MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Dreamstime.com => Topic started by: Beppe Grillo on May 28, 2014, 09:24
-
I have just received this from Dreamstime.
It is absolutely confidential and I have been one of the few elected to have the possibility to participate to their program :D :D :D (Like other 10 millions of contributors…)
_____________
"This email is sent to you under a private beta campaign, please keep it confidential.
We have some exciting news. Dreamstime has agreed to undertake a small scale beta test program that permits the use of images in online advertising. We are very delighted about this collaboration which will make use of our rich database to commercially license low-res versions of Dreamstime images for this purpose. End users will not have access to the images on an ongoing basis, but will be able to select them for association with their ads that appear on third-party websites. The purpose of this email is to tell you that based on the quality of your images, you are among only a few contributors that have been selected to participate in this test program.
Given the quality of your submissions, and because you have opted to participate in Dreamstime's Alliances program, your following files have been chosen to appear in this limited pilot program for test and evaluation purposes:
XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX.
Although there will be no compensation provided to Dreamstime or the chosen contributors for the initial testing period, if the beta test goes well, this new partnership should result in additional exposure and revenue to you and to Dreamstime. There are no other details at this time. We will be monitoring this test in order to come up with the best offer.
If you are interested in participating, there is nothing more for you to do. The selected images from your library will be included in the pilot program unless you do not wish to participate. If you choose not to participate in this beta test program, you may remove your images from the program by disabling your participation in the Dreamstime Alliances program within the next 5 days (http://www.dreamstime.com/alliances (http://www.dreamstime.com/alliances)).
We have agreed to keep the project confidential during the testing phase, so we kindly ask you not to disclose that you've been invited to participate. Congratulations on being selected as one of the top Dreamstime contributors, and thank you for being a valued member of our community.
Congratulations,
The Dreamstime Team"
_______________
Confidential, no compensation, pilot program, test program, beta test program, hmmmm……
-
I just press the button to exclude my portfolio. Although the link in newsletter is broken. :) I don't want to have zero compensation.
-
that looks really fair for me. love the idea of zero commission.
lol iam out. ;D
-
Got the same email, Felt special for a moment...no way I am giving anything for free.
-
How can they expect people to agree to allow free usage of their images and not even explain how this would ever lead to any revenue?
-
Haha, got it too.
I love how they are trying to explain that zero commission is good for me :D
-
I really have no comment on another try to cheat us.
NOTHING FOR FREE !
-
"hmm, Mr. Bad-Business-Cheating-Manager, how can we make it hard to opt out? "
Bad-Business-Cheating-Manager: "Yeah lets place a broken link and hope for lazy people."
-
.
-
F SHAMELESS
no, no, no and no!
-
+1
Opted out of Alliances
-
What the ... A broken link for the opt-out?
Only one image is selected from my library, but how does this benefit me? How is this "EXCITING NEWS"?
-
I also opted out! No money sounds funny. Nope!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
They still know what they do isnt that nice..
"We have agreed to keep the project confidential during the testing phase, so we kindly ask you not to disclose that you've been invited to participate. "
-
What the f-- is going on with these companies. As if it's not bad enough when someone comes along and wants to sell our work for a buck and offer pennies, now we're down to "free". Great.
Some days I really feel like I could just walk away from this whole mess of a business and be pretty ok with that decision.
-
I got that top-secret email too. Should I be thrilled that TWO of my images were so honored? Noooo, I really don't think so. I'm opting out too.
-
50 of my images to give away free? opted out!
-
LOL. Did they actually expect you to keep this "awesome" deal secret? ;)
-
LOL. Did they actually expect you to keep this "awesome" deal secret? ;)
yep ;D
DPC turned out a huge success and we need another...
-
Opted out too just now.
They listed 39 of my images to be included.
They're not getting any :)
-
opt out link is there. But not working.
-
i got that email too. But no opt out link in my email.
Go to your management page on the DT site and click on Alliances button. Check the box to opt out and you are done :)
-
I just sended a mail to our attorney to kick their asses.
Despite that new attempt of cheating contributors they still sell our images although we cancelled our accout over 9 months ago.
I hope they kick the bucket as soon as possible.
-
i got that email too. But no opt out link in my email.
Go to your management page on the DT site and click on Alliances button. Check the box to opt out and you are done :)
thanks. This way its working.
-
Kind of P.O'd from this. >:( I'm flattered, but there is no information on beta test time limit nor can I opt out of this one program. Highly annoying. Fine. I'll click out of ALL alliances. Again, I need money badly, but I don't like being strong-armed or taken advantage of!!!! >:(
-
Opted out. No agency gets freebies from me anymore!
-
Either I'm a dirtbag, or I didn't get the e-mail because I was already opted out of the partnerships (based on finding my work hither, thither and yon and not liking that).
If someone wanted to do a test for working out the bugs, I'd be happy for them to do that, but if this beta includes real ads for real customers, then there should be compensation AND it would be reasonable to have a separate opt out for giveaways (if they really feel they must) and for the paid alliances.
I don't want to participate in the partner programs, but supposing someone did, but just didn't want to have their work donated (and I'm sure they picked the best sellers, not the new images with no downloads yet)? They have to do an all or nothing opt out to avoid the freebies.
Not good.
-
Well stated. EXCITING news would be an increase in pay!!! :o
What the ... A broken link for the opt-out?
Only one image is selected from my library, but how does this benefit me? How is this "EXCITING NEWS"?
-
This could turn into something good - similar to the Shutterstock-Facebook deal or into something bad - similar to the Getty free embedding.
Anyway, a very bad start for Dreamstime:
1. Lying about the "small scale" while a lot of us are invited;
2. Asking to contribute our images for free while they could and should at least pay a sub;
3. Not giving enough information to allow us to decide.
-
opt out link is there. But not working.
I had the same problem but if you copy and paste http://www.dreamstime.com/alliances (http://www.dreamstime.com/alliances) it will take you to the page where you can opt out :)
-
OK, since this got out, here are a few details.
1. This is confidential because we're under an agreement. The email says that. We've always been transparent. We did our best to share more, our partners didn't agree.
2. This is NOT free. Once the partnership ends, we evaluate results and negotiate best royalties given the volume. The real deal will begin then. We plan to do our best to pay royalties retroactively.
3. We don't get paid for the test either, there is no scam. Just like you, we've adding our infrastructure and we've been working on this for quite a while.
4. We did tests like these in the past and we paid the royalties ourselves. This is a large size project and we can't support them, even if the scale of the initial test is small. 0.01% of something huge could still be significant. We need our contributors support and we sent them an email asking for that. You can opt out, nobody is forcing you to accept.
Again, I'm sorry for not being able to share more. I'm actually very enthusiastic about it since this could be the biggest partnership a stock agency can hope for. It could turn out into a great deal, unlike other negative examples that sadly, you've been exposed to.
Thank you for your support.
-
How long will last the evaluation period?
-
No e-mail for me even tho opted in to alliances. Now opted out. When beta is done and we find out what royalties we get I might opt back in.
SS gives usual sub royalty for this and there was no request for free images to test it.
-
"2. This is NOT free."
you bet... it's not free for us, we have expenses producing these photos.
-
OK, since this got out, here are a few details.
1. This is confidential because we're under an agreement. The email says that. We've always been transparent. We did our best to share more, our partners didn't agree.
2. This is NOT free. Once the partnership ends, we evaluate results and negotiate best royalties given the volume. The real deal will begin then. We plan to do our best to pay royalties retroactively.
3. We don't get paid for the test either, there is no scam. Just like you, we've adding our infrastructure and we've been working on this for quite a while.
4. We did tests like these in the past and we paid the royalties ourselves. This is a large size project and we can't support them, even if the scale of the initial test is small. 0.01% of something huge could still be significant. We need our contributors support and we sent them an email asking for that. You can opt out, nobody is forcing you to accept.
Again, I'm sorry for not being able to share more. I'm actually very enthusiastic about it since this could be the biggest partnership a stock agency can hope for. It could turn out into a great deal, unlike other negative examples that sadly, you've been exposed to.
Thank you for your support.
Thanks for dropping by and explaining what you can. Did you really think it was not going to "get out"? :):)
I appreciate that this is a test/trial and development costs are involved. I appreciate your offer to pay retroactively if that is possible. I'm going to stay in and see what happens, unlike other 'schemes' we have been exposed to you gave fair notice, allowed an opt out and only selected a few images instead of the whole portfolio. A much more reasonable and up front plan than some others. I might have suggested that the email be an "opt in" rather than "opt out" to allow only those that want to participate to do so, but OK at least you warned us.
And I must say I am proud to be one of the "top Dreamstime contributors". Considering my sales volume I feel really bad for those who are not "top Dreamstime contributors", they must be starving.;)
-
opted out
-
38 of mine for a give-away? Not just no but _ELL NO! Congratulations, DT, you just joined my scumbag list along with FT, DP and IS.
-
How can anyone opt in with zero information? Not even how long it's going to be going on for.
"will you give away your images for free for an indeterminate amount of time?"
Well obviously no.
-
I tried to give Dreamstime the benefit of the doubt, I really did. But what benefit can there be to participating in a trial where my work is given to customers and I get no direct benefit beyond a hope (not in the original letter) that some compensation may be given when the trial is done? The loss to me may be small, but the benefit is even smaller if it exists at all. And beyond that it's all unknowns, including the duration of the trial. The only reason I can see to participate is that opting out means losing any third party sales as well. Better to opt out for now until and unless more information becomes available that changes the equation.
-
At least we are being informed.
But it should really state the duration of the experimental period at least.
-
why can't we know the details behind the deal?
if not why dont you work on the deal and let us know after, ain't that more simple? why don't you try it with DT admins pictures?
I have always heard that we should read an agreement before signing
-
4 images selected. Not my best. I'll give it a try. I guess i will be able to opt out later, if i don't see any changes and only free give-aways.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Dear Contributor,
You should be exceedingly grateful because we have decided to donate your hard work to a secret advertising project. Now you might or might not get a few pennies down the road at some time in the future, but don't count on it. These poor advertisers can't afford to pay you anything but just think of the wonderful EXPOSURE your work will receive! Here is the (non-working) link to opt out if you choose to turn down this exciting offer.
-
Surprised the DT admin posted here, but even more surprised he thought this is a good deal for us. It screams BOHICA to me!
-
Surprised the DT admin posted here, but even more surprised he thought this is a good deal for us. It screams BOHICA to me!
he is the CEO/founder/owner of DT
-
OK, since this got out, here are a few details.
1. This is confidential because we're under an agreement. The email says that. We've always been transparent. We did our best to share more, our partners didn't agree.
2. This is NOT free. Once the partnership ends, we evaluate results and negotiate best royalties given the volume. The real deal will begin then. We plan to do our best to pay royalties retroactively.
3. We don't get paid for the test either, there is no scam. Just like you, we've adding our infrastructure and we've been working on this for quite a while.
4. We did tests like these in the past and we paid the royalties ourselves. This is a large size project and we can't support them, even if the scale of the initial test is small. 0.01% of something huge could still be significant. We need our contributors support and we sent them an email asking for that. You can opt out, nobody is forcing you to accept.
Again, I'm sorry for not being able to share more. I'm actually very enthusiastic about it since this could be the biggest partnership a stock agency can hope for. It could turn out into a great deal, unlike other negative examples that sadly, you've been exposed to.
Thank you for your support.
SHAME ON YOU! In future do not hide crap like this on us! We will find out as this team is open to telling the truth! Simple- just be honest and straight up to our faces!
-
I've always liked DT. I'd like to think this would be a good deal for us - but how can anybody enter into a business deal on the basis:
1) We won't tell you what the deal is
2) You have a few days to reject the offer, otherwise you are automatically (locked?) in.
3) This commits you to acceptance of the unknown deal for an unspecified time.
4) At the end of the unspecified time maybe you will or will not get paid something - unspecified - for the way your work has been used.
Would Serban sign up his own company (DT) for something on those conditions? If so, I think I can make him an offer here and now!
Maybe he has come up with a great deal but I can't walk into it with a blindfold on.
(Thank you, at least, for informing us in advance and providing the opt-out)
-
Why not post this concept/idea to us in the first place- than use our 'Feedback' to decide if the venture is worth it for both us and your company. You will be surprised how smart we are and fair!
-
Isn't EXPOSURE usually harmful? Most people do not want any EXPOSURE.
-
Dreamstime has agreed to undertake a small scale beta test program that permits the use of images in online advertising.
Small scale but too big to pay contributors for it. Hmm...
We don't get paid for the test either, there is no scam. Just like you, we've adding our infrastructure and we've been working on this for quite a while.
Someone is getting something of value. The advertising testing is real ad placement, right? So someone's goods or services are being promoted. That's valuable.
You're our agent, you're supposed to incur costs to test new products. But we shouldn't see our content given away for free in real settings where someone is getting value out of the use of our content. That's not testing, that's use.
-
At least it isn't as shady and behind-your-back as the Google deal, but this is unethical either way. Here's some proper feedback and tips for DT:
1) You can't expect contributors to willingly hand over images for testing purposes without any form of direct compensation; the 'promise' of retroactively paying contributors is too vague and unprofessional. Usually this is a 'red flag' in the freelance designer world: "we pay you when we like it or once we're making money on this". Freelance designers get that crap all the time. You wouldn't ask a plumber to work for free, now would you?
2) In order to get contributors along, give them a fair compensation.
3) If you can't cough up the dough beforehand, get better financial backing. Or, if this is promising to be 'the biggest partnership a stock company could hope for', negotiate a better payment plan with your partners. If they aren't willing to invest in this plan, it isn't a promising plan to begin with.
4) The notice is too late. Only 5 days to opt out of some vague test plan? That should've been 30 days.
5) Give us more information: how long will this test run, how will the images be used/sold, what's in it for contributors? We want hard facts, not vague promises that sound too good to be true. Contributors are no fools.
-
I can opt out only all partnerships. Can I opt out only this ridiculousness?
-
I used to like DT but now I must wait till August end to say good bye... (6 months after last upload).
What the h... is going on with this market?! :-\ >:( ???
-
OK, since this got out, here are a few details.
1. This is confidential because we're under an agreement. The email says that. We've always been transparent. We did our best to share more, our partners didn't agree.
2. This is NOT free. Once the partnership ends, we evaluate results and negotiate best royalties given the volume. The real deal will begin then. We plan to do our best to pay royalties retroactively.
3. We don't get paid for the test either, there is no scam. Just like you, we've adding our infrastructure and we've been working on this for quite a while.
4. We did tests like these in the past and we paid the royalties ourselves. This is a large size project and we can't support them, even if the scale of the initial test is small. 0.01% of something huge could still be significant. We need our contributors support and we sent them an email asking for that. You can opt out, nobody is forcing you to accept.
Again, I'm sorry for not being able to share more. I'm actually very enthusiastic about it since this could be the biggest partnership a stock agency can hope for. It could turn out into a great deal, unlike other negative examples that sadly, you've been exposed to.
Thank you for your support.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify the situation here Achilles. And good to know that in the end it wont be a free deal.
-
I understand that Dreamstime is testing a new opportunity to generate revenue and they need to see how this goes before deciding if it's worth it, what kind of money they can charge for this use and what kind of commission to pay. However, I do not agree that this kind of testing should assume free image use. If someone is using my image in online add, during test run or not, I should be compensated.
-
I dont believe in any great deals and partnerships anymore. They are always so excited whenever they announce something new... IS, DP, FT, now even DT.. The agencies are so obssessed with great deals that they completely forgot about the protective role which they should play, as our agents. I would like to see the major agencies join forces and fight all those scumbag sites which offer our images for free. Instead the agencies only fight each other, come with with crazy new deals or start to offer our precious content for free too. I dont know where this will end, it is going downhill really fast :-/
-
If they had given some details, depending on those I would decide.
As they gave none, I have to assume the worst - this is something like DPC. Opted out immediately.
-
I am glad they don't like my work enough to give it away for free.
-
"The purpose of this email is to tell you that based on the quality of your images, you are among only a few contributors that have been selected to participate in this test program."
What's the meaning of the word few? Probably thousands of contributors?!
If you can't give us more info, why are you lying us?
I'm out of all your Alliances!
-
They asked 81 images from me.
I opted out.
Not because I don't believe this "deal" can be a big nice opportunity, but because most "BIG DEALS" mean "LOW commissions".
The bigger the customer, the better the deal ... for the customer.
Perhaps it's Google again, trying to find a new partner after the Istock-disaster ;)
Main problem is of course that if we opt out because of this e-mail, all other partners also loose our images.
If Dreamstime does not like that, they 'd better make 2 Opt-out buttons : 1 for the Secret Deal, and 1 for all other alliances.
-
I'm on the fence.
I do appreciate the fact that they at least informed those of us included and provided an opt out up front. However, I'm disappointed that I have to opt out of all alliances just to avoid this "free" one.
I am pleased that Achilles came here and provided some additional information. I'm especially pleased that he's said they intend to provide retroactive royalties for usage. However, I'm not happy that no information is given regarding the amount of those retroactive royalties, when they might be provided and under what conditions DT would elect not to pay them.
So far DT has not been quite the jerks some of the other sites have been so I'd like to think there is a level of trust there that they would like to work on keeping. However, we've been taken advantage of a lot lately and its harder than ever to trust any agency.
I hope Achilles will come back and offer some information about timing and potential retroactive compensation. I'd also like it if DT would provide an opt out that was only for this test or "free" tests like it. If those things happen, I'm likely to stay opted in and give them the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, I'll probably opt out to protect my 20 files.
-
I didn't get the email, but I opted out anyway. I come from the world of big ad agencies where we pay people for their work. I expect to be paid.
-
I opted out
+1
-
I didn't get the email, but I opted out anyway. I come from the world of big ad agencies where we pay people for their work. I expect to be paid.
same here
Your portfolio is NOT enrolled.
-
what about people who missed the email for any reason?
They are automatically in! This is a dirty trick
The participation should be in full consent with "I agree"
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
-
Main problem is of course that if we opt out because of this e-mail, all other partners also loose our images.
Don't you think it's a sign?! IF partner sites loose valuable images, that may mean they should offer us better comission and OPEN DOORS...
IMO.
We've been talking about that in DP case, and any other microstock with PP program... the monster needs images to live! Our images. The problem is that microsites forget that lately.
Btw. I opted out all I could (of PP sites), anywhere, long time ago. If some agency wants to earn money with me, why not work directly? One middleman taking 70% or more from my $ is enough. I don't need any special 10 agents in that chain.
-
I do wonder why Dreamstime doesn't just use their own free stock photo site for this "small scale" testing.
http://www.stockfreeimages.com/ (http://www.stockfreeimages.com/) has almost a million images to test.
-
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us.
In this metaphor, the big fish being reeled in represents US. The big payday would be for THEM.
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
Usually, I love to complain about whatever any agency does, but in this case you might be right. It can be a good deal for us too. If it is not, we still can opt out.
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
Usually, I love to complain about whatever any agency does, but in this case you might be right. It can be a good deal for us too. If it is not, we still can opt out.
It's not clear you can opt out once it begins - if you want to opt out you have to do it within the next few days, after that, what? And how will you know whether or not it has been a good deal for you? You don't even know when the trial period is.
How can you know that "it can be a good deal for us too", when you don't know what the customer is, what the nature of usage is, what the method of earning is (could it be click-through advertising?), what the percentage payout would bea, what the earnings potential per usage is, whether the main benefit is financial or "exposure"?
That's my problem. If Serban could present the facts then I could make an informed decision. Right now, there is no way of making an informed decision because he won't tell us what he is asking us to do.
-
I have also always liked DT. I just don't want to give away my images for free.
This is completely different to what IS and FL pulled, we have been informed and given an opt out.
I may not like the idea of putting my work in but good on DT for the way they have done it. Reminds me of the Yay streaming idea. Didn't like that either but as long as we are given the choice they can do what they like, just not with my images.
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
I agree. We should look at the history of the agency to make a decision. It's certainly bad time as we are all too jumpy after recent events. I must be one of the most jumpy one, deleting my port from both FT and DP, so fast that i practically donated to DP about 30$ that got stuck as unpaid payment even though i could just wait for a few days to get to the payout threshold, but i couldn't wait. But this is because they both have very shady, abusing history.
Dreamtimes on the other hand has so far been a fair agency. And the tests like this, i am sure those shady agencies have been doing all the times without us even know about them. DT could have just kept silence about it. How would you even find out?
I am afraid that our reaction may actually push those few good agencies to the point to hide from us. Things like DPC is bad enough for good agencies to stay in business. We should fight bad agencies by supporting the good ones. I am not saying that this test will turn out to be something good for us, but i am willing to give them the benefit of doubt.
-
Well-stated Goofy! That's what they need to do. Ask us our opinion. We should be treated as equals if they want us to respect them. :(
Why not post this concept/idea to us in the first place- than use our 'Feedback' to decide if the venture is worth it for both us and your company. You will be surprised how smart we are and fair!
-
Maybe so. However, a "good agency" is relative. It depends on one's opinion. For example, I believe a "good agency" pays the artist at least 50% of the sales.
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
I agree. We should look at the history of the agency to make a decision. It's certainly bad time as we are all too jumpy after recent events. I must be one of the most jumpy one, deleting my port from both FT and DP, so fast that i practically donated to DP about 30$ that got stuck as unpaid payment even though i could just wait for a few days to get to the payout threshold, but i couldn't wait. But this is because they both have very shady, abusing history.
Dreamtimes on the other hand has so far been a fair agency. And the tests like this, i am sure those shady agencies have been doing all the times without us even know about them. DT could have just kept silence about it. How would you even find out?
I am afraid that our reaction may actually push those few good agencies to the point to hide from us. Things like DPC is bad enough for good agencies to stay in business. We should fight bad agencies by supporting the good ones. I am not saying that this test will turn out to be something good for us, but i am willing to give them the benefit of doubt.
-
This business plan sounds no different than what Getty is doing offering a hyperlink for no charge in order to be able to mine data and possibly push out ads in the meantime through websites (ideally bloggers) that need images.
According to the Getty model, photographers would have opportunities to generate 'click through' revenue no different than Google Ads.
I'm not fond of the business model, but I'd be interested to see how it goes.
-
@all
How can you be sure that you really have opted out??
Screenshots, Screencasts, tons of people who wittness that you really opted-out??
I mean - if they just say that you did not opt-out - what can you do?
If an agency acts like gangsters (automatically opt-in is in germany illegal) i can imagine that they try to betray you with even more dirty tricks.
-
immediately opted out..
the problem is I am pretty sure I had opted out of alliances before.. (like years ago)
how did I end up "in" again?
that's the real puzzle!..
-
that's right, we can opt out and still be in once it is a top secret project that will turn the microstock industry upside down ;D
too bad it took so long...
-
:(I was beginning to have doubts about DT when they abolished the default option for deleting old files with no sales.
They altered my pre-set default without even informing me so now I have to manually delete them individually or pay to have them re-keyworded.
It will be interesting to see how opting out of their alliances affects my meagre sales.
-
I think the word "exposure" is used these days like a magician would use something like "Abacadabra" - misdirection.
-
Does someone knows a Grease-Monkey-script which makes it possible to delete all my images which are hold like hostages by this dubious website without spending my half lifetime?
-
:(I was beginning to have doubts about DT when they abolished the default option for deleting old files with no sales.
They altered my pre-set default without even informing me so now I have to manually delete them individually or pay to have them re-keyworded.
It will be interesting to see how opting out of their alliances affects my meagre sales.
Really? I have the option to leave online with out rekeywording.
-
Maybe I made the wrong assumption when I noticed that the options had changed been reduced to leave online or donate to free section.
Do you know when they made the change from having the three options.
To delete images or have them re-keyworded or donate to the free section.
If you are right it would have been nice of them to inform me of the changes before they altered my default setting.
-
:(I was beginning to have doubts about DT when they abolished the default option for deleting old files with no sales.
They altered my pre-set default without even informing me so now I have to manually delete them individually or pay to have them re-keyworded.
It will be interesting to see how opting out of their alliances affects my meagre sales.
Really? I have the option to leave online with out rekeywording.
Yes, I just looked and I see that my default, which was "delete" has now changed to "keep online", delete is no longer an option - which makes rather a farce of the whole notification process. I was unaware that they had changed the options. I assume everybody is offered the same choices.
As for talk about them going behind your back and secretly keeping you in the programme .... well, each and every agency could pull stunts like that. Either you trust them and keep working with them or you pull out as quickly as you can.
-
When I contacted support about the changes the reply just said that I could delete manually.
-
Yes it's a "beta test" and the purpose of the test is to find out what percentage of contributors would go along with a Getty-style giveaway that creates revenue without looking like a "sale", so royalties aren't paid.
I imagine many - maybe most - contributors just glance at an email like this and say "fine, whatever". They don't read MSG and are satisfied with whatever an agency decides to pay.
If a deal like this was actually announced ahead of time, with an opt-out, what percentage of contributors would say 'no'? That's the data this test will produce.
-
It is getting to the point I am afraid of what I will find here when I sign in. DT has always treated me well. But hell no you can not give my images away for free.
I opted out!
-
It is getting to the point I am afraid of what I will find here when I sign in. DT has always treated me well. But hell no you can not give my images away for free.
I opted out!
I think what so many people are failing to understand is that DT's endgame is NOT out to give our images away for free!
They are conducting a small, limited-time test with the "big fish" partner to make sure the partner is satisfied with how it will work. If partner is indeed satisfied, a deal that could be quite lucrative will be entered, and we could benefit greatly.
DT has said they would try to retroactively pay us for those images downloaded in the test period, but I'm guessing those will be pennies compared to the many dollars that will come once the full deal is in place.
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
-
Who's talking about "many dollars"?
Large deals usually result in "many dollarcents".
-
The 12 in the email are mostly low performers that have been online forever although 3 of them do ok across the 5 sites in general - does look like linked to the new "keep them even if not sold" change.
-
DT gives me a hard time becoming excl on IS, since I cannot delete my port entirely...
-
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?
-
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?
If I were DT I wouldn't be thrilled with this approach. If many or most of the contributors whose work they selected for this beta chose to sit on the sidelines, there's less likelihood the potential partner would be impressed by the offering. DT would have to keep finding replacement images to fill in for the ones you yanked out. Then if the test goes well and a lucrative deal is implemented, you want to hop back in?
To me, fairness means those who are willing to support an initiative like this should be the first (maybe even only) contributors to benefit from it.
-
DT gives me a hard time becoming excl on IS, since I cannot delete my port entirely...
Jaysus!!
-
the expense of doing trial run should lie with them - our job is to offfer our content - their job is to market, promote, and look after the transactions of sales.
every business has to 'invest' if they want to grow - thats the chance you take when you think the payoff will be worth it. if this is one of the most significant deals ever done, the potential payoff for dt will be enormous, so they should bear the burden of the expenses of doing this trial run
it shouldn't be on the backs of the little people
-
They selected some of my worst images...
I like dreamstime... but deals without money are bad deals...
-
After deleting the images they identified I sent them an email "Thank you for telling me which of my images you intended to give away for free. It was tedious but I have now deleted them from the database. Other images you intend to give away for free could you please delete them from your database for me?"
-
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?
If I were DT I wouldn't be thrilled with this approach. If many or most of the contributors whose work they selected for this beta chose to sit on the sidelines, there's less likelihood the potential partner would be impressed by the offering. DT would have to keep finding replacement images to fill in for the ones you yanked out. Then if the test goes well and a lucrative deal is implemented, you want to hop back in?
To me, fairness means those who are willing to support an initiative like this should be the first (maybe even only) contributors to benefit from it.
Wouldn't it be their loss or the loss of their new partner, if they limit the number of contributors (and works) participating in the program?
-
It is getting to the point I am afraid of what I will find here when I sign in. DT has always treated me well. But hell no you can not give my images away for free.
I opted out!
I think what so many people are failing to understand is that DT's endgame is NOT out to give our images away for free!
They are conducting a small, limited-time test with the "big fish" partner to make sure the partner is satisfied with how it will work. If partner is indeed satisfied, a deal that could be quite lucrative will be entered, and we could benefit greatly.
DT has said they would try to retroactively pay us for those images downloaded in the test period, but I'm guessing those will be pennies compared to the many dollars that will come once the full deal is in place.
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
how do you know that? which agency have done any good for you/us in the latest years? IS? DP? FT? DT?
your statement shows how we are in the verge of accepting anything from agencies, guess you are forgetting that hope doesn't pay bills
how can you be so sure that this deal will get us many dollars in the future? and so many that you are willing to give them away for free now
sorry to say but I have never expected such thought from you, I know I cannot make decisions for you but staying happy with FREE thinking of a wonderful wealthy future isn't going to help contributors and agencies as well once the buyers left will be ready to pay zero
maybe you know something we don't once I see no reason to believe this will be positive
-
I do wonder why Dreamstime doesn't just use their own free stock photo site for this "small scale" testing.
[url]http://www.stockfreeimages.com/[/url] ([url]http://www.stockfreeimages.com/[/url]) has almost a million images to test.
because they won't sell 8)
-
If its just a beta test why wouldn't watermarked pics work? If exposure is so great then watermarks will get more of it.
Isn't another meaning of exposure to be left out in the cold? Maybe that's the kind of exposure they mean for us?
-
...To me, fairness means those who are willing to support an initiative like this should be the first (maybe even only) contributors to benefit from it.
This is muddled thinking. How will a buyer benefit if only a tiny handful of images (those of the loyal few who would happily give away their work) is available in the final program?
If DT wants to experiment, they should pay - perhaps a sub royalty which isn't much per image - or use their free collection.
Fairness would have us all still with a 50% royalty as DT started out with, not some club you can only get into by giving your work away, but we clearly differ on what's fair and to whom.
-
Not sure it will matter sales wise, to me anyway. I just checked about half of the images they selected from my portfolio and only two had ever sold. I didn't bother checking the rest. I wonder what the selection criteria was? Random numbers?
-
What the f-- is going on with these companies. As if it's not bad enough when someone comes along and wants to sell our work for a buck and offer pennies, now we're down to "free". Great.
Some days I really feel like I could just walk away from this whole mess of a business and be pretty ok with that decision.
I hear ya Mike.
-
DT - Please at least tell us how long the trial will be for? I can't see how this piece of information could be so super confidential that it would jeopardise the test. But it is crucial for contributors to know how long they will be giving away their images for free.
-
What the f-- is going on with these companies. As if it's not bad enough when someone comes along and wants to sell our work for a buck and offer pennies, now we're down to "free". Great.
Some days I really feel like I could just walk away from this whole mess of a business and be pretty ok with that decision.
I hear ya Mike.
I'm starting to wonder if Lisa was right and I'm wrong. Maybe this whole thing really is already over and it doesn't matter what we do. Might as well just grab whatever we can get out of it before it goes under completely. Or speed it along and let it burn up faster and hope that something better rises up in place of it.
Not sure I'm totally there yet, but the thought has crossed my mind today.
-
Completely random set of images they picked of mine. There's no pattern between them at all. Oh well. I'll see what happens for now. Nothing to loose with the ones they picked :-)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I opted out too.....
They just want the images free to test in Beta.... lol. I have seen sites stay in beta for years..... Not no, but HELL NO!
-
Opted out from this exciting program
-
I'm starting to wonder if Lisa was right and I'm wrong. Maybe this whole thing really is already over and it doesn't matter what we do. Might as well just grab whatever we can get out of it before it goes under completely. Or speed it along and let it burn up faster and hope that something better rises up in place of it.
Not sure I'm totally there yet, but the thought has crossed my mind today.
I don't buy it. The bad deals at iStock and Fotolia both look like leveraged buyout deals gone bad, as they generally go. Both are overloaded with debt to pay off their investors, so they look to screw their suppliers to make up the difference.
This Dreamstime deal feels different to me, maybe because we really don't know anything about it. It feels unfinished, like they have the basics figured out but don't know yet about pricing or what the customer uptake will be. So they want to run a trial or a series of trials to figure out what works. The problem is that they want to keep it all secret, and they want someone else (i.e. us) to help them keep expenses down (i.e. to zero). Once the trials are over and we hear the specifics, we may decide that it's a good deal, or at least not a bad one. The problem is with the here and now.
If I were Serban, I would have offered us something for our participation, like an extra 10% royalty over what everybody else gets when it goes live. That's an incentive to jump in now, and it won't cost them anything until they know it's ready for prime time. Heck, they could make the extra royalty a limited time thing, say for the first year. At least we'd have a chance to gain, rather than giving away our work with a hint that we might get something someday.
Think of this as more like Shutterstock's deal with Facebook, which hasn't made me very much but isn't costing me either. Maybe it's not the cosmic screwing of Google Drive or DPC. Of course, I could be wrong...
-
I'm starting to wonder if Lisa was right and I'm wrong. Maybe this whole thing really is already over and it doesn't matter what we do. Might as well just grab whatever we can get out of it before it goes under completely. Or speed it along and let it burn up faster and hope that something better rises up in place of it.
Not sure I'm totally there yet, but the thought has crossed my mind today.
Welcome to the dark side. ;)
I do kind of wonder if it is good news or bad news sometimes when part of me thinks the whole thing could or maybe even should burn down.
-
As said I deleted the images of mine they targeted. If they want to market their site then fine, do it. But not by giving away my images for free (especially when they are on other sites at the same time) :(
-
Welcome to the dark side. ;)
I do kind of wonder if it is good news or bad news sometimes when part of me thinks the whole thing could or maybe even should burn down.
I have to say, the dark side seems a little less stressful. Taking on a, "Screw it, let it burn," attitude is sort of therapeutic. :)
-
In 2005, Dreamstime was the first site where I made enough for a payout. I remember wondering if this microstock thing was for real and if I could trust them and whether they would really send me real money. They did, and they have never given me personally any reason to distrust them in the nine years I have done business with them.
Some of the posts here seem a little over the top. Do people here really believe Serban is a "crook"? I have always admired his success and the way he runs his business. I hope this beta test works and I make some money from the ensuing deal. In the meantime, I don't mind if 154 of my images (out of 2229) are used in a limited trial and I don't get paid if the deal fails to materialize. My images aren't gold or diamonds or the cure for cancer. They are just clipart. If you hate DT, leave. If you don't want to participate in the beta test, then don't. It was just an invitation. Not the end of the world.
-
Like many of you, I was an early adopter of DT. At one time we were equals - then the royalties were adjusted so they come out earning more, but overall - my income was growing.
Through all these years I have never had one of my hissy fits over DT. I believe in them. I like them, Serban and Tangie and the real people running the show. I have always rooted for them (if that is too English - cheered for, hope they do well).
In the meantime I have loudly quit IS, 123, Deposit Photos and just barely hanging onto FT by the skin of my teeth. I was early adopters of them too but they are pretty clear about the level of respect for the owners of the 30 million plus units they flog as their own.
I'm pretty certain if DT had asked for help even two years ago I would have been proud to comply. Maybe even if they hadn't thrown "confidential" and "no compensation" in the same missive. Now I am jaded, bitter, angry with and distrustful of all the distributors (although I still hold DT and SS in quite high regard.) so I'm sorry DT, but you are a little too late with this ambiguous offer.
At one time we were 50/50 partners but now DT earns more than I. It is simply outrageous for a company of it's size to ask for help. When I am doing research and development, I don't go to vendors and manufactures and ask for parts for free. I pay for all my own R&D. Some of it flies some of it falters - that is why it is R&D. It is mind blowing that they have gone so far from their origins and think that a digital file has no value. Why is it different from a widget? It costs to manufacture a photo just like it costs to manufacture a widget. To make it worse, a widget goes into a door of a car or wherever and stays there... the word free associated with digital content leads one to feel... well lost forever/out there/abused.
If this was any other industry where they really really needed free widgets - they would have to offer the manufacturers a stake in the company. But that's the last thing any of these agencies would want. Shareholders that are also photographers.
They are not yet on my sh*t list, at least they didn't tell us after the fact.
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
Love your optimism but unfortunately you obviously weren't around when we had similar breathless requests to "donate" free images for similar schemes at IS and FT.
Those were supposedly "for a limited time" too ... but the images in question were still available for free download years later (and also had registered hundreds of thousands of 'sales').
Nothing for contributors ever came of either scheme. The 'big fish' used its power to get the free images but never actually signed up for the big deal.
Good luck with giving your images away for free in anticipation of a big pay-day later. If I were a Nigerian prince I'd be emailing you some great offers that would make you even more money.
-
Let's see how it goes. I am in favour of trying this deal. I agree with michaeldb. We have to try something to call it failure. I learnt my lessons that examine the opinion of masses very carefully. Lets try this deal. Yes, I got this invitation with image ids. Best of Luck DT. I am with you. Go ahead.
-
A personal Note to Achilles...
My friend I've been with you since day one But...The time has come to tell you and anyone else reading and listening to whats going on lately has to Know.....
Achilles....Without us, You and your site is dead and I mean dead. You and the other sites biggest issue is , You and others still after all this time have no clue or respect for what we go through to give you our hearts and soul through our work, The time and Money we invest in supplying you with your income and vast income. We own everything...You and all the other sites own Nothing But server space and some furniture. The sooner you and all the other greedy sites realize this the better off you will be going forward. FT set off a firestorm and It's about time, I've been saying since 2006 we have to unite and we Finally are.
This is not going to stop and I prey it doesn't. This crap cannot go on and I will spend whatever time it takes to alarm everyone about the continuing injustice we have been through.
If any site cannot make a decent profit with product they don't make themselves at a 50/50 split from every dollar then maybe it's time to do something else.
The Gravy train is over my Old friend, We are starting to rise up and I Prey we don't stop....Is it to late? well ya. We were lazy and let this happen. But Im afraid FT and now you have awoken a sleeping Giant and Thank God it's about time.
Ya better hear this Achilles and Oleg and Jon. Those of us that do the work, Invest in our craft deserve more. There is no creative agency anywhere that takes more than 50% of any artists work.
You can spin this anyway you want, and this message is not about your new test program...it's about Our future, Not the gullible newbies that are happy getting 20 cents or whatever....You want to target them Like the others? Go for it.
245,000 Images are new just this week on SS. WHY? because no one Gives a crap. if thats what you want, Well you got it.
My advise is make it as fast as you can because WE OWN EVERYTHING!! You own Nothing and the sooner you get this the better you will Position yourself for the future because no matter what you think, it's gonna change and come back to us.. That I will guarantee or die trying.
I would rather make 800 Million and take care of the people who made that happen than make a Billion. All you owners have to get your head straight. 50/50 or nothing!!! No Business makes a better margin than that. You can't? Then business is not your forte"
I wish you the best of Luck and also My Comrades whom I will always support regardless of there opinions.
Laurin Rinder.
-
"The purpose of this email is to tell you that based on the quality of your images, you are among only a few contributors that have been selected to participate in this test program."
Well, looks like we all received the email, so they are lying to us. :-\ Disgusting. Email subject "Exciting news" ?!?!?! Shame.
-
"This email is sent to you under a private beta campaign, please keep it confidential."
Or how about... "We are trying to cheat you into giving us some free images, please don't tell anyone." :-X
-
I'm starting to wonder if Lisa was right and I'm wrong...
Where is Lisa? What happend? What did I miss here? ???
Rinderart, that above is the best post I've read lately!
-
A personal Note to Achilles...
....
Thanks Laurin!
-
Great post Laurin Rinder!
-
A personal Note to Achilles...
My friend I've been with you since day one But...The time has come to tell you and anyone else reading and listening to whats going on lately has to Know.....
Achilles....Without us, You and your site is dead and I mean dead. You and the other sites biggest issue is , You and others still after all this time have no clue or respect for what we go through to give you our hearts and soul through our work, The time and Money we invest in supplying you with your income and vast income. We own everything...You and all the other sites own Nothing But server space and some furniture. The sooner you and all the other greedy sites realize this the better off you will be going forward. FT set off a firestorm and It's about time, I've been saying since 2006 we have to unite and we Finally are.
This is not going to stop and I prey it doesn't. This crap cannot go on and I will spend whatever time it takes to alarm everyone about the continuing injustice we have been through.
If any site cannot make a decent profit with product they don't make themselves at a 50/50 split from every dollar then maybe it's time to do something else.
The Gravy train is over my Old friend, We are starting to rise up and I Prey we don't stop....Is it to late? well ya. We were lazy and let this happen. But Im afraid FT and now you have awoken a sleeping Giant and Thank God it's about time.
Ya better hear this Achilles and Oleg and Jon. Those of us that do the work, Invest in our craft deserve more. There is no creative agency anywhere that takes more than 50% of any artists work.
You can spin this anyway you want, and this message is not about your new test program...it's about Our future, Not the gullible newbies that are happy getting 20 cents or whatever....You want to target them Like the others? Go for it.
245,000 Images are new just this week on SS. WHY? because no one Gives a crap. if thats what you want, Well you got it.
My advise is make it as fast as you can because WE OWN EVERYTHING!! You own Nothing and the sooner you get this the better you will Position yourself for the future because no matter what you think, it's gonna change and come back to us.. That I will guarantee or die trying.
I would rather make 800 Million and take care of the people who made that happen than make a Billion. All you owners have to get your head straight. 50/50 or nothing!!! No Business makes a better margin than that. You can't? Then business is not your forte"
I wish you the best of Luck and also My Comrades whom I will always support regardless of there opinions.
Laurin Rinder.
Love this !!
-
As a new contributor I didn't get this email... lucky me, I guess.
-
I think Laurin speaks on behalf of all of us....I know that after nine years of this I've just about had a gutful. Who do these people think they are?
-
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
-
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
Emailing an "exclusive" offer to everybody and their cousin and then expect that it's kept confidential?
Come on, I would expect a bit more understanding of how communication works.
This is the sad proof, not this thread.
Confidential deals are made in person with a few selected ones, and with proper compensation.
-
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
What about the commissions the rest of us are being paid?
-
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less.
Thanks Achilles, despite being vague, even a general timeframe is helpful. That was (part of) the info that was sorely missing, and may help some make up their mind about giving this the benefit of the doubt or not.
-
Yuri said a few weeks as well (over 1 year...)
anyway I am opt out even if it is a day only
-
I think Laurin speaks on behalf of all of us....I know that after nine years of this I've just about had a gutful. Who do these people think they are?
I agree but the post should really be on the FL thread. We have to be careful not to tar every agency with the same brush and reward the better ones. DT definitely isn't one of the worst.
Thanks to Achilles for chiming in here. I look forward to finding out more about the scheme down the line. Hopefully it is like the SS Facebook deal, not like some of the shady Getty deals/ giveaways.
I am just not prepared to take the gamble with my images until I know more.
-
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
Emailing an "exclusive" offer to everybody and their cousin and then expect that it's kept confidential?
Come on, I would expect a bit more understanding of how communication works.
This is the sad proof, not this thread.
Confidential deals are made in person with a few selected ones, and with proper compensation.
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
Thanks for the update Achilles. I understand the need for confidentiality and the need to only reveal partial information. I can't blame anyone for being skeptical though. We've experienced the google drive deal (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/google-giving-photos-away-free-for-commercial-use-and-istock-agrees) and microsoft deal (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/microsoft-giving-images-away-for-free-to-unregistered-users-and-istock-agrees/25/), both of which where terribly rotten for contributors.... essentially giving our work away for free for eternity. The Facebook deal (http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/feedback-thoughts-on-facebook-shutterstock-deal/) with Shutterstock however, I'm a big fan of. So I agree partnership deals can be good for everyone.
A couple things put you in a better light. You warned us BEFORE the deal took place with an email, as apposed to an unseen forum post or nothing at all (what Fotolia and iStock seem to do) and you offered an opt out. Two very important steps.
So... I'll trust you on this one and leave my images opted in. If the deal turns out to be 'free images in exchange for "promotion" or free images in exchange for "more traffic to my portfolio" I'll be opting out / deleting images very quickly. By the sounds of it, the deal will be paid exchange for image use... that is what I am expecting when all the details are laid out. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
-
I did not opt out because I'm against free use of my images.
If DST would have asked me to use a few (not 81) for free, for ONE TIME use in a beta test, I would probably not object at all.
But what if this beta test means that 100 test-customers can use my images in several projects? That's a lot of sales potential lost ... :'(
However, now that I DID opt out, I also loose sales potential, because my images are also opted out of the other partner sites.
So whatever I do, I don't like it.
-
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
This is such a laugh!!!!!
"nobody is forcing you to participate."
You do - for example all contributors you have choosen for your "exciting business-model" and which have been in holiday!!!
"but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential."
This thread is a hint that hoepefully the times are over that gready people can do what ever they want with contributors and their work.
Like Laurin Rinder said.
You are nothing without us and you get the respect you deserve.
-
By the sounds of it, the deal will be paid exchange for image use... that is what I am expecting when all the details are laid out. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Leaf, do you mean "the beta deal will be paid for image use" or : "the final deal will be paid for image use" ?
-
By the sounds of it, the deal will be paid exchange for image use... that is what I am expecting when all the details are laid out. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Leaf, do you mean "the beta deal will be paid for image use" or : "the final deal will be paid for image use" ?
2. This is NOT free. Once the partnership ends, we evaluate results and negotiate best royalties given the volume. The real deal will begin then. We plan to do our best to pay royalties retroactively.
I meant the final deal re: the above post by Achilles but he also stated they they will hopefully be able to pay royalties retroactively.
-
exposure and hope!
how about paying bills?
-
I got the message too. And Im by far not a "top contributor" and looking at the number of responses here Im also not one of the "few" who received the letter. Many contributors received it. So the previous two statements are not truth, I suppose some "clever mind" in the legal department came up with it, thinking that we will feel "special". This simply doesnt reflect the reality of today - contributors are no longer silent sheep who accept everything without a discussion. I think the representatives of agencies should spend more time reading the discussions going on here and elsewhere recently, about all great deals we have been experiencing. Then maybe they would realize that a straight talk would be much better than some flattering email sent only to the "few"...
-
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good.
Few my thoughts here and with full respect, but to be honest... We have subs. today which is not good thing for authors - it lets sell images for pitty prices, hundreds of images almost for free to wide RF usage (! clients can do almost everything with our work). So I wonder what better can be good deal today? Of course you can't tell that now, it's a secret and we'll get answer later, after few months. We'll see what is this new idea and what it gives us. I (we?) only hope it means better price (not lower!) for download (subs. are pathetic enough), or/ and more sales. Can you tell if my expectations go right way?
Btw. It's hard to forget FT or Veer (and many others) new great ideas which was hoping better sales and for better money... We're still waiting and as we can see it's not going to good.
How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
First thing I think is giving some kind of packs of images for poor $ like FT did lately. This is the model that we know already and we're affraid of the most! You must understand.
Be respectful and you will be respected.
Exactly :)
-
I find it hard to believe that any professional could expect anyone to take anything on trust these days, specially in this business, and yet..... here we have people who , for one reason or another are willing to do just that.
It's a strange world.
-
I find it hard to believe that any professional could expect anyone to take anything on trust these days, specially in this business, and yet..... here we have people who , for one reason or another are willing to do just that.
It's a strange world.
well said!
-
Mr Achilles, i would like to know what happens once the 5 days period you gave us to opt out ends. Are we supposed to be "in" forever after that?
Or maybe does it means we are in for the beta test period and once finished (who knows when) you are giving us the full details of the outcome and a new chance to decide, this time with information.
I have just opted out, if i change my mind in this 5 days period can I opt in again?
Also if we opt out, can then opt in once the test is finished?
Will we even know when the test ends?
Are we going the get the details of how many of our images were given away in the beta test?
I'm asking you with not real hope to get a straight answer, please surprise me!
-
@Achilles:
Surely you can at least tell us what % of the income you would pass on to us if this went through? That isn't something that would concern your partners.
You might also be able to say whether payments per use would be for sums of money similar to the current payments from DT, or would they be for fractions of a cent?
If I had assurances on these things I might give you the benefit of the doubt. If I'm left thinking that it might be some click-through system, where people get to use my image for as long as they like and I get thousandths of a cent in return, then I really can't contemplate reactivating my associate option.
(AND what Arquiplay77 says above - surely these things are independent of your partner's concerns and are simply matters of internal DT policy, which you should be free to tell us about).
-
Just a few of us are in the project.... ???
-
@Leaf
thanks for your private message where you informed me that you deleted one post out of this thread.
May i ask what post it was and why you think that it is "offtopic"?
As far as i see this thread is not only about the new "business model" - it is about the general question if DT is trustworthy or not.
And if i try to get an answer from achilles why DT still sells our images although even an attorney has been hired it is definitely not "offtopi" because it shows the level of "trust" DT deserves.
Of course i realized that you are one of just few who claims for understanding against DT in this thread.
May i ask with all the given respect if there is a closer relation between you and DT than you have with other agencies?
-
A personal Note to Achilles...
My friend I've been with you since day one But...The time has come to tell you and anyone else reading and listening to whats going on lately has to Know.....
Achilles....Without us, You and your site is dead and I mean dead. You and the other sites biggest issue is , You and others still after all this time have no clue or respect for what we go through to give you our hearts and soul through our work, The time and Money we invest in supplying you with your income and vast income. We own everything...You and all the other sites own Nothing But server space and some furniture. The sooner you and all the other greedy sites realize this the better off you will be going forward. FT set off a firestorm and It's about time, I've been saying since 2006 we have to unite and we Finally are.
This is not going to stop and I prey it doesn't. This crap cannot go on and I will spend whatever time it takes to alarm everyone about the continuing injustice we have been through.
If any site cannot make a decent profit with product they don't make themselves at a 50/50 split from every dollar then maybe it's time to do something else.
The Gravy train is over my Old friend, We are starting to rise up and I Prey we don't stop....Is it to late? well ya. We were lazy and let this happen. But Im afraid FT and now you have awoken a sleeping Giant and Thank God it's about time.
Ya better hear this Achilles and Oleg and Jon. Those of us that do the work, Invest in our craft deserve more. There is no creative agency anywhere that takes more than 50% of any artists work.
You can spin this anyway you want, and this message is not about your new test program...it's about Our future, Not the gullible newbies that are happy getting 20 cents or whatever....You want to target them Like the others? Go for it.
245,000 Images are new just this week on SS. WHY? because no one Gives a crap. if thats what you want, Well you got it.
My advise is make it as fast as you can because WE OWN EVERYTHING!! You own Nothing and the sooner you get this the better you will Position yourself for the future because no matter what you think, it's gonna change and come back to us.. That I will guarantee or die trying.
I would rather make 800 Million and take care of the people who made that happen than make a Billion. All you owners have to get your head straight. 50/50 or nothing!!! No Business makes a better margin than that. You can't? Then business is not your forte"
I wish you the best of Luck and also My Comrades whom I will always support regardless of there opinions.
Laurin Rinder.
These bolded comments are why DT or any other agency for that matter don't care. They have the critical mass on their side. The newbies, I assume many of them, are producing good work that would easily replace our work 10 fold. Secondly, MANY, and I mean MANY contributors do not know what's going on or if they do don't understand the consequences. And then there are those who understand it and accept it. This places a strong weight in the goal post of the FT's and DT' sand DP's and they know it.....AND THIS IS WHY THEY DO IT. If they were in any way AT RISK of losing most of their images they would reverse course or not even go there, but the preverbal ball is in their court, unfortunately. Don't get me wrong. I support everything you said, Lauren. I am trying to bring logic as to WHY the agencies don't care.
-
@Mantis
thats true and a plea for more education / clarification of facts.
These people who accept and dont care about all this rip-off will one day realize that they did ruin their mean of existence.
but the onces who just dont know whats going on can be enlightened.
-
I am a new to stock, still I follow this forum and I trust the elders, I care just as much as the most worried contributor around. Maybe it's time to think about a super meta orginized stock contributor global federation. I would pay good money along with others if it means that there will be a strong official contributors organization. Not a volentery organization but a full blown hardcore coalition !
-
I suggest you allow us to uncheck specific partnerships (such as this new exciting offer), so we can choose. That would be the best approach and leave us feeling less taken advantage of—or forced to do something we don't want to do. 8)
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
-
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you.
Why you lie? You force all contributors who had received "secret" letters to participate it's images in this partnership by default.
Be respectful and you will be respected.
Exactly! But you should say this phrase yourself first.
Microstocks MUST respect their contributors.
If you need to include some images in beta-test of some partnership program you MUST ask it first, even if they'll get their royalty afterwards.
You shouldn't take their images by default. Yes, you've send email notice, but: some contributors have vacation now and can't do required actions to opt-out. Also some mail services was placed your letter in Spam or Junk folders. Also some stockers don't read microstocks newsletters.
You must provide to your contributors full conditions of their works usage and royalties.
You must provide separate opt-out option for this partnership program (in current case you force people to opt-out from all partner services, not only from your beta-test PP)
It's minimal requirements. Simply be honest with people who helps earn money to you.
Only after this you can require respect to you and your microstock.
-
Welcome to the dark side. ;)
I do kind of wonder if it is good news or bad news sometimes when part of me thinks the whole thing could or maybe even should burn down.
I have to say, the dark side seems a little less stressful. Taking on a, "Screw it, let it burn," attitude is sort of therapeutic. :)
LOL. There is a certain peace in caring less. I guess I still care though. I feel more like a doomsday prepper hoping to survive the coming apocalypse. Not that this is it or at least it doesn't seem like it.
-
Be respectful and you will be respected.
Imagine the respect you would have gotten by sending an email allowing people to opt IN for some sort of compensation. That would have brought you a round of quiet applause. People would have been happy and probably would not have made it public.
This could wind up being an awesome deal...who knows? But coming on the heels of DPC it leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.
Re-read your own advice and keep it in mind for next time.
-
Just out of curiosity I had a look at DT's sub plans. If my math is correct, this "partner" could purchase the biggest plan and get full use of 18,250 images for one year for a measly 21 CENTS each. I'm sorry, but if they can't cough up a few cents up front for their beta test, then I have a hard time believing it's such a great deal for us or DT.
Pay your 21 pennies for your "beta tests", that's what those big sub packages are for!
-
If DT really can't afford to pay us for our images used in the beta test, then they need to offer those whose images are included in the beta test some other incentive, such as a higher % once the beta test is complete and the actual program starts, assuming it is successful, as well as higher search placement.
If not, why should we stay opted in and allow our images to be used for free to reel in a big fish, and then once the deal is completed, get the same deal as those who have opted out?
I'd be willing to let them use my chosen images, some of which have been very high earners for me on other sites, and some good earners on DT as well, if I knew that, should the test be successful, I would benefit from keeping my images opted in, beyond a vague promise of "hoping" to pay retroactive benefits.
I'd also like to know which images are used and be assured that any free use is a one-time use, and will not continue past the beta period, unless we are compensated for that use.
Serban, I appreciate your responses here, and hope you will be back to respond to our additional questions and requests.
-
I do not feel the whole dt discussion as so bad.
If Those Who want to support DT, do that.
The one Which does not matter what is with DT, then op-out.
I am not really interested in helping DT. Sales 10th place out of 10
Therefore I give no pictures for free.
But who thinks everything better than FT .. then you should already consider something to contribute. Therefore, some weeks to waive the sales of some images.
So, support, or let it be.
I choose to let it be. :D
-
DT has a million free images, thats point one I dont understand. Why dont they use them images?
Point two, why cant they afford a sub for images used, why cant they pay for this themselves? Do they really need to beg for free images of their members to real in a big fish? LOL
It makes no sense whatsoever and just shows greed and disrespect for us. Period.
-
A personal Note to Achilles...
My friend I've been with you since day one But...The time has come to tell you and anyone else reading and listening to whats going on lately has to Know.....
Achilles....Without us, You and your site is dead and I mean dead. You and the other sites biggest issue is , You and others still after all this time have no clue or respect for what we go through to give you our hearts and soul through our work, The time and Money we invest in supplying you with your income and vast income. We own everything...You and all the other sites own Nothing But server space and some furniture. The sooner you and all the other greedy sites realize this the better off you will be going forward. FT set off a firestorm and It's about time, I've been saying since 2006 we have to unite and we Finally are.
This is not going to stop and I prey it doesn't. This crap cannot go on and I will spend whatever time it takes to alarm everyone about the continuing injustice we have been through.
If any site cannot make a decent profit with product they don't make themselves at a 50/50 split from every dollar then maybe it's time to do something else.
The Gravy train is over my Old friend, We are starting to rise up and I Prey we don't stop....Is it to late? well ya. We were lazy and let this happen. But Im afraid FT and now you have awoken a sleeping Giant and Thank God it's about time.
Ya better hear this Achilles and Oleg and Jon. Those of us that do the work, Invest in our craft deserve more. There is no creative agency anywhere that takes more than 50% of any artists work.
You can spin this anyway you want, and this message is not about your new test program...it's about Our future, Not the gullible newbies that are happy getting 20 cents or whatever....You want to target them Like the others? Go for it.
245,000 Images are new just this week on SS. WHY? because no one Gives a crap. if thats what you want, Well you got it.
My advise is make it as fast as you can because WE OWN EVERYTHING!! You own Nothing and the sooner you get this the better you will Position yourself for the future because no matter what you think, it's gonna change and come back to us.. That I will guarantee or die trying.
I would rather make 800 Million and take care of the people who made that happen than make a Billion. All you owners have to get your head straight. 50/50 or nothing!!! No Business makes a better margin than that. You can't? Then business is not your forte"
I wish you the best of Luck and also My Comrades whom I will always support regardless of there opinions.
Laurin Rinder.
Laurin, great post. Thank you very much.
One cant quote it often enough...
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
+1
I'm IN
-
If I were Serban, I would have offered us something for our participation, like an extra 10% royalty over what everybody else gets when it goes live. That's an incentive to jump in now, and it won't cost them anything until they know it's ready for prime time. Heck, they could make the extra royalty a limited time thing, say for the first year. At least we'd have a chance to gain, rather than giving away our work with a hint that we might get something someday.
Exactly. You might think he'd realize that we've already been burnt by enough giveaway deals and most of us aren't even interested in the details - we're already typing "NO WAY" and looking for the opt-out.
With these agencies today, it's all stick and no carrot.
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
+1
I'm IN
What? You mean you're not panicking over a beta test that could allow a few of your images to be downloaded by testers at no cost for a few weeks (even though we're told we could still be compensated for these)? Haven't you heard that the world is ending? How dare an agency, by most accounts one of the "good ones," try to land a deal that could potentially mean many more sales for us in the long run? The nerve!
-
This isn't about panic. It's about getting paid for my work. I'll tell you what. I know a lot of families with large yards and I am on a pretty good terms with them. Why don't you come over and mow my yard for free. Once all of my friends see what a great job you did then maybe they will hire you to mow their yards too. Or maybe not but you will get great exposure and I get my lawn mowed. Sounds like a win win doesn't it. I'll even throw a kickback to you if my friends pay me a finders fee. So you might even get paid for mowing my lawn too.
Seriously, this is about saying no. There is a line in the sand. It used to be $.25 per sale and now it just crossed over to "Free". At some point you need to step up and say I deserved to get paid for my work. I can't believe people are even considering this as a good option. Why would I want my images floating around the net for free. I already have enough theft off of paid for images.
Whatever... eventually I will be one of the few people left making money on my images because everyone else has quit when they finally realize that free or next to free simply doesn't justify the work needed to make good images. I spend a lot of time working on getting paid a fair wage for my images. I'll stick with the outlets that actually pay decent commissions. Like EmberMike said in another thread "Let it burn!"
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
+1
I'm IN
What? You mean you're not panicking over a beta test that could allow a few of your images to be downloaded by testers at no cost for a few weeks (even though we're told we could still be compensated for these)? Haven't you heard that the world is ending? How dare an agency, by most accounts one of the "good ones," try to land a deal that could potentially mean many more sales for us in the long run? The nerve!
ehm...no ;D
i'm too busy in more important things...create new images, improve my works, find new market niches...
-
I'm disappointed to see DT getting into a deal like this because they're actually the only place where my photos are making more money over time, instead of less, because of their 'levels' scheme.
-
Despite how it may sound, I'm no shill for DT. I just think they're getting a raw deal in this forum. I was starting to write a snarky response to Laurin's letter to Achilles, but I'm just going to do it straight, with all due respect to Laurin, who does deserve respect...
A personal Note to Achilles...
My friend I've been with you since day one
Right, this is my first point. Many of us have done business with DT for several years now. I, for one, actually trust them. They have done right by me for a long time, and they AT LEAST deserve the benefit of the doubt. Let's continue...
But...The time has come to tell you and anyone else reading and listening to whats going on lately has to Know.....
Achilles....Without us, You and your site is dead and I mean dead. You and the other sites biggest issue is , You and others still after all this time have no clue or respect for what we go through to give you our hearts and soul through our work, The time and Money we invest in supplying you with your income and vast income. We own everything...You and all the other sites own Nothing But server space and some furniture. The sooner you and all the other greedy sites realize this the better off you will be going forward. FT set off a firestorm and It's about time, I've been saying since 2006 we have to unite and we Finally are.
Yes, we contributors own our work. But it's completely unfair to say the agencies bring nothing to the table but servers and furniture. They have real overhead, and are spending real money everyday to sell our work. Reviewers, accountants, lawyers, marketing costs. This is why no single or small group of contributors could do what they do, and exactly why we need them.
This is not going to stop and I prey it doesn't. This crap cannot go on and I will spend whatever time it takes to alarm everyone about the continuing injustice we have been through.
If any site cannot make a decent profit with product they don't make themselves at a 50/50 split from every dollar then maybe it's time to do something else.
The same should be true with contributors. I'm profiting handsomely right now. I treat it as a business. I keep my costs down, my workflow tight, but the moment this looks like the payoff won't be worth it, I'll be out. If enough contributors decided this, the law of supply and demand would kick in, and things would have to tilt in the supplier's favor.
The Gravy train is over my Old friend, We are starting to rise up and I Prey we don't stop....Is it to late? well ya. We were lazy and let this happen. But Im afraid FT and now you have awoken a sleeping Giant and Thank God it's about time.
Ya better hear this Achilles and Oleg and Jon[/b]. Those of us that do the work, Invest in our craft deserve more. There is no creative agency anywhere that takes more than 50% of any artists work.
I'm all for using our collective weight to try to get changes made. But let's be careful who we're lumping together and targeting. I'd love to get 50% as well, but I agreed to those terms and if I disagree I can end my partnership with any agency I believe is treating me unfairly.
You can spin this anyway you want, and this message is not about your new test program...it's about Our future, Not the gullible newbies that are happy getting 20 cents or whatever....You want to target them Like the others? Go for it.
This IS about a test program. It's supposed to last a few weeks and be done. If the test goes well, DT says we could benefit greatly. They have not lied to me before. Again, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.
245,000 Images are new just this week on SS. WHY? because no one Gives a crap. if thats what you want, Well you got it.
Some of those 245,000 are mine. And they've been selling, on SS and elsewhere. Who isn't giving a crap? The agencies like them, their customers like them, and I like how they're selling.
My advise is make it as fast as you can because WE OWN EVERYTHING!! You own Nothing and the sooner you get this the better you will Position yourself for the future because no matter what you think, it's gonna change and come back to us.. That I will guarantee or die trying.
The agencies own their infrastructure for selling our work, and they own the branding and relationship with customers keep coming back for more. Is this worth nothing? Try to duplicate it. Many are trying, most are failing.
I would rather make 800 Million and take care of the people who made that happen than make a Billion. All you owners have to get your head straight. 50/50 or nothing!!! No Business makes a better margin than that. You can't? Then business is not your forte"
I wish you the best of Luck and also My Comrades whom I will always support regardless of there opinions.
Laurin Rinder.
50/50 or nothing. That's quite a line in the sand. I admire your boldness, Laurin, and I do believe you feel you're fighting for all of us. But what exactly does "50/50 or nothing" mean? Are you going to delete your port from agencies that don't meet this demand? If you make statements like this and don't follow it with real action that makes the agencies take notice -- like taking your valuable work and going home -- you could end up doing more harm to the cause than good.
Despite all this... respect, Laurin. Just wanted to offer a different perspective.
-
I'm disappointed to see DT getting into a deal like this because they're actually the only place where my photos are making more money over time, instead of less, because of their 'levels' scheme.
Yes, EXACTLY! DT is one of the good ones... and for you it sounds like DT may be the BEST one. Read what this is all about before condemning them. They have performed well for you in the past... and believe me, the levels approach has been good to me as well... so doesn't it seem fair to give them a chance on this test. Your images are only "free" during the test period, and you may be compensated for those "free" downloads when the test is done. And if the partner feels the test went well, this MIGHT be huge for all of us... or those of us willing to give DT the benefit of a doubt.
-
What that... even the link is broken
-
I'm disappointed to see DT getting into a deal like this because they're actually the only place where my photos are making more money over time, instead of less, because of their 'levels' scheme.
Yes, EXACTLY! DT is one of the good ones... and for you it sounds like DT may be the BEST one. Read what this is all about before condemning them. They have performed well for you in the past... and believe me, the levels approach has been good to me as well... so doesn't it seem fair to give them a chance on this test. Your images are only "free" during the test period, and you may be compensated for those "free" downloads when the test is done. And if the partner feels the test went well, this MIGHT be huge for all of us... or those of us willing to give DT the benefit of a doubt.
I have opted out of (all) alliances as soon as I got their email stating they wanted 39 of my images.
If the beta test fails I loose nothing (of nothing).
If the beta test is successful (and I'm pretty sure we'll all hear about it PDQ) then I'll opt in to the program ann benefit from the success.
I am quite happy to let 'others take the risk' if they want to (and thank you for that) and I'll join in later ;D
If DT think I have 39 images worthy for the beta test now, I'm pretty sure they'll let me join the program once it's proven, to make sure it continues to be a success in the future.
And do I feel guilty about my stance on this?
No I do not. Why should I?
-
There are a number of things DT could have done better w/ this, but it could actually be a good thing for contributors. (although I must say I have become very leery of "exciting" new offers). They should have told us how long they expect this beta test to go on, and I'd like to know the order how much we would get for a use. For instance if it is for less than a sub sale - I want out and I don't want it to gain traction. Another question is will a usage with this program raise the image level or will we get a higher remuneration if a high level image is used in this new way?
DT in general have been one of the better sites. My long term earnings graph there shows a general trend with 2 big drops - I think they might have both been from "exciting" new opportunities - when they dropped from 50% to less, and the second drop was when they dropped our % again and got rid of the more $ for higher level subs sales.
I hope that they understand why we are a little gun shy right now. I appreciate the heads up from them, but in the current climate any site needs to explain what they are doing if they don't want people to be immediately skeptical if not hostile.
Sorry to be nit-picky and point this out Laurin, but we "pray" the sites don't "prey" on us. Otherwise I am sort of picturing a conversation between Magneto and Prof Xavier.
-
I have opted out of (all) alliances as soon as I got their email stating they wanted 39 of my images.
If the beta test fails I loose nothing (of nothing).
If the beta test is successful (and I'm pretty sure we'll all hear about it PDQ) then I'll opt in to the program ann benefit from the success.
I am quite happy to let 'others take the risk' if they want to (and thank you for that) and I'll join in later ;D
If DT think I have 39 images worthy for the beta test now, I'm pretty sure they'll let me join the program once it's proven, to make sure it continues to be a success in the future.
And do I feel guilty about my stance on this?
No I do not. Why should I?
There is NO risk in this beta test. The ACTUAL risk is in it not going well and the partner not wanting to proceed.
You read that right... there is NO risk to you! This is for an online advertising platform. Testers of this program would NOT be buying your images elsewhere if they didn't have access to them through this test. They just wouldn't be running ANY images in their ad if it weren't for this test. You are out NOTHING. And DT says they will actually try to compensate you for images used in the test! What have they done to you to earn your mistrust?
Everyone is fixating on these few weeks of POSSIBLY unpaid image usage during the beta test!!! Don't you see the forest for the trees?!! Do you really want this to fail? Imagine who this big player could be and what this could mean!
-
Why do we need to support their beta test with our images for free? That I dont get. When did that became the norm? Free?
-
I have opted out of (all) alliances as soon as I got their email stating they wanted 39 of my images.
If the beta test fails I loose nothing (of nothing).
There is NO risk in this beta test. The ACTUAL risk is in it not going well and the partner not wanting to proceed.
You read that right... there is NO risk to you! This is for an online advertising platform. Testers of this program would NOT be buying your images elsewhere if they didn't have access to them through this test. They just wouldn't be running ANY images in their ad if it weren't for this test. You are out NOTHING. And DT says they will actually try to compensate you for images used in the test! What have they done to you to earn your mistrust?
Stockmarketer, do you know something that the rest of us don't? Do you know for sure that they wouldn't pay actual money for our images if they couldn't get them for free?
-
I have opted out of (all) alliances as soon as I got their email stating they wanted 39 of my images.
If the beta test fails I loose nothing (of nothing).
If the beta test is successful (and I'm pretty sure we'll all hear about it PDQ) then I'll opt in to the program ann benefit from the success.
I am quite happy to let 'others take the risk' if they want to (and thank you for that) and I'll join in later ;D
If DT think I have 39 images worthy for the beta test now, I'm pretty sure they'll let me join the program once it's proven, to make sure it continues to be a success in the future.
And do I feel guilty about my stance on this?
No I do not. Why should I?
There is NO risk in this beta test. The ACTUAL risk is in it not going well and the partner not wanting to proceed.
You read that right... there is NO risk to you! This is for an online advertising platform. Testers of this program would NOT be buying your images elsewhere if they didn't have access to them through this test. They just wouldn't be running ANY images in their ad if it weren't for this test. You are out NOTHING. And DT says they will actually try to compensate you for images used in the test! What have they done to you to earn your mistrust?
Everyone is fixating on these few weeks of POSSIBLY unpaid image usage during the beta test!!! Don't you see the forest for the trees?!! Do you really want this to fail? Imagine who this big player could be and what this could mean!
I have to say Marketeer that I agree with you.
Having been a member of these forums for a number of years, I have constantly observed that any new plan/proposal from Agencies has nearly always been met with mistrust and suspicion.
DT has never given me any reason to doubt them and I see no reason now to change my opinion on that.
Suspicion ( which broke many relationships) breeds negativity of which sadly there is a lot to be found throughout these forums!
-
I have opted out of (all) alliances as soon as I got their email stating they wanted 39 of my images.
If the beta test fails I loose nothing (of nothing).
If the beta test is successful (and I'm pretty sure we'll all hear about it PDQ) then I'll opt in to the program ann benefit from the success.
I am quite happy to let 'others take the risk' if they want to (and thank you for that) and I'll join in later ;D
If DT think I have 39 images worthy for the beta test now, I'm pretty sure they'll let me join the program once it's proven, to make sure it continues to be a success in the future.
And do I feel guilty about my stance on this?
No I do not. Why should I?
There is NO risk in this beta test. The ACTUAL risk is in it not going well and the partner not wanting to proceed.
You read that right... there is NO risk to you! This is for an online advertising platform. Testers of this program would NOT be buying your images elsewhere if they didn't have access to them through this test. They just wouldn't be running ANY images in their ad if it weren't for this test. You are out NOTHING. And DT says they will actually try to compensate you for images used in the test! What have they done to you to earn your mistrust?
Everyone is fixating on these few weeks of POSSIBLY unpaid image usage during the beta test!!! Don't you see the forest for the trees?!! Do you really want this to fail? Imagine who this big player could be and what this could mean!
I will respond to you this way. DT keeps about 70 percent of each sale and I am expected to now bend over and give then another percent or two for a beta test that they should be funding through their marketing budget? Really?
-
Common' DT, be serious.
In 2014 you want to test a revolutionary idea of advertising online?
Check if a jpg image can be embedded in HTML page?
Opt OUT.
-
I will respond to you this way. DT keeps about 70 percent of each sale and I am expected to now bend over and give then another percent or two for a beta test that they should be funding through their marketing budget? Really?
Wish I could give this one more than one heart. ++++++
-
This notion that the forums (and I assume by extension the people posting in the forums) are inherently negative is steaming horse pucky.
If people are suspicious or flinch after a long series of outright lies, underhanded takebacks from previous contract terms and changes that overall decrease the income the creator of the artwork receives, is it really those people who are negative?
Really?
It is the actions by agencies that are the problem(s), not the attitudes of participants in this forum.
And asking for freebies with the promise of future exposure, future expansion of the market etc. is like all the lies told in a bar around closing time - you stop believing them after you've been fooled a time or two.
-
I hear ya Jo Ann. My rant was frustration Mostly and the sense of Losing what we have now. It's just all to much for me to take in. DT has always been a strong #2 for me.
Never had problems and agree with there removing Non selling work. it's just stuff building up. Im really tired. Photography has been My occupation forever and I get very sad sometimes. Im just concerned for us all.
-
In 2005, Dreamstime was the first site where I made enough for a payout. I remember wondering if this microstock thing was for real and if I could trust them and whether they would really send me real money. They did, and they have never given me personally any reason to distrust them in the nine years I have done business with them.
Some of the posts here seem a little over the top. Do people here really believe Serban is a "crook"? I have always admired his success and the way he runs his business. I hope this beta test works and I make some money from the ensuing deal. In the meantime, I don't mind if 154 of my images (out of 2229) are used in a limited trial and I don't get paid if the deal fails to materialize. My images aren't gold or diamonds or the cure for cancer. They are just clipart. If you hate DT, leave. If you don't want to participate in the beta test, then don't. It was just an invitation. Not the end of the world.
Agree – not the smash & grab we’ve seen elsewhere, a very small number of images notified in advance with the option of opting out.
Maybe not a good idea but no sense of anyone pulling a fast one here.
-
@Leaf
thanks for your private message where you informed me that you deleted one post out of this thread.
May i ask what post it was and why you think that it is "offtopic"?
As far as i see this thread is not only about the new "business model" - it is about the general question if DT is trustworthy or not.
And if i try to get an answer from achilles why DT still sells our images although even an attorney has been hired it is definitely not "offtopi" because it shows the level of "trust" DT deserves.
Of course i realized that you are one of just few who claims for understanding against DT in this thread.
May i ask with all the given respect if there is a closer relation between you and DT than you have with other agencies?
The post that was removed that was off-topic was where you started talking about your personal problems with dreamstime... essentially what you've just posted again. I suggest you take it up with Dreamstime directly or through your lawyer. You also have mentioned this in a seperate thread you started and elsewhere. We don't need to start the discussion in this thread. This thread, as the subject states, is about the email that Dreamstime sent out and the partnership deal.
I have the same relationship to Dreamstime as I do with the other agencies.. the same relationship that every other contributor has.
-
This notion that the forums (and I assume by extension the people posting in the forums) are inherently negative is steaming horse pucky.
If people are suspicious or flinch after a long series of outright lies, underhanded takebacks from previous contract terms and changes that overall decrease the income the creator of the artwork receives, is it really those people who are negative?
Really?
It is the actions by agencies that are the problem(s), not the attitudes of participants in this forum.
And asking for freebies with the promise of future exposure, future expansion of the market etc. is like all the lies told in a bar around closing time - you stop believing them after you've been fooled a time or two.
Exactly it is like blaming a group for bleeding after someone has stuck them squarely in the face multiple times with a large 2X4 board.
It is not much different than telling them, you have no right to bleed all over the place.
-
To me, it makes a lot more sense to be skeptical about a deal these days than to walk into it with blind faith. I'm kind of surprised people would agree to it, but I guess nothing should surprise me anymore.
-
"The purpose of this email is to tell you that based on the quality of your images, you are among only a few contributors that have been selected to participate in this test program."
>> Well, looks like we all received the email, so they are lying to us. :-\ Disgusting. Email subject "Exciting news" ?!?!?! Shame.
It takes a real genius to come up with a letter like this. Almost as brilliant as the statement from FT that they will compensate for the DPC fiasco by paying EL's on DPC. How does it feel to send out such offers?
Those bright minds should take a course how to write respectful and effective emails. What will they come up with next?
-
There is NO risk in this beta test. The ACTUAL risk is in it not going well and the partner not wanting to proceed.
You read that right... there is NO risk to you! This is for an online advertising platform. Testers of this program would NOT be buying your images elsewhere if they didn't have access to them through this test. They just wouldn't be running ANY images in their ad if it weren't for this test. You are out NOTHING. And DT says they will actually try to compensate you for images used in the test! What have they done to you to earn your mistrust?
Everyone is fixating on these few weeks of POSSIBLY unpaid image usage during the beta test!!! Don't you see the forest for the trees?!! Do you really want this to fail? Imagine who this big player could be and what this could mean!
STockmarketer, are you a DT employee? I guess you must be because you are the only one on this board who knows that there is no risk, that it is a "big fish" they have "hooked", that it will mean a lot more money for all of us if we are in it and it is a success, etc. etc., that it won't be something that sucks lots of other agencies into "great deals" where we might get paid a lot if it succeeds.
You clearly know the sort of sums of money involved, that it isn't a click-through scheme, that we will get a good commission percentage etc. etc. ... in fact, all the things that DT refuses to tell us about. Therefore, I presume you are informed about details of the deal.
Either that, or you are building castles in the air.
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
.....
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
+1
I'm IN
What? You mean you're not panicking over a beta test that could allow a few of your images to be downloaded by testers at no cost for a few weeks (even though we're told we could still be compensated for these)? Haven't you heard that the world is ending? How dare an agency, by most accounts one of the "good ones," try to land a deal that could potentially mean many more sales for us in the long run? The nerve!
ehm...no ;D
i'm too busy in more important things...create new images, improve my works, find new market niches...
ah....interesting.....create new images to give away for free
Maybe you should read a good book some how and then. A bit of math or Wittgenstein to become more logical would suit
-
@Axel
interesting ... you have access to my accounts?
You know how much I earn?
anyway thanks for the advice
I respect your decision and I think you should respect my choice.
-
@Axel
interesting ... you have access to my accounts?
You know how much I earn?
anyway thanks for the advice
I respect your decision and I think you should respect my choice.
I dont know what you earn and i dont care about what you earn.
I know that you are working very hard - to get to the point that you (and we all) will earn nothing!!
And one thing i know for sure.
That people with your opinion ("i have better things to do than to care if someone gives away my images for free") will ruin the mean of existence of every serious photographer.
Either your work is so low level that there is no need to care about or you just bite the hand that feeds you without even knowing what you do.
-
@Axel
i'm not giving away my images for free. I've opted out others 'deals' (dpc), but i think that, for now i can give my trust to DT. If it is not
the case i'll opt out, you can be sure of this.
And i'm not ruining anything, so, please stop you with this ridiculous accusation.
Peace and love :)
I have nothing else to say.
-
The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
Imagine going into a business conference or meeting of investors and their lawyers, offering all this vagueness... :) You would be out the door in under a minute: "Is this some childish joke?"
-
There is NO risk in this beta test. The ACTUAL risk is in it not going well and the partner not wanting to proceed.
You read that right... there is NO risk to you! This is for an online advertising platform. Testers of this program would NOT be buying your images elsewhere if they didn't have access to them through this test. They just wouldn't be running ANY images in their ad if it weren't for this test. You are out NOTHING. And DT says they will actually try to compensate you for images used in the test! What have they done to you to earn your mistrust?
Everyone is fixating on these few weeks of POSSIBLY unpaid image usage during the beta test!!! Don't you see the forest for the trees?!! Do you really want this to fail? Imagine who this big player could be and what this could mean!
STockmarketer, are you a DT employee? I guess you must be because you are the only one on this board who knows that there is no risk, that it is a "big fish" they have "hooked", that it will mean a lot more money for all of us if we are in it and it is a success, etc. etc., that it won't be something that sucks lots of other agencies into "great deals" where we might get paid a lot if it succeeds.
You clearly know the sort of sums of money involved, that it isn't a click-through scheme, that we will get a good commission percentage etc. etc. ... in fact, all the things that DT refuses to tell us about. Therefore, I presume you are informed about details of the deal.
Either that, or you are building castles in the air.
Does sound a bit like an employee doesn't he....shades of Matt.
-
I first opted out to decide in peace. After I read all these posts, I have decided to participate in the test. I want to give a chance to the test at DT.
I see the risk that the new licensing methode results in a competition with the other existing licensing procedures at DT or at the other agencies and my earnings are further reduced. Therefore, I will decide again after the test, when we have more information about the tested new licensing procedure. And perhaps I would decide to leave one or more agencies completely, especially those who have lowered my license shares in the past...
-
As I am an employee of Dreamstime, I can confirm that stockmarketer is not.
You keep talking about the deal, let me clarify that: there is no deal. Yet.
There will be some tests for a possible, future deal. The success of this deal pretty much depends on your enrollment in the tests, cause, like Rinderart said, you guys own everything. If you want the deal to be successful and earn more in the near future, you should opt in for the tests. I think it's a fair agreement: you provide the content (which costed money to produce), Dreamstime provides human and technical resources (which costs money), know how and the ability to do business with big companies, for free, during the tests. All for a possibility to earn more, both from your perspective and ours.
We all want to earn more, but that doesn't come that easy. You must be able to give something in order to get something back. It's pretty much what we're all doing (I'm also a contributor) from the first step into a stock agency: we upload our images without knowing if we'll ever going to sell anything. The agency has the same risk: it provides the human and technical resources without knowing if there will be a positive return in the end.
Businesswise, if Dreamstime wanted to make a shady deal, you wouldn't have been asked in the first place, just like the other recent happenings in other places. We don't have such a record and we're not interested in getting any. Fair and square, a small group out of 184,000 contributors have been invited to participate. You can either participate or opt out. It's your choice, but bear in mind that participating means higher chances for getting the deal done and earning more in the future. Dreamstime has always been about the community. If you want to earn more as much as we do, join the tests and let's make it happen for both sides of this business.
-
As I am an employee of Dreamstime, I can confirm that stockmarketer is not.
You keep talking about the deal, let me clarify that: there is no deal. Yet.
There will be some tests for a possible, future deal. The success of this deal pretty much depends on your enrollment in the tests, cause, like Rinderart said, you guys own everything. If you want the deal to be successful and earn more in the near future, you should opt in for the tests. I think it's a fair agreement: you provide the content (which costed money to produce), Dreamstime provides human and technical resources (which costs money), know how and the ability to do business with big companies,for free, during the tests. All for a possibility to earn more, both from your perspective and ours.
You take 70% of the profits already, just fund your own beta tests with that money. Why do we need to fund the beta test out of our 30%?
And why are you not using your million free images??
-
As I am an employee of Dreamstime, I can confirm that stockmarketer is not.
You keep talking about the deal, let me clarify that: there is no deal. Yet.
There will be some tests for a possible, future deal. The success of this deal pretty much depends on your enrollment in the tests, cause, like Rinderart said, you guys own everything. If you want the deal to be successful and earn more in the near future, you should opt in for the tests. I think it's a fair agreement: you provide the content (which costed money to produce), Dreamstime provides human and technical resources (which costs money), know how and the ability to do business with big companies, for free, during the tests. All for a possibility to earn more, both from your perspective and ours.
We all want to earn more, but that doesn't come that easy. You must be able to give something in order to get something back. It's pretty much what we're all doing (I'm also a contributor) from the first step into a stock agency: we upload our images without knowing if we'll ever going to sell anything. The agency has the same risk: it provides the human and technical resources without knowing if there will be a positive return in the end.
Businesswise, if Dreamstime wanted to make a shady deal, you wouldn't have been asked in the first place, just like the other recent happenings in other places. We don't have such a record and we're not interested in getting any. Fair and square, a small group out of 184,000 contributors have been invited to participate. You can either participate or opt out. It's your choice, but bear in mind that participating means higher chances for getting the deal done and earning more in the future. Dreamstime has always been about the community. If you want to earn more as much as we do, join the tests and let's make it happen for both sides of this business.
This would make perfect sense if we were equal partners. But since we earn 30% and you 70% we are not! Please, start to pay 50% to independents and then we can discuss splitting costs and earnings and risks. Please note that most of us are professionals that have heard this kind of "deals" many times before.
-
a small group of 184k contributors, ain't that a little too much for a simple test? and for sure over 1M files? is there a company who needs that much? use the free images!
-
a small group of 184k contributors, ain't that a little too much for a simple test? and for sure over 1M files? is there a company who needs that much? use the free images!
He wrote: "...a small group out of 184k contributors..." 8)
-
a small group of 184k contributors, ain't that a little too much for a simple test? and for sure over 1M files? is there a company who needs that much? use the free images!
Luis, you missed a word... "a small group OUT of 184k contributors."
Fair and square, a small group out of 184,000 contributors have been invited to participate.
-
a small group of 184k contributors, ain't that a little too much for a simple test? and for sure over 1M files? is there a company who needs that much? use the free images!
"small group out of 184,000 contributors"
-
DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the referrals, partners, human resources, technical resources, advertising, taxes and so on. And let's not forget that exclusives get 60% out of any sales. Even more, you can compare our subs with other agencies' subs and decide for yourself who pays more on a sub from the day one a contributor joins the agency.
You don't fund the beta test alone, Dreamstime pays for the people and technical resources required as well. And we're not getting the 70% either. While you don't have to do anything more than you already did (uploading the images), we have to pay more for the resources involved in the test.
Let's face it, the free images are good, but not good enough to impress a partner or a customer.
-
a small group of 184k contributors, ain't that a little too much for a simple test? and for sure over 1M files? is there a company who needs that much? use the free images!
He wrote: "...a small group out of 184k contributors..." 8)
oops, my bad! anyway if I had over 10 files I am sure there must be Millions of pictures, would needs all that for a test?
-
DT almost sounds like we are paid too much for our own work, like they feel sorry for themselves. To me its comes across as DT is Calimero. Fund the beta test out of your own pocket. You've got millions, we've got pennies.
-
Viorel, thanks for coming here and trying to clarify things. My problem remains the complete lack of information about what the deal represents (the beta test is, of itself, a deal, you know, otherwise you wouldn't have both parties' lawyers preparing the emails).
All we know is that it involves embedding images in online adverts, apparently hotlinking from DT as they won't be permanently available. We don't know how that would be paid for or what the rate of pay would be. My guess is that this "limited" access would be at prices lower than the ordinary RF price - after all, they are getting less in return aren't they? - but adverts are only expected to run for a limited time, so it might involve selling usage rights for a three-month ad campaign at one tenth the price of a standard RF sale which would have been bought for the full price normally. That would lead to further industry-wide devaluation of the value of our work.
Or maybe payment is per click on the advert ..... same devaluation effect.
Right now, I can't think of any temporary hotlink online advertising usage that won't involve a drop in the sales value of our files.
If it's a bigger company than DT you are trying to link up with, it could mean flooding the internet with cut-price temporary image licensing. Maybe it's better for me if you never make the hoped-for deal. I have no way of knowing.
As an independent, it is not in my interests to support schemes that may strip 38c sales from other sites and turn them into 5c sales on DT. What's good for DT may or may not be good for me. When you refuse to tell me what you want to do, except for outlining a temporary advertising usage, how can I have any expectation that it will be beneficial for independents and not just another plunge towards the bottom in pricing?
You know the treatment we've had to put up with from site owners over recent years, you can't be surprised that many people are very suspicious about being invited to "trust the management" and head, blindfolded, into a new deal.
-
viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?
-
DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the referrals, partners, human resources, technical resources, advertising, taxes and so on. And let's not forget that exclusives get 60% out of any sales. Even more, you can compare our subs with other agencies' subs and decide for yourself who pays more on a sub from the day one a contributor joins the agency.
You don't fund the beta test alone, Dreamstime pays for the people and technical resources required as well. And we're not getting the 70% either. While you don't have to do anything more than you already did (uploading the images), we have to pay more for the resources involved in the test.
Let's face it, the free images are good, but not good enough to impress a partner or a customer.
While our 30% is net revenue, right? We don't have expenses and we don't pay taxes...
Thanks for calling us tax evaders
-
As I am an employee of Dreamstime, I can confirm that stockmarketer is not.
You keep talking about the deal, let me clarify that: there is no deal. Yet.
There will be some tests for a possible, future deal. The success of this deal pretty much depends on your enrollment in the tests, cause, like Rinderart said, you guys own everything. If you want the deal to be successful and earn more in the near future, you should opt in for the tests. I think it's a fair agreement: you provide the content (which costed money to produce), Dreamstime provides human and technical resources (which costs money), know how and the ability to do business with big companies, for free, during the tests. All for a possibility to earn more, both from your perspective and ours.
We all want to earn more, but that doesn't come that easy. You must be able to give something in order to get something back. It's pretty much what we're all doing (I'm also a contributor) from the first step into a stock agency: we upload our images without knowing if we'll ever going to sell anything. The agency has the same risk: it provides the human and technical resources without knowing if there will be a positive return in the end.
Businesswise, if Dreamstime wanted to make a shady deal, you wouldn't have been asked in the first place, just like the other recent happenings in other places. We don't have such a record and we're not interested in getting any. Fair and square, a small group out of 184,000 contributors have been invited to participate. You can either participate or opt out. It's your choice, but bear in mind that participating means higher chances for getting the deal done and earning more in the future. Dreamstime has always been about the community. If you want to earn more as much as we do, join the tests and let's make it happen for both sides of this business.
Are the Dreamstime employees who are working on the deal still receiving their paychecks, or have they volunteered to work pro bono?
-
I can understand the scepticism towards the "deal" - I, too, cringe everytime an agency sends me an email stating that they are excited about something... ;)
What I cannot understand is the downright hostility towards representatives of that agency, trying to explain what little they obviously are allowed to...
-
What I cannot understand is the downright hostility towards representatives of that agency, trying to explain what little they obviously are allowed to...
Lack of proper communication for years - leads to such an extreme reaction.
-
I can understand the scepticism towards the "deal" - I, too, cringe everytime an agency sends me an email stating that they are excited about something... ;)
What I cannot understand is the downright hostility towards representatives of that agency, trying to explain what little they obviously are allowed to...
Exactly because they are "representatives". Hostility is not at all towards them as persons, but towards their lies that they are probably asked to tell us.
-
DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the ...
No? DT doesn't take 70%? SO where it goes? Lets see - we have 100% income, where 70% goes to DT and the rest 30% for author, right? Still saying DT doesn't take 70%? It's easy like 2+2
But wait, you say DT has cost? Hm, did I get my gear for free? Nikon, would you give me full new system stuff, please? My old is to old to work anymore. No? buu... And I need to pay for my computer as well, post processing isn't for free, taxes (grrr, it's to big!), my tax men isn't working for free (bad men!), travel, tickets or session costs, food isn't coming from the sky, for free... Some of us have people working on images that we take, they're not just 1 person. If we have registered business (we usually have to, depends on country) the cost is HUGE!
ETC...
So tell me please, how is it - I get 30% and need to pay my bills (all th.above) and who gets more?
Btw. I can count only on myself, my few hundreds/ thousands images and agency has milions ... streams of income. Can you feel the difference?
Edit.
I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry that I get this 30% or 0,30$ for image... We crossed the reasonable line long time ago. Time to wake up and say no in some cases.
-
DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the referrals, partners, human resources, technical resources, advertising, taxes and so on. And let's not forget that exclusives get 60% out of any sales. Even more, you can compare our subs with other agencies' subs and decide for yourself who pays more on a sub from the day one a contributor joins the agency.
You don't fund the beta test alone, Dreamstime pays for the people and technical resources required as well. And we're not getting the 70% either. While you don't have to do anything more than you already did (uploading the images), we have to pay more for the resources involved in the test.
Let's face it, the free images are good, but not good enough to impress a partner or a customer.
Since a plenty of successful businesses run on a lot lower percentage cut, your whine about expenses is instantly rejected. This has been cleared years ago with plenty of live running examples, again, and again, and again, and again.... why would anyone even bring up? It's an insult to everyone's intelligence. I personally don't EVER want to hear again how the majority of income coming from the thousands of my tediously prepared images is hard to get by on, after I trust them to your ppl without almost ever asking even a question about trustworthiness... untill now.
-
Sorry, but for an employee of DT he understands little of the cost involved for a photographer to produce images. And the tone of the replies from Achilles and Virol comes across as disdain.
-
In business there are such things as Non Disclosure Agreements. DT could send out an email with minimal details with a link to log in to DT and accept an NDA where they would see the details.
Start the Beta with exclusives only that have a significant investment in DT (hopefully ensuring the NDA will be adhered to and severe consequences if not). If you treat your contributors as professionals and understand we are in business together and we both need to make profits for such things as equipment, bills, and taxes then professionalism is what you will get back. If there is no interest in opting-in into the beta opportunity then DT knows there is going to be a problem and the Contributor knows what he is getting into and can make an appropriate decision.
Once the Beta is completed advertise (with details) the opportunity to all contributors as an opt-in option to make more revenue. Advertise how the Beta program went and the results seen in increased revenue during the Beta.
Just my two cents and that seems to be the way professionals work.
-
When some 35 million images have been offered to bloggers, for free, as embeds, we came up with a Wordpress plugin that made it easier for the same bloggers to buy images from Dreamstime. That should tell you something about our intentions and our long term strategy.
You can turn my words upside down as much as you like, bottom line is: when there is an opportunity to have a clear, legitimate deal which could bring all of us more income, we should at least try to get it done.
There is nothing more to be said in public about the possible deal. That's how business works, that's how negotiations are made in the real world. Sure, we can pray for better income, but it won't rain with dollars anytime soon. Different opinions are actually good, they help everybody somehow. All you have to do now is to act on your own judgement.
-
shame on you contributors, getting "30%" and still complaining and not willing to give a few thousands of images for a test that will make you so much richer ;D
now its time to count some cents, Millions must be boring!
-
Businesses love to hide behind this "confidential" bit. Like "We can't tell you how much you're going to make, because we have a confidential deal with Getty".
-
....... If you want the deal to be successful.....you should opt in for the tests....
This is it in a nut shell. I have no idea if I want the deal to be successful. All I know is that it is a deal with a big company. It could be terrible, it could be great. The track record for these deals is not good, one out three decent vs terrible so far.
I am not in a panic, but I am neutral to skeptical at this time. I understand that you perhaps can't tell us more but you have to understand that it makes no sense for anyone to contribute their work under these circumstances.
What if we opt in and help the scheme succeed then it turns out it's another c****y pay-per-click-fraction-of-a-cent-deal that sees our work splattered all over social media?
-
You can turn my words upside down as much as you like, bottom line is: when there is an opportunity to have a clear, legitimate deal which could bring all of us more income, we should at least try to get it done.
The exact same words were used by Fotolia and one of its employers. Turned out it wasnt a great deal after all and in fact cost us more then we bargained for. When do you guys start to understand you have been milking us for years and asking for free images touches a nerve.
And your precious deal doesnt sound to exciting after all, its a copy of SS Facebook model and it hasnt shifted bucket loads of money either.
-
viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?
Right. It's currently all or nothing, so if we want to opt out of the beta we have to opt out of all partner opportunities. Since partner sales drive up downloads which drive up revenue for us, this particular partner set up with DT is more lucrative for us contributors that with other agencies. So they "force us to feel the pain" if we opt out of the free beta test. That's not very professional.
-
viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?
Right. It's currently all or nothing, so if we want to opt out of the beta we have to opt out of all partner opportunities. Since partner sales drive up downloads which drive up revenue for us, this particular partner set up with DT is more lucrative for us contributors that with other agencies. So they "force us to feel the pain" if we opt out of the free beta test. That's not very professional.
And he can't even answer this question.
Honestly, I don't even care. It's not like DPC thing. Dreamstime makes only around 3% of my income.
-
when there is an opportunity to have a clear, legitimate deal which could bring all of us more income, we should at least try to get it done.
Nobody is stopping you from getting the deal done. All you have to do is work professionally with your business partners.
Inform artists about an upcoming beta test. Invite people with a specific opt in to this beta test. Offer a financial incentive for those who do.
Why is that so difficult?
You have 1 million free images, you have exclusive artists that might be more ready than others to opt in their whole portfolio. Surely that is not a lack of images.
Dreamstime has been around for many years and you must be following what is going on in he industry. It is not difficult to work with the community.
The Opt in works really well. So why not use it?
The only reason to take peoples files with minimal warning and an opt out for everything is because you know we would not agree to let you take it.
Imagine the content on your system was like a supermarket. And we the suppliers have sent you all the bread loafs,vegetables, cans of baked beans and toilet paper. If you asked us to supply all of these items for free while you are doing a test with an unknown third party - would you think the suppliers of the supermarket would agree?
It costs money to produce stock. Is what we produce in your opinion and that of your prospective client really so worthless?
This year in particular has seen a rise of agencies doing "deals" - moving our content out to other platforms where the rules of what they pay us are drastically changed (if we get paid at all).
So I am sorry, you should have known that we would have preferred an opt in.
-
I did not see an opt out clause. So I just deleted the identified files from their database. I have these files on other sites why do I want a trial of giving them away for free on DT??? Let them do it with exclusive files? Future royalties? I see the future as free version of your images floating around when you still try to sell them at other sites. Confidential?? Really?? Words put together by lawyers do not win me over.
-
You know what?... I have exchanged 3 letters with one of the people from Support. As the result, a different picture emerges. A large number of images thrown in the pool. Only a few probably picked up by the end-buyers. The whole testing would take a few weeks, let's say, couple of months. And that the test run is done on already constructed interface with something like 0.1% of full capacity.
If they would send me a normal letter, with working links, explaining all that and kindly asking to participate in "subbotnik", mentioning that they also work for free... and mentioning that many contributors are invited, instead of all that "secrecy" and "you are outstanding" crap...
...I would have probably participated.
Because I do understand that the "opt-in" mode is easier to do, than the "opt-out". It can be done with existing button. No need to create a special one.
If such second letter would come within the next 3 days, I would be tempted to reconsider.
-
An excellent and reasonable suggestion of which DT should consider...(in a future program, that is) :)
In business there are such things as Non Disclosure Agreements. DT could send out an email with minimal details with a link to log in to DT and accept an NDA where they would see the details.
Start the Beta with exclusives only that have a significant investment in DT (hopefully ensuring the NDA will be adhered to and severe consequences if not). If you treat your contributors as professionals and understand we are in business together and we both need to make profits for such things as equipment, bills, and taxes then professionalism is what you will get back. If there is no interest in opting-in into the beta opportunity then DT knows there is going to be a problem and the Contributor knows what he is getting into and can make an appropriate decision.
Once the Beta is completed advertise (with details) the opportunity to all contributors as an opt-in option to make more revenue. Advertise how the Beta program went and the results seen in increased revenue during the Beta.
Just my two cents and that seems to be the way professionals work.
-
viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?
Right. It's currently all or nothing, so if we want to opt out of the beta we have to opt out of all partner opportunities. Since partner sales drive up downloads which drive up revenue for us, this particular partner set up with DT is more lucrative for us contributors that with other agencies. So they "force us to feel the pain" if we opt out of the free beta test. That's not very professional.
I assumed that I could opt back in in five days time after the deadline to avoid the giveaway. Definitely need some clarification here. I will not be happy if the images end up being given away.
One more thought re. confidentiality. How confidential can it be if the advertisers are getting told about it so they can use the images. Why are we contributors the only ones involved not privy to the information. Surely the buyers in the test are just as likely to talk about it!? We are supposed to be the copyright holders here.
-
Justanotherphotographer, no, it looks like we need to stay opted OUT for the duration of the testing period. It starts in 3 days and will go... "for a few weeks", according to private reply to me from Support.
Oh well... I will run my own experiment. To check how much Dreamstime sells direct, and how much comes from the third-party sales. 8)
-
There is nothing more to be said in public about the possible deal. That's how business works, that's how negotiations are made in the real world.
In the real world, a business doesn't expect other businesses to sign blank sheets of paper so that it can write a contract without the signatories knowing the terms they are agreeing to. That is what you are asking us to do.
It's somewhat insulting to be lectured on "real world business" as if we're all just playing games with our images.
-
For all we know the deal could undercut our sales elsewhere.
-
haven't SS made the deal with FB without giving our work for free?
perhaps DT needs to learn how to make deals on the real world (because we are all fake and know nothing!)
-
The reaction of the DT representatives here is just disappointing. I didnt have any negative experience with DT until now and maybe I would have participated in this test if things had been handled in a different way.
They basically didnt give me any other option but to opt out of all alliances because among the few images which they chose from my portfolio, there is one which is my bestselller at SS.. And I dont want to offer my bestseller for free under ANY conditions. So I had to opt out my whole port. They could have let us choose which of the files we want to put in the test but for some reason it was all or nothing. So it will be nothing then.
-
Businesses love to hide behind this "confidential" bit. Like "We can't tell you how much you're going to make, because we have a confidential deal with Getty".
When business is equitable you do not need to hide the details. The question is why does the partner feel the need for secrecy?
I also wonder if another agency is involved in this deal.
-
Businesses love to hide behind this "confidential" bit. Like "We can't tell you how much you're going to make, because we have a confidential deal with Getty".
When business is equitable you do not need to hide the details. The question is why does the partner feel the need for secrecy?
I also wonder if another agency is involved in this deal.
Could be that or they don't want some other agency coming in to snake the deal.
-
haven't SS made the deal with FB without giving our work for free?
perhaps DT needs to learn how to make deals on the real world (because we are all fake and know nothing!)
I think SS pays subs when they use images for testing. I recall Scott mentioning that.
-
Justanotherphotographer, no, it looks like we need to stay opted OUT for the duration of the testing period. It starts in 3 days and will go... "for a few weeks", according to private reply to me from Support.
Oh well... I will run my own experiment. To check how much Dreamstime sells direct, and how much comes from the third-party sales. 8)
Thank you for clearing that up for me, saved me some irritation!
-
Come on guys, you know I didn't mean any disrespect to nobody. I only have a small portfolio online, but I know how hard it was to produce it. In the end, you own your images so it's your decision if you want to participate. That's why, naturally, you have the right to choose.
Cheers!
-
Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
Your logic is wrong.
Let me get this straight
DT = the ice cream supplier
Walmart food buyer = the big fish partner
Now, you're forgetting that we contributors are the factory that supplies the spoons for the ice cream supplier's taster spoons. Would an ice cream supplier ask for free spoons from the factory to pitch his ice cream to the food buyer? With a vague promise of spending more on spoons once the food buyers agrees to a big deal? Of course not. However DT is. The ice cream supplier should invest the money for spoons because he's the only who should bear this financial risk.
-
Anyway we should thank DT for this deal. If there were not DPC from FT and this "super deal" from DT - many stockers continued to work without paying attention to all this "Megaprojects".
Now all spend much more time to know about all nuances of work with microstocks. Now stockers really understanding that he has his own voice. It's great thing for all of us.
But DT employees, are you still can't understand one simple thing? Be honest with your contributors. You've made big work - you've made enviroment for this project, you've selected works from contributors portfolio. So you have information about selected works in your database in separate table, right? So i think this database have minimum 2 fields like Contributor Login and Image ID. And are you want to say to us that simple button which will send one request to your database and will erase selected image ID's of specified contributor it's so hard for you? It will take 2 hours maximum including programmer's breakfast, smoking time and many other. Why do you not to do this?
-
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
-
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
If you continue sleeping they can only lower it even more.
-
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
If you continue sleeping they can only lower it even more.
LOL. That wouldn't be any different than when I was awake and participating.
-
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
If you continue sleeping they can only lower it even more.
Completely agree, though it is encouraging to see that many of micros slow cooked frogs do seem to be jumping out of the pot.
-
How can you trace sales from partner programs at DT?
I would like to know how much that "invitation" to the test will cost me.
-
How can you trace sales from partner programs at DT?
I would like to know how much that "invitation" to the test will cost me.
you can't and the same goes for most agencies, I believe that contributors developed a lot of trust, not in agencies but deep inside!
-
Let's face it, the free images are good, but not good enough to impress a partner or a customer.
WHAT????
What will you invent next?
Do we have to pay if your customer uses our images??
Oooh yes, every time i dream of some horrible stockmarket inventions it comes true a few days later.
"Exciting news from DT - we have to pay for the exposure DT generates"
-
I think these agencies are at a crossroads. Price has been driven down to the point of extinction. They have to have good exclusive quality in order to survive but can't attract it with low commission rates.
Agencies without a good portion of quality exclusive content have nothing to offer the market other than price and have to compete with well funded SS (who doesn't even use exclusivity in their business plan). The only other option is to offer exclusive content which requires paying out a higher commission rate.
Maybe we'll look back at this moment of turmoil with a smile. Some of these players will simply die out and we'll see a resurgence of specialty stock. Who wouldn't want to put their various images (food, people, urban scenes etc) with agencies who specially market those categories to specific buyers. This one stop shopping model just dilutes all images to the same rate regardless of there real value.
-
I think these agencies are at a crossroads. Price has been driven down to the point of extinction.
Right! And who has driven the price so low? WE have, by supporting every low-balling new agency that comes along. And when the bigger agencies have to remain competitive by dropping their prices, sure there's some whining here in the forums, but backed with no real action. In fact, we keep uploading more.
So what's an agency to do if it wants to survive, and maybe drive more downloads of our images? One way is to create deals with partners to position our content in unique ways. That's exactly what DT is doing with this potential deal, and what do contributors say? We want to kill the deal because the beta test period won't pay us for images that the testers use for a few weeks. Are we really that short-sighted?!? (insert your tired arguments about who should pay for the beta test here... I'm looking at the big picture, and my "losses" during the beta test will be tiny drops compared to the big revenue that could be possible with the deal if it goes well.)
Fact is, DT is one of the more fair-paying agencies out there. We should give them some credit on this, and once the deal is finalized let them present the commission scenario to us. If we don't like it, we can bail. But for god's sake, let's give them the chance.
-
I'm not interested in more downloads. I'm interested in raising my revenue.
We have no idea what this deal is other than a giveaway during the test. For all we know it could be a sucker deal like Vlasic/Walmart.
-
I think these agencies are at a crossroads. Price has been driven down to the point of extinction. They have to have good exclusive quality in order to survive but can't attract it with low commission rates.
Actually, DT has some pretty nice commissions at the higher levels. I'm pretty happy when I get a $5 or $10 royalty. I just wish they'd move closer to that end on a regular basis. I'd love to see them say to heck with it. We aren't going to compete with these other agencies for the lower prices. They already do it partially now, so why not do it all the time?
-
what do contributors say? We want to kill the deal because the beta test period won't pay us for images that the testers use for a few weeks. Are we really that short-sighted?!? (insert your tired arguments about who should pay for the beta test here... I'm looking at the big picture, and my "losses" during the beta test will be tiny drops compared to the big revenue that could be possible with the deal if it goes well.)
Fact is, DT is one of the more fair-paying agencies out there. We should give them some credit on this, and once the deal is finalized let them present the commission scenario to us. If we don't like it, we can bail. But for god's sake, let's give them the chance.
I am sorry, did I miss something? I am not seeing anyone say they want to "kill the deal". People just want to get paid. It´s normal.
If the potential partner thinks this is such a great opportunity, then what is the problem with paying us?
And if it is such a short test and only few images would probably be downloaded...well...even more reason to just pay us normally,right?
As has been said before, i don´t think the employees of dreamstime will accept not being paid for a few weeks. So why should we?
But the reaction from DT admins gives the impression that a majority of the artists have already opted out, right?
So why not come back with an offer that makes it interesting for the artists as well?
Negotiations have to be done in all directions with all business partners. You don´t´take one party for granted,especially if they own the product that is going to be sold.
At least this is the way business works in the real world that I know.
-
Says Walmart to Vlasic:
Here is the deal. We'll take your product, sell it to our customers for a really, really low price. Our customers will be ecstatic to get your product as such a low price. And think of all the exposure your company will get!
Oh and by the way, if you don't take the deal, there are two other companies lined up to take it. And next year we'll be offering you even less of a profit margin because our customers expect "falling prices". Sign here.
-
I have nothing against Dreamstime, in fact I made my first sale with them (and a credit one at that), so I quite like this agency. They are not my biggest earner but they're all right.
It's just that we're all quite touchy at the moment, what with DPC and other bad news. If only we had more information about this possible deal. If only there was a way of knowing it's not gonna hurt us more than benefit us.
-
I think one could take an educated guess giving the industry's track record.
-
We have no idea what this deal is other than a giveaway during the test. For all we know it could be a sucker deal like Vlasic/Walmart.
True enough. And when the test is over and it is ready to go live, we will need to evaluate the terms and decide whether or not to participate. That's separate from deciding whether or not to support the test. I've decided to let them use my handful of images for the test. Most are not big sellers, so my financial risk is low. And Dreamstime hasn't abused me like some other agencies, so I'm a little more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, especially now that we have a little more information.
-
is there anything in this world for free except breathing?
why would our work be? as simple as that!
-
Let's say this big buyer needs thousands of images a month. May be today he's buying this images from agency which pays me more than the possible DT future deal.
Of course this is just speculation, but when DT can't give me more info I don't have other choice than to opt out! They choose most of my best sellers for the test and I can't risk to give them for free to this BIG BUYER (who needs free images to decide if he wants to make a deal)!
-
is there anything in this world for free except breathing?
I'm sorry but I must disappoint you. Here, where I live you have to pay some kind of climatic fee. For example you travel to Tatra Mountains (to take some new photos for micros) and you pay for room or any other tourist service and you have that extra fee in it. Why? Because you breathe the fresh air, really. I was in huge shock when I heard that lately ;) Oh, and I will have to make new calculations for future trip. Is it worth uploding new images to... anywhere ;)
Sorry for OT, I'm out :)
-
is there anything in this world for free except breathing?
I'm sorry but I must disappoint you. Here, where I live you have to pay some kind of climatic fee. For example you travel to Tatra Mountains (to take some new photos for micros) and you pay for room or any other tourist service and you have that extra fee in it. Why? Because you breathe the fresh air, really. I was in huge shock when I heard that lately ;) Oh, and I will have to make new calculations for future trip. Is it worth uploding new images to... anywhere ;)
Sorry for OT, I'm out :)
ooh that is just perfect haha anyway that is your fee not agencies so it doesn't really matter ;D
this reminds of restaurants and hotels where when we feel we had a nice meal/service we tip but many places it is already included as you know
what I am saying is that photographers/contributors never get any tips but DT wants us to give our work for free and there isn't even a small gratification, next time I go to my favourite sushi restaurant I won't pay for the meal and no tip as well :P
they won't call the police because I will say it is a test and that I will potentially bring tons of friends later!
-
One thing is for sure-I know some agencies that would have never asked us. Sure, you know what agencies I'm talking about
-
One thing is for sure-I know some agencies that would have never asked us. Sure, you know what agencies I'm talking about
And right now such agencies are reaping what they sowed.
-
next time I go to my favourite sushi restaurant I won't pay for the meal and no tip as well :P
they won't call the police because I will say it is a test and that I will potentially bring tons of friends later!
Well, OK, but let's be fair. To make it a perfect match you do have to ask the restaurant before you start the meal if they mind you not paying for it since it might create a wonderful opportunity for them later on, and give them the right to refuse your business. There's no need to crucify DT over this, I just wish they would/could let us know what they want us to get involved with.
If they can come back later and tell us what they are doing l will be happy to consider the deal on its merits and join in if it makes sense for me to do so.
-
Fact is, DT is one of the more fair-paying agencies out there. We should give them some credit on this, and once the deal is finalized let them present the commission scenario to us. If we don't like it, we can bail. But for god's sake, let's give them the chance.
My experience is that DT has experimented with pricing so much they have a tangle more complicated than any agency out there. They came up with a levels system; sold us subscriptions on the basis that higher level images earned higher royalties and then took that back.
They have cut royalty rates and while raising RPD have managed to cut monthly income. Shutterstock has increased both RPD and monthly income to the point that comparing November 2006 to November 2013, DT went from neck and neck with Shutterstock to about 1/4 of Shutterstock earnings for me.
My experience with DT experiments is that they haven't done anything to date to boost my earnings from them (and they have roughly the same files to sell as the other agencies).
They say that the best predictor of future performance is past performance.
-
They say that the best predictor of future performance is past performance.
No. The disclaimer on almost every investment instrument will say exactly the opposite. For good reason: Because it is not.
-
They say that the best predictor of future performance is past performance.
No. The disclaimer on almost every investment instrument will say exactly the opposite. For good reason: Because it is not.
I'lll rephrase. When looking at hiring people, they say the best predictor...
This discussion is about the abilities, choices and performance of the people running the agency, not a financial investment analysis
-
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with. And then what ?
-
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with. And then what ?
Then, you become me. ;D
-
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with. And then what ?
Then we all meet in places like Pond5 - exclusive, unique files with self-fair pricing? :) Can you imagine how the world turns upside down? :o :D
-
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with.
Otherwise, "soon, all of the main agencies will have pushed contributors over the edge".
-
I think these agencies are at a crossroads. Price has been driven down to the point of extinction. They have to have good exclusive quality in order to survive but can't attract it with low commission rates.
Agencies without a good portion of quality exclusive content have nothing to offer the market other than price and have to compete with well funded SS (who doesn't even use exclusivity in their business plan). The only other option is to offer exclusive content which requires paying out a higher commission rate.
Maybe we'll look back at this moment of turmoil with a smile. Some of these players will simply die out and we'll see a resurgence of specialty stock. Who wouldn't want to put their various images (food, people, urban scenes etc) with agencies who specially market those categories to specific buyers. This one stop shopping model just dilutes all images to the same rate regardless of there real value.
Exactly the way I'm seeing this now. The recent giveaways and price slashing by a number of agencies reeks of desperation, IMO. We are at a crossroads. I'm just not sure which direction to go from here.....agencies don't seem to either.
As for specialty stock, I would like nothing more than to see that become the norm. However, my recent experience with that concept hasn't been real positive....main complaint from potential buyers was that it wasn't 'one-stop shopping'.....can't win, I guess.
-
My main complaint about this is that we have to opt out of all Alliances, if we don't want to participate. That feels more coercive than an e-mail saying 'let us know if you don't want to participate'. By being one of the 'lucky' chosen ones, we have to give up existing sales to not participate - in effect punishing those with the images they want to use for the trial by imposing a financial penalty if we don't participate...
Sort of like if my boss came to me and said "Hey, we have an exciting new opportunity that could really help our company take off. We need a few volunteers to help out with a few extra hours - don't worry: nothing out of pocket for you. We can't pay you for your time but if things work out you could be in for a raise (or not!). If you aren't interested, that is not a problem, but we'll dock your pay by <whatever portion of sales I get from the partner program>."
-
Agreed. Coercive is an appropriate word in this instance.
My main complaint about this is that we have to opt out of all Alliances, if we don't want to participate. That feels more coercive than an e-mail saying 'let us know if you don't want to participate'. By being one of the 'lucky' chosen ones, we have to give up existing sales to not participate - in effect punishing those with the images they want to use for the trial by imposing a financial penalty if we don't participate...
Sort of like if my boss came to me and said "Hey, we have an exciting new opportunity that could really help our company take off. We need a few volunteers to help out with a few extra hours - don't worry: nothing out of pocket for you. We can't pay you for your time but if things work out you could be in for a raise (or not!). If you aren't interested, that is not a problem, but we'll dock your pay by <whatever portion of sales I get from the partner program>."
-
Stepping back from my initial go-stuff-yourself attitude when I saw the words non-compensation (or similar)... I wonder if I having a difficult time seeing over the wreckage of the Getty Google + deal.
When they say "beta test" do you suppose they are building a site, throwing some photos on it, having testers download, upload, buying credits, one time visa's, paypal, and so on.... actually trying to break/improve the thing before moving public.... while maybe signing something that states they will destroy the photos in the end?
Or is my first reaction the right one... ain't givin 'nottin away fo 'nottin..
-
If it was just for testing they could use the freebie collection.
They went to the trouble to pick out images from some group of contributors - I assume to dangle enticing content in front of the other party to this "big deal" that they hope to land. The effort to curate the images shown suggests that DT believes the images have value in closing the deal.
I think that being treated like pawns in someone else's game doesn't ever feel good, but certainly feels worse after several rounds of it - you wonder just how weak or stupid people think you are that they'd keep treating you this way. Google-Getty, Veer-Alamy, Deposit Photos - ShotShop - the list is fairly long...
-
Most of the photos they chose out of my portfolio were old photos with few if any sales. None of them were high value photos.
I was on the fence about this before but the vitriol I've seen on this forum in the last few days has made me decide to stay in.
DT has been one of the few relatively honest agencies. They told us about this up front and didn't keep it secret. They offered an opt out. Then, they came here to give as much detail as they said they could given their agreements with the partner they are pursuing. They told us if all goes well, there will be retroactive royalties and future sales opportunities.
I don't think this deal deserves the violent reaction it's gotten in this forum. I think it's unfortunate that this came on the heels of the DPC thing and the other nefarious, secret deals that other agencies have forced on us recently and I know people are angry. So am I. But that is not DT's fault. In my opinion, this forum has been unfair to DT.
So, I'm in. I don't see that I have much to lose and I still trust DT. I'm willing to support them in this and then I'll see how it goes.
-
So the only reason to opt in is to spite your fellow contributors? Good bases for a business decision.
-
I opted out and thank DT for giving me the opportunity to do so beforehand.
However, I think agencies generally should take note: the time that we get excited about having our images used in deals with no compensation to us - just for the extra exposure and the potential-maybe-maybe-not-future revenue-streams (or dribbles) - that time is over. That is not exciting anymore.
Imagine how my day was I received the mail from DT. I had come home to my stock stats to see that I had had an Extented license sale at Stocksy. And then open my mailbox and found the exciting news from DT. Can you guess which of the two events I found more exciting?
-
A lot of people seem to be wetting the bed on this one. DT did the right thing and asked permission first. Give them a break. They wanted short term use of a few files so they could test something that might make us more money. I don't have a problem with that. Just like any other investment I make in my business, I have to spend a little now in hopes of gaining more later. The investment is small and short term.
-
At this stage DT (Achilles) knows how we feel. It's early and they have been more or less fair to contributors relatively speaking. I wasn't selected to participate so it doesn't affect me THIS TIME. I still think it is a raw deal when they already keep so much of the sale. But maybe, just maybe the outpouring of anger and frustration from this thread will serve to help our longer term relationships with DT. In my mind they haven't necessarily destroyed anything with us like FT or DP. One of the reasons I am giving DT a little more slack regarding my longer term relationship with them is that my guess is the design of this beta has been in the works for awhile, before May 1 D-day. I don't know this for sure, of course, but it's me gut feel. If they were to start crafting a new beta TODAY, maybe they wouldn't have made this silly move.
Really, I am trying to convince myself that DT is still a good, long term partner, and I believe they are. FT is not, DP is not. Those two have earned the burnt crust brand.
-
A lot of people seem to be wetting the bed on this one. DT did the right thing and asked permission first. Give them a break. They wanted short term use of a few files so they could test something that might make us more money. I don't have a problem with that. Just like any other investment I make in my business, I have to spend a little now in hopes of gaining more later. The investment is small and short term.
While having your nuts in a vice. If you don't like it, you need to OPT OUT of ALL partner programs, not just this one. When partner sales go against image ranking that is a direct killer of revenue, future revenue simply by forcing you to delay pushing your files up in rank due to lack of partner sales. That's a sh1tty deal.
-
A lot of people seem to be wetting the bed on this one. DT did the right thing and asked permission first. Give them a break. They wanted short term use of a few files so they could test something that might make us more money. I don't have a problem with that. Just like any other investment I make in my business, I have to spend a little now in hopes of gaining more later. The investment is small and short term.
While having your nuts in a vice. If you don't like it, you need to OPT OUT of ALL partner programs, not just this one. When partner sales go against image ranking that is a direct killer of revenue, future revenue simply by forcing you to delay pushing your files up in rank due to lack of partner sales. That's a sh1tty deal.
It's like, what, 12 files? 20? I looked at the ones they wanted to use for me, and only a couple were sellers. So it seems to me that if the other partner programs were so important to you, it makes little sense to opt out over 12 rarely sold images that will be used in a short-term test project. You all can click the minus all you want, but it seems to me that a lot of people just don't want to be reasonable anymore.
-
A lot of people seem to be wetting the bed on this one. DT did the right thing and asked permission first. Give them a break. They wanted short term use of a few files so they could test something that might make us more money. I don't have a problem with that. Just like any other investment I make in my business, I have to spend a little now in hopes of gaining more later. The investment is small and short term.
While having your nuts in a vice. If you don't like it, you need to OPT OUT of ALL partner programs, not just this one. When partner sales go against image ranking that is a direct killer of revenue, future revenue simply by forcing you to delay pushing your files up in rank due to lack of partner sales. That's a sh1tty deal.
It's like, what, 12 files? 20? I looked at the ones they wanted to use for me, and only a couple were sellers. So it seems to me that if the other partner programs were so important to you, it makes little sense to opt out over 12 rarely sold images that will be used in a short-term test project. You all can click the minus all you want, but it seems to me that a lot of people just don't want to be reasonable anymore.
Yes and what about when they fully launch? If we don't want to earn 20 cents (or whatever that royalty will be) for this program we have to opt out all of our images. This initial thing is the principal of what they are asking of photographers. If you happen to not want your images in it (any many don't) they have to opt out all of their images. But when I look at what's to come (and that is speculation because Achilles won't kiss and tell) and I don't like it, then what?
-
You'd be in the same boat you're in now, except you don't know it would be bad. They aren't going to drop the test no matter what if there's money to be made.
-
After much consideration i have opted out. This is because many of my chosen files are good sellers, but mainly, it's because i dont know if the deal would turn out good or bad for me. I am not saying DT is misleading or something, simply, a good deal for them may not be a good deal for me, just like, a good deal for many contributors here may not be a good deal for me.
Having said and done that, i must say I will support DT when whenever i could, not on this one as i do not have enough information. I haven't lost trust in them. I really dont understand the hostility in this thread toward DT. They are treated exactly the same as FT with DPC deal. I dont think DT belongs to the same group as FT, DP and IS, or not yet anyway. They dont deserve this hostility. I am afraid, at this rate, at some point even Pond5 would be on the chopping board. Actually, there are people already complaining about Pond5 here, which i dont really understand. There is no "perfect" agency. It's impossible to please everyone and stay in business at the same time. We should see what is the most important things we need from agencies. For me, it's the trust.
-
So the only reason to opt in is to spite your fellow contributors? Good bases for a business decision.
Not out of spite towards other contributors but because I think DT deserves a chance to do the right thing and I'm willing to give it to them.
-
@robhainer
i cant say that often enough:
People who accept everything (even if someone gives away their images for free) are responsible when the business goes fubar.
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
-
I had 6 or 8 selected. All but one were level 0s, meaning no sales for several months. The other had 1 sale. I don't see a huge risk in letting these be used for a test program-they are generating $0 for me now.
It's unfortunate there is so much info not released, but that is probably because the potential partner new it wouldn't be kept confidential, so I get it.
It seems to me the stock industry needs to move to new business models and that is going to take some experimentation.
My only complaint is the tone of the email was over the top with flattery. I would have appreciated a more matter of fact presentation.
-
It's like, what, 12 files? 20? I looked at the ones they wanted to use for me, and only a couple were sellers. So it seems to me that if the other partner programs were so important to you, it makes little sense to opt out over 12 rarely sold images that will be used in a short-term test project. You all can click the minus all you want, but it seems to me that a lot of people just don't want to be reasonable anymore.
They are nicely and up front telling you your going to participate and if you don't then you have to pull all your images out of all the affiliate programs. Just another strong arm tactic. If they really thought they had something good (for all of us) we would have received a confidential email asking to use the chosen images in a beta test with some idea of the potential. NOT penalizing us for not participating. This strong arm tactic gives me no reason to believe it will be any different if the program becomes an official program.
If this is your business and the way you pay your bills then any business person that wants to stay in business does not invest product in a business model they have no clue what the potential or return might be. What if it is another deal like the Getty deal and instead of marketing to bloggers they are marketing to corporate advertising. I have no clue but that is the point. As a business I will not invest in a opportunity I have no clue what the impact will be. It could be good or it could be another program that continues the spiral to the bottom.
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
-
I think Rob has reasonable arguments and he has been around for a while, so I guess he knows whats best for him personally. Everyone is entitled to make their own decisions, but the personal attacks are unneseccary. Keep it civil folks, otherwise Leaf will lock the thread and its important to keep these communication channels open and centralised without any personal vendettas. Cheers.
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
yes - and I shoot without camera and equipment - be serious
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
You have stated on this and other forums that stock photography for you is a hobby. You also confess to also being an average photographer - your words not mine.
And I would not disagree with your view about that.
Assuming you have a full time occupation and this 'stock thing' is just for 'pin money' your views on the DT deal is bound to be completely different from others here that make their living from photography.
I really don't have a problem with guys like you making a few bucks from your hobby.
But please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.
You might want to take a moment to think about that Mr Hainer while you're spending your pocket money and ask not why we judge you.
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
You bite the hand that feeds you!
I have never met a person who is so resistant against that very simple point.
If you go on like that you cant even afford a plastic camera in future - not to talk about any reasonable gear.
People like your ruin the mean of existence of all of us because you turn down the spiral to the bottom.
Do you like it to bend down lower with every day??
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
You have stated on this and other forums that stock photography for you is a hobby. You also confess to also being an average photographer - your words not mine.
And I would not disagree with your view about that.
Assuming you have a full time occupation and this 'stock thing' is just for 'pin money' your views on the DT deal is bound to be completely different from others here that make their living from photography.
I really don't have a problem with guys like you making a few bucks from your hobby.
But please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.
You might want to take a moment to think about that Mr Hainer while your spending your pocket money and ask not why we judge you.
well said - we has to be aware that we could be shot by both sides - agencies and some conributors
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
You have stated on this and other forums that stock photography for you is a hobby. You also confess to also being an average photographer - your words not mine.
And I would not disagree with your view about that.
Assuming you have a full time occupation and this 'stock thing' is just for 'pin money' your views on the DT deal is bound to be completely different from others here that make their living from photography.
I really don't have a problem with guys like you making a few bucks from your hobby.
But please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.
You might want to take a moment to think about that Mr Hainer while you're spending your pocket money and ask not why we judge you.
Actually, I'm a full-time photographer. Stock photography is just one revenue stream. About 15-20 percent of my annual income. I use it to put food on the table. I think you have me confused with someone else.
So maybe you should have respect for my views, too.
-
guys, the mudslinging at eachother is not doing anything to the value of the discussion - could you take that elsewhere please?
-
guys, the mudslinging at eachother is not doing anything to the value of the discussion - could you take that elsewhere please?
Agreed. Back on topic :)
-
guys, the mudslinging at eachother is not doing anything to the value of the discussion - could you take that elsewhere please?
Agreed. Back on topic :)
Not true
It is definitely "ontopic" if peopledo not understand that willling into every "deal" - anyhow meagre the result is - ruins our existence.
And his own too.
@robheiner
Do you love your family??
Why dont you take care of them in a way that you have food on their table not only today but as well in some days?
Axel, I think Mellimage point is valid that the 'mud slinging' (making it too personal) was detracting from the core topic of this thread. I think he is right. If the thread turns into a fight people that have valid comments will just turn away and not involve themselves in this important topic.
Let's keep it clean and lets keep it measured. Sure you're angry about other 'photogs' going along with giving stuff away for free and even trying to justify it but they have a right to their views. Even if they are bonkers :)
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
it is not personal - you are working against the interest of majority of us - so don t be astonished if we condemn your attitude...
After you send me money for all of my equipment and time spent on my images, then you can sit in judgment and tell me what to do.
You have stated on this and other forums that stock photography for you is a hobby. You also confess to also being an average photographer - your words not mine.
And I would not disagree with your view about that.
Assuming you have a full time occupation and this 'stock thing' is just for 'pin money' your views on the DT deal is bound to be completely different from others here that make their living from photography.
I really don't have a problem with guys like you making a few bucks from your hobby.
But please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.
You might want to take a moment to think about that Mr Hainer while you're spending your pocket money and ask not why we judge you.
Actually, I'm a full-time photographer. Stock photography is just one revenue stream. About 20 percent of my annual income. I think you have me confused with someone else.
No I don't think so. I quoted comments you have made previously on Shutterstock forums.
It would also appear your views aren't too popular there either if you don't mind me saying.
And if you are indeed a full time photographer (as you now appear to be saying) then I have no comment.
Mouth open.
.... I don't think so... too................... - and my income is 100% ms
-
please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.
Two things:
1. Nobody in microstock can seriously make this argument with a straight face. ETA: because microstockers already did it to those earning a good living selling stock at higher prices.
2. If your markets are genuinely sustainable and economically viable then they will not depend upon you persuading people to do this or that.
There are more and more microstock pictures every day. The more of something there is, the less you can realistically expect to get paid. Microstock is the basic (no added value) stock product and is clearly moving ever closer towards being free at the point of delivery IMO.
-
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.
We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.
Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.
-
please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.
Two things:
1. Nobody in microstock can seriously make this argument with a straight face.
2. If your markets are genuinely sustainable and economically viable then they will not depend upon you persuading people to do this or that.
There are more and more microstock pictures every day. The more of something there is, the less you can realistically expect to get paid. Microstock is the basic (no added value) stock product and is clearly moving ever closer towards being free at the point of delivery IMO.
This is well said - just because the reality is not very palatable doesn't make it less real ...
-
@ethan,
your right
@gbalex
well said
Just made an decision
I will pull 70% of my port from SS
SS is the "last man standing" - all others i already gave the axe (means i already canceled although some of them like DT still sell my images)
What i will do:
I leave the typical stock-crap (http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?searchterm=brush&x=0&y=0&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&lang=de&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&submitter=1309612&photographer_name=Axel+Lauer&search_group=&orient=&commercial_ok=&show_color_wheel=1&sort_method=popular") which can be done by any of our interns and the good stuff (http://www.shutterstock.com/g/Axel+Lauer/sets) like travel or fashion i will pull and give symbiostock a try.
I will leave the videos online until the trend "sell for pennys" will arise there too.
Then it would be time to pull the videos as well.
Enough is enough
-
@ethan,
your right
@gbalex
well said
Just made an decision
I will pull 70% of my port from SS
SS is the "last man standing" - all others i already gave the axe (means i already canceled although some of them like DT still sell my images)
What i will do:
I leave the typical stock-crap (http://"[url]http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?searchterm=brush&x=0&y=0&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&lang=de&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&submitter=1309612&photographer_name=Axel+Lauer&search_group=&orient=&commercial_ok=&show_color_wheel=1&sort_method=popular[/url]") which can be done by any of our interns and the good stuff (http://"[url]http://www.shutterstock.com/g/Axel+Lauer/sets[/url]") like travel or fashion i will pull and give symbiostock a try.
I will leave the videos online until the trend "sell for pennys" will arise there too.
Then it would be time to pull the videos as well.
Enough is enough
It's not my place to interfere with your plan, it's good that you have a plan.
Why don't you consider doing exactly what you plan with Symbiostock but keep your port at SS (just for the income) and then cull it by 70% when you are ready?
That way you don't punish yourself financially and it might help in the interim period establishing your symbiostock site.
Might be worth consideration.
Oh. And good luck :)
-
Unfortunately in this day and age the majority of people in all walks of life are all too willing to sell out tomorrow for the chance of making a quick buck today.
The saddest thing of all, in my opinion is that those who choose not to follow that path merely make it even more profitable for those that do.
I suspect that the real reason that some people are so quick to take these type of deals see it as an opportunity to enhance their incomes by taking advantage of reduced competition.
I am certain that those who participate in these schemes will see some short term benefits, BUT only if the majority of people opt out.
I am not referring to any contributor/s in particular here but I would ask those who are thinking of participating in any of these recent schemes to remember that they are gambling with everyone's future incomes, not just their own and that is why some people may appear somewhat aggressive in response to their actions.
I sincerely hope that everything pans out in the end and we can all enjoy a more prosperous future
-
I suspect that the real reason that some people are so quick to take these type of deals see it as an opportunity to enhance their incomes by taking advantage of reduced competition.
this is essential - great post - dpc problem
-
Guys,
DreamsTime is not a bad agency. And, as one guy said here, "DT is relatively honest". :)
(I like this definition ("relatively honest") very much. We are now at the point of time when all the microstocks go to 3 groups: "relatively honest", "dishonest" and "too small to be considered as a serious agency". And there is no "honest" group at all. So, let's be more respectful to DT.)
Now to the point. I do not like this shady deal offered by DreamsTime and I opted out - turned off all the partner sales, because DT does not offer any other way to opt out.
But I can change my decision if DreamsTime will fix the errors they just made. All the errors were mentioned and discussed here at MSG.
First of all, I must say that I contacted DT support and they answered my questions politely. But why do not they send a new corrected newsletter to all the DT contributors?! They answer to personal support emails, trying to fix their mistakes in person-to-person conversation, but why not send a new email to all the photographers?!
Now, after the 1-May boycott, Fotolia sends emails to the contributors several times a week! (Trying to entice the contributors) But DreamsTime sent the only message to us and they understand that they sent a bad invitation. Anyway, they did not send a more polite, correct, informative new message to us. Even the broken links were not fixed. They do not need chisel+stone to make the message, but ...
So, dear DreamsTime, please show us your respect and confirm your reputation: Write a new text and send it to us. You see all the questions here at MSG. Just write some good answers to us - your partners.
P.S.
What especially I do not like in DT offer is: "You have 5 days to decide."
Emm... Excuse me?! Why not 5 hours or 5 minutes? Where did you take this number? We are photographers and designers, our job does not require to be online 24/7/365. And I also do not think that DT makes any business decisions in such a hurry. Why should we?
P.P.S.
Sorry for my bad English.
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
I am not trying to make it personal in any way. I hope you don't feel that's what I am doing. We are having a great discussion as far as I'm concerned.
-
My answer to DreamsTime Please exclude me from this “Beta” or “Pilot” project. Customers are stealing pictures from everywhere for their blogs and it is not fear to the contributors to give them access for free to your database. I know that Getty Images made reshaping of the market with close to 39 millions free images. If someone has to have blog and couldn’t make money from it has to close this blog or to support it by them. I’m not supporter of the idea for free images at all. I show you before year or two how one picture which wasn’t downloaded as a stock photo for sell but when was shown as free stock photo for a week has more than 100 downloads which means the Stock Photo wasn’t good when have to pay $0.36 but was enough good to be used when was free $0.00. No action of Getty Images (they are not connected with photography Getty Image is own by investment fond) no any other steps back in front of the customers will make any prosperity of the micro stock photography.
-
In the absence of information nobody knows whether DT is offering a good deal or a bad deal. When we hear how the beta test went and what comes out of it we should be able to make informed decisions on what to do. Compared with all the other stuff going on this topic is small beer and, really, acting like a trade union picket line attacking people for not having the same point of view as you is totally over the top.
I would argue that it is completely misguided to think that personal attacks will forge unity. The only way to get people to join you in a campaign is through reasoned argument. Abuse will not only create divisions, it will drive away reasonable people who do not want to get involved in viciousness and thus, ultimately, guarantee the failure of those who resort to abuse.
The main issue at the moment is Fotolia's DPC, not DT's attempt to set up some new deal, and I suspect this squabble is distracting attention from that far more important cause.
-
… (I like this definition ("relatively honest") very much. We are now at the point of time when all the microstocks go to 3 groups: "relatively honest", "dishonest" and "too small to be considered as a serious agency". And there is no "honest" group at all. So, let's be more respectful to DT.)…
Excellent summary. DT, in general, suffers from a lack of transparency but is (relatively) fair compared to the others that are actually worth a * (other than SS who appear to make very few mistakes, business or PR).
This initiative seems harmless enough with the limited files etc, will certainly have no impact on me personally because it’s limited and doesn’t include my best selling files so prepared to let it run & see how it goes. Equally, folks who will be or think they will be compromised or who have a principled position can opt out. IS unilaterally hugely reduced prices not long ago with no opt out and no corresponding sales increase. No long before, FT and 123 did something similar. Even the conscientious objectors have to admit this exercise DT are running is not in the same league.
-
I've just finished a lot of editing of this thread. I have tried to remove all the posts that are simply personal insults, crude language and mud slinging and kept things related to the topic. Let's try keep this a little more professional and cut the insults. If I missed any posts please let me know. The 'report post' works well.
One member was also banned for continually using crude language and insulting members.
-
Well done, Leaf ... these discussions (DT, FT, DPC ...) are too important for us all to be disturbed and flogged to death by trivialities!
-
sorry Tyler but was I the one offending other members? all my posts were removed :o
-
sorry Tyler but was I the one offending other members? all my posts were removed :o
I removed a lot of posts that were off topic and quotes of those posts
-
ok that is fine!
-
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.
I am not trying to make it personal in any way. I hope you don't feel that's what I am doing. We are having a great discussion as far as I'm concerned.
No. It wasn't you. You were debating the topic, and you made some good points. It's the people who were trying to make it about me and my decision to opt back in to DPC who were making it personal when that has nothing to do with this discussion.
-
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.
We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.
Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.
Could not agree more.
The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.
-
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.
We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.
Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.
Could not agree more.
The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.
I'm not sure where you're coming from. I think it's the opposite. I'm on track to make more than $20,000 this year from stock. While that's not a full-time salary, it's not pocket change either. It's enough for me to care about what happens to it, which is why I've made the decisions I have. "Boycotting" Fotolia would have cost me a decent chunk of that money, while hobbyists who do make pocket change can afford to delete whatever they want.
-
I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.
-
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.
We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.
Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.
Could not agree more.
The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.
I'm not sure where you're coming from. I think it's the opposite. I'm on track to make more than $20,000 this year from stock. While that's not a full-time salary, it's not pocket change either. It's enough for me to care about what happens to it, which is why I've made the decisions I have. "Boycotting" Fotolia would have cost me a decent chunk of that money, while hobbyists who do make pocket change can afford to delete whatever they want.
On the other hand I'll probably make more than twice that much from microstock this year, and I not only opted out, I just deleted my files from Fotolia. I'd like to earn even more next year, and I think DPC will make that more difficult. I'm not interested in being associated with a coompany that undercuts my sales elsewhere.
-
The 'hobbyists' (their term not mine) are missing the point.
Collectively we must resist at all times giving away our products for free - I really am struggling with the mentality sometimes - of people that believe their 'product' is so worthless they can willingly give it to complete strangers (that never, ever come back to buy from you) their images.
Complete madness.
No business worth it's salt has ever devalued their product to such an extent they give it away for free.
And when the day comes, and we're collectively heading that way, when there are literally millions of RF images on the web for free, the very same people that (today) are willing to give away their stuff for free, will realise, far too late "Oh ****, look what's happened"
"Oh well, back to the day job, it was nice while it lasted. My, I really feel (not) for all those professional full timers that warned us this might happen......"
-
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.
We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.
Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.
Could not agree more.
The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.
I'm not sure where you're coming from. I think it's the opposite. I'm on track to make more than $20,000 this year from stock. While that's not a full-time salary, it's not pocket change either. It's enough for me to care about what happens to it, which is why I've made the decisions I have. "Boycotting" Fotolia would have cost me a decent chunk of that money, while hobbyists who do make pocket change can afford to delete whatever they want.
On the other hand I'll probably make more than twice that much from microstock this year, and I not only opted out, I just deleted my files from Fotolia. I'd like to earn even more next year, and I think DPC will make that more difficult. I'm not interested in being associated with a coompany that undercuts my sales elsewhere.
They're your files, so I don't have a problem with it. I just get annoyed when people tell me what to do with my files especially when all they have to back up their assertions are assumptions, speculations and guesses. Fact is, we don't know what impact any of this will have. Every other site sells images cheaper than Shutterstock, which makes me most of my stock income. I still use them. I don't see the difference. This effort by Dreamstime could mean more money. I don't see the harm in letting them use a few of my low income images to find out. I think it's worth the very small risk.
That said, I understand the point people like Mantis have made. The email by Dreamstime wasn't a very good effort. It's not very clear what they're trying to do, and you should be able to opt out without losing other Alliance sales.
-
I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.
Sorry, Farbled. I was just responding to Ethan. Even for people who don't rely on the income still pour a lot of heart and soul into their images. And let's face it, uploading and keywording isn't a very pleasurable experience; it can only be called "work."
E
-
Well said, robhainer. I agree with both your points: that making a few images available for Dreamstime's pilot represents a small risk financially, one that I'm willing to take; and that DT could have and should have handled it better. The lack of a more limited opt out is a pain; your choices are either to opt out of everything or to disable the specific set of images DT identified in your email, at least for the duration of the pilot. In my case that's 21 images. Given the goal, the duration of the pilot and at least the possibility of being paid at the end of the trial, that seems a fair investment to me. Your mileage may vary.
-
I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.
Sorry, Farbled. I was just responding to Ethan. Even for people who don't rely on the income still pour a lot of heart and soul into their images. And let's face it, uploading and keywording isn't a very pleasurable experience; it can only be called "work."
E
No worries at all, my reply was to the post before yours and I appreciate the sentiment. I just hate stupid assumptions about a whole group based on one or two people's actions. Point of fact I am currently on only three stock sites, SS, DT and one other very small agency. Plus my Sym sites. I want to get my collections back under my own control, but that 6 month thing at DT is hampering me. But I'm getting there, its now a small collection left there.
Like you, I will do what is best for me. I don't like herd mentality, I don't like bandwagons. If the DPC club was a good thing for me, then sure. And it very well could be for my old non sellers. But its not, so I am not in it, or on FT for that matter. Same thing with Sym, love the platform, lukewarm about the networks. My work, my control over where and how I use it. Anyone who tells me otherwise can um, well I cant say it here. :)
When people start saying collective and I see how they treat people not yet in it, I really want no part of it. Reminds me of being in a union and how they would call us at night at home to ensure we voted the "right" way on things.
Other people here have commented on how adversarial its gotten here, and I agree. I think I will extend my vacation from micros to include forums. Have a great summer!
-
I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.
Sorry, Farbled. I was just responding to Ethan. Even for people who don't rely on the income still pour a lot of heart and soul into their images. And let's face it, uploading and keywording isn't a very pleasurable experience; it can only be called "work."
E
No worries at all, my reply was to the post before yours and I appreciate the sentiment. I just hate stupid assumptions about a whole group based on one or two people's actions. Point of fact I am currently on only three stock sites, SS, DT and one other very small agency. Plus my Sym sites. I want to get my collections back under my own control, but that 6 month thing at DT is hampering me. But I'm getting there, its now a small collection left there.
Like you, I will do what is best for me. I don't like herd mentality, I don't like bandwagons. . Anyone who tells me otherwise can um, well I cant say it here. :)
When people start saying collective and I see how they treat people not yet in it, I really want no part of it. Reminds me of being in a union and how they would call us at night at home to ensure we voted the "right" way on things.
Your definitely a guy I'd want watching my back if we were in a trench.
Way to go.
:)
-
I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.
Sorry, Farbled. I was just responding to Ethan. Even for people who don't rely on the income still pour a lot of heart and soul into their images. And let's face it, uploading and keywording isn't a very pleasurable experience; it can only be called "work."
E
No worries at all, my reply was to the post before yours and I appreciate the sentiment. I just hate stupid assumptions about a whole group based on one or two people's actions. Point of fact I am currently on only three stock sites, SS, DT and one other very small agency. Plus my Sym sites. I want to get my collections back under my own control, but that 6 month thing at DT is hampering me. But I'm getting there, its now a small collection left there.
Like you, I will do what is best for me. I don't like herd mentality, I don't like bandwagons. . Anyone who tells me otherwise can um, well I cant say it here. :)
When people start saying collective and I see how they treat people not yet in it, I really want no part of it. Reminds me of being in a union and how they would call us at night at home to ensure we voted the "right" way on things.
Your definitely a guy I'd want watching my back if we were in a trench.
Way to go.
:)
Thank you, if that's the conclusion you draw, well, not much else to be said. And now I'm really out. Thanks for proving my point.
-
I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.
Sorry, Farbled. I was just responding to Ethan. Even for people who don't rely on the income still pour a lot of heart and soul into their images. And let's face it, uploading and keywording isn't a very pleasurable experience; it can only be called "work."
E
No worries at all, my reply was to the post before yours and I appreciate the sentiment. I just hate stupid assumptions about a whole group based on one or two people's actions. Point of fact I am currently on only three stock sites, SS, DT and one other very small agency. Plus my Sym sites. I want to get my collections back under my own control, but that 6 month thing at DT is hampering me. But I'm getting there, its now a small collection left there.
Like you, I will do what is best for me. I don't like herd mentality, I don't like bandwagons. . Anyone who tells me otherwise can um, well I cant say it here. :)
When people start saying collective and I see how they treat people not yet in it, I really want no part of it. Reminds me of being in a union and how they would call us at night at home to ensure we voted the "right" way on things.
Your definitely a guy I'd want watching my back if we were in a trench.
Way to go.
:)
Thank you, if that's the conclusion you draw, well, not much else to be said. And now I'm really out. Thanks for proving my point.
No, it's probably the conclusion that most uninterested observers (like me) would draw.
Permit me to ask you a question, Straight up.
Why would a partner 'an exciting potential revenue partner' approach a mid tier (at best) to low middle tier agency like Dreamstime with a 'exciting opportunity/joint venture beta test' ?
Why not Getty or Shutterstock?
The two leading worldwide agencies.
Why a mid-low tier agency (an agency desperate for a 'good news item to announce and compete with a bottom feeder like FT).
Think about it.
Why?
Because it's worthless ?
They'll make money and DT will make money but not you.
Why?
You gave away your stuff for free.
Mull over that my friend, mull over that.
I'm out too :)
-
Straight answer, there could by a myriad of reasons why someone would approach a not-quite top selling agency. I couldn't presume to guess. Conflict of interest, other partnerships, previous successful deals, who the heck knows?
But I do like the assumptions. Keep them coming. You've been wrong with pretty much all of them so far. I have never, ever given an image away for free through an agency, please stop the insinuation that I do. Never have, never will unless its done behind my back. So be a little bit more careful with "you gave" stuff. Its not rooted in any facts.
-
Well, after reading everything here and mulling it over, I decided to take a close look at my images that DT "selected" to see if there was any sort of pattern I could distinguish. I suppose my case would only apply to someone else who had a relatively large number of images selected, say 10 or more. What I found, for me at least, was the images seemed to represent a wide variety of styles from close-up to macro to backgrounds to Photoshop compositing to scenics to any of a large number of other styles. In other words, a selection showing a wide variety of what is available on DT. This makes sense in a beta test for a new customer (or whatever it is). Of course this would have to be combined with other contributor's images to show the full breadth of DT's offering. I don't do vectors or illustrations so don't know if any of that may have been included as well.
As to the images themselves, there's really only one that I would be reluctant to include. It has had over 500 sales across all agencies along with multiple EL's, including an EL on DT. Of the others, they have all sold only in the single digits or not at all on DT and have relatively low sales numbers elsewhere (except for one that has had 100+ sales, mostly at SS).
Having worked in the "real" business world for over 50 years, much of it as an executive for a multi-national corporation, I know the idea of giving away samples of one's product for a limited time is a proven way to encourage people to try and then buy your product(s). This appears to be the approach DT is taking, although on a more limited scale. It is always a risk that people may not like your product and not purchase it, but that's a normal risk of any business. It's a form of marketing. So long as it is limited in scope and duration, that is usually considered an acceptable cost of doing business.
Is there a downside to this action, of course. However the potential upside appears to be greater (based on the limited information we have so far been provided). Accordingly I've decided to remain opted in in the anticipation that DT, who knows their market much better than any of us, is correct in their assessment that the upside potential warrants this short-term beta test. This is within my personal risk tolerance, however it may not be within the risk tolerance of others and they are perfectly correct in opting out.
-
The main problem is the lack of a clear definition of the scope and duration.
If DT could be a little less vague I am sure lots more people, including myself, would be more willing to support them.
I am afraid that actually giving something for an unspecified time for an unspecified use in the hope of MAYBE getting something in return at some unspecified possible future date does not sound very appealing to me.
-
Having worked in the "real" business world for over 50 years, much of it as an executive for a multi-national corporation, I know the idea of giving away samples of one's product for a limited time is a proven way to encourage people to try and then buy your product(s). This appears to be the approach DT is taking, although on a more limited scale.
But DT isn't giving their products away, they want to give our products away.
-
Having worked in the "real" business world for over 50 years, much of it as an executive for a multi-national corporation, I know the idea of giving away samples of one's product for a limited time is a proven way to encourage people to try and then buy your product(s). This appears to be the approach DT is taking, although on a more limited scale.
But DT isn't giving their products away, they want to give our products away.
Actually those who opt in are giving their products away, not DT. DT has made an offer that if we choose to allow certain images to be put up for free for a limited period of time, in this case "about" a week or two, we stand a chance of improving our sales. Thus if someone allows this to happen, then they are offering their product and DT is only the venue through which the product is offered. DT has made it possible to opt out of this (although they could have done a much better job in this regards) so the choice is now ours to make. This is no different from someone like, oh say, COSTCO giving away samples at lunch time of various edible products. Some people like the sample sufficiently to go and purchase the entire package. Others make it a point to show up at COSTCO every day a noon to get what amounts to a free lunch. Who says there's no such thing as a free lunch? :P
The choice is yours to make. Do you want to allow a limited number of your images to be offered for free for a limited time in the hopes of increasing your cash flow or not. Is it a risk ... yes. Is it guaranteed ... no. But in the end only you can make that decision and therefor you, and not DT, are the one offering your images. And BTW, there is no guarantee that any image you may agree to offer may be taken. In this instance, there seems to be only one large customer and they may not like or have need for whatever image(s) any individual contributor agrees to have offered. Be nice to know how each image fared in this, but I doubt we'll ever know. If you offered something for free and nobody wanted it, even for free, would you really want to know?
-
Having worked in the "real" business world for over 50 years, much of it as an executive for a multi-national corporation, I know the idea of giving away samples of one's product for a limited time is a proven way to encourage people to try and then buy your product(s). This appears to be the approach DT is taking, although on a more limited scale.
But DT isn't giving their products away, they want to give our products away.
Actually those who opt in are giving their products away, not DT. DT has made an offer that if we choose to allow certain images to be put up for free for a limited period of time, in this case "about" a week or two, we stand a chance of improving our sales. Thus if someone allows this to happen, then they are offering their product and DT is only the venue through which the product is offered. DT has made it possible to opt out of this (although they could have done a much better job in this regards) so the choice is now ours to make. This is no different from someone like, oh say, COSTCO giving away samples at lunch time of various edible products. Some people like the sample sufficiently to go and purchase the entire package. Others make it a point to show up at COSTCO every day a noon to get what amounts to a free lunch. Who says there's no such thing as a free lunch? :P
The choice is yours to make. Do you want to allow a limited number of your images to be offered for free for a limited time in the hopes of increasing your cash flow or not. Is it a risk ... yes. Is it guaranteed ... no. But in the end only you can make that decision and therefor you, and not DT, are the one offering your images. And BTW, there is no guarantee that any image you may agree to offer may be taken. In this instance, there seems to be only one large customer and they may not like or have need for whatever image(s) any individual contributor agrees to have offered. Be nice to know how each image fared in this, but I doubt we'll ever know. If you offered something for free and nobody wanted it, even for free, would you really want to know?
Like I said a couple of time before, yes, you can opt out, but you must opt out everything from every other partner site. These opt outs will affect your sales. Why? Because your images move up in rank the more they sell, even if it's a sub sale. So while we do have the option to opt out, we don't have the option to opt out of ONLY that scheme. They force the contributor to hurt their own sales in a way that makes it hard to opt out at all. Taking this a step further, let's assume they move forward with this program and it is another FT kind of thing where we get peanuts for commission. And DT them opts in all of our content and the only way out is a global opt out. That wouldn't be a good scenario and who's fault would that be? Now, I would venture to guess that DT will create a custom opt out if this thing moves forward. I think they are fair enough to do that. That's my personal opinion, of course.
-
@ Mantis: I completely agree with you. That's why I commented that DT could have done a better job insofar as their opt out was concerned. Opting out of everything is really the wrong way to approach this. Opting out of this test only would have been the correct thing to do. Opting out individual images would be even better, but that's not likely to happen. I also agree that, in my opinion, DT has shown themselves to be a fair agency and won't set up a scenario such as FT or DP. Never-the-less, it is up to us to take the old saying to heart "Trust but verify." Watch what they do and act accordingly. If all goes well, we will be winners. If it doesn't then we have other courses of action open to us. Let's just hope it doesn't come to that.
-
@ Mantis: I completely agree with you. That's why I commented that DT could have done a better job insofar as their opt out was concerned. Opting out of everything is really the wrong way to approach this. Opting out of this test only would have been the correct thing to do. Opting out individual images would be even better, but that's not likely to happen. I also agree that, in my opinion, DT has shown themselves to be a fair agency and won't set up a scenario such as FT or DP. Never-the-less, it is up to us to take the old saying to heart "Trust but verify." Watch what they do and act accordingly. If all goes well, we will be winners. If it doesn't then we have other courses of action open to us. Let's just hope it doesn't come to that.
Right. I do think they will work favorably with us, too.
-
(forgive me, I didn't read all 14 pages of this thread, this may have been already said)
don't DT already have a free images section? why not use those?
-
(forgive me, I didn't read all 14 pages of this thread, this may have been already said)
don't DT already have a free images section? why not use those?
Yes that has been brought up. Sounds like they wanted to hand pick hi-power images specifically for this test.
-
... DT has made it possible to opt out of this (although they could have done a much better job in this regards) ...
DT has to make it "opt in" deal, not "opt out". And, of course, not "opt out in 5 days"+"opt out from partner sales all together".
"Opt-in" is the only fair way. Fotolia took all our images to DPC and then (as a result of the boycott) offered that hidden and tricky "opt out" link. And we clearly stated to Fotolia that it was a wrong way to do the things. I am surprised that DreamsTime did not learn that lesson.
“Learn from the mistakes of others." (c) Eleanor Roosevelt
Yes, DT sent a notification (unlike Fotolia). But "opt in" would be much better. "Click this link and those images will be added to the experiment." is it so difficult?
-
Well, I think the period when you could opt out of this scheme is now over - either you are in or out.
The question is, if we now opt back in to the partner programme, will we remain opted out of the giveaway scheme? Does anybody know?
-
Sounds like they wanted to hand pick hi-power images specifically for this test.
4 from the 11 pictures they have picked from my portfolio have 0 downloads so I would say they are looking for subjects instead of downloads
-
Well, I think the period when you could opt out of this scheme is now over - either you are in or out.
The question is, if we now opt back in to the partner programme, will we remain opted out of the giveaway scheme? Does anybody know?
I would say "you" would be out
If you are interested in participating, there is nothing more for you to do. The selected images from your library will be included in the pilot program unless you do not wish to participate. If you choose not to participate in this beta test program, you may remove your images from the program by disabling your participation in the Dreamstime Alliances program within the next 5 days (http://www.dreamstime.com/alliances (http://www.dreamstime.com/alliances)).
-
As to the images themselves, there's really only one that I would be reluctant to include. It has had over 500 sales across all agencies along with multiple EL's, including an EL on DT. Of the others, they have all sold only in the single digits or not at all on DT and have relatively low sales numbers elsewhere (except for one that has had 100+ sales, mostly at SS).
ditto, I had a look and there is a broad range of stuff included, and one is a best seller but the rest not so much, and two that are SIMILAR!! omg. how could they.
I'd like to ask DT if staff are also working for free to roll out this project? Not just a little bit of overtime for free, completely for free, with a hint of a promise that maybe they'll get paid.
-
Alea iacta est – “The die is cast”
Time is up and People have made their decisions. I for one will risk 10 image for this experiment.
The “elephant in the room”, what if:
The trial is a success and increased earnings is the result.
I respect those who want nothing to do with DT and deleted their entire portfolio.
But those who didn't want to “Risk” their images, how many will then want to be part of the new successful Alliance?
So goes comradeship . . . . .
For those in Munich, Germany:
I'm involved in an Exhibition of Painting, Film, Sculpture, Photography at the Mohr Villa.
Stop by for a glass of wine and we can talk trash . . . .
Mohr-Villa, Situlistr. 75, München-Freimann
Vernissage: Freitag 6. Juni 2014, 19 – 22 Uhr
-
The “elephant in the room”, what if:
The trial is a success and increased earnings is the result.
I respect those who want nothing to do with DT and deleted their entire portfolio.
But those who didn't want to “Risk” their images, how many will then want to be part of the new successful Alliance?
So goes comradeship . . . . .
It's a very small elephant. Once I hear what the project involves I will decide what to do.
Another small elephant (making a Pygmy Elephant herd in the room, I suppose) would be what would the participants do if the trial is a success and then they discover it's the sort of programme they never wanted to be involved in in the first place?
All will become clear in a few weeks' or months' time, I suppose.
-
The “elephant in the room”, what if:
The trial is a success and increased earnings is the result.
I respect those who want nothing to do with DT and deleted their entire portfolio.
But those who didn't want to “Risk” their images, how many will then want to be part of the new successful Alliance?
So goes comradeship . . . . .
It's a very small elephant. Once I hear what the project involves I will decide what to do.
Another small elephant (making a Pygmy Elephant herd in the room, I suppose) would be what would the participants do if the trial is a success and then they discover it's the sort of programme they never wanted to be involved in in the first place?
All will become clear in a few weeks' or months' time, I suppose.
That would be the time I would opt-out, but hell, that's just me . . . . .
-
Alea iacta est – “The die is cast”
Time is up and People have made their decisions. I for one will risk 10 image for this experiment.
The “elephant in the room”, what if:
The trial is a success and increased earnings is the result.
I respect those who want nothing to do with DT and deleted their entire portfolio.
But those who didn't want to “Risk” their images, how many will then want to be part of the new successful Alliance?
So goes comradeship . . . . .
If the alliance is successful, I want to be part of it. But I consider it very fair that, given the little info we received and the risks involved, I don't want to be a guinea pig for their experiments. At least not for free.
-
I won't give up (opt-out) because I am "the chosen one", just a few of us are involved in this project! Elite of elites!
We are the best, we are "delta force" of stock industry, whatever you talk negatively about it!
:o 8) ??? ::) :P
;D ;D ;D ;)
-
Yes, we are!
;D ;D ;D
-
My two cents about time frame of the experiment. I have been in contact with a Dreamstime Support. According to my contact, the experiment will take "a few weeks time". And than they need to analyze the data. I expect it to be more like couple of months. With the agency probably not telling us the testing period is over, I bet.
Anybody knows approximate proportion of revenues on Dreams itself and via its' Partners? Just bracing for an extra loss here after opting out...
-
Does anyone know, is it safe to turn the Alliances back on now, if I do not want to participate in the testing program?
-
Does anyone know, is it safe to turn the Alliances back on now, if I do not want to participate in the testing program?
LOL I was thinking the exact same thing :)
I suspect if you do, any previously identified images selected from your portfolio prior to turning off the partnership option, will be automatically included in the Beta Test.
I also suspect, DT is going to be very reticent in coming forward with an answer as it most likely is from people like us that aren't prepared to help them by giving away our images for free in the first place :)
-
If I can help Dreamstime with a few of my pictures to test out a new source of revenues I have no problem with that. At least they informed me about it and it only involves a small quantity of my pictures.
Remember Getty stole all your pictures to give them away for free without hope of ever receiving a dime and they even didn't inform you about it.
-
Let me know how much you all made from this test. Cant wait to find out.
-
I'm glad to see my BS detector has been properly calibrated after a few years in this industry. As soon as I see any message from an agency praising my work, I reach for the opt out lever.
The latest email I got was from Deposit Photos asking me to upload more.
-
I'm glad to see my BS detector has been properly calibrated after a few years in this industry. As soon as I see any message from an agency praising my work, I reach for the opt out lever.
The latest email I got was from Deposit Photos asking me to upload more.
So they are really reaching out to contributors for more content? What a big set of brass balls swinging to and fro.
-
DT is not like FTL or IS. On DT my income is not down to 1/4 of 2009. For me it tells they know what they are doing. Everyone knows that internet businesses need constant innovation. If they want to test waters and they want my support for a few month then why not. I trust them. I may lose some dollars now but I way win more later. I don't understand why are everyone so upset. Yes, I would not support the 'innovative' ideas of FTL or IS - anymore - but DT or SS still has my support.
-
I like DT too but for me it's about the word "FREE". This is a slow grind to contributors eventually earning nothing for their hard work. I intend to be selling my images 20 years from now. This is just a very small step towards making "FREE" acceptable. If you accept this one then the next one will be just slightly worse and the argument will be "It's not much different than the DT trial and we were OK with that so what's the difference." 3-5 years down the road the line has gotten so muddy that "FREE" is fairly normal.
I have kids in school and we teach our boys that Bullying isn't Ok... ever! Not "well he just punched him in the arm but it really didn't hurt.. so thats OK, but if he had hit a little bit harder it's not OK." Bullying is bullying regardless of the degree and should not be tolerated.
Free is free regardless of the degree and should not be tolerated!
-
Free is not always necessarily free. Many deals contain a free period... etc. We do not know the details yet. Let them work this thing out and then you can still opt out.
DT is a company they want to earn money - in the long run they will not give our photos for 'free'. And when they earn money they pay royalty - this is the base of our agreement. If it turns out that they don't I'll quit. But we are talking about a test period here. I am sure they aren't testing a business model where they give everything for free and earn nothing.
-
I like DT too but for me it's about the word "FREE". This is a slow grind to contributors eventually earning nothing for their hard work. I intend to be selling my images 20 years from now. This is just a very small step towards making "FREE" acceptable. If you accept this one then the next one will be just slightly worse and the argument will be "It's not much different than the DT trial and we were OK with that so what's the difference." 3-5 years down the road the line has gotten so muddy that "FREE" is fairly normal.
I have kids in school and we teach our boys that Bullying isn't Ok... ever! Not "well he just punched him in the arm but it really didn't hurt.. so thats OK, but if he had hit a little bit harder it's not OK." Bullying is bullying regardless of the degree and should not be tolerated.
Free is free regardless of the degree and should not be tolerated!
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
Some common sense spoken :)
-
No... Free is always Free! Once they pay me then it is no longer free. However, there is no indication that I would ever get paid. "Maybe" doesn't change the fact that they are giving away my images without compensation to me with terms that I am not privy too. If I knew the terms then I could determine whether this is an investment or not. I am Ok with investing my images when I know the risks and possible rewards, I am not Ok with blind faith in a company because "They are less bad then their competition".
If you were to compare DT's reputation to Clipartof, Toonvectors, Symbiostock, and even GLStock they don't look so good anymore. Just sayin'.
-
Free is not always necessarily free. Many deals contain a free period... etc. We do not know the details yet. Let them work this thing out and then you can still opt out.
DT is a company they want to earn money - in the long run they will not give our photos for 'free'. And when they earn money they pay royalty - this is the base of our agreement. If it turns out that they don't I'll quit. But we are talking about a test period here. I am sure they aren't testing a business model where they give everything for free and earn nothing.
I prefer: Let them work this thing out and then we can still opt in! ;)
-
Yes free is free. If DT is using your images that you sell else where to sweeten the pot over the competition, then you are complicit in your own destruction.
Who ever the deal is with, they could have made the same deal with any other agency. Its all comes down to which agency is going to cut the lowest deal.
Believe me, this deal does not hinge on the 20 images of mine they selected.
-
Yes free is free. If DT is using your images that you sell else where to sweeten the pot over the competition, then you are complicit in your own destruction.
Who ever the deal is with, they could have made the same deal with any other agency. Its all comes down to which agency is going to cut the lowest deal.
Believe me, this deal does not hinge on the 20 images of mine they selected.
I think it also shows the inept manner in which DT have negotiated the deal, to give away our intellectual property away for free.
Maybe they're just not very good business people.
-
I had a look at my statistics after 10 days out of 30 in June. The June money is 30% from the last month earnings. Ha!.. So much ado about Partner Program. I had switched it off. And do not feel the impact. Yea, that is one hell of a Partner Program they have at the moment!..
-
I am on track to make 50% less on dt this month but I doubt it's related to their new scheme. Too early for that. I think I am seeing the summer slow down begin. In fact to be fair all sites are significantly down for me compared to previous months.
-
Toc toc!
Bump
Have we news of this "experiment"??
-
8/11/14 - "...the test is still not yet live. Our partners have been delayed and we're expecting to have more news (and perhaps go live) this fall. We will make an update when one is available. Thanks for your patience! "
8/12/2014 "...I hope the fact that the test batch is not live yet is reassuring and shows that our partners take the required time to do this properly. Also, it limits the time interval the test images are to be live (for the initial beta), taking us closer to the commercial launch."
from Serban/Achilles
-
I didn't get this email ... don't know why ! But am I automatically opted in to this ? Hope not !
-
The email was not sent to everyone so you probably are not included. If you need clarification you will have to ask someone there in Support.
-
I didn't get this email ... don't know why ! But am I automatically opted in to this ? Hope not !
I didn't get the email either but I'm pretty sure that was because I had chosen to opt-out of 'Alliances and Partnerships'. It seems to me that these things always turn out to be bad for contributors.
Go to 'Management Area' and then click on the Alliances button (towards the bottom R/H corner) to see if you are opted-in or out.
-
8/11/14 - "...the test is still not yet live. Our partners have been delayed and we're expecting to have more news (and perhaps go live) this fall. We will make an update when one is available. Thanks for your patience! "
8/12/2014 "...I hope the fact that the test batch is not live yet is reassuring and shows that our partners take the required time to do this properly. Also, it limits the time interval the test images are to be live (for the initial beta), taking us closer to the commercial launch."
from Serban/Achilles
Thank you cuppacoffee.
I did not received the email too, albeit I am opted-in.