MicrostockGroup

This is weird. I read somewhere about reject for similarity to twitter bird. Is it possible that RF image become copyrighted?

Yes I am a bit surprise also that Twitter did not buy the exclusivity of the file... does not make much sense to me

My take is that when they bought it, they did not expect to be so successful.......

I was talking about the design not the logo and thanks for the link, at least this brought him some publicity...

Well he definitely got paid well for the image.. After all twitter is not the exclusive owner.. That's why it is cheap..

If it had been RM, he would of lost $6, as twitter were low budget when they started and went to a microstock site.  I would rather have $6 than $0, wouldn't you?

It is pointless constantly knocking microstock, if it wasn't here, people on a low budget would just use the free sites.

maybe i'm just too old... a macro-saur.

but i don't know a single designer who would draw anything for less than 500 euro,
and never ever for big companies for less than a few thousands euro.

would i like to make the cover of TIME magazine ?
of course.

would i do it for 5 bucks ?
hmmm ... i don't think so.

stick and carrot ... egg vs chicken ... but i still find unthinkable to make 6 bucks
from a logo of a millionaire company with plenty of cash to spend from their VCs.

i prefer to not sell at all instead of getting ripped off and give away my work for free.
somebody else will get the job, no problem, i can live pretty well without those 5 bucks
don't you think ?

I said no to thinkstock and have removed my images from crestock.  $0.25 subs are too low for me.  Overall though, if it wasn't for the lowering commissions, I would be happy with microstock.  The sales volume makes up for the low prices, it is hard to make anywhere near as much with alamy.  I would prefer it if the sites charged more for certain licenses but there isn't much I can do about that.  Hopefully they will realize that they can also make more and they will change things.  Overall, microstock has been very good for me, much better than my rejection letter experience with a traditional agency.

what would you like more ?

1 sale for 100$, or 10 sales for 10$ each, or 100 sales for 1$/each ?

for all of you it's the same.
for me it's not.

the honest way should be i sell 1 photo for 100$ and you buyer sell your depliant for 1000$, win-win situation.

with micros instead, 100 clients will sell a catalog for 1000$ each therefore 100K$ while i'll still get only
100$ in my pocket.

is this fair ? to me it sounds like a giant ripoff on my shoulders.
not to mention it's sold as RF and they will re-use my pics over and over if they need.

i like what i do and i want to keep doing it.
the only thing i can do is improve my quality and stick to RM.

i'm experimenting selling some leftovers on istock and it's promising so far,
but it still has a bitter taste .. leftover or not they guy paying it 1$ will still make
a lot more money than what i'll make with that picture.

however it turns out it's a scam situation, or it's me getting old ?

What if your $1,000 photo never sells as RM?

Yes, I realize you were not, but some people keep making that mistake.