MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Do we need a deactivation day on fotolia?  (Read 8677 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: July 24, 2013, 15:02 »
+16
Sad to say it, but I think this is right.  D-Day was a great idea, but didn't turn out to accomplish anything. 

I need to respectfully disagree with you here, Lisa. You are correct that we probably can't do anything to change the ways of the agencies which treat us poorly. But you accomplish 100% of what you wish to accomplish when you take your business elsewhere. I deleted my images Fotolia a few years ago after the repeated "goal post movements" and their aggressive threats on independent forums to punish anyone who questioned them.

The result? I gave up my income with Fotolia immediately, but also gave up all the headaches which came with working with them. I have never once regretted it. Nor would I consider uploading there unless there was a complete sale of the company which brought in 100% new leadership. I don't trust them. I eventually replaced my Fotolia income by finding other outlets within stock, and other ventures which have nothing to do with photography.

The worst thing we can continue to do is to accept poor treatment. How do we feel about ourselves as people, when we allow others to treat us this way? This has nothing to do with the agency, and everything to do with us.


« Reply #26 on: July 24, 2013, 15:04 »
+4
I just closed istock, might as well close this one out also. I've been concentrating on Alamy and probably should have from the beginning since my port is wildlife and nature. Haven't had any sales there yet but I'm sure I will in time. Also sending vids to shutterstock and pond 5.

« Reply #27 on: July 24, 2013, 15:07 »
+6
D-Day may not have brought iStock to its knees - but they don't have the same general manager working there any longer. Maybe a co-oincidence, maybe not.

« Reply #28 on: July 24, 2013, 15:13 »
+1
Didn't a former executive at iS move into a management/executive position at Fotolia?

Garth Johnson if I remember correctly.

« Reply #29 on: July 24, 2013, 15:13 »
0
There is no effect of deactivation, we saw that before!

Only thing what you can is to try to redirect customers to better deal for you, Symbiostock (if you have), or to other still friendly agencies...
If you announce that you stopped to send new images on iStock or Fotolia for example, on every place where you can (social networks,etc.), every day... That is 365 times per year... Which can be significant impact on their greed...

WarrenPrice

« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2013, 15:27 »
+3
There is no effect of deactivation, we saw that before!

Only thing what you can is to try to redirect customers to better deal for you, Symbiostock (if you have), or to other still friendly agencies...
If you announce that you stopped to send new images on iStock or Fotolia for example, on every place where you can (social networks,etc.), every day... That is 365 times per year... Which can be significant impact on their greed...

It's a joke; not them.  Us.  We'll continue to argue amongst ourselves while the agencies/stores/markets laugh at us.



« Reply #31 on: July 24, 2013, 15:29 »
0
Didn't a former executive at iS move into a management/executive position at Fotolia?

Garth Johnson if I remember correctly.

And Dittmar, a former Fotolia member (Germany, Switzerland, Austria) moved onto istock/Getty - but Dittmar has left both by now, it seems.

« Reply #32 on: July 24, 2013, 15:36 »
+2
There is no effect of deactivation, we saw that before!

Only thing what you can is to try to redirect customers to better deal for you, Symbiostock (if you have), or to other still friendly agencies...
If you announce that you stopped to send new images on iStock or Fotolia for example, on every place where you can (social networks,etc.), every day... That is 365 times per year... Which can be significant impact on their greed...

It's a joke; not them.  Us.  We'll continue to argue amongst ourselves while the agencies/stores/markets laugh at us.

So, every answer to greedy agencies has to be on the personal level...
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 15:43 by borg »

WarrenPrice

« Reply #33 on: July 24, 2013, 15:46 »
0
Didn't a former executive at iS move into a management/executive position at Fotolia?


Garth Johnson if I remember correctly.


And Dittmar, a former Fotolia member (Germany, Switzerland, Austria) moved onto istock/Getty - but Dittmar has left both by now, it seems.


This is the one I was thinking of -- iStock Co-Founder.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/co-founder-of-istockphoto-joins-rival-fotolia-as-north-american-president/

It seems iStock  are running Fotolia. 

« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 15:52 by WarrenPrice »

WarrenPrice

« Reply #34 on: July 24, 2013, 15:51 »
0
There is no effect of deactivation, we saw that before!

Only thing what you can is to try to redirect customers to better deal for you, Symbiostock (if you have), or to other still friendly agencies...
If you announce that you stopped to send new images on iStock or Fotolia for example, on every place where you can (social networks,etc.), every day... That is 365 times per year... Which can be significant impact on their greed...

It's a joke; not them.  Us.  We'll continue to argue amongst ourselves while the agencies/stores/markets laugh at us.

So, every answer to greedy agencies has to be on the personal level...

??? Sorry,  I don't understand?


« Reply #35 on: July 24, 2013, 15:56 »
0
I think this is going to be next agency I stop uploading. Their uploading UI is very tedious and result are pathetic. I have around 200 images with no sales so maybe I should delete them too. I am doing this periodically when DT sends me email and it does not seem to affect me in any way.

« Reply #36 on: July 24, 2013, 16:00 »
+4
There is no effect of deactivation, we saw that before!

Only thing what you can is to try to redirect customers to better deal for you, Symbiostock (if you have), or to other still friendly agencies...
If you announce that you stopped to send new images on iStock or Fotolia for example, on every place where you can (social networks,etc.), every day... That is 365 times per year... Which can be significant impact on their greed...

It's a joke; not them.  Us.  We'll continue to argue amongst ourselves while the agencies/stores/markets laugh at us.

So, every answer to greedy agencies has to be on the personal level...

??? Sorry,  I don't understand?
I think I understand.  Just because other people carry on supporting greedy sites doesn't mean we all have to.  I'm pleased I removed all my best images from istock.  I don't really care what other people did, it was the right thing for me to do.

I'll wait and see what happens with FT, not going to make a quick decision but I've lost all motivation to upload new images.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #37 on: July 24, 2013, 16:01 »
0
I just closed istock, might as well close this one out also. I've been concentrating on Alamy and probably should have from the beginning since my port is wildlife and nature. Haven't had any sales there yet but I'm sure I will in time. Also sending vids to shutterstock and pond 5.
My wildlife pics don't sell at Alamy, though I noticed that quite early on so send very little nature there now - there is a lot of competiton.

« Reply #38 on: July 24, 2013, 16:27 »
+1
I just closed istock, might as well close this one out also. I've been concentrating on Alamy and probably should have from the beginning since my port is wildlife and nature. Haven't had any sales there yet but I'm sure I will in time. Also sending vids to shutterstock and pond 5.
My wildlife pics don't sell at Alamy, though I noticed that quite early on so send very little nature there now - there is a lot of competiton.

Ouch, well I'm still going to close out fotolia, they reject most of my stuff anyway. Shutterstock does well for my port.

« Reply #39 on: July 24, 2013, 16:37 »
+4
I think I understand.  Just because other people carry on supporting greedy sites doesn't mean we all have to.  I'm pleased I removed all my best images from istock.

That's pretty much how I feel about it now. I can't babysit everybody in the industry, but I can certainly control where my files go. It may be a longer term strategy, but I think it will pay off in the end.

gillian

  • *Gillian*

« Reply #40 on: July 24, 2013, 16:38 »
+1
I like the idea of deleting good files that sell well elsewhere, but,
*sigh* more work for no return!

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #41 on: July 24, 2013, 16:41 »
0
I just closed istock, might as well close this one out also. I've been concentrating on Alamy and probably should have from the beginning since my port is wildlife and nature. Haven't had any sales there yet but I'm sure I will in time. Also sending vids to shutterstock and pond 5.
My wildlife pics don't sell at Alamy, though I noticed that quite early on so send very little nature there now - there is a lot of competiton.

Ouch, well I'm still going to close out fotolia, they reject most of my stuff anyway. Shutterstock does well for my port.
That's interesting, but I see you are based in the US. I have some colleagues who shoot (mainly) UK wildlife and submit to SS and sell badly there. Two of them in particular are extremely accomplished and have won several wildlife competitions between them. Possibly the US market is bigger (?)

It may also be that the US wildlife supply on Alamy is relatively small, so you have less competition (?)

« Reply #42 on: July 24, 2013, 16:50 »
-5
Cool all deactivate, that will help me sell more ;-) 

I thing it's  good idea chop the price and then when you've sold 3 bump it back up again. Just look at most peoples ports and see how many pages have no sales!! great files too! just put up at the wrong time, this game is pot luck sometimes.  I'm all in favor of the new short term price drop. better than DT who give your files away fro free after four years of no sale!!!

Not like istock!! they don't tell Big Porkers!

:-)


lisafx

« Reply #43 on: July 24, 2013, 17:04 »
+1
  I'm all in favor of the new short term price drop. better than DT who give your files away fro free after four years of no sale!!!



Hyrons, you don't have to give away your files on DT after they haven't sold for 4 years.  You can select to disable them instead. 

lisafx

« Reply #44 on: July 24, 2013, 17:06 »
+3
Sad to say it, but I think this is right.  D-Day was a great idea, but didn't turn out to accomplish anything. 

I need to respectfully disagree with you here, Lisa. You are correct that we probably can't do anything to change the ways of the agencies which treat us poorly. But you accomplish 100% of what you wish to accomplish when you take your business elsewhere. I deleted my images Fotolia a few years ago after the repeated "goal post movements" and their aggressive threats on independent forums to punish anyone who questioned them.

The result? I gave up my income with Fotolia immediately, but also gave up all the headaches which came with working with them. I have never once regretted it. Nor would I consider uploading there unless there was a complete sale of the company which brought in 100% new leadership. I don't trust them. I eventually replaced my Fotolia income by finding other outlets within stock, and other ventures which have nothing to do with photography.

The worst thing we can continue to do is to accept poor treatment. How do we feel about ourselves as people, when we allow others to treat us this way? This has nothing to do with the agency, and everything to do with us.

You're right Dan, maybe D-Day had more effect than I have seen.  For those whose motivation was just to disentangle themselves from Istock completely, I am sure it was a rewarding experience. 

For those that hoped Getty/Istock would modify some of their most abusive policies, it was a disappointment. 

« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2013, 19:11 »
+5

Delete files only if it makes you happy. There is no evidence that D-Day had any effect whatsoever on iStock, but some people were very happy to take certain files out of possible abuse on other sites.

Sad to say it, but I think this is right.  D-Day was a great idea, but didn't turn out to accomplish anything.  I don't plan on tilting at anymore windmills.  Just going to turn the majority of my efforts elsewhere.
I'm not so sure. We hoped an immediate effect, like step back and it didn't happen. I think D-Day and all bad noise around iStock (and FT) contribute to their decline.
I'm in charge of 5 designers and very often we hire PR agencies. I asked them to NOT select any images from iStock/Getty for our projects. I couldn't tell them that the reason was I don't like them. I used objective arguments like: too expensive, bad performance of research engine, IT problems and high risk of images been deleted. Yes, I told them that many contributors were unhappy and the risk to not find selected images. I can guarantee you that this argument speaks.  If after the whole and long process of validation you try to download the high resolution version and it's not more there...
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 19:16 by rene »

« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2013, 19:29 »
0
Didn't a former executive at iS move into a management/executive position at Fotolia?


Garth Johnson if I remember correctly.


And Dittmar, a former Fotolia member (Germany, Switzerland, Austria) moved onto istock/Getty - but Dittmar has left both by now, it seems.


This is the one I was thinking of -- iStock Co-Founder.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/co-founder-of-istockphoto-joins-rival-fotolia-as-north-american-president/

It seems iStock  are running Fotolia.


Looks like Patrick Lor moved on. He's the CEO for Dissolve http://www.dissolve.com which looks like video footage for $5. Yeech, $5?

ETA: Okay so looks like generic or leftover clips are $5. Better stuff is $50.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 19:32 by PaulieWalnuts »

WarrenPrice

« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2013, 19:56 »
0
So no one is up for it, mostly saying the same as I do, yet my post gets voted down and one post is actually now a great post?

Its clearly personal. I'll take the hint.

I think it is every man (woman) for themselves, Ron.  I tried deleting images and found it far too tedious.  I emailed a request to close my account ... and deposit my $43.99 balance in my PayPal account.

Did they do both things for you?

@Ron,
Yes.  A very amicable email confirming my request and letting me know that a $1 fee would be assessed for transferring any balance of less than $50.  I'm happy.   8)

farbled

« Reply #48 on: July 24, 2013, 20:03 »
0
So no one is up for it, mostly saying the same as I do, yet my post gets voted down and one post is actually now a great post?

Its clearly personal. I'll take the hint.

I think it is every man (woman) for themselves, Ron.  I tried deleting images and found it far too tedious.  I emailed a request to close my account ... and deposit my $43.99 balance in my PayPal account.

Did they do both things for you?

@Ron,
Yes.  A very amicable email confirming my request and letting me know that a $1 fee would be assessed for transferring any balance of less than $50.  I'm happy.   8)

For me as well just now.

« Reply #49 on: July 24, 2013, 20:20 »
+3
I think that we are all small enough potatoes that deleting our ports won't make much difference to the agencies - at least at first. BUT, it can do a lot for your own self esteem etc. That is the reason to stop uploading or delete things, when you are no longer happy living with the situation the way it is.

In the long run maybe the sites that cause many people to do this will lose business.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
938 Replies
95577 Views
Last post April 30, 2014, 18:36
by deryl1975
28 Replies
4146 Views
Last post February 02, 2013, 14:12
by Jo Ann Snover
4 Replies
1174 Views
Last post November 18, 2013, 08:36
by Mantis
35 Replies
3947 Views
Last post November 22, 2013, 14:24
by BaldricksTrousers
1604 Replies
128047 Views
Last post October 02, 2016, 11:44
by YadaYadaYada

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors