Jump to content

balajisrinivasan

Members
  • Content Count

    753
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by balajisrinivasan

  1. "Deeply a part of creator community" indeed. You've been selling Adobe in pretty much every post you make here these days. Maybe because SS actually has a functioning forum as opposed to the agency you're championing. You need to get out of microstock forums and into the photography world to see how Adobe is as much a villain for photographers after its extortionate CC subscriptions as SS is for slashing pay for contributors. Most hobbyist photographers (including myself) who don't sell anything on AS just can't afford to pay 150$ a year perpetually to use a piece of software. A lot of ph
  2. With @geogif leaving, we lost much of the humour on the forums. Now it's purely functional (if that). Which is why it's sad and we need him back. But someone needs to listen for that to happen ๐Ÿ˜•
  3. Same... 1000 plus lifetime downloads on SS vs. 60 on AS. Even comparing only the non-editorial content on both platforms, 480 on SS vs 60 on AS. So while the RPD on AS is twice the RPD here, it is not a meaningful alternative, at least for the content I upload.
  4. Too expensive in my opinion, especially with the way the stock market is at the moment. If you can afford it just to keep the hobby going, it's a pretty handy cam to have. I have a Rx100 3 that goes with me everywhere and it's certainly a lot better and more versatile than my phone camera (a high end Samsung). The VII will be in a different league altogether.
  5. I do appreciate Adobe giving their software away for free to contributors who sell. But I hardly ever sell on AS, one of the big mysteries. In one and a half years, I've sold a little over 50 pictures on AS as opposed to almost a 1000 on SS. I've made more than 5 times the AS money on IS and even DT has given me double the downloads and dollars. So either I must be doing something terribly wrong over there or the algorithm just doesn't like me too much.
  6. Sales bad. Reviews bad. Money bad. All bad.
  7. Well, I've discontinued my CC account. Can't afford it anymore on the microstock cents. Thankfully, the Luminar (bought for half the yearly fee of Adobe CC a couple of years ago) is a one time purchase which will work for a lifetime. So don't really need anything else.
  8. As of this day, I made more money in January 2020 when my port was only 3 months old and had less than 500 images than I did this month with over 3000 images. Good times.
  9. For me, it's practically a lottery but I play it because, well, I don't really have a life and my pictures don't sell much anywhere else. One of my best-selling images was rejected 7 times before it was accepted. At least, one of their competitors who also sell images for a few cents don't have any illusions about quality and would take just about anything. With Shutterstock currently, for your image to get accepted on the first go, it needs to be some kind of premium noiseless sparkling good image and they would only give you 10 cents if it sells. Quite a bargain that.
  10. Nice! I had an ODD for 1.33. We gettin' rich.
  11. So what do you do with the images you don't upload?
  12. Yeah... downloads have been realllly slow so far. I thought things would pick up post 10th but they haven't. This combined with level one is a real blow. So far it has been way worse than Jan last year when my port was just 3 months old. Hope things pick up ๐Ÿ˜•
  13. If you can't draw (and have no inclination to learn), can't get shots in focus or get them right (and have no desire to correct) and aren't "artistically inclined", why are you selling pictures in the first place? Especially using long-winded digital tracing methods that are only going make your images look worse? I mean, there are far better ways to make money or waste your time.
  14. Like I said in my post, for generic oversaturated images of mountains and beaches and architecture and people and everyday things, of course, I agree with you, they're competition and they would likely win. But for a lot of specific categories, like species of insects, fungi, wild animals and locations of, say, a town in Bavaria or a temple in Thailand or a village in India or a particular shop in a city, the free sites are practically useless because they don't have either the range of available images or the rigorous keywording and SEO that comes with the best microstock sites. A lot of
  15. The microstock industry isn't going to collapse. Websites, blogs, news corporations, ad agencies, everyone needs new images every day. So unless that entire sphere is going to collapse, microstock will be up and running because it still offers a good, affordable deal and variety as opposed to traditional stock. Yes, free sites exist but they aren't competitors to microstock. The emphasis on the free sites is more on beauty than usefulness. So yeah, if you have a port full of random beautiful mountain landscapes and beaches and people, you might get affected. But if a customer is looking f
  16. One download for me too... although it was a picture I never thought would sell on account of there being thousands like it on SS (and shot way better than mine). So there's that.
  17. Yay... I feel good about being at the same level as Africa Studio. If only for half a day (probably).
  18. December 2020 was very close to being my BME, beating even my best months in pre-rate cut times. So not an entirely bad way to end a terrible year. It also makes me look forward to 2021. I'm not as pessimistic as some of the others on the forum and I do sincerely hope for good sales this year. Happy new year, everyone, hope you'll have a great 2021 as well
  19. I get about 70 percent of my cellphone photos accepted. And all are taken by a Galaxy S7, a smartphone that's now about over 5 years old. But typically I reduce resolution and submit to cover some of the noise/artifact issues.
  20. Well, big corporate houses and publications with annual subscriptions make for the majority of Shutterstock's customers and Shutterstock's current business model caters almost exclusively to them because that's where they see profits. I've seen a LOT of 10-14 cent sales this month, at a rate faster than any other time this year, which is probably an indicator that no such boycott exists from big customers. If independent creators who would normally buy an ODD or SOD are boycotting and going for other alternatives, I doubt it puts any serious dent in Shutterstock's domination of the market and
  21. Right now, I think there's more money to be made exchanging leftover bottles for a few cents than selling images on MS markets.
  22. As for the topic at hand, I do see some rejections but only a very few of them are unjustified. Mostly, the rejections happen when I'm taking a gamble with a picture that I know is not all there technically. They would have been accepted a few months ago when the reviews were more lenient. So yeah, I think they've become a bit stricter. I have no complaints. There are other sites where they get accepted and sell.
  23. I use Snapseed for quick edits and posting to social media like instagram and facebook. But haven't used it for stock yet because I don't see a noise reduction feature. How do manage noise with snapseed?
×
×
  • Create New...