Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: Low-Res Suscriptions?

Low-Res Suscriptions? 1 year, 9 months ago #1772

  • Piedra
  • OFFLINE
  • Microstock Newbie
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: 0
Hello,
I'm surprised that none of the big stock images sites have an option for subscription for low-res images.

I'd assume there would be a huge market for low res images, sites that just need 400pixel wide, or less.

For example, Photos.com has a yearly subscription with a monthly $37.95 plan, but it's includes 2290 x 1527 px, I'd be more than happy with just their 506 x 338 px sizes, at a somewhat proportionate price. Shutterstock does not even come close to a plan for the million of single web owners and blog editors.

It seems there are no stock agencies with plans for the small website owners, who would like to purchase pics but dont need high-resolution images. Am I missing something? Why are the needs of the people like me (that I know is a lot) being ignored by all stock agencies?

Thanks

Re:Low-Res Suscriptions? 1 year, 9 months ago #1773

I think the problem happens when they try and pay the photography even less than they currently do for subscription sales. Most agencies pay about $.20 for subscription sales to the image seller. Others like Pixmac pay even less I think.. Due to the savings to the buyer (especially if they download their limit) this could cause problems. I think I would complain if they started paying me $.10 an image in order to give the buyers a smaller deal. Just my thoughts.
Last Edit: 1 year, 9 months ago by Administrator.

Re:Low-Res Suscriptions? 1 year, 9 months ago #1774

  • Piedra
  • OFFLINE
  • Microstock Newbie
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: 0
But there again, maybe 3000 photos sold at $.10 might earn the photographer more than 300 photos at 0.50, and not only that, it's not exclusive.

Just because you open up to the huge market of smaller sites that would like to do things legally without stealing pics, doesn't mean you would stop selling those high-definition pics at a more expensive cost.

I see it as a different, additional market stock agency's are ignoring. Probably the reason why site's are stealing so many pictures: site owners are not finding any stock agencies that offer them what they want at a price they can afford. And with the millions of sites coming out every week, I cant understand it, it seems the system has still not finished adapting to the modern internet times.
Last Edit: 1 year, 9 months ago by Piedra.

Re:Low-Res Suscriptions? 1 year, 9 months ago #1778

at a somewhat proportionate price. Shutterstock does not even come close to a plan for the million of single web owners and blog editors.
It seems there are no stock agencies with plans for the small website owners, who would like to purchase pics but dont need high-resolution images.



Photo Gifts
  • Page:
  • 1
Time to create page: 0.33 seconds