other Certainly not as obvious a choice as some people like to make out! That said, I basically sat flat for a year as DT trailed off and the other sites picked up the slack in revenue. But now, starting to see lots of growth again as I hit higher royalty rates on those sites - but the fact that DT remains at 50% means it is growing for me too!
Interesting....when i dropped exclusivity from DT my revenue dropped at 1/3 from what used to be, and never recovered; despite the fact that my portfolio is now increased by 250%.... SS filled the gap from the first month. Congrats for your success there.
Clearly I am one of the few who seems to be very well suited to sales on DT. I only wish my ratio of sales on Shutterstock to DT matched the ratio in the poll results Fotolia, for me, is outsold by DT by about 20x, yet in the poll results it often / always ranks higher. Just goes to show you that although there are averages, none of us is average!
32
« on: September 03, 2013, 14:48 »
Up 26% over August 2012, up 35% year over year (last 12 months over previous 12 months). Top 5 (% of August revenue): DT 50% SS 31% IS 6% (no longer uploading, but have about 1/5 of my portfolio there) 123 5% FT 2% Been non exclusive (from DT) for a couple of years now, but interesting to see they are still 50% of my revenue. Given that I dropped earnings by about 50% when I left, I can't see it is an obvious choice, one way or the other Certainly not as obvious a choice as some people like to make out! That said, I basically sat flat for a year as DT trailed off and the other sites picked up the slack in revenue. But now, starting to see lots of growth again as I hit higher royalty rates on those sites - but the fact that DT remains at 50% means it is growing for me too!
33
« on: August 28, 2013, 14:38 »
Just checked my SS stats from yesterday ( Tuesday 8-27) and was shocked. It was 4 times what I usually earn on an average weekday. Huge numbers of OD sales for yesterday.
I am wondering if this is a result of the Facebook tie in, or just extremely good luck on my part. FWIW, today looks pretty average.
Anybody else?
Same here. yesterday was about 1/4 of my normal monthly earnings!
35
« on: August 13, 2013, 15:15 »
DT offers a map of locations and contributors can geo-tag their images. I'm not sure if it automatically pulls the exif info for the map...
FYI, it does. My geotagged images get placed on the map automagically.
Which is handy for travel shots, but not so helpful for studio shots
36
« on: August 01, 2013, 15:04 »
It is likely a subscription in the sense that it will be recurring unless the purchaser decides to break the agreement for future months. I can't see any downside here. My RPD is less than $2.00, so if they are offering me $2.00 commission per DL on these purchases then I will gladly take it.
You might call this more of an "On Demand" plan, per SS. On average, it appears to pay out about the same.
Well, your RPD is based on current credit AND sub sales, so if the credit buyers move to this new plan you still have the sub sales bringing you down to lower overall RPD. Whether this is good or bad will greatly depend on whether they draw from credit buyers or subscription buyers... As JSNOVER says, if you cut your credit sales to $2 each, this will definitely decrease revenue. My RPD on credit sales over 9 sales in the last two days totaled $55, and would be $18 if purchased under the new plan. On the flip side, if someone goes from a sub plan to a 10 pack, that is hundreds of sub sales that won't happen (assuming they made SOME use of their subscription) - and the counter argument on DT is that you won't rise through the levels quickly due to subs Sadly, I see this as having a lot more appeal to a credit buyer than a sub buyer. Who is currently buying 750 images a month, with 25 max in a day that actually only needs 5 or 10 files a month? If it draws in current non-buyers, that is good for everyone...
37
« on: July 30, 2013, 19:11 »
Revenue up 25% over last July, down 17% from June 2013, but that is typical for me in July... DT still beating SS for me by a reasonable margin! Can't say I really see any trends in sales on DT that indicate doom and gloom, at least for my portfolio.
38
« on: July 30, 2013, 12:37 »
Interesting - I had a batch of 14 images all rejected this morning for the same lighting/composition reason. At the same time, all 14 accepted on DT (and other sites) so I can't be totally out to lunch on exposure and lighting!
39
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:17 »
don't ask me why but I ended up on this topic (its "old" from November 2012)
so I decided to pop a question, I had the idea that we couldn't do composites or major edits on editorial work, am I wrong?
I think buyers have to assume 'editorial' on microstock means it has been edited, unless definitively stated like on Alamy. Some news agencies would have problems using these shots.
40
« on: June 14, 2013, 10:05 »
Several of my older files with historic high sales (but not nowadays) have been 'promoted' to S+, which will kill them dead. Given a choice, I'd have moved some of these down to the main collection, and kept the rest in S.
Other files which are of very unusual subjects have gone down one or even two collections. They are never going to sell a lot, but I feel should have a premium because of their rarity value.
Not much evidence of vsual editor involvement.
This was what made Photo+ useful, in my opinion. Self selection by the Artist crowdsources the work effort by the very people most likely to know and care which images are promoted!
41
« on: June 12, 2013, 14:36 »
DT continues to be my best site, making up over half my revenue... On an RPI basis SS beats DT for me by 1/3, but I've got 2.2 times more photos on DT. Revenue on DT up 20% over last May. I think the reality is that some of us have styles and portfolios that work well under the DT paradigm and their similars policy, while others don't. Frankly, I'm glad there is at least one site that favors my style or I might never have kept at it
42
« on: April 02, 2013, 12:44 »
DT are a steady #2, they don't have the volumes that SS has but RPD is good (compared to SS, FT and 123 at least). Uniquely, DT makes it possible to go up the levels with a small port as it's based on image performance instead of the brute force and ignorance approach everyone else uses.
That's a nice way to look at it. They used to have 50% for all sales now they start your files at 25% and you can work all the way up to 45%, thanks Dreamstime for making that possible. 
Never said they dont have flaws. I tend not to look at %, just on what I get paid and its the only place I get $5 for an extra small.
I wasn't saying just look at the percentage. You said Dreamstime "makes it possible to go up the levels", they made it possible by cutting royalties in half and now you can go up to 45% instead of starting at 50%. The money is the important thing not moving up levels like some kind of game isn't it?
The money is the important thing isnt that pretty much what I said? I cant comment about historical commission rates as I wasnt around but I get a distinct impression that they all pretty much start off with 50% and then reduce it. The point though is that all sites have mechanisms to increase RPD based on sales mostly brute force and ignorance (10,000 images will get you to the higher RPD values even if you produce crap). DT is the only site offers folks with small ports the opportunity to get to the higher RPD levels and, thus, more money.
123RF, for example, requires a volume of sales across your portfolio. Same with Fotolia, and DP, and IS. IS and 123RF both require ONGOING sales as well, or you can drop back down. Shutterstock is kind of in the middle - you rise in royalties as your total dollar balance increases. While this is sort of based on portfolio size, if you had a small number of very well selling images you'd still make it to the highest 'levels'. The key difference at Dreamstime is that it is file based - so a single file and a few hundred dollars in total sales could net you the highest royalty rate - which is unlike where you would be on other sites with a very small number of files and a strong seller. Of course, the downside is that if you have a very large and strong selling portfolio, it still takes 25 sales on each and every new file to get to the highest rate for that file - meaning the bulk of anyone's images are not at the highest levels, and selling at 25-40% royalties... I much preferred it (of course) when the level system just meant the prices went up, but the agency share was the same (50%). Now that they've tied royalty rates into it as well it isn't the greatest deal for established sellers with new content. I have a hard time being too critical, as DT still provides 60% of my income and gets me the highest RPD of any site I sell at. If money is the thing, DT certainly has my vote - though I understand it is a different story for many... When it comes to royalty rates, they aren't all they once were with 50% across the board and higher paying subs.
43
« on: April 02, 2013, 11:30 »
I'm routinely shocked by the difference between my personal results and the poll results. If I went by the poll results, I might focus on Fotolia and Deposit Photos over Dreamstime! Yet Dreamstime is my best seller by far, and outsold Deposit Photos for me by a factor 45x last month, despite a similar number of images online! Dreamstime has been doing very well for me lately, climbing to more than double my SS sales, and making up 60% of my total sales. The poll results are useful to spot trends at each site, or the industry in general, but are completely useless for predicting your own performance.
44
« on: February 01, 2013, 18:59 »
51.5 % Dreamstime 30.7 % Shutterstock 6.4 % 123RF 4.3 % iStock 2.0 % Fotolia 2.7 % DepositPhotos + other minor amounts... Up about 40% over January 2012 (and Jan 2011 which was my last January as an exclusive) as I enter my 5th year of this. I'm surprised at how well DT continues to do for me as a non-exclusive. Based on the current percentages, doesn't seem to be much advantage for me in going non-exclusive. My results, as usual, are way off the rankings on the MSG poll. Bumped up a notch on the 123RF scale as of today, 2nd best month there... Wish I could elevate my other sites up to reduce Dreamstime to 10% of my total like so many others
46
« on: January 11, 2013, 12:54 »
The Flickr community guidelines https://www.flickr.com/help/guidelines/ state: "Do upload content that you've created." It goes on to say: "If you see photos or videos that youve created in another members photostream, don't panic. This is probably just a misunderstanding and not malicious. A good first step is to contact them via FlickrMail and politely ask them to remove it. If that doesn't work, please file a Notice of Infringement with the Yahoo! Copyright Team who will take it from there."
47
« on: January 09, 2013, 13:46 »
My 2c:
I found it took about 9 months to get back above where I was at with DT before I left. SS didn't have the option to pre-upload (or I didn't know about it) so it is hard to say, but I do feel like uploading regularly on SS helps. New uploads only have exposure for so long - so I might hold back a few weeks of uploads to keep yourself in the search engine... My income on DT dropped to about 50-60% of what it was before, and has never fallen below 48% of my total income across all agencies. So if DT income is 50% of what I make now, and income fell by a similar amount, it is unlikely that I'm doing a whole lot better as a non-exclusive (I'm doing better revenue wise, but the numbers also tell me DT is driving a large part of that). Still, I'm happy I made the choice as it has opened up some other options for me, and in theory I'm less dependent on one site and their decisions. I made more in 2012 than in 2011, despite months of earning less than before as an exclusive - so it did work out (or at least didn't hurt me).
If you follow my thinking, you'll go through a few phases:
1. Initial excitement at getting sales at lots of sites.
2. Boredom as you learn the ropes and get your uploads up.
3. Regret as your monthly income doesn't match what you made before. Anger at a 9c sale.
4. Resolve to work harder and prove that the decision was the right one!
5. Fun, as you realize that some of your ideas that are rejected on DT are accepted elsewhere.
6. Satisfaction when you finally get back to previous income levels (and gloss over the months where you did worse!).
7. Mixed feelings - if you had just put in the extra effort when on DT only, would you be doing better, and spending less time on keywording/uploading and more time on photos?
Bottom line - you'll likely never know if it was the right choice, but if you work hard at it you are likely to continue to increase your income... You are doing well on DT, so unfortunately that means (in my opinion) that you are not going to see the "promised" 10x gains that others talk about. #4 in my list is the important one - if you step up your effort you WILL earn more, exclusive or non-exclusive. As a non-exclusive it is a bit easier to step up the effort as pretty much every image you create will get accepted somewhere and keep you going. If you decide that you will do better as a non-exclusive you will if you work towards that goal!
Great post Megastock! Although I have never been exclusive, this sounds like a very good blueprint for what to expect as an indie to me
Just wanted to add, if it hasn't been brought up before, that other sites do not have the "too many similars" rejection that DT does, so Brett may find that he can upload larger numbers of images from past shoots. That should boost his portfolio size considerably.
Thanks Interestingly, I have not found it to be the case that DT's similar policy results in few images. It could be that I happen to have a style that doesn't run me in the policy, but in the last three months my AR on DT has been 100%, and lower on every other site. Since I went indie, I've tracked a few batches or time periods and there is no conclusion I can draw on how to maximize income. For example, one batch of photos resulted in 55 images online at DT and 28 at SS, and DT has earned me 60% more consistently for 9 months now. Yet a different batch (my photos from summer 2012) are the opposite - 3x the earnings on SS. Unlike many who post on these boards, I seem to still be quite successful on DT, and have a hard time getting a foothold on the other sites. My income on SS has risen steadily for a year then fell in half last month. Looking at poll results on the right, my first 3 would be DT, SS and 123RF - so I'm clearly not the typical person here I personally think that those who get their start on DT like I did, have done a lot better there than the average person does, and learned to work around the similar policy, etc. That turns out to not translate very well to other sites, so to really do well as a indie it takes a real change in your style. I think Brett will find he ends up at 50% to 100% more income after a year or two if it works at it... But who knows ? I left some of my older best sellers on DT as Exclusive files, so that may be helping my search placement to some degree. Same goes for keywording. As an exclusive you can really tailor your keywords and so on for maximum benefit, but as an indie it is a tradeoff between maximum earning and time spent. DT keywording habits don't lend themselves to other sites as they don't support keyword phrases, and you have to include plurals and alternate spellings. Some sites care about order, etc. So even if you did DT with IPTC, you probably have a lot of work ahead of you. That is the other danger of uploading everything to SS up front. I think you want to be * sure you understand good keywording on SS before you commit your whole portfolio. In case anyone cares, I've got about 3000 images up at DT, 1000-2000 at most other sites now. I'm not hiding, but just prefer to not have my musing on MSG appear in a Google search on my name
48
« on: January 08, 2013, 13:47 »
Thanks all I'm still torn and feel I have hit a bit of a wall in the creativity area. I'm pretty sure that older files at DT get a lesser ranking in the search results so these files would be better off elsewhere plus I'm pretty sure that "too many similar" effects your image placements for the accepted similars, again this would be no issue with many agencies. Then there is the tax stuff to do, I guess most agencies like DT need all forms sorting before your stuff is for sale.... I'm pretty sure I'm going to make the jump but the big question is when. I think my first step is to join SS ( which I have but need to sort ID and tax out ), then spend some time there to get a feel as I build a port off line, will see how that goes before going live.
Does anyone know if building this off line port can go against you, I mean if newer images get a kind of showcase placement, could my offline port miss this whilst they just sit there and when they do become live have missed the boat. Stuff to do and sort, will report back
My 2c: I found it took about 9 months to get back above where I was at with DT before I left. SS didn't have the option to pre-upload (or I didn't know about it) so it is hard to say, but I do feel like uploading regularly on SS helps. New uploads only have exposure for so long - so I might hold back a few weeks of uploads to keep yourself in the search engine... My income on DT dropped to about 50-60% of what it was before, and has never fallen below 48% of my total income across all agencies. So if DT income is 50% of what I make now, and income fell by a similar amount, it is unlikely that I'm doing a whole lot better as a non-exclusive (I'm doing better revenue wise, but the numbers also tell me DT is driving a large part of that). Still, I'm happy I made the choice as it has opened up some other options for me, and in theory I'm less dependent on one site and their decisions. I made more in 2012 than in 2011, despite months of earning less than before as an exclusive - so it did work out (or at least didn't hurt me). If you follow my thinking, you'll go through a few phases: 1. Initial excitement at getting sales at lots of sites. 2. Boredom as you learn the ropes and get your uploads up. 3. Regret as your monthly income doesn't match what you made before. Anger at a 9c sale. 4. Resolve to work harder and prove that the decision was the right one! 5. Fun, as you realize that some of your ideas that are rejected on DT are accepted elsewhere. 6. Satisfaction when you finally get back to previous income levels (and gloss over the months where you did worse!). 7. Mixed feelings - if you had just put in the extra effort when on DT only, would you be doing better, and spending less time on keywording/uploading and more time on photos? Bottom line - you'll likely never know if it was the right choice, but if you work hard at it you are likely to continue to increase your income... You are doing well on DT, so unfortunately that means (in my opinion) that you are not going to see the "promised" 10x gains that others talk about. #4 in my list is the important one - if you step up your effort you WILL earn more, exclusive or non-exclusive. As a non-exclusive it is a bit easier to step up the effort as pretty much every image you create will get accepted somewhere and keep you going. If you decide that you will do better as a non-exclusive you will if you work towards that goal!
49
« on: January 08, 2013, 11:48 »
I knew commissions on 123RF were dropping, but had no idea how much until this morning (scroll to the right):  !!! According to my stats someone bought a sub, and returned a sub, but it totals to $0.00 in the downloads section - not $0.07 to the negative! My guess is that the refund was for a sub purchased in Dec at the higher price... Still - looks pretty funny As for sales, I'm already at more than 50% compared to last January, and about 1/4 of December - so sales volume seems similar to me so far.
50
« on: December 14, 2012, 15:46 »
Thanks 
I take it I won't get any kind of royalties from it ? Not really that bothered as it certainly adds weight to my portfolio.
Not any more than your $0.38 from Shutterstock no. Unless they needed to buy an extended license that is, then you should see $28
Shouldn't they need to buy an EL if they sell the poster? From SS Standard terms: "Standard -- print run limited to 250,000. Posters must combine words with the Images and must be used to promote the sale of products other than the posters, etc., containing the Images" And the EL: "Incorporated in merchandise for resale or distribution, including without limitation, clothing, artwork, magnets, posters, calendars, mugs and mousepads" Seems to me as a poster for a movie they can go with a Standard License, but if they sell the posters they need an EL. Bottom line I'm surprised that for a movie this large they wouldn't just go for ELs to cover themselves later... In any case, fun to find that one!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
I love Nick's 'understanding' of how to use this camera, and Chris' constant counterpoint...
