IXth MAN wrote:

Somebody does it, otherwise the site wouldn't be thriving, well, if it is.

9th

Yes, I'm skeptical about the business model, and whether the site is doing well at all.

ddtphoto wrote:
Who's going to pay a dollar to vote on a picture?

That's right. I was invited for a guest account. Then I found out I have to pay to vote. My thought was WTF? I have had people to pay me voting for them, not the other way around.

paul best  wrote:
I dont understand why models dont move to canada  the model owns the right to photos . lol

hahah what?

IXth MAN wrote:
That's what I found on a model's profile.

If I'm correct, I believe the way that site works is you get your money from votes. Each vote being worth $1. Supposedly the split is $0.40 to the site, $0.40 to the photographer and $0.60 to the model.


Just seemed kind of wrong to expect to be paid to have a photographer produce something for you to make more than he/she on.

It seems like producing, as a model or photographer, it's not a way to pay rent unless you are prolific or work constantly. Are there any sites that are worth shooting for?

I know there are two or three questions wrapped up in this, but an educated oppinion on this would be as nice as an answer from someone in the business. I've thought about trying to produce sets, but not sure it's the way to go.

Thanks,

9th

There is nothing about Zivity that says you can't make money other ways from the same images.  I link to the web site where I sell prints from my Zivity page.

Dark Shadows wrote:
Is that for an entire year of work? Couldn't you offer some teenager a senior portrait session for $50 and still make more than that entire year of Zitivity in about half an hour?

Left-handed Photography wrote:
The split is 60/30/10: model/photographer/Zivity.

The short answer to whether or not this is worth the photographer's time is "no." I contribute to the site and it takes about three-four hours of shooting to produce two sets, then about another 5-10 hours to process/edit the sets, then another hour or two reviewing stuff with the model and uploading the files. All for 30¢ a vote. Not even minimum wage. Not even close. And when you factor in opportunity costs, you lose money.

So why do I and others do it? Simple, it's fun. For now. The biggest problem is wrangling models for multiple sets on a regular basis. Quantity adds up to more votes. The more popular models have multiple sets (5 or more). If a model only shoots a set or two and then loses interest, it's a waste of my time.

Having fun shouldn't be so difficult.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it $10 to join, and the new member gets 5 votes for that $10?  The way I understood it, the owner of the site makes $1.10 per vote that way.  I have not checked in a while though.

Fashion Photographer wrote:

Yes, I'm skeptical about the business model, and whether the site is doing well at all.

I am skeptical too.  I hear mostly rumors, but I believe Zivity had to lay off one third of their work force back in 2008.  http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10068653-2.html  and that they are struggling.  However many websites are struggling ... except for Facebook!

IXth MAN wrote:
'The split is 60/30/10: model/photographer/Zivity. "

Just seemed kind of wrong to expect to be paid to have a photographer produce something for you to make more than he/she on. It seems like producing, as a model or photographer, it's not a way to pay rent unless you are prolific or work constantly.

People who go on the site are not looking for good photography. They are looking for tits and ass and vagina. Good photography only applies if it makes seeing the tits and the ass and vagina, easier. Good photography is not the product, It's the tits and the ass and the vagina. In that sense, since the model's contribution is more highly valued that the shooter's skill, the pay is skewed in the model's favor.

Back in the day, when comic duos like Laurel&Hardy, Abbot&Costello, Martin&Lewis, you had straight men and you had the funny man. it was so much harder to find a good straight man to feed the funny man the joke setup, than it was for someone to take the bows. That's why it was standard for the split to be 60/40 in the straight man's favor, even though it the the funny man's antics that got the laughs.

IXth MAN wrote:
'The split is 60/30/10: model/photographer/Zivity. "

Just seemed kind of wrong to expect to be paid to have a photographer produce something for you to make more than he/she on. It seems like producing, as a model or photographer, it's not a way to pay rent unless you are prolific or work constantly.

It may not be significant, but the split (last time I checked) was 55/30/15. I've always recommended to people who are concerned about the split to simply shoot Zivity sets in addition to your regular shoot so there isn't as much worry over doing a shoot just for Zivity. I actually shoot almost all of my sets at local group shoots (one on one shoots at a rented, private location where people usually schedule in one hour blocks). A lot of it is natural light and I let photographers know that minimal editing is usually just fine (though I leave it up to them, I'm not going to insist that they alter their editing style).

I think what a lot of people don't know/see is that in order to be successful on Zivity (and that term is relative to the site at any given time as the number of models/sets fluctuates), the model has to be active on the site. You can't just throw a set or three up and just get votes. The model has to promote the set, interact with fans, etc. And it pretty much has to be the model. I've seen some photographers who try to be active in this and they just don't have the same effect as the models.

Francisco Castro wrote:
People who go on the site are not looking for good photography. They are looking for tits and ass and vagina. Good photography only applies if it makes seeing the tits and the ass and vagina, easier. Good photography is not the product, It's the tits and the ass and the vagina. In that sense, since the model's contribution is more highly valued that the shooter's skill, the pay is skewed in the model's favor.

Have you been on Zivity before? There are maybe a handful of active models who do shoot some more of the more revealing stuff and staff are actually pretty careful about much genitalia can be shown, and of that I don't think vagina is allowed at all. Labia, yes, vagina, no. But the quality of the sets overall has been going up steadily. When I browse all the sets, at least half of them are really great quality shot in a more editorial style with a storyline or some kind of progression, usually in an interesting location, with solid makeup, wardrobe, and lighting/editing. There are still some more amateur sets, my self shot sets among them, but there is very, very little of the gratuitous T&A type stuff.

As for what the fans want... sure, it's a glamour/nude site mainly. Not porn, not what I would call "adult" (and certainly not what MM considers adult), but definitely more sexy and sometimes erotic content. But there are plenty of other styles either mixed with that or in addition to that like pin up, cosplay, alt fashion, I've even seen some sets that look like they were straight out of an editorial or art magazine. And because I put 100% into everything I do, I've asked my fans what they like and I've talked with them. The couple of times I've expressed concern that maybe I should be shooting more explicit content I was told that it wasn't something that suited me and that I shouldn't do it if I didn't want to. And they kept right on voting, so it wasn't all talk. I've regularly had fans compliment me on how classy and artistic my sets are. And I've only had maybe 10 guys out of 300+ voters make any kind of really sexual comment. Far more are interested in hearing about what I do, not just modeling, but the international art events I coordinate, for example, and in sharing their own stories and lives.

All in all, I think it's just like anything else, and it is what you make of it to a large degree. Models who go in expecting to do nothing will get nothing. Models and photographers who take the time to get to know the fans and put out quality sets with content the fans like are much more likely to make money. It's still not going to make anyone rich, but it can be a nice supplement. My Zivity checks have paid my medical bills before and they keep my modeling wardrobe, makeup, etc up to date so I'm not buying that stuff out of pocket.

Primitive Studio wrote:
also never got a check in mail from them.  Not to say I made that much but still, should have gotten at least a few dollars

Francisco Castro wrote:
People who go on the site are not looking for good photography. They are looking for tits and ass and vagina.

IXth MAN wrote:
I'm sure the contract each party signs covers this.

I will probably be corrected if I'm wrong, but I also believe Zivity has usage permission from the photographer and ties the images up for a designated time frame, then the images are back in the photographer's hands to do with what he wishes.

Thanks,

9th

The photographer can "do with it what they wish" from the beginning.  Zivity just has a licence, not that different from what MM has, to show the image.  (Zivity does have a minimum time, but no more control over what else you do with the image.)

Dekilah wrote:
I think what a lot of people don't know/see is that in order to be successful on Zivity (and that term is relative to the site at any given time as the number of models/sets fluctuates), the model has to be active on the site. You can't just throw a set or three up and just get votes. The model has to promote the set, interact with fans, etc. And it pretty much has to be the model. I've seen some photographers who try to be active in this and they just don't have the same effect as the models.

And you have just articulated why I am not in favor of the recent monthly support program. If a member is going to pledge monthly support, 97+% of the time it will be going to a model. Couple that with the fact that people generally have a fixed amount of discretionary money for "fun", it is to be expected that those who pledge monthly support will be reducing their vote budget to keep things in balance. So as overall number of votes goes down the vote payment to both model and photographer goes down. However the model has a much greater likely hood of making that up in monthly support. The new system provides nothing good for the vast majority of photographers.

Eye of the World wrote:
What was so important that you needed to ressurect a thread that has been dead for 4 years?

Well, they made it work for 4 years at least. I know friends who use it. Is it dying or viable??

thiswayup wrote:
I've not shot for zivity, but I did google it when I saw this thread - and the resentment from soem photographers over the model's larger share of revenue seems unfair to me. Success  on zivity seems to be based more on the model investing time networking there than anything else; she's being paid not just for her time on the shoot but for hours of time online, week after week, promoting her shoots.

You are correct (at least in the case of the more successful models). And it's not a great fit for everyone (that's true of almost anything in life), but for some of us it's fun to shoot for and we enjoy the extra money it generates. I've always been very open to talking to people about it and giving them my recommendation and the pros & cons.

Dekilah wrote:
You are correct (at least in the case of the more successful models). And it's not a great fit for everyone (that's true of almost anything in life), but for some of us it's fun to shoot for and we enjoy the extra money it generates. I've always been very open to talking to people about it and giving them my recommendation and the pros & cons.

Exactly. Calling the site "anti-photographer" is just silly. I'd shoot for zivity - and to be honest, I'd think the model was getting the worst end of the deal, with all that promo work to do. As for the amount of money, pick something you want to do anyway and treat any money as a bonus.