What would compel you to sell your footage

[Aerial Entertainment Studios]

Hi everyone,

Many of you have experience in distributing your content through stock footage sites like Shutterstock and Pond 5. As you may be aware, I am building a platform that focuses exclusively on high quality exotic aerial content; and I absolutely intend on shaking things up in the stock imagery industry.

For those of you who currently sell through stock sites, I would like to know what elements you would like to see improved in the overall experience in order to wow you.

Which components are really critical to you?

For example:

- flexibility to opt out whenever you want?
- ability to add/remove content at will?
- receiving a higher % for each sale made (the industry standard is 25%-40%)
- not being locked in for 1-3 years
- knowing quickly if your footage is approved or not
- etc.

Your feedback will help me as I do final tweaks to the user experience.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Cheers

Patrice

 

[Aerial Entertainment Studios]

Ok perhaps I rephrase the question:

- What would compel you enough to start selling your footage through a distribution platform?

This is essential feedback that will allow me to finalise this project. I believe to have nailed down a compelling offer for artists and content creators (of which I am part), but hearing it from you first hand is better.

Any thoughts?

 

[The Editor]

Almost twelve thousand members on the forum, nearly one hundred views of your thread/post and only one reply (which was you own!) - I think you might have your answer there.
Are you sure this compelling offer/business idea is as compelling as you think it is?

 

[Aerial Entertainment Studios]

For some reason, this forum is not picking up on the post. I'm getting great feedback on other forums which is strange as this is my go to resource and people usually respond.

Answering your question, yes I am 100% sure the proposal we have is simply unique in the marketplace and offers flexibility and rewards to content creators like no other stock footage site. No one comes even close in fact.

The reason is simple. The platform was built out of passion by a content creator, as opposed to someone looking to make a quick buck.

More feedback would be really appreciated. I can't believe I'm getting more traction on the Yuneec and 3dr forums.

Cheers guys.

Patrice

 

[Kilrah]

Probably because stock is just mostly appealing to people who are not really in the business i.e. people who own machines mainly "for fun" and who think it can be a way to get a bit of cash out of footage they shot while flying for no particular purpose (in practice, 99% of your shots will never interest anyone). There's most likely much fewer of those with an Inspire than with the other platforms.

People who are really into it tend to mostly work on contract jobs they've have been hired for to shoot specific stuff - i.e. where you know you're being paid, usually well, instead of losing their time to go shoot random stuff with zero guarantee they'll ever get anything for it.

I'm not interested in spending days shooting stuff potentially for nothing, the people I work with on exciting projects value having their own original content and would never look at stock, and as they want original content they also want exclusivity so that I couldn't offer it for sale on a stock platform or use it anywhere beyond making a demo reel for my own business.
IMO stock for video (much more than for photo) is usually the meeting place of "bottom-feeders", content creators who are not good or dedicated enough to get contract jobs, and buyers who are looking for the cheapest possible option rather than good quality content that would be interesting both to create and for the end viewers to enjoy. You can easily use a stock photo to illustrate an article, but telling a story in video with generic footage just doesn't cut it. Obviously it's only a personal opinion.

 

[Aerial Entertainment Studios]

Probably because stock is just mostly appealing to people who are not really in the business i.e. people who own machines mainly "for fun" and who think it can be a way to get a bit of cash out of footage they shot while flying for no particular purpose (in practice, 99% of your shots will never interest anyone). There's most likely much fewer of those with an Inspire than with the other platforms.

People who are really into it tend to mostly work on contract jobs they've have been hired for to shoot specific stuff - i.e. where you know you're being paid, usually well, instead of losing their time to go shoot random stuff with zero guarantee they'll ever get anything for it.

I'm not interested in spending days shooting stuff potentially for nothing, the people I work with on exciting projects value having their own original content and would never look at stock, and as they want original content they also want exclusivity so that I couldn't offer it for sale on a stock platform or use it anywhere beyond making a demo reel for my own business.
IMO stock for video (much more than for photo) is usually the meeting place of "bottom-feeders", content creators who are not good or dedicated enough to get contract jobs, and buyers who are looking for the cheapest possible option rather than good quality content that would be interesting both to create and for the end viewers to enjoy. You can easily use a stock photo to illustrate an article, but telling a story in video with generic footage just doesn't cut it. Obviously it's only a personal opinion.

I agree with you on the fact that content is king. If the product offering is diluted then the whole concept of stock looses its value. That is why we are specialising in artistic sequences of exotic destinations that showcase the beauty of the planet. There is a huge market for that and a lot of money to be made for artists and filmmakers (as opposed to the guy shooting stuff for no apparent reason).

The real problem is how the stock industry compensates those who do the work. The business model is to milk the artist and reap profits from someone else's work.

We want to completely turn this around and give money back to those who deserve it: content creators. That's why we have a compensation system that pays artists up to 70% of the sale price, which is totally unheard of in the stock imagery industry. Add to that total flexibility with no long term commitments and you have a winning formula.

Have a look at what our site is all about and you will see we are in the super premium price range. None of that 'bottom feeder' stuff as you would put it.

Have a look: www.aerial-entertainment-studios.com

Cheers

Patrice

 

[Kilrah]

The real problem is how the stock industry compensates those who do the work. The business model is to milk the artist and reap profits from someone else's work.

Well not necessarily, but there's a point where it isn't interesting to get stock anymore and you'd be better off just creating the content yourself. That point is low, so people ready to buy stock will only want to buy if it's cheap, and that's why stock mostly works for bottom level.

Have a look at what our site is all about and you will see we are in the super premium price range. None of that 'bottom feeder' stuff as you would put it.

Well good luck with it. To me your decision to go "premium price range" just means you'll struggle to find anyone ready to pay that price.

Part of the problem is the "rigidity" of a stock platform, it's nice you post 1min clips for $1k, but 90% of people won't put a 1-min aerial clip of a given subject in their production. I'd probably need to buy 10 of the clips and take 5-10 secs of each, which would cost $10k, and is completely uninteresting as for that price I could get someone to go shoot exactly what I want.

 

[Aerial Entertainment Studios]

Well not necessarily, but there's a point where it isn't interesting to get stock anymore and you'd be better off just creating the content yourself. That point is low, so people ready to buy stock will only want to buy if it's cheap, and that's why stock mostly works for bottom level.


Well good luck with it. To me your decision to go "premium price range" just means you'll struggle to find anyone ready to pay that price.

Part of the problem is the "rigidity" of a stock platform, it's nice you post 1min clips for $1k, but 90% of people won't put a 1-min aerial clip of a given subject in their production. I'd probably need to buy 10 of the clips and take 5-10 secs of each, which would cost $10k, and is completely uninteresting as for that price I could get someone to go shoot exactly what I want.

Agree, which is why certain flexibility around pricing is required.

Just sold 8 clips yesterday to a French TV company making a documentary on Bali. Don't forget that you can't possibly send a crew and equipment for 8 days in a destination like this for $10k. We sold the clips for $500 each which was a complete bargain for them. A win win situation for all involved. It's all a question of perspective.

We need to think big. There is a world of opportunity out there for creative filmmakers and we want to act as the conduit between creators and customers.