I know it is an old story....and I know there is no solutions...(maybe)....I just want to express my frustration looking at my last 20 sales to realize that 14 of them are subscriptions...70%...and this is not a particular unlucky case.....I see my earnings growing up really really slowly....so I HATE SUBSCRIPTIONS!
I believe that there are always some buyers who make credit sales since they need a few images only and it doesn't sense for them to buy some sub package. So, sub sales increase level and then credit sales help us to make more money. So, I am never upset abot subs.
7d + lenses: Canon EF-S 15-85mm/3.5-5.6 IS USM & EF 100mm/2.8 USM Mac...
Quoted Message: I believe that there are always some buyers who make credit sales since they need a few images only and it doesn`t sense for them to buy some sub package. So, sub sales increase level and then credit sales help us to make more money. So, I am never upset abot subs.
I don't like subs on my level 5 images as there is no benefit at all as there isn't a higher level to be pushed into. Saying that the credit sales make enough commisions here to still make the rpd higher than almost any other site.
Godfer, I see your point. But that would probably drive people away from this site to competitors. The guys using credits should be favored. 1000 3 credit sales is still better than 200 10 credit sales.
Anyway, no use dreaming. :P
55-250mm standard lenses. Dual tube macro flash and external speedlit...
We all wish to earn more money but the essence of stock industry is to offer huge choice of images for a very low price. Such are the rules, though we do understand that the efforts we make shoud be evaluated much more. Don't get upset and enjoy every sale even though it's a subscription.
Subs = contributor going in hole monetarily (at bare minimum expenses figured in seeing this as a business, I would need 48,000 sales per year to break even; never going to happen)
Subs = extreme unfairness to contributor and buyer alike (i.e.: everyone making the same as Yuri yet aren't as good, a small business paying more (credits) than larger one having subs)
Subs = devaluation of work and effort of the photographer
I agree subs should be restricted in size, at lower levels, and less downloads per day/month not high res to deter theft of our work, if subs are here to stay. I mean really how many will use all 9,125 high resolution images downloading 25/day/365 days a year; 45,625 images over 5 years? None! So why do they need them high res and how many are used illegally? We might find some wrongly used, but if people are using them, intentionally or unintentionally w/o license, privately (home, office) or in a small way (local fundraiser, business card, retail store), we will never know....
I see high res downloads as detrimental to DT, Buyers, and Contributors alike! Whoever thought this [subs] up didn't look at the whole picture and the possible ramifications associated with it IMHO or perhaps they just didn't care.... Makes me wonder if stock is even worth it all at this time and just remove all images from sites; concentrate on photography business, especially after reading some of the long time contributor thoughts of late.
Once again, personally, I believe subs should mean a discounted price for all images, at all levels; not one low set price (.35 to .45 cents) for everything, a small business gets a slightly better discount then larger one and sub downloads be restricted to 72ppi/small size to have all info/catalog to find again, when image will definitely be used, they pay for the size/license they want at 300ppi.
I appreciate every sale I get. However, with that being said, I agree that sub sales should be limited to lower level images only. Higher level images make it to the higher level for a reason, extremely good quality and high demand. People should expect to pay more.
Nikon Equipment, Nikon Lenses, Professional Photo Software
I just was given like a homeless person .42 cents today for an image that normally sells for 7$. 7$ still isn't winning the lottery, but seriously? Max Res for the top selling image in my portfolio. I don't have much online, but this is my best selling image.... .42$?
40 of my downloads have been subscription, that's 81% of my total sales!
I would like to see the subscription package scrapped in favour of a membership scheme. Users would sign up for the same periods of 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, however no images would be included within the membership, instead they'd receive a percentage discount from their downloads.
Plucking figures from the air (eg): 20% off level 0 30% off level 1 40% off level 2 50% off level 3 60% off level 4 70% off level 5
This would still offer huge discounts to users, but give back a better return for contributors. It would also mean high level images would gain more revenue than low level images.
Of course a card payment system would need to be set up with a (one click) download facility.
Quoted Message: Godfer, I see your point. But that would probably drive people away from this site to competitors. The guys using credits should be favored. 1000 3 credit sales is still better than 200 10 credit sales.Anyway, no use dreaming. :P
Actually, on DT it can be the other way around. Since the royalty goes up along with the price you would get more from 200 10 credit level 5 sales than 1000 3 credit level 1 sales...
On my last 20 sales I had 9 credit sales of which:
So I'll take the boost from subs, happily pushing my credit sales up. You have to be prepared to sell your images as a commodity, not a work of art, if you are selling in the RF model. If you aren't, then you should take your work off these sites, do your own promotion, and reap the rewards of higher prices and royalties, if you can get the sales. Microstock is all about volume of sales, so if your work suits lower volume, higher revenue, you should sell in another channel.
I do agree that under a sub model, people would still be willing to pay more for a higher level image - but at the same time it was very complicated under DT's older system with multiple sub 'credits' per sale as the total daily count and total number of images included with the packages was variable - and hard to compare to other sites. I do think you could require people buy the jpg to get access to the RAW, guaranteeing 2 subs for a RAW, effectively.
Sure nice fat level 5 credit sales all the time would be great but DT has to compete & I'd still rather get a bunch of sub sales than none. Also remember that we are parting with nothing, the file can continue to generate revenue at zero cost to the contributor.
Quoted Message: Godfer, I see your point. But that would probably drive people away from this site to competitors. The guys using credits should be favored. 1000 3 credit sales is still better than 200 10 credit sales.
Anyway, no use dreaming. :P
I don't think it does drive people away. Of my credit sales I find that a lot more of them are of level 4 and 5 images than they are of the lower level images.
I'm happy with ANY sale. I think it's just cool that someone thought my work was good enough to use. And on the bright side. if you are to travel ..that 42 cents on the other side of the world can buy a few rides on the bus or a tasty snack! I know it's not a lot in North America BUT it does add up.