MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: An Interesting Commentary by CEPIC to Dreamstime About Giving Images Away  (Read 7224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ed

« on: May 27, 2013, 12:24 »
+1
This is a post by CEPIC directed toward Serban and Dreamstime....

http://www.cepic.org/news/blog/2013/05/fair_trade_creator_distributor_and_customer


« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2013, 12:36 »
+14
It's criminal when agencies that are supposed to be representing us are offering images for free, and bragging about how it's going to educate people. As one person in the article pointed out, free images aren't free. The site makes money off of ads and clicks, etc. They are making money...the contributor is the loser.

You will NEVER convince me that people can't afford to pay micro prices for images, when those same people, I would bet, stop at Starbucks for $4.00 or $5.00 a pop for a mocha latte, or buy a carton of cigs on the way home, or I could go on and on. Microstock prices are affordable for everyone and images should NEVER be given away for free.

But then as long as Dreamstime continues to rake in the profits, who gives a crap about the contributor.  >:(

« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2013, 12:43 »
+6
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?

Ed

« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2013, 12:47 »
0
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?


CEPIC stands for the Coordination of European Picture Agencies Stock, Press and Heritage.  It is an organization similar to ASMP or PACA.

http://www.cepic.org/

« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2013, 12:51 »
+4
If you check out the site, what he is doing is trying to use free images as a lure to redirect people to DT.

If people hadn't agreed to have their work given away then there wouldn't be this issue.

« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2013, 12:54 »
+1
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?

Hmm __ it would seem so. Serban has been giving images away for free for several years now and yet he still doesn't 'get it'. Of course he can only do so by virtue of the photographers who have 'donated' their images.

I'd assume that he is also picking up the tab for site maintenance and bandwidth too so it must be costing him money. Obviously the conversion rate of users clicking through to DT, to actually buy a more suitable image for their project, must make it relatively cheap marketing. He has the data ... and we don't.

« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2013, 12:59 »
+4
If you check out the site, what he is doing is trying to use free images as a lure to redirect people to DT.

If people hadn't agreed to have their work given away then there wouldn't be this issue.

You are right about that. But aren't agencies supposed to look out for contributors? If an agency is hired to make money for a contributor, why would the agency even propose such nonsense? The answer is, of course, because the agency continues to make money while the contributor has been convinced that the free images are going to bring in paying customers. That was Serban's philosophy regarding Pinterest, and now he has taken it one step further. I would like to see the hard data saying that contributors are getting lots of conversion sales and people are indeed being educated.  ::)

« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2013, 13:03 »
+1
If you check out the site, what he is doing is trying to use free images as a lure to redirect people to DT.

If people hadn't agreed to have their work given away then there wouldn't be this issue.

You are right about that. But aren't agencies supposed to look out for contributors? If an agency is hired to make money for a contributor, why would the agency even propose such nonsense? The answer is, of course, because the agency continues to make money while the contributor has been convinced that the free images are going to bring in paying customers. That was Serban's philosophy regarding Pinterest, and now he has taken it one step further. I would like to see the hard data saying that contributors are getting lots of conversion sales and people are indeed being educated.  ::)

I would like to see that too, and in fact how much cash I'm making from those conversions.

« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2013, 13:03 »
0
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?

Hmm __ it would seem so. Serban has been giving images away for free for several years now and yet he still doesn't 'get it'. Of course he can only do so by virtue of the photographers who have 'donated' their images.

I'd assume that he is also picking up the tab for site maintenance and bandwidth too so it must be costing him money. Obviously the conversion rate of users clicking through to DT, to actually buy a more suitable image for their project, must make it relatively cheap marketing. He has the data ... and we don't.

It may look to him on the surface like good marketing but he won't be able to tell how many people who might otherwise  have paid simply grab something free and go away. Without knowing the sum that has been removed from the industry's overall earnings, he can't know whether he is gaining or losing even if the referrals from the site exceed the cost of maintaining it.

It doesn't look to me as if it has been an effective police for DT, if my earnings are an indication (which, of course, they might not be).

« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2013, 13:11 »
0
It may look to him on the surface like good marketing but he won't be able to tell how many people who might otherwise  have paid simply grab something free and go away. Without knowing the sum that has been removed from the industry's overall earnings, he can't know whether he is gaining or losing even if the referrals from the site exceed the cost of maintaining it.

It doesn't look to me as if it has been an effective police for DT, if my earnings are an indication (which, of course, they might not be).

Yep. No other significant agency operates the 'free images' policy although Peter of Stockxpert did do so and thought it highly effective in growing StockXpert.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #10 on: May 27, 2013, 13:12 »
+1
I'd love to see some stats on what percentage of freebie hunters that are lured by free images actually end up buying something.

As long as free usable images are available why would anyone buy an image?


Poncke v2

« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2013, 16:08 »
+1
Where does he get those free images? Same with Fotolia, they have a collection of free images. But how does it get there?

They get all these images because the option to offer the image for free when it is rejected for the main library is opt out. You need to untick the box to prevent the image from being given away for free, and there are tons of contributors that do not know this or simply overlook it.

The option to give away your image needs to be opt in and when that happens, you will see no more images for free.

Facebook is the king of opt out and have been reprimanded many times for this. It should be made law that any option, whatever it is, is opt in, instead of opt out.

« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2013, 16:13 »
+24
Why doesn't CEPIC make a comment about the thousands of stock images Google is giving away for free without fair compensation to the owners?

dbvirago

« Reply #13 on: May 27, 2013, 16:34 »
+7
Early on, I opted in a few free images on FT and DT if they weren't 'good enough' to sell for .25. After they got thousands of downloads, I disabled/deleted and never did that again.

« Reply #14 on: May 27, 2013, 16:46 »
+4
The standard that nine out of 10 buyers require for a project is way below the minimum quality demands of microstock inspectors. So it stands to reason that all the "marginal" rejected images will be good enough for the vast majority of commercial users.
What Serban is giving away is largely BETTER - by a country mile - than the stuff that microstock was founded on 10 years ago and which people were more than happy to give a dollar or two for.

« Reply #15 on: May 27, 2013, 17:01 »
-2
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?


CEPIC stands for the Coordination of European Picture Agencies Stock, Press and Heritage.  It is an organization similar to ASMP or PACA.

http://www.cepic.org/


sure! I wonder what CEPIC does anyway, what sort of authority have they in terms of private companies? CEPIC is just another cool "company" with some big guys filling well their pockets pretending they are making the all photography industry so much better ;)

will this commentary change DT or IS or other? nop!

in case you don't know go and be a CEPIC friend for 100 EUR ;D

Ed

« Reply #16 on: May 27, 2013, 17:01 »
0
Why doesn't CEPIC make a comment about the thousands of stock images Google is giving away for free without fair compensation to the owners?


Go through their website - you'll find many good articles....

They have done this successfully with Yahoo

http://www.cepic.org/news/blog/2013/04/when_it%E2%80%99s_time_say_no

There are various articles regarding orphan works and Google.

Ed

« Reply #17 on: May 27, 2013, 17:07 »
+2
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?


CEPIC stands for the Coordination of European Picture Agencies Stock, Press and Heritage.  It is an organization similar to ASMP or PACA.

http://www.cepic.org/


sure! I wonder what CEPIC does anyway, what sort of authority have they in terms of private companies? CEPIC is just another cool "company" with some big guys filling well their pockets pretending they are making the all photography industry so much better ;)

will this commentary change DT or IS or other? nop!

in case you don't know go and be a CEPIC friend for 100 EUR ;D


Luis - CEPIC board members are elected by owners of stock photography companies that are trying to make a difference and change the way DT IS and other agencies do business.  You can find the member agencies here...

http://www.cepic.org/directory/member_agencies

Yes, you can join CEPIC as an individual for 100 EUR plus a 20% one time initiation fee.  Your membership helps to influence agencies to do the right thing for photographers.  This is no different than the ASMP, or the APA.

« Reply #18 on: May 27, 2013, 17:13 »
-2
I'm confused. What's the debate here? Do you really need to form a council to decide that giving away images for free isn't a very good idea?


CEPIC stands for the Coordination of European Picture Agencies Stock, Press and Heritage.  It is an organization similar to ASMP or PACA.

http://www.cepic.org/


sure! I wonder what CEPIC does anyway, what sort of authority have they in terms of private companies? CEPIC is just another cool "company" with some big guys filling well their pockets pretending they are making the all photography industry so much better ;)

will this commentary change DT or IS or other? nop!

in case you don't know go and be a CEPIC friend for 100 EUR ;D


Luis - CEPIC board members are elected by owners of stock photography companies that are trying to make a difference and change the way DT IS and other agencies do business.  You can find the member agencies here...


oh really... interesting that nothing changes, actually it has, for worst :o

« Reply #19 on: May 27, 2013, 17:19 »
+1
It doesn't seem easy to find out who the board members and their companies are, but I did notice this on one of their press releases: "On 7 March, Jonathan Lockwood, VP Legal Counsel at Getty Images UK & BAPLA board member, gave a presentation on automated licensing solutions for low volume transactions"

So while I share their feelings over free images, I do suspect they are an old-time-trad agency pressure group.

Ed

« Reply #20 on: May 27, 2013, 17:32 »
0
It doesn't seem easy to find out who the board members and their companies are...


Board members serve for two years.  All of the information is on their website.  Here are the current list of nominees (requiring ratification)

http://cepic.org/news/2013/04/cepic_agm_10th_june_2013_barcelona_1400

« Reply #21 on: May 27, 2013, 17:42 »
0
It doesn't seem easy to find out who the board members and their companies are...


Board members serve for two years.  All of the information is on their website.  Here are the current list of nominees (requiring ratification)

http://cepic.org/news/2013/04/cepic_agm_10th_june_2013_barcelona_1400


And the list of Board members?  I have googled without success

« Reply #22 on: May 27, 2013, 17:45 »
0
It doesn't seem easy to find out who the board members and their companies are...


Board members serve for two years.  All of the information is on their website.  Here are the current list of nominees (requiring ratification)

http://cepic.org/news/2013/04/cepic_agm_10th_june_2013_barcelona_1400



And the list of Board members?  I have googled without success


One click from the link above.

http://cepic.org/about_us/cepic_committee

« Reply #23 on: May 27, 2013, 17:59 »
0
It doesn't seem easy to find out who the board members and their companies are...


Board members serve for two years.  All of the information is on their website.  Here are the current list of nominees (requiring ratification)

http://cepic.org/news/2013/04/cepic_agm_10th_june_2013_barcelona_1400



And the list of Board members?  I have googled without success


One click from the link above.

http://cepic.org/about_us/cepic_committee


Thanks, though I'm still really none the wiser since I don't know what the acronyms mean, so I guess microstock is not one of their interests. That might explain why they weren't bothered about the Google deal, if Sean's observation is correct.

« Reply #24 on: May 27, 2013, 18:26 »
-1
I like the fancy idea of us all giving away our images for free.
And such undermine the whole industry.

And actually, why shouldnt we. We are almost there anyway.

10 cents here and 25 cents there. And the distributors making all kinds of fancy trades with our content.

It can produce a much better feeling when you give a picture away to someone who needs it and he says thanks.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
4634 Views
Last post March 12, 2008, 01:45
by Peter
4 Replies
3693 Views
Last post February 05, 2012, 17:39
by cybernesco
14 Replies
6604 Views
Last post October 05, 2012, 15:53
by lisafx
20 Replies
4344 Views
Last post October 13, 2013, 12:48
by Fred
11 Replies
7021 Views
Last post January 27, 2016, 10:02
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results