MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Dreamstime.com => Topic started by: FRooGZ on September 13, 2011, 11:12
-
I have just asked to DT to cancel my account.
The last drop of water was a couple of rejection. The images was of my father collection of old diapositives that is now my heritage since he is dead. I have tried to discuss it with the reviewer and tought that i have reach an agreement with him, on which i have resubmit those images. For my surprise, they got rejected again for "containing elements that might be protected by copyright" .
There are two funny things at this matter. First, if you search for diapositives at DT, you will find tree images. Neither of those with any kind of Property release, and with the pictures in the frames of those slides much much more clearly apparent then the images that i have made. Second, just as today i was censured at DT forum by an admin and got my thread closed by pointing out a clearly copyright infringment by a user, and whem i said clearly, i mean it! Same composition, same posin, same concept, same framing, SAME TITLE AND SAME KEYWORDS! of an image of no less than Yuri Arcurs!!
So i ask my self, there are two weights and two measures at DT? They are or not worried about copyrights?
The thrid thing that bothers me alot is the policy regarding editors are alow to upload and sell images at DT! For me this is a huge bad policy!
So i am sick of it, and i quit!
-
Not one single point you mention is valid! old diapositives? etc, fair enough but this is micro 2011 and maybe they were not technically sound, etc.
Reviewers being allowed to upload? ha, thats been going on all the time and what business really is that of yours? the rest of us has to live with that. Are you an exeption?
Sorry, but your action is naive and stupid, with respect. ::)
-
Looking forward to your next post when they inform you that can't close your account for six months.
-
diapositive = slides
I had to look it up. In all my photo classes and surfing the internet, never ran across that term before.
-
I don't have to live with nothing of that! and that's why i quit!
About old diapositives being out of fashion, FYI the On Assignment of this month is "Going Retro", so the only argument that is not valid is yours! What more was not valid? The existance of similar reproduction of slides w/o PR? The fact that the slides ARE my heritage therefor MY property?
And about calling me stupid with all respect... now that is something that much be a 'new hype' therefor i do not get! And did not like it. Please respect to be respected.
Regards,
-
diapositive = slides
I had to look it up. In all my photo classes and surfing the internet, never ran across that term before.
LOL guess i am already old with 36 years old! Felt like a dinossaur, cause i have always use that term!! LOL
Regards,
-
Looking forward to your next post when they inform you that can't close your account for six months.
Yes! I am looking forward to that too! Wait and see if i can't manage to get myself out of that s*t!
LOL
-
When playing in someone elses sandpit you play by their rules if you don't like it don't play!
Fair play to you for leaving but doubt that DT will either notice or give a....
-
When playing in someone elses sandpit you play by their rules if you don't like it don't play!
Fair play to you for leaving but doubt that DT will either notice or give a....
Just like i don't giva a... about them nor will either notice their absence in my life. tought i would have fun at this stock thing, since i do photography for fun and not for living, but i will not tolerate bad policies and proceedures and no one will force me to be/have an online account and my images for 6 months without my permission! I too easy to became persona non grata at that place.
-
diapositive = slides
I had to look it up. In all my photo classes and surfing the internet, never ran across that term before.
LOL guess i am already old with 36 years old! Felt like a dinossaur, cause i have always use that term!! LOL
Regards,
Words' usage across the world is weird... in Italy "diapositive" (pl) or "diapositiva" (singular) is the common word for a slide; while "slide" only means the A4 (letter) transparent media (once) used in slide shows
-
When playing in someone elses sandpit you play by their rules if you don't like it don't play!
Fair play to you for leaving but doubt that DT will either notice or give a....
no one will force me to be/have an online account and my images for 6 months without my permission!
But when you agreed to DT terms ansd conditions you explicitly entered into a legally binding contract agreeing to the terms as stated... As such YOU explicitly gave them permission! The same goes for all of your other gripes, you did not uncover anything groundbreaking or any Watergate style conspiracy, don't like it don't play but whinging aint going to change anything.
As for bad policies and procedures you yourself are entering into the most heinous of "bad practices" by attempting to breech a legally binding contract because the games are not being played by your rules!
-
When playing in someone elses sandpit you play by their rules if you don't like it don't play!
Fair play to you for leaving but doubt that DT will either notice or give a....
Just like i don't giva a... about them nor will either notice their absence in my life. tought i would have fun at this stock thing, since i do photography for fun and not for living, but i will not tolerate bad policies and proceedures and no one will force me to be/have an online account and my images for 6 months without my permission! I too easy to became persona non grata at that place.
As said above - you gave them permission when you uploaded. Not that I am a particular fan of the 6 month lock in, but I did agree to it when I continued to upload new content after they implemented it.
Nothing wrong with stopping when you disagree with what an agency does, but you do have to abide by your side of the agreement.
-
Let's see, you joined DT in 2005 and to date have 25 images there with 8 sales. You wrote a DT blog saying how much you have learned from rejections and from other contributors and now you call them names. You also say in your blog that you have only just started uploading images there. But, if you joined in 2005 you must have been either a buyer or just an interested party and should have read all the FAQs by now. I think you are just mad at your recent rejections and are trying to justify them by pointing fingers at others who seem to have gotten away with something that you cannot. And, to emphasize your frustration you post about it here too. Many old images there would not be accepted today so different rules applied when they were accepted. It's hard to compare images they accepted in 2004 with those accepted today.
Every post in their forums has been about something you deem not to be fair, a criticism or an attempt to point a finger at the admin team for something you don't agree with. I don't think they will be sorry to see you go. If you haven't tried this at other micro agencies be prepared for worse. DT is one of the easiest agencies to work with and have been known to actually listen when approached with new ideas (not yelled at). They have been aggressive lately with DMCA notices when contacted by their contributors about infractions with pretty good results. I'm not saying that they are perfect but no agency is. That's the name of the (microstock) game.
-
Froogze, microstock isn't for everybody, get out and keep your sanity. DT might even waive the 6 month rule for you. I've never seen a thread on dt with so many staff members entering. They're quite a patient lot really, especially if you consider how some other agencies don't accept any freedom of speech, if it's negative comments about their agency.
-
there will be always a second, third or even 4th type of contributors for agencies
I have questioned myself about all the crap going on some if not in all stock agencies but in the end there is just one question, what do you want from stock? if you donīt want to be upset, depressed or other negative stuff just step out and find other industry, if not give your best everyday or at least every time you pick the camera to do some stock pics, in the end they will pay off despite all the negative spirit on this or other forum
-
Hi Froogz, I was the one who "censored" you, when you've started attacking other users. Do you remember? Right when you finished questioning our honesty as an agency, you started pointing fingers at other users.
Oh, wait, that's not called "censoring", it's called "moderating". We don't allow anybody pointing fingers or attacking other users. It's simple common sense on any forum, not just on Dreamstime. If you had anything to complain about other users, you should have contacted us by email, not like you did - starting a thread AND writing a blog about it, like you own the absolute truth. That really was not a grown up behaviour.
You were allowed to criticize us, and that thread is still live right now. You had the right to an opinion. But for sure you will not be allowed to attack other users.
Regarding the subject of your thread, if we had to accept only original concepts, there would have been less than 100.000 photos on all agencies. Actually, the photographer you think that was copied clearly said once that he finds his inspiration in other stock sites. So, you don't know for sure if it was an original idea. And regarding keywords, the same photographer set up a FREE keywording tool, to help other contributors in keywording their images. This should have been enough for you to understand his position on inspiration. Oh, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't need any protection supplied by you :)
It seems to me that you should concern more about yourself and your photos, instead of searching around flaming subjects on public forums.
-
There's a difference between criticizing and just being negative. I haven't read any of the blog posts or forum comments Froogze has made so i don't know where he lies on that but in this instance he makes a good point.
I'm exclusive with Dreamstime which says something: I like them. I want to work with them but if there's something that needs improving I will speak up. I don't have a large port or make huge sales but I see myself, like all contributors, as being a partner. I provide them with the material they sell and they provide me with a place to sell my material. Partners. They criticize me when they reject my shots and I criticize them when their policies are suspect. Doesn't mean they're a bad agency.
Some contributors on here by the sounds of their posts, have an attitude of "it's their rules so what can I do but bend over and take it in the a$$". Well, I don't do that. Neither, it seems, does Froogze.
If no one speaks up and says I don't think what you're doing is fair then they will never know how their contributors feel, never change their ways and improve and those contributors will continue to spread their cheeks. I think this attitude that agencies can do whatever they want and we have to take it has to stop. We don't have to take it. Telling them that is a good first step.
edit: to be clear I'm not referring to the copying of images or concepts or pointing fingers at other contributors only to the legitimate concerns.
-
Hi Froogz, I was the one who "censored" you, when you've started attacking other users. Do you remember? Right when you finished questioning our honesty as an agency, you started pointing fingers at other users.
Oh, wait, that's not called "censoring", it's called "moderating". We don't allow anybody pointing fingers or attacking other users. It's simple common sense on any forum, not just on Dreamstime. If you had anything to complain about other users, you should have contacted us by email, not like you did - starting a thread AND writing a blog about it, like you own the absolute truth. That really was not a grown up behaviour.
You were allowed to criticize us, and that thread is still live right now. You had the right to an opinion. But for sure you will not be allowed to attack other users.
Regarding the subject of your thread, if we had to accept only original concepts, there would have been less than 100.000 photos on all agencies. Actually, the photographer you think that was copied clearly said once that he finds his inspiration in other stock sites. So, you don't know for sure if it was an original idea. And regarding keywords, the same photographer set up a FREE keywording tool, to help other contributors in keywording their images. This should have been enough for you to understand his position on inspiration. Oh, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't need any protection supplied by you :)
It seems to me that you should concern more about yourself and your photos, instead of searching around flaming subjects on public forums.
Hi viorel_dudau,
Had just post my last (at least for now and for a good time) post at dreamstime forum, asking for apology for my ramp. I have tought about everything that happened and you are right about ramping in public. Hope you and all that i might cause any upset can accept it, it is truthful.
I know i am nobody at this hole microstock thing, and even less as a photographer. I do it because i like to shoot. Have a some formal classes but i am far away from been a professional. So i admit that aproach to change things at where i stand and the way i did was ridicule.
Still think that original concept is onething and absolut copy is another, but let's get this behind.
Best regards,
-
Well, I have just read what he said on his DT submitters-as-inspectors thread and he was pretty aggressive. He has a point - though I think the point is better aimed at another site where there seems to be fairly clear evidence of at least some inspectors colluding and using the system to award themselves special privileges, I am not aware of that happening at DT.
When people feel diminished as a result of rejections and policies that they feel affect them negatively it is easy for that to turn to anger and an obsession with perceived wrongdoing.
-
Hi viorel_dudau,
Had just post my last (at least for now and for a good time) post at dreamstime forum, asking for apology for my ramp. I have tought about everything that happened and you are right about ramping in public. Hope you and all that i might cause any upset can accept it, it is truthful.
I know i am nobody at this hole microstock thing, and even less as a photographer. I do it because i like to shoot. Have a some formal classes but i am far away from been a professional. So i admit that aproach to change things at where i stand and the way i did was ridicule.
Still think that original concept is onething and absolut copy is another, but let's get this behind.
Best regards,
Bull in a China shop comes to mind, but I've been there a few times too. It's big of you to apologise though. Dt's forum is not the right place for causing a stir. You can continue to do it here though. :D
-
Well guys, in his case DT will probably wave the 6 months rule. I dont think they want more diapositives, supositries, slides, trannies, etc, etc, etc. ;D
-
snip
Had just post my last (at least for now and for a good time) post at dreamstime forum, asking for apology for my ramp. I have tought about everything that happened and you are right about ramping in public. Hope you and all that i might cause any upset can accept it, it is truthful.
I think you mean rant and ranting?
-
diapositive = slides
I had to look it up. In all my photo classes and surfing the internet, never ran across that term before.
Wasn't it on all Kodachrome boxes? It certainly was on at least one of the Fuji or Kodak slide type slide boxes as sold here (UK), but maybe not in the US (?)
-
@OP: take it from one who likes a good rant as much as the next person. It's bad enough posting when you've got the RedMist coming down over your eyes - my typos go up about 100% from a high base - but when you're posting in a language which isn't your native language, it just compounds the problem, and leads to all sorts of misunderstandings.
-
diapositive = slides
I had to look it up. In all my photo classes and surfing the internet, never ran across that term before.
Wasn't it on all Kodachrome boxes? It certainly was on at least one of the Fuji or Kodak slide type slide boxes as sold here (UK), but maybe not in the US (?)
Hi Sue, yes it was but the word Diapositives is just another word for transparancies, dia-slides, etc, may it be Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Velvia or Provia. The OP however seems to have dug out some really old stuff and even if you drumscan very old trannies, its extremly hard to get good quality, unless its large format 4x5 or 8x10.
I can see why DT rejected them flat out.
-
diapositive = slides
I had to look it up. In all my photo classes and surfing the internet, never ran across that term before.
Wasn't it on all Kodachrome boxes? It certainly was on at least one of the Fuji or Kodak slide type slide boxes as sold here (UK), but maybe not in the US (?)
Hi Sue, yes it was but the word Diapositives is just another word for transparancies, dia-slides, etc, may it be Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Velvia or Provia. The OP however seems to have dug out some really old stuff and even if you drumscan very old trannies, its extremly hard to get good quality, unless its large format 4x5 or 8x10.
I can see why DT rejected them flat out.
Quite. I was just curious as to why Cathy wasn't familiar with the term.
@OP: see how things can get convovulated?
-
@OP: see how things can get convovulated?
Exactly! Not to mention convoluted. ;D
-
Now I'm all discombobulated.
-
About 6 years ago, I wanted to go exclusive and I had to get out of several agencies. Most of them were courteous, understanding and cooperative. They even wished me well. Dreamstime, however, was absolutely unconcerned that my one remaining image was hanging up my process for three months. Basically their attitide was "too bad" and "stick it". I also got a few very nasty comments on these boards as well, one person saying I was stupid to expect fair treatment.
-
Now I'm all discombobulated.
Put the kettle on, sit urself down and have a nice cup of tea. ;)
-
@ShadySue
All this issue was settle. Exchange a couple of mails with DT staff. And have to say that was very well treated by them. Have made a public apology at the DT forum and will stay away from it for a while. After all the dust had gone down i could saw that ranting (@cclapper yes english isn't my native language, thank you for the correction) and reporting a copyright issue in public was not a wise move.
@lagereek the images of the diapositives, slides, or whatever were accepted at the end, and no, the images are from a large slides collections, not scaned from slides it self (hope that i have expressed the idea correctly). Better if i post the images here:
(http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_632/1315929675u5v2d2.jpg)
(http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_632/1315929730nkQhsR.jpg)
Now that the storm is over, hope to get over all this and wish to start to participate here at this forum, in order to learn more about stock photography and share my experiences, rants (@cclapper see? i am a good learner! ;)), etc..
Best wishes!
-
Well played Froogz. I miss slides, they seemed to be more vivid, more colorful but that might have been an optical illusion because they were always viewed with light shining through. After all the confusion I think those images could be sellers, if for nothing else than an article on the "good old days."
-
Thanks MP, that's much better ;D
@ Froogz - I agree with Cuppacoffee. Well played ;D It's great that you've gained something from the experience and turned a negative into a positive. I really like the top shot.
-
Oh well, good!! out of something negative comes something positive (diapositive) ;D, good luck in future!
best.
-
Dreamstime, however, was absolutely unconcerned that my one remaining image was hanging up my process for three months. Basically their attitide was "too bad" and "stick it". I also got a few very nasty comments on these boards as well, one person saying I was stupid to expect fair treatment.
I still do not get stuff like this, fair treatment for all parties is that an agreement is adhered to in my view... If both parties agree to a compromise it is fair enough but neither s obligated to as far as I am concerned!
If you wish tp break a contractual arrangement it is done by mutual consent and no amount of bleating changes the fact that you said that in exchange for "X" you would agree to "Y". It does make me a little angry to be honest, I am new to this whole stock thingy but in other work spheres there is a simple answer to anyone wishing to break a commercially binding contract and usually that answer is quite simply "no"!
I can understand frustrations but to throw all of your toys out of the pram as the OP did and then say he will not tolerate "Bad Practices" and throw a whole load of accusations around only to turn around less than 24 hours later and say I have apoloigised and in the end the accepted my pictures smacks of "Brattishness" and realisitcally not anything that I consider to be either grown up or adult behaviour!
-
I can understand frustrations but to throw all of your toys out of the pram as the OP did and then say he will not tolerate "Bad Practices" and throw a whole load of accusations around only to turn around less than 24 hours later and say I have apoloigised and in the end the accepted my pictures smacks of "Brattishness" and realisitcally not anything that I consider to be either grown up or adult behaviour!
Anyone can have an opinion about anything, and the fact is that i don't care the way you think. You are not aware about what was talked between me and DT staff, and mainly, you don't know me! So please keep your grown up and adult thing to you.
I was just sharing with who cares about the settle of this history, and the fact the my pictures was accepted or not has nothing to do with the way it had ended. FYI the picture was accepted earlier today, and the hole issue ended yesterday.
-
Dreamstime, however, was absolutely unconcerned that my one remaining image was hanging up my process for three months. Basically their attitide was "too bad" and "stick it". I also got a few very nasty comments on these boards as well, one person saying I was stupid to expect fair treatment.
I still do not get stuff like this, fair treatment for all parties is that an agreement is adhered to in my view... If both parties agree to a compromise it is fair enough but neither s obligated to as far as I am concerned!
If you wish tp break a contractual arrangement it is done by mutual consent and no amount of bleating changes the fact that you said that in exchange for "X" you would agree to "Y". It does make me a little angry to be honest, I am new to this whole stock thingy but in other work spheres there is a simple answer to anyone wishing to break a commercially binding contract and usually that answer is quite simply "no"!
I can understand frustrations but to throw all of your toys out of the pram as the OP did and then say he will not tolerate "Bad Practices" and throw a whole load of accusations around only to turn around less than 24 hours later and say I have apoloigised and in the end the accepted my pictures smacks of "Brattishness" and realisitcally not anything that I consider to be either grown up or adult behaviour!
Well said!
-
I can understand frustrations but to throw all of your toys out of the pram as the OP did and then say he will not tolerate "Bad Practices" and throw a whole load of accusations around only to turn around less than 24 hours later and say I have apoloigised and in the end the accepted my pictures smacks of "Brattishness" and realisitcally not anything that I consider to be either grown up or adult behaviour!
Anyone can have an opinion about anything, and the fact is that i don't care the way you think. You are not aware about what was talked between me and DT staff, and mainly, you don't know me! So please keep your grown up and adult thing to you.
I was just sharing with who cares about the settle of this history, and the fact the my pictures was accepted or not has nothing to do with the way it had ended. FYI the picture was accepted earlier today, and the hole issue ended yesterday.
The minute that you posted in a public fora you invited the thoughts of the members of the community, my thoughts are valid and logical... If you feel that I have made illogical leaps please point them out?
You are free to an opinion however if you start throwing them out there you must expect a response and that is my response, a response that you have chosen to respond to by putting your fingers in your ears whilst going "la la la" I don't care, like I say very grown up and professional!
I have just one question, you claimed to be unwilling to accept bad porcedures and policies but it now seems that oyu are willing to stay affiliated on the site, does that mean that you have either changed your mind or that you changed DT's mind?
-
Like you said, that i prefer to keep it to me.
You are free to have your option on anything you want. I didn't say you weren't. What i meant is that your jugdment about my person, is not important at all. I don't know you and you don't know me. So we are at a speculation ground over here.
There is a quote that i like a lot and might fit in here: "Judge Not, Lest the First Stone be Cast at Your Glass House"
I admited that i have made a mistake, public admited and public apologised, if that is not enought for you, well, i don't care. If that is childish behaivor still, well, i don't care.
-
Dreamstime, however, was absolutely unconcerned that my one remaining image was hanging up my process for three months. Basically their attitide was "too bad" and "stick it". I also got a few very nasty comments on these boards as well, one person saying I was stupid to expect fair treatment.
I still do not get stuff like this, fair treatment for all parties is that an agreement is adhered to in my view... If both parties agree to a compromise it is fair enough but neither s obligated to as far as I am concerned!
If you wish tp break a contractual arrangement it is done by mutual consent and no amount of bleating changes the fact that you said that in exchange for "X" you would agree to "Y". It does make me a little angry to be honest, I am new to this whole stock thingy but in other work spheres there is a simple answer to anyone wishing to break a commercially binding contract and usually that answer is quite simply "no"!
I can understand frustrations but to throw all of your toys out of the pram as the OP did and then say he will not tolerate "Bad Practices" and throw a whole load of accusations around only to turn around less than 24 hours later and say I have apoloigised and in the end the accepted my pictures smacks of "Brattishness" and realisitcally not anything that I consider to be either grown up or adult behaviour!
Well said!
You guys make this so simple and black and white. Maybe you didn't read the situation. I had removed all but ONE IMAGE from Dreamstime. They refused to consider removing it so I could move on. They made me wait THREE MONTHS to remove that image, so I could go exclusive elsewhere. During that time, they made no sales of the image, they made no money on it, it made no practical difference to them AT ALL. It is unreasonable, belligerant, uncooperative and spiteful behavior. You support that behavior? Weird. Their behavior was pointless and destructive. You like that? Weird.
-
pictures locked doesnīt make any sense, I do understand they had a reviewer looking at the picture and that means $
but when it come to bring level 0 and 25% royalties they donīt give us 3 months so we can get used.. again they have the fork and the cheese (portuguese expression) so nothing we can do, obey and donīt talk with reviewers or make complain, it wont take you anymore, actually might be prejudicial, there are "great" moves from both big and small agencies (we notice that quite often here)
-
You guys make this so simple and black and white. Maybe you didn't read the situation. I had removed all but ONE IMAGE from Dreamstime. They refused to consider removing it so I could move on. They made me wait THREE MONTHS to remove that image, so I could go exclusive elsewhere. During that time, they made no sales of the image, they made no money on it, it made no practical difference to them AT ALL. It is unreasonable, belligerant, uncooperative and spiteful behavior. You support that behavior? Weird. Their behavior was pointless and destructive. You like that? Weird.
What about Istock? They too could have been flexible in their 'rules' and allowed you to go exclusive with the exception of that one image. I don't understand why you are so critical about DT enforcing their ToS (which you signed up to) but seem to think that Istock were being perfectly reasonable. It was in Istock's interest to make an exception for you but absolutely not in DT's interest.
-
....
You guys make this so simple and black and white. Maybe you didn't read the situation. I had removed all but ONE IMAGE from Dreamstime. They refused to consider removing it so I could move on. They made me wait THREE MONTHS to remove that image, so I could go exclusive elsewhere. During that time, they made no sales of the image, they made no money on it, it made no practical difference to them AT ALL. It is unreasonable, belligerant, uncooperative and spiteful behavior. You support that behavior? Weird. Their behavior was pointless and destructive. You like that? Weird.
I wonder if you could have set it to sell the rights for 1$ and bought it yourself (or paid someone to buy it).
-
Dreamstime, however, was absolutely unconcerned that my one remaining image was hanging up my process for three months. Basically their attitide was "too bad" and "stick it". I also got a few very nasty comments on these boards as well, one person saying I was stupid to expect fair treatment.
I still do not get stuff like this, fair treatment for all parties is that an agreement is adhered to in my view... If both parties agree to a compromise it is fair enough but neither s obligated to as far as I am concerned!
If you wish tp break a contractual arrangement it is done by mutual consent and no amount of bleating changes the fact that you said that in exchange for "X" you would agree to "Y". It does make me a little angry to be honest, I am new to this whole stock thingy but in other work spheres there is a simple answer to anyone wishing to break a commercially binding contract and usually that answer is quite simply "no"!
I can understand frustrations but to throw all of your toys out of the pram as the OP did and then say he will not tolerate "Bad Practices" and throw a whole load of accusations around only to turn around less than 24 hours later and say I have apoloigised and in the end the accepted my pictures smacks of "Brattishness" and realisitcally not anything that I consider to be either grown up or adult behaviour!
Well said!
You guys make this so simple and black and white. Maybe you didn't read the situation. I had removed all but ONE IMAGE from Dreamstime. They refused to consider removing it so I could move on. They made me wait THREE MONTHS to remove that image, so I could go exclusive elsewhere. During that time, they made no sales of the image, they made no money on it, it made no practical difference to them AT ALL. It is unreasonable, belligerant, uncooperative and spiteful behavior. You support that behavior? Weird. Their behavior was pointless and destructive. You like that? Weird.
It is indeed black and white, a contractual agreement is, in its very definition black and white and it has to be to make it worth anything!
Whether I, you or indeed Dreamstime like it or not a contractual agreement is a contractual agreement, you were the one who wished to renege on your responsibilities and DT were completely within their rights to say no!
-
Of all the problems existing in this industry, and the way agencies have treated contributors over the last year, I cannot fathom attacking an upstanding agency like Dreamstime. If I were them I would gladly waive the 6 month rule just to be done with the headache of dealing with someone who argues this much but has uploaded only 25 images since 2005.
-
Of all the problems existing in this industry, and the way agencies have treated contributors over the last year, I cannot fathom attacking an upstanding agency like Dreamstime. If I were them I would gladly waive the 6 month rule just to be done with the headache of dealing with someone who argues this much but has uploaded only 25 images since 2005.
FYI, i was a designer and a buyer back in 2005. Started uploading in august 2011. My issues with DT are settled. And for my best luck i do not depend on stock agencies for a living, so i can affort to critique them if i see something that do not like. For now on will just do it by direct contacting them and not in public.
This thread is over
-
Of all the problems existing in this industry, and the way agencies have treated contributors over the last year, I cannot fathom attacking an upstanding agency like Dreamstime. If I were them I would gladly waive the 6 month rule just to be done with the headache of dealing with someone who argues this much but has uploaded only 25 images since 2005.
FYI, i was a designer and a buyer back in 2005. Started uploading in august 2011. My issues with DT are settled. And for my best luck i do not depend on stock agencies for a living, so i can affort to critique them if i see something that do not like. For now on will just do it by direct contacting them and not in public.
This thread is over
"It ain't over till it's over..." And after a diatribe about diapositives, I suspect there will be more. I'll probably forget that term for slides by tomorrow, but it was interesting having it come up.
Now that you posted the images in question, I see that it wasn't the slide scan contents but the mount designs that were in question. (did I get that right?) Interesting.
I'm sure some people are very happy and do well at DT. When I closed my account, I followed their guidelines and terms, cashed out, had no problems, and possibly still have an account? I don't know, except I removed all my images because I had so many rejected as "these don't sell well" and low commercial value, when they were the same as my best sellers on DT, same as acceptable the months before. Style and general contents, not identical.
Everyone went away happy. They got rid of my CrapStock, I got my money and had one less agency to worry about. Two other sites took months of emails and trying to explain, that all I wanted to do was cash out and leave. Some how, something that simple didn't translate to agencies who claim to be based in Houston TX or NY NY? ???
-
Well, I have just read what he said on his DT submitters-as-inspectors thread and he was pretty aggressive. He has a point - though I think the point is better aimed at another site where there seems to be fairly clear evidence of at least some inspectors colluding and using the system to award themselves special privileges, I am not aware of that happening at DT.
When people feel diminished as a result of rejections and policies that they feel affect them negatively it is easy for that to turn to anger and an obsession with perceived wrongdoing.
Which site are you talking about??