MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Dreamstime.com => Topic started by: PenelopeB on April 11, 2007, 10:57
-
I have contacted support for clarification but...
Over Easter I received an email from DT requesting that I upload my RAW file as an addition format due to a customer request. (I could have said no & will in the future)
I did this thinking that it would be an 8 credit sale. Lo and behold, 5 minutes after it is approved... the RAW file gets grabbed via subscription sale.
Credit to me? A lousy $0.25 cents.
SUCKS!!!
Never again.
-
:o :o :o
(As you can see I'm speechless)
-
Ridiculous. No scruples. RAW should not be available for 25 lousy cents. It would be so easy to implement 40 Subscription DLs per RAW. I never even considered giving my RAWs to a microstock agency regardless of price.
-
Special file types should get a different treatment. I am an oponent of 25c JPEGs already, what to say about a RAW or a vector file... Thanks for warning us.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
I am interested to hear what support says. Please keep us updated and thanks for the heads-up.
-
I was given a request for a raw files once - but couldn't be bothered to upload it. I am not sure what the original was downloaded at, but I think it would take at least $10.00 for me to go back and dig up the raw file and spend the time uploading it and then considering a fair price for it. I don't think that the raw files are SO valuable as many people feel, but i would still need a bit of encouragement to be bothered to upload it.
-
Special file types should get a different treatment. I am an oponent of 25c JPEGs already, what to say about a RAW or a vector file... Thanks for warning us.
Even SS charges more for a tiff and they are only generated from the jpeg. Raw should be an EL.
-
well.. sorta off topic but. Why would shutterstock create a tiff from a jpg then sell it for more?? Doesn't that defeat the purpose - the two files are identical, why would one cost more?
-
Why would shutterstock create a tiff from a jpg then sell it for more?? Doesn't that defeat the purpose - the two files are identical, why would one cost more?
According to SS (from a thread when this was first implemented), this was a feature that was requested from buyers.
Many buyers purchase an image and then work on it over time. As they open and close a JPG image, it degrades (because of the re-compression).
To avoid this, the first thing buyers will do when they download an image is convert it to a TIFF, so that opening and closing the image will not degrade it.
So this essentially saves them time from converting the image. You can think of SS providing buyers a service (converting JPG to TIFF) that they are now charging for.
-
well.. sorta off topic but. Why would shutterstock create a tiff from a jpg then sell it for more?? Doesn't that defeat the purpose - the two files are identical, why would one cost more?
Geopappas explained it but lots weren't convinced. They made SS put a disclaimer that it was geneated from a JPEG as they thought it was misleading.
From a designers perspective, I guess the price is low compared to macro sites and most places pass costs onto clients anyway.
-
well.. sorta off topic but. Why would shutterstock create a tiff from a jpg then sell it for more?? Doesn't that defeat the purpose - the two files are identical, why would one cost more?
Geopappas explained it but lots weren't convinced. They made SS put a disclaimer that it was geneated from a JPEG as they thought it was misleading.
From a designers perspective, I guess the price is low compared to macro sites and most places pass costs onto clients anyway.
CJPhoto:
Thanks for adding that. I had forgotten about that crucial piece.
Although I love SS, I sometimes wonder why they uprez images 100% and why they create a TIFF from a JPG. They both seem pretty silly to me.
But if that is what the customer wants, then...
-
So this essentially saves them time from converting the image. You can think of SS providing buyers a service (converting JPG to TIFF) that they are now charging for.
I could open a business to do this, and I'd probbaly charge much cheaper. :)
Regards,
Adelaide
-
alamy upsizes their images too (they just have the submitter do it). I am still in the dark why they would do it.
-
I had a request for a simplified version of one of my illustrations at featurepics I made a 12mp version set it $5 (no resizing) uploaded within an hour as they said they wanted it quickly and waited and waited. :'(
Finally after a week I had the sale and earned me $3.50 ;D
-
Fintastique,
I also received an email from FP admin about a buyer wanting a change in colors for one illustration, I did it, also waited for days, then it sold as an EL! :D
Regards,
Adelaide