Author Topic: DT's approval policy - your thoughts (Read 13691 times)

click_click · « **on:** July 25, 2012, 08:22 »

I think most of us do NOT agree with DT's approval policy (similars, series & whatever they call it).

Let's throw our professional expertise into this discussion to try to figure out what DT is on to following this strange and questionable strategy of approving certain images.

My only logic guess is to create a library that sets itself apart from what all other agencies do accept, trying to become a niche or specialty provider. We often see good sellers rejected by DT whilst others make it through. This will technically lead us to believe that it will hurt us and them.

I can't however accept the thought that DT's management is that stupid. They must aim for something else.

What do you think it is?

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #1 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:07 »

It sucks, their efn dumb a**es and have no idea how much they are costing themselves and how many buyers they are loosing much less what i am loosing!

Wim · « **Reply #2 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:11 »

Another one haha, hey whats with all the cursing today lads! Leaf is probably going mad now.

click_click · « **Reply #3 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:21 »

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on July 25, 2012, 09:07

It sucks, their efn dumb a**es and have no idea how much they are costing themselves and how many buyers they are loosing much less what i am loosing!

I think we have established this here on the forums for over the last 12 months of complaining.

I understand that running a company that generates millions of $ every year doesn't have to be run by geniuses. Let's give DT the benefit of the doubt and assume they DO have a bigger (serious) plan. What do you think it is?

It does look like that they try to ship wreck their company into the ground but I just cannot fathom that thought.

gostwyck · « **Reply #4 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:31 »

I think it is ridiculous and that's why I haven't uploaded to DT for over a year. What's the point when they reject many of the best images you've ever produced simply because it is a subject matter that you have shot previously? Someone else can have much worse images of the same subject accepted (provided they haven't shot that subject before). Other contributors can compete against your own images in niche subjects ... but you cannot.

I still think that DT will be selling out to SS once the IPO goes through. Maybe there will eventually be a 'Bridge to DT' too!

Wim · « **Reply #5 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:32 »

Exactly my thoughts btw, some agencies seem to be out there to destroy themselves, underestimating the consequences of their actions.
Of course I haven't been around that long so it might just be their time, they had their share.
DT used to be a lot better right?

My sales are down compared to previous months but they are still regular (daily). I notice some good sellers with big ports reporting lack of sales for days or even a week.

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #6 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:33 »

If they have a plan i am a Billionaire!

And i dont think i am.

If i am a buyer looking for a specific shot and i find one similar and think to myself now this is what i want but i want it from a different viewpoint from another angle and a different focal length, what do i do?

Hmmmmmm i ask them why they dont have any other or i just go somewhere else?

Me myself i go somewhere else.

Just like Wally World they think they are doing the best for the buyer yet when they get the most sold items off the shelf to refill them with something else they think is going to sell better then loose both money and customers who now have to go somewhere else to get what they need.

click_click · « **Reply #7 on:** July 25, 2012, 09:48 »

Quote from: gostwyck on July 25, 2012, 09:31

... I still think that DT will be selling out to SS once the IPO goes through. Maybe there will eventually be a 'Bridge to DT' too!

OK good thought.

Do you think there is a possibility that DT is eagerly looking for a buyer but everyone who might be interested might be low-balling it since DT has been on a downward trend for a while now?

I'm sure that potential buyers are well aware of that.

So maybe they wait it out to grab DT for scraps once they are about to fold?

cthoman · « **Reply #8 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:05 »

Quote from: click_click on July 25, 2012, 08:22

I can't however accept the thought that DT's management is that stupid. They must aim for something else.

What do you think it is?

I would assume that they want a diverse catalog, and want contributors to fill it with a new and different subject or topic with each file. Unfortunately for them, most professional contributors don't work like that. They work in sets and revisit popular topics, so these rules have the opposite effect. They become overly restrictive.

I think both the similar policy and the payment tiers work as upload deterrents. Why create new files that are just going to undercut your older files?

gostwyck · « **Reply #9 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:16 »

Quote from: click_click on July 25, 2012, 09:48

Do you think there is a possibility that DT is eagerly looking for a buyer but everyone who might be interested might be low-balling it since DT has been on a downward trend for a while now?

I doubt that DT themselves have been on a 'downward trend'. I imagine that their sales/turnover has been steadily increasing but the contributors' slice of the pie has been shrinking via commission cuts and spread thinner through an ever-increasing number of images. The commission cuts would have increased their profitability and therefore the value of the business.

I think that the entrepeneurs who started these microstock agencies have always had an eye towards their exit strategy. The only real question is when to sell. DT are still a phenomenally successful business. Running my own sales numbers backwards gives them an annual turnover of over $50M. The business must be worth $100M+. Not bad for 8 years work.

cathyslife · « **Reply #10 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:20 »

Quote from: cthoman on July 25, 2012, 10:05

I would assume that they want a diverse catalog, and want contributors to fill it with a new and different subject or topic with each file. Unfortunately for them, most professional contributors don't work like that. They work in sets and revisit popular topics, so these rules have the opposite effect. They become overly restrictive.

I think both the similar policy and the payment tiers work as upload deterrents. Why create new files that are just going to undercut your older files?

I also think that from a buyer's perspective having a few similars makes sense. Many times I have though "gee, I wish they would have just turned this way a little, or...". I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same, but having a few choices is a good thing. At the time the contributor uploads, they have no idea which is going to become the better seller, or which will never get any downloads.

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #11 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:29 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20

Quote from: cthoman on July 25, 2012, 10:05
I would assume that they want a diverse catalog, and want contributors to fill it with a new and different subject or topic with each file. Unfortunately for them, most professional contributors don't work like that. They work in sets and revisit popular topics, so these rules have the opposite effect. They become overly restrictive.

I think both the similar policy and the payment tiers work as upload deterrents. Why create new files that are just going to undercut your older files?

I also think that from a buyer's perspective having a few similars makes sense. Many times I have though "gee, I wish they would have just turned this way a little, or...". I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same, but having a few choices is a good thing. At the time the contributor uploads, they have no idea which is going to become the better seller, or which will never get any downloads.

+1 That's what i have been saying.

sam100 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:33 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20

Quote from: cthoman on July 25, 2012, 10:05
I would assume that they want a diverse catalog, and want contributors to fill it with a new and different subject or topic with each file. Unfortunately for them, most professional contributors don't work like that. They work in sets and revisit popular topics, so these rules have the opposite effect. They become overly restrictive.

I think both the similar policy and the payment tiers work as upload deterrents. Why create new files that are just going to undercut your older files?

I also think that from a buyer's perspective having a few similars makes sense. Many times I have though "gee, I wish they would have just turned this way a little, or...". I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same, but having a few choices is a good thing. At the time the contributor uploads, they have no idea which is going to become the better seller, or which will never get any downloads.

+1

click_click · « **Reply #13 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:34 »

Quote from: gostwyck on July 25, 2012, 10:16

Quote from: click_click on July 25, 2012, 09:48
Do you think there is a possibility that DT is eagerly looking for a buyer but everyone who might be interested might be low-balling it since DT has been on a downward trend for a while now?
I doubt that DT themselves have been on a 'downward trend'. I imagine that their sales/turnover has been steadily increasing but the contributors' slice of the pie has been shrinking via commission cuts and spread thinner through an ever-increasing number of images. The commission cuts would have increased their profitability and therefore the value of the business. ...

I can only speak from my numbers and I had my good times with DT more than 3 years ago. Good for everyone else who still managed to be on an upward trend since then but my sales tanked since then.

I do have have excellent search result placements but receive just "too many" subscription sales.

My first uploads are in the 100.000 file ID range (2005) and I have seen wonderful growth with them but for some reason they are the only one of the bigger agencies that screwed things up for me on an unsurpassed scale.

No doubt that they have to ensure their income stream to pay for their overheads and pay rises but I cannot see how the dilution of images has such a big impact ONLY on DT and nowhere else...

sam100 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:45 »

Quote from: click_click on July 25, 2012, 10:34

Quote from: gostwyck on July 25, 2012, 10:16
Quote from: click_click on July 25, 2012, 09:48
Do you think there is a possibility that DT is eagerly looking for a buyer but everyone who might be interested might be low-balling it since DT has been on a downward trend for a while now?
I doubt that DT themselves have been on a 'downward trend'. I imagine that their sales/turnover has been steadily increasing but the contributors' slice of the pie has been shrinking via commission cuts and spread thinner through an ever-increasing number of images. The commission cuts would have increased their profitability and therefore the value of the business. ...
I can only speak from my numbers and I had my good times with DT more than 3 years ago. Good for everyone else who still managed to be on an upward trend since then but my sales tanked since then.

I do have have excellent search result placements but receive just "too many" subscription sales.

My first uploads are in the 100.000 file ID range (2005) and I have seen wonderful growth with them but for some reason they are the only one of the bigger agencies that screwed things up for me on an unsurpassed scale.

No doubt that they have to ensure their income stream to pay for their overheads and pay rises but I cannot see how the dilution of images has such a big impact ONLY on DT and nowhere else...

I am at 1/3 of what i used to earn 3 years ago.
Speaks for itself I guess.

Patrick.

click_click · « **Reply #15 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:50 »

Quote from: sam100 on July 25, 2012, 10:45

I am at 1/3 of what i used to earn 3 years ago.
Speaks for itself I guess.

Patrick.

That's also my situation. I admit I'm not a high volume uploader, however I do select very carefully what I do upload and try to only produce highly commercial content - at the end of the day this is my main income, so I can't fiddle around.

Sadstock · « **Reply #16 on:** July 25, 2012, 10:52 »

I've always thought the similars policy is linked to the image level system.

The fewer images on a given subject there are, particularly from the same shoot, the more the few uploaded images from that subject/shoot will sell and will climb up through the levels. This allows DT to get more per sale and justify it by saying "these are the cream of the crop images, just look at how many times they've sold". It probably works well for buyers who only have an account with DT and nobody else, since they don't really have a choice.

Personally, I think its a dumb system, kind of like damming half a river since buyers can go to the many other micros for more diversity for a given subject/shoot. Few big buyers are going to limit themselves to just one company.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:09 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20

I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same

there is a contributor that is just over the roof, half his portfolio at SS is on a single subject and we are talking about objects, over 2k pictures of the same object, not concepts just them "on white" (over 10 sessions on the same stuff)

basically all shoots are 50 of the same object and upload! agencies seem to approve them...

123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less

I am exclusively talking about similarity, nothing against "his/her" work, if I am talking about a subject that cannot be talked or I am unpolite please leaf remove it

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #18 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:15 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 25, 2012, 11:09

Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20
I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same

there is a contributor that is just over the roof, half his portfolio at SS is on a single subject and we are talking about objects, over 2k pictures of the same object, not concepts just them "on white" (over 10 sessions on the same stuff)

basically all shoots are 50 of the same object and upload! agencies seem to approve them...

123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less

I am exclusively talking about similarity, nothing against "his/her" work, if I am talking about a subject that cannot be talked or I am unpolite please leaf remove it

And who it may be i wanna go see?

cathyslife · « **Reply #19 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:26 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 25, 2012, 11:09

Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20
I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same

there is a contributor that is just over the roof, half his portfolio at SS is on a single subject and we are talking about objects, over 2k pictures of the same object, not concepts just them "on white" (over 10 sessions on the same stuff)

basically all shoots are 50 of the same object and upload! agencies seem to approve them...

123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less

I am exclusively talking about similarity, nothing against "his/her" work, if I am talking about a subject that cannot be talked or I am unpolite please leaf remove it

So how does this person get over 50 through the queue with no similars rejections? Maybe they were uploaded before the similars policy, or maybe part of the "in crowd" at DT? I know that in several of my searches on DT, in the past year, I have seen many similars that I couldn't tell one from the other and thought they had been double-uploaded. But I have not checked the dates to see when they were uploaded.

pancaketom · « **Reply #20 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:29 »

I think that the DT search engine tends to lump similar files from the same contributor together, so rather than fix the search engine or create some sort of system that stacks similars they thought it would be easier to just stop accepting similar images.

I think they also hope that contributors will combine multiple images together so that we can get .35 for 4 or 9 or more images together instead of .35 each.

I can understand limiting truly similar images, but I think most contributors have had the experience of rejections of not very similar similars.

Lagereek · « **Reply #21 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:35 »

Oh I would welcome that very much! if DT, were to set themselves apart, trying to streamline or nieche itself! great stuff! I mean whats the stupid point in following everybody else?
As far as similars, well whats the big point in having gazillions of similar images? nothing!. You will find that ordinary micro is running out, they got less and less to offer and pretty soon the big four will have no option but to streamline, specialize in a few fields.
IS, started with Vetta and more is to come.

The days of ordinary photography are over, there is no room for diletants in todays stock-files and thats really the end of story.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #22 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:36 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 25, 2012, 11:09

123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less

thats portfolio size

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #23 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:40 »

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on July 25, 2012, 11:15

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 25, 2012, 11:09
Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20
I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same

there is a contributor that is just over the roof, half his portfolio at SS is on a single subject and we are talking about objects, over 2k pictures of the same object, not concepts just them "on white" (over 10 sessions on the same stuff)

basically all shoots are 50 of the same object and upload! agencies seem to approve them...

123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less

I am exclusively talking about similarity, nothing against "his/her" work, if I am talking about a subject that cannot be talked or I am unpolite please leaf remove it
And who it may be i wanna go see?

Ah yes i know that one very well and they sell everyday!

luissantos84 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 25, 2012, 11:45 »

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on July 25, 2012, 11:40

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on July 25, 2012, 11:15
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 25, 2012, 11:09
Quote from: cclapper on July 25, 2012, 10:20
I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same

there is a contributor that is just over the roof, half his portfolio at SS is on a single subject and we are talking about objects, over 2k pictures of the same object, not concepts just them "on white" (over 10 sessions on the same stuff)

basically all shoots are 50 of the same object and upload! agencies seem to approve them...

123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less

I am exclusively talking about similarity, nothing against "his/her" work, if I am talking about a subject that cannot be talked or I am unpolite please leaf remove it
And who it may be i wanna go see?
Ah yes i know that one very well and they sell everyday!

all 2400 files sell everyday? yep right..

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: DT's approval policy - your thoughts (Read 13691 times)

click_click

ruxpriencdiam

Wim

click_click

gostwyck

Wim

ruxpriencdiam

click_click

cthoman

gostwyck

cathyslife

ruxpriencdiam

sam100

click_click

sam100

click_click

Sadstock

luissantos84

ruxpriencdiam

cathyslife

pancaketom

Lagereek

luissantos84

ruxpriencdiam

luissantos84

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors