Comments for Microstockgroup Blog - The meeting place for microstock photographers http://blog.microstockgroup.com Microstock forum highlights, microstock tips, and industry news and reviews Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:11:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Licensing Images In Today’s Market by gemmy http://blog.microstockgroup.com/licensing-images-in-todays-market/comment-page-1/#comment-1460 gemmy Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:11:39 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1108#comment-1460 Thank you Mr Jim for sharing you ideas and experience with us. Like your other articles even this one helps in understanding the trends in stock/microstock sites. Thank you Mr Jim for sharing you ideas and experience with us. Like your other articles even this one helps in understanding the trends in stock/microstock sites.

]]> Comment on Earnings vs Portfolio Size – Microstock Survey 2010 by Andrej Verbic http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-income-vs-portfolio-size/comment-page-1/#comment-1458 Andrej Verbic Fri, 03 Feb 2012 15:47:25 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1064#comment-1458 Hello. Finally I have an opportunity to thank Tyler for his work. Tyler's surveys have played an important part in my desk research since they approach the market from contributor's point of view. While good statistics are available from various agencies there's still a lot unknown about the factors which influence success of a contributor. Using Tyler's findings as a starting point in an attempt to clarify this, another survey was designed with a slightly different approach. "Survey on commercial application of visual arts" is available on http://www.va-survey.biz Please take part in this survey. The results will be shared with all the participants. Hello.

Finally I have an opportunity to thank Tyler for his work. Tyler’s surveys have played an important part in my desk research since they approach the market from contributor’s point of view. While good statistics are available from various agencies there’s still a lot unknown about the factors which influence success of a contributor.

Using Tyler’s findings as a starting point in an attempt to clarify this, another survey was designed with a slightly different approach.

“Survey on commercial application of visual arts” is available on
http://www.va-survey.biz

Please take part in this survey. The results will be shared with all the participants.

]]> Comment on Earnings vs Portfolio Size – Microstock Survey 2010 by stefan http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-income-vs-portfolio-size/comment-page-1/#comment-1457 stefan Wed, 01 Feb 2012 23:22:45 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1064#comment-1457 I want to share another thought with you. Think the above the other way around... The micro agencys posses no content. They own nothing of what they sell. And their service is absolutly exchangable. The shooters own the content. :-) ! Even if a big player shuts down nothing would harm the deliverers. I mean nothing at all. The missing downloads would be done on one of the remaining plattforms (this could even make you more money?! Upgrading...). If the community (the real community; the 30% who generate 70% of the downloads) would (conform to their contracts dictated by the agency) decide to completly withdraw their content at one agency at one (twittered,faced and bloged) date - this agency would shut down within days, maybe months. Gone and leaving nothing behind but the remaing shocked microstock agencys. Do you find yourself smiling at this point? ;-) stefan I want to share another thought with you. Think the above the other way around… The micro agencys posses no content. They own nothing of what they sell. And their service is absolutly exchangable. The shooters own the content. :-) ! Even if a big player shuts down nothing would harm the deliverers. I mean nothing at all. The missing downloads would be done on one of the remaining plattforms (this could even make you more money?! Upgrading…).

If the community (the real community; the 30% who generate 70% of the downloads) would (conform to their contracts dictated by the agency) decide to completly withdraw their content at one agency at one (twittered,faced and bloged) date – this agency would shut down within days, maybe months. Gone and leaving nothing behind but the remaing shocked microstock agencys.

Do you find yourself smiling at this point? ;-)

stefan

]]> Comment on Earnings vs Portfolio Size – Microstock Survey 2010 by stefan http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-income-vs-portfolio-size/comment-page-1/#comment-1456 stefan Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:38:09 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1064#comment-1456 The only way to stay competative for microstock agencies is to have more exclusive contributors who get a fair return. If the costumers find the same picture on different sites (like it is right now), they choose the cheapest one. That leads to the lowprice battle that we see today. BUT this is not going to work for the future because high quality pictures are expensive to produce. The producers risk of not getting his investment back rises every day. I would never ever take the risk of a high end production for the microstock market and I guess even Yuri gets his wakeup call these days. (And he gets camerastuff and lighting gear for free... ) To establish his own stockagency is not a result of greed but a nessesary step to keep his company running (having a staff of around 30-40 people). Right now the lowprice battle goes on and will as long as the really good shooters in the business drop out because it does not pay off anymore. Quality and sells will drop. It will be very interesting to see what happens next but right now we see more and more better contitions for exclusive content. There has to be a breakeven in the close future when it becomes defenitly better paying to stick exclusivly to one agency than to spread ones pictures across all agencys. And then the agency with the best conditions for the producers (us :-) will win. Maybe we will see a split - a "trash" foto segment that will be very cheap and a premium segment with higher prices and quality content (still microstock). 2/3 of all microstock content today is trash. I wonder why the agencys pay to host and manage this non selling amateur ballast. Why keep a picture in stock that did not sell at least 10 times in 2 years??? Maybe we will observe a exclusive-nomadism - be exclusive to an agency for 1-2 years and then change :-) and go to the next one - exklusive again of course. Maybe Yuri comes up with: Come ( ONLY exclusive) all you tired and poor but good stockshooters. Here at my All-Stock-agency I pay fair prices for all segments (except trash ;-) be loved and paid well. And let s watch the greedy bloodsuckers die slowly and painfully while we all make business. If he would be able to get the 30 best selling micro-shooters and the mayority of the quality micro deliverers the (micro)stockworld would change in an amount we can hardly imagine today... Hey yuri, why not? I ll be the first to sign up!!! stefan The only way to stay competative for microstock agencies is to have more exclusive contributors who get a fair return. If the costumers find the same picture on different sites (like it is right now), they choose the cheapest one. That leads to the lowprice battle that we see today. BUT this is not going to work for the future because high quality pictures are expensive to produce. The producers risk of not getting his investment back rises every day. I would never ever take the risk of a high end production for the microstock market and I guess even Yuri gets his wakeup call these days. (And he gets camerastuff and lighting gear for free… ) To establish his own stockagency is not a result of greed but a nessesary step to keep his company running (having a staff of around 30-40 people).
Right now the lowprice battle goes on and will as long as the really good shooters in the business drop out because it does not pay off anymore. Quality and sells will drop. It will be very interesting to see what happens next but right now we see more and more better contitions for exclusive content. There has to be a breakeven in the close future when it becomes defenitly better paying to stick exclusivly to one agency than to spread ones pictures across all agencys. And then the agency with the best conditions for the producers (us :-) will win. Maybe we will see a split – a “trash” foto segment that will be very cheap and a premium segment with higher prices and quality content (still microstock). 2/3 of all microstock content today is trash. I wonder why the agencys pay to host and manage this non selling amateur ballast. Why keep a picture in stock that did not sell at least 10 times in 2 years???
Maybe we will observe a exclusive-nomadism – be exclusive to an agency for 1-2 years and then change :-) and go to the next one – exklusive again of course.
Maybe Yuri comes up with: Come ( ONLY exclusive) all you tired and poor but good stockshooters. Here at my All-Stock-agency I pay fair prices for all segments (except trash ;-) be loved and paid well. And let s watch the greedy bloodsuckers die slowly and painfully while we all make business. If he would be able to get the 30 best selling micro-shooters and the mayority of the quality micro deliverers the (micro)stockworld would change in an amount we can hardly imagine today… Hey yuri, why not? I ll be the first to sign up!!!

stefan

]]> Comment on iStockphoto 2012: Semi-Annual Analysis by jill http://blog.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-2012-semi-annual-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-1448 jill Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:50:56 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1129#comment-1448 Thanks for the information. It can seem a bit daunting, since I have recently become a contributor. However, to know the numbers is a great help in order to know the hard work ahead of me. Thank you! Thanks for the information. It can seem a bit daunting, since I have recently become a contributor. However, to know the numbers is a great help in order to know the hard work ahead of me.
Thank you!

]]> Comment on Microstock Survey – 2009 Results by Tyler Olson http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-survey-2009-results/comment-page-1/#comment-1436 Tyler Olson Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:50:10 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=554#comment-1436 perhaps you are ending up at the blog? MicrostockGroup has a few areas. Blog -> http://blog.microstockgroup.com Forum (main site) -> http://www.microstockgroup.com Wiki -> http://wiki.microstockgroup.com perhaps you are ending up at the blog? MicrostockGroup has a few areas.

Blog -> http://blog.microstockgroup.com
Forum (main site) -> http://www.microstockgroup.com
Wiki -> http://wiki.microstockgroup.com

]]> Comment on Microstock Survey – 2009 Results by alfiesaden http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-survey-2009-results/comment-page-1/#comment-1432 alfiesaden Wed, 04 Jan 2012 10:20:46 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=554#comment-1432 hello - is it just me !! can any one explain why when i type in the firefox browser "blog.microstockgroup.com" i get a different site yet whe i type it in google its ok? could this be a bug in my system or is any one else having same probs ? alfie saden hello – is it just me !! can any one explain why when i type in the firefox browser “blog.microstockgroup.com” i get a different site yet whe i type it in google its ok? could this be a bug in my system or is any one else having same probs ?
alfie saden

]]> Comment on Earnings vs Portfolio Size – Microstock Survey 2010 by Tyler Olson http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-income-vs-portfolio-size/comment-page-1/#comment-1431 Tyler Olson Tue, 03 Jan 2012 08:02:02 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1064#comment-1431 The median will never be close to the average for microstock photographers income. The income breakdown is on a long tail curve, not a bell curve. If we have 10 microstockers, their incomes would look like (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 10, 20, 40, 100) The median of that range is 1.5, the avg is 7.8). I acknowledge that there are probably some bogus numbers in the survey but the overall majority are valid. I also think it is dangerous to start picking out certain answers saying they simply can't be true, simply because they don't fall along a certain curve. Take a look at PhotoDune's top selling authors. <a href="http://photodune.net/author/top_authors" rel="nofollow">http://photodune.net/author/top_authors</a>. Everyone with 1000 plus sales has 7000+ images.. some 19,000 images, then comes solarseven with 246 images and just as many sales. Would his stats look out of place if he was answering the poll? Or take a look at the iStock charts and sort by downloads. http://istockcharts.multimedia.de/ Most people with top sales have thousands (4,000-16,000) of files, Yet the artist in 16th spot, out of 38,000 members has only 774 files. Just becomes someone doesn't fall on the curve doesn't mean they answered the survey with bogus numbers. The median will never be close to the average for microstock photographers income. The income breakdown is on a long tail curve, not a bell curve. If we have 10 microstockers, their incomes would look like (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 10, 20, 40, 100) The median of that range is 1.5, the avg is 7.8). I acknowledge that there are probably some bogus numbers in the survey but the overall majority are valid. I also think it is dangerous to start picking out certain answers saying they simply can’t be true, simply because they don’t fall along a certain curve.

Take a look at PhotoDune’s top selling authors. http://photodune.net/author/top_authors. Everyone with 1000 plus sales has 7000+ images.. some 19,000 images, then comes solarseven with 246 images and just as many sales. Would his stats look out of place if he was answering the poll? Or take a look at the iStock charts and sort by downloads. http://istockcharts.multimedia.de/ Most people with top sales have thousands (4,000-16,000) of files, Yet the artist in 16th spot, out of 38,000 members has only 774 files. Just becomes someone doesn’t fall on the curve doesn’t mean they answered the survey with bogus numbers.

]]> Comment on Earnings vs Portfolio Size – Microstock Survey 2010 by lagereek http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-income-vs-portfolio-size/comment-page-1/#comment-1430 lagereek Tue, 03 Jan 2012 07:25:05 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1064#comment-1430 Does this concern ALL kinds of stock-photography? because if it does, I beat the avg exclusive by five lightyears, in earnings. If its only micro, well then its to be expected, with all the Vettas and other collections, they should earn much more, or else, whats the point? Does this concern ALL kinds of stock-photography? because if it does, I beat the avg exclusive by five lightyears, in earnings.

If its only micro, well then its to be expected, with all the Vettas and other collections, they should earn much more, or else, whats the point?

]]> Comment on Earnings vs Portfolio Size – Microstock Survey 2010 by oldsalt19 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/microstock-income-vs-portfolio-size/comment-page-1/#comment-1429 oldsalt19 Mon, 02 Jan 2012 20:50:47 +0000 http://blog.microstockgroup.com/?p=1064#comment-1429 I hate to say this, but most of your data does not make a lot of sense. Firstly, the median (midpoint in a set of numbers) and the average (arithmetic mean) should be somewhat close to each other if you are working with a population with any sort of normal distribution. A Median Earnings: USD 2,000 and Avg Earnings: USD 9,265 means that your data is so skewed that your conclusions are not meaningful. Photographers who claim to have about 1000 images on line with an annual income of almost a half million dollars per year from these images can distort the real situation considerably, regardless of my disbelief. You need to calculate an average deviation for your results and throw out data (both average and median) that are disqualified by not being within the standard deviation set. This will leave you with a body of at least believable results with which you may be able to extract your conclusions. I hate to say this, but most of your data does not make a lot of sense. Firstly, the median (midpoint in a set of numbers) and the average (arithmetic mean) should be somewhat close to each other if you are working with a population with any sort of normal distribution. A Median Earnings: USD 2,000 and Avg Earnings: USD 9,265 means that your data is so skewed that your conclusions are not meaningful. Photographers who claim to have about 1000 images on line with an annual income of almost a half million dollars per year from these images can distort the real situation considerably, regardless of my disbelief. You need to calculate an average deviation for your results and throw out data (both average and median) that are disqualified by not being within the standard deviation set. This will leave you with a body of at least believable results with which you may be able to extract your conclusions.

]]>