Author Topic: Email from DT asking for free images (Read 7923 times)

Dodie · « **on:** November 26, 2016, 11:19 »

I just got an email from DT:

Quote

This is an automated notification. Your portfolio includes images that have been online for more than 4 years with no downloads up to the present. In order to keep up with the current standards we believe they should be removed from our commercial database, allowing fresh content to be more visible.

The following action options are available for you to decide:

- donate the image to the free section (default action) which can provide significant portfolio exposure and increase your sales; images can be disabled at any time later.
- keep the image online.

In order to review the images and take the desired action, please access the link below.
If no action is taken, the default one is automatically selected.

Review the images: https://www.dreamstime.com/oldfiles.php

Of course I have images with no downloads, who hasn't but what I find interesting is that they selected three images that I should waste for free, two of them are isolated gift boxes, just perfect for Christmas giveaway.

If you look at the wording, first they say that old images should be removed from the database, which I could agree with and also stop uploading. However, later on, they give me two options, to donate or to keep them online.
Would you give your images for free, while you market them on other agencies too?

I wonder if this has anything to do with what Shelma said at this other thread.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #1 on:** November 26, 2016, 11:54 »

This is an automated email and you will get it for every image not downloaded in the last 4 years. It has been happening for ages.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #2 on:** November 26, 2016, 11:56 »

I never give any away.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #3 on:** November 26, 2016, 12:08 »

Me too....does anyone I wonder?

Dodie · « **Reply #4 on:** November 26, 2016, 12:13 »

Thanks guys, that's what I think too.
I started uploading four years ago and this is the first time I got this message.
If I wanted to give them for free I wouldn't upload them to micros.

memakephoto · « **Reply #5 on:** November 26, 2016, 12:20 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 12:08

Me too....does anyone I wonder?

I'm sure some do. There are some who are under the delusion that doing this increases exposure and that increased exposure translates to sales. Giving images away for free no doubt benefits DT (increased traffic from those looking for freebies can impact google search rank) but for individual contributors I've never seen any evidence that it increases sales in any measurable way.

DT stopped disabling images that haven't sold several years ago when they realized their image collection wasn't keeping up with their competitor's growth. It's all about numbers these days. DT just hit 50 million while SS passed 100 million a while ago.

Mantis · « **Reply #6 on:** November 26, 2016, 12:22 »

I think if you change your option to keep on line it remembers that and next time it defaults to that, not give away for free.

Dodie · « **Reply #7 on:** November 26, 2016, 13:05 »

Quote from: memakephoto on November 26, 2016, 12:20

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 12:08
Me too....does anyone I wonder?

I'm sure some do. There are some who are under the delusion that doing this increases exposure and that increased exposure translates to sales. Giving images away for free no doubt benefits DT (increased traffic from those looking for freebies can impact google search rank) but for individual contributors I've never seen any evidence that it increases sales in any measurable way.

DT stopped disabling images that haven't sold several years ago when they realized their image collection wasn't keeping up with their competitor's growth. It's all about numbers these days. DT just hit 50 million while SS passed 100 million a while ago.

I have downloads in a short interval (5-6 consecutive days) of each month, sometimes several downloads/day but after that the switch is off. That's the exposure I get and this pattern will not change by giving away some images for free. My earnings at DT are miserable.

Dodie · « **Reply #8 on:** November 26, 2016, 13:06 »

Quote from: Mantis on November 26, 2016, 12:22

I think if you change your option to keep on line it remembers that and next time it defaults to that, not give away for free.

Thanks for the info, good to know.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 26, 2016, 13:26 »

Quote from: memakephoto on November 26, 2016, 12:20

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 12:08
Me too....does anyone I wonder?

I'm sure some do. There are some who are under the delusion that doing this increases exposure and that increased exposure translates to sales. Giving images away for free no doubt benefits DT (increased traffic from those looking for freebies can impact google search rank) but for individual contributors I've never seen any evidence that it increases sales in any measurable way.

DT stopped disabling images that haven't sold several years ago when they realized their image collection wasn't keeping up with their competitor's growth. It's all about numbers these days. DT just hit 50 million while SS passed 100 million a while ago.

Actually when you consider their relative sales performance 50 million on DT is far more scary than 100 m on SS

Dodie · « **Reply #10 on:** November 26, 2016, 13:35 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 13:26

Quote from: memakephoto on November 26, 2016, 12:20
Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 12:08
Me too....does anyone I wonder?

I'm sure some do. There are some who are under the delusion that doing this increases exposure and that increased exposure translates to sales. Giving images away for free no doubt benefits DT (increased traffic from those looking for freebies can impact google search rank) but for individual contributors I've never seen any evidence that it increases sales in any measurable way.

DT stopped disabling images that haven't sold several years ago when they realized their image collection wasn't keeping up with their competitor's growth. It's all about numbers these days. DT just hit 50 million while SS passed 100 million a while ago.
Actually when you consider their relative sales performance 50 million on DT is far more scary than 100 m on SS

And when you consider 50 million clean library, no duplicates, 50 million is much more than 100 m full of spam.
It's a pity that DT can not sell more.