Agency Based Discussion > Dissolve
Dissolve: "We’re optimizing the collection"
gcrook:
It's not the killing of the portfolio or the rejections that bother me.
I can only speculate at this point but these are my thoughts.
No agency (that i know of) has so far decided to impose strict aesthetic criteria in moving images.Yes agencies have a bit of an agenda,some dont accept editorials for example,and some dont sell even if they accept,but deciding on a certain aesthetic is something else.
As i've said i have good sales there,and im buffled really.My images dont correspond to their "post" aesthetics in general,if one should look at their front page he will
get a certain feel for what kinds of images resonate with them.
Are they going towards that direction?Then theoretically my footage is irrelevant or they dont know what they want
and that will create imbalance and/or disturbance in both their clients and contributors alike.
This will be interesting to see how it turns out.
Is there an agency that has adopted this model in the stock photography world?(im footage only so i dont know really about some photo-only sites)
Is canva like this for example?If yes does it work out?
cobalt:
--- Quote from: gcrook on July 12, 2015, 20:57 ---
Is there an agency that has adopted this model in the stock photography world?(im footage only so i dont know really about some photo-only sites)
Is canva like this for example?If yes does it work out?
--- End quote ---
It is very common to do this in the photo world, lots of higher priced agencies build collections around a certain "Look"
Check out tetra images, blend, stocksy,offset, or the variously themed collections on getty or corbis.
The advantage for the customer is that they can easily mix and match all the files, because the whole collection looks like it was done by a single studio with one art director.
In a world of maybe 100 million images, themed collections save the customer a lot of time.
The video Stock market is still in a very early stage, very little content overall, but it looks like they want to position themselves as a themed niche agency.
If it brings ins the money, why not, as a contributor you will learn what they want, so you just send them part of your production.
The 5 year commitment is the reason I haven't looked at them. 5 years is total lifetime on the internet.
But their concept can work if they market it well.
gcrook:
--- Quote ---
The video Stock market is still in a very early stage, very little content overall, but it looks like they want to position themselves as a themed niche agency.
--- End quote ---
Let's hope this is not what they want to do, because i think that "themed" or "niche" video as opposed to a similar still image has very little chance to sell as part of a bigger puzzle, (which is what video is used for in most cases,in video projects).
Again we're speculating here,unless we see what this is all about we can only riff-raff.
ruchos:
--- Quote from: cobalt on July 13, 2015, 00:03 ---The 5 year commitment is the reason I haven't looked at them. 5 years is total lifetime on the internet.
--- End quote ---
Can someone help me understand this 5 year commitment thing? I hear people say it a lot about their contract, but when I read the contract it says the contract is valid for 5 years (with year on year extension after that) but can be terminated at any time that the contributor wishes to, and you can remove your clips at any time that you wish to by notifying them. Which to my understanding isn't locking you in for 5 years.
ccbcc:
You know that contracts are negotiable? Anyway, I like what they are doing with the filtering. SS and P5 have so much crappy footage, I hope they'll do the same thing. Raise the bar and remove the cruft.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version