Author Topic: Recent trend on DP (Read 10252 times)

eggshell · « **on:** September 16, 2010, 03:49 »

DP has recently become more strict than DT for similar images . Basically you can't submit more than one image per subject , you have to choose one angle and either horizontal or vertical version , you can't have both . Personally I find it ridiculous when relatively low earners are rejecting images accepted by SS , FT and DT ( and in this case all the other stocks ) .
Anyone else noticing that or people don't even bother to check the acceptance of their images on DP ?

Koufax73 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 16, 2010, 03:55 »

Quote from: eggshell on September 16, 2010, 03:49

DP has recently become more strict than DT for similar images . Basically you can't submit more than one image per subject , you have to choose one angle and either horizontal or vertical version , you can't have both . Personally I find it ridiculous when relatively low earners are rejecting images accepted by SS , FT and DT ( and in this case all the other stocks ) .
Anyone else noticing that or people don't even bother to check the acceptance of their images on DP ?

Same here. And also a lot of "composition problem". Problems that other much important sites don't see at all.

sharpshot · « **Reply #2 on:** September 16, 2010, 05:04 »

I don't bother to upload. Was thinking about it but not after reading this, never understood the DT policy and I am sure it has cost them, for a relatively new site to do this is totally wrong. Let the buyers choose what they want.

eggshell · « **Reply #3 on:** September 17, 2010, 04:11 »

Judging from my small stock experience , agencies are their own biggest enemies , not the competition . Market leaders are simply a product of less blatant mistakes rather than good calls . Sometimes I really get the impression of a business managed by kids

Koufax73 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 17, 2010, 04:35 »

Quote from: eggshell on September 17, 2010, 04:11

Judging from my small stock experience , agencies are their own biggest enemies , not the competition . Market leaders are simply a product of less blatant mistakes rather than good calls . Sometimes I really get the impression of a business managed by kids

I totally agree. And also with Sharpshot. And I add: I had ten sales March-July. Come August: stricter control on images, many rejections, zero sales.

mtkang · « **Reply #5 on:** September 22, 2010, 03:28 »

anyone got something like returned sale?

i had 2 sales and another 2 returned sales, 1 returned sale is in June and one is in Sep. I emailed then and it is said it was because of stolen credit, so the transaction is invalid.

but i am still suprised how 'lucky' i am to get 2 returned sales(subs) out of 4 download in long period. my question is the files sure had been downloaded, but the transaction just didn't push through and dp didn't get the payment.

so it seems the security and the system there is very faulty, or some thieves are active there. Anyway, returned sales had never happened to me to other websites.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #6 on:** September 22, 2010, 14:40 »

Quote from: eggshell on September 16, 2010, 03:49

or people don't even bother to check the acceptance of their images on DP ?

Exactly. To the low earners I tend to upload many images hoping they accept a good %. And the more a site randomly rejects, the more I upload everything without checking. I've got no time to check statistics for sites which are less than 1% of total earnings.

I'm talking in general, as DP is not even the worst among low earners. In fact, it is one of the few new sites producing regular sales.

donding · « **Reply #7 on:** September 22, 2010, 14:50 »

Quote from: mtkang on September 22, 2010, 03:28

anyone got something like returned sale?

i had 2 sales and another 2 returned sales, 1 returned sale is in June and one is in Sep. I emailed then and it is said it was because of stolen credit, so the transaction is invalid.

but i am still suprised how 'lucky' i am to get 2 returned sales(subs) out of 4 download in long period. my question is the files sure had been downloaded, but the transaction just didn't push through and dp didn't get the payment.

so it seems the security and the system there is very faulty, or some thieves are active there. Anyway, returned sales had never happened to me to other websites.

That's not uncommon. A lot of sites take the money back out of your account for a returned sale. Some put a hold on your funds until the transaction clears. That way they are not paying out money that they have not fully received. The only way this could be avoided would be to put a hold on the image until the transaction clears, but that would never work because a buyer needs that image now...not two weeks from now, so it's just a hazard of selling stock.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #8 on:** September 22, 2010, 14:55 »

Quote from: donding on September 22, 2010, 14:50

That's not uncommon. A lot of sites take the money back out of your account for a returned sale.

Shouldn't credit cards have an insurance against unauthorised use?
I wonder if they are charging twice: once from the credit card insurance and once by not paying us.

donding · « **Reply #9 on:** September 22, 2010, 18:07 »

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on September 22, 2010, 14:55

Quote from: donding on September 22, 2010, 14:50
That's not uncommon. A lot of sites take the money back out of your account for a returned sale.

Shouldn't credit cards have an insurance against unauthorised use?
I wonder if they are charging twice: once from the credit card insurance and once by not paying us.

That insurance is for the person using the card. It protects them from unauthorized charges. The stock site wouldn't get the money. Also if some one is using someone else credit's, they would have to refund those charges to the original person. Therefore it comes out of your end. Not all sites do that, but some do.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #10 on:** September 22, 2010, 18:34 »

Quote from: donding on September 22, 2010, 18:07

That insurance is for the person using the card. It protects them from unauthorized charges. The stock site wouldn't get the money. Also if some one is using someone else credit's, they would have to refund those charges to the original person.

Ok, thanks for the explanation - now it's clear to me.

Nevertheless, it would be nice if agencies which are not able to protect themselves from credit card scams could sustain the cost instead of charging back to us, since they already gave away our picture and they have no way to prevent use. Things are different of course if a sale is really returned by a legit buyer (wrong buy), in which case they must deduct the sum from us of course.

Quote from: donding on September 22, 2010, 18:07

Therefore it comes out of your end. Not all sites do that, but some do.

And this is one more reason to consider some sites 'fair' or not so fair to contributors.

mtkang · « **Reply #11 on:** September 23, 2010, 01:14 »

well, i know there is always invalid transaction for credit cards, what i mean is that happened to me in a low sales website, and 2 out of 4 sales in a span of few months. I am not sure anyone else encountered similar case, or i am just too 'lucky'.

Quote from: donding on September 22, 2010, 14:50

Quote from: mtkang on September 22, 2010, 03:28
anyone got something like returned sale?

i had 2 sales and another 2 returned sales, 1 returned sale is in June and one is in Sep. I emailed then and it is said it was because of stolen credit, so the transaction is invalid.

but i am still suprised how 'lucky' i am to get 2 returned sales(subs) out of 4 download in long period. my question is the files sure had been downloaded, but the transaction just didn't push through and dp didn't get the payment.

so it seems the security and the system there is very faulty, or some thieves are active there. Anyway, returned sales had never happened to me to other websites.

That's not uncommon. A lot of sites take the money back out of your account for a returned sale. Some put a hold on your funds until the transaction clears. That way they are not paying out money that they have not fully received. The only way this could be avoided would be to put a hold on the image until the transaction clears, but that would never work because a buyer needs that image now...not two weeks from now, so it's just a hazard of selling stock.