Posted
in
Newbies
on
15. September 2006
by willsun
I was just wondering the angle of Crestock. I haven't really been uploading to this site or others, but I like that Crestock pays more and rejects more.
However, I wonder how many photobuyers will pay $6 per photo when they could get the same one on other sites. Many of themicrostock photographers w/ large portfolios on other sites seem to actually be people who snap 100s of photos within minutes, upload, then see what sticks (which isn't a bad practice considering the payout). Most of them may be rejected by Crestock, but a few have got to pass. However, wouldn't a cost-conscious photo-buyer purchase this photo for .25 instead? I'd think if they were after quality above cost, they wouldn't be searching microstock sites in the first place.
Maybe Crestock is attempting to create a middle ground. Maybe they believe that with the plethora of images--since everyone has a digital camera nowadays--photo-buyers will burn out from ordinary quarter stock and resort to something of higher quality for imagery.
RE: Crestock's business model
Fortunately, about a month after I posted this, Crestock seems to have joined the bandwagon of selling RF photos for cheap with their subscription model. I've read that the majority of subscribers download 10 images on average. Crestock can now compete and maybe take business from other microstock companies which place less premium on quality.
Posted: 17. Oct 2006 by willsun
RE: Crestock's business model
Posted: 17. Oct 2006 by Boss
RE: Crestock's business model
I have just joined the site and it has been one of the best (of the site that I have joined) for downloads. Keep up the good work
Posted: 14. Dec 2006 by Nicemonkey