MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Dreamstime.com => Topic started by: hose on February 20, 2011, 17:29
-
someone knows?
-
donīt know but I guess a buyer at iStock can request a RAW file but for a total difference price..
-
As far as I know they are the only ones. They aren't selling my RAWs though. Personally I think it's crazy to give away our digital negatives for microstock prices...
-
I can't see myself allowing any raw photos to get out because I don't want anyone seeing a raw photo and mistaking it for the finished work that I produce.
-
on one hand it's like this... but on the other - I think it's fair to give the designers all options - you don't know what they need... and how they will need it... so giving them the RAW you give them all options
about the price - when they buy with credits it's much higher, but with subscriptions is very low...
-
Is Dreamstime the only one selling RAW?!
Yes probably because the other sites realise nobody in their right mind would want to sell their raw files.
-
Is Dreamstime the only one selling RAW?!
Yes probably because the other sites realise nobody in their right mind would want to sell their raw files.
Of course the RAW image isn't actually the image that was originally inspected & approved either. It might be quite different to what the customer was expecting from the JPEG.
-
As far as I know they are the only ones. They aren't selling my RAWs though. Personally I think it's crazy to give away our digital negatives for microstock prices...
Exactly. If someone were going to request RAW files, I would be negotiating a contract outside of micro.
-
As far as I know they are the only ones. They aren't selling my RAWs though. Personally I think it's crazy to give away our digital negatives for microstock prices...
yep +1 (at least they weren't when I used them), I did get a couple requests but always turned them down.
-
but on the other - I think it's fair to give the designers all options - you don't know what they need... and how they will need it... so giving them the RAW you give them all options
It's not fair at all really. The designer is enjoying an unprecedented selection of images for a price point that can only be described as give away. Why would they need yet another perk?
-
why do you think that RAW files are so precious? I don't get it...
It's the same if you sell JPEG or RAW for me...
but I have a lot of images on my web site which are originally made on slide films and they are really ART... and I don't upload them at stock sites... recently I even disable more than 20 files that I was upload years ago... I just decided these files worth much more
but all the others... are just stock... and wheather it's jpeg or raw... the same for me
-
I'm curious too about this idea that the RAW file is the only way to prove an image is yours.
Much of my microstock work is done in JPEG only. Am I vulnerable?
-
I'm curious too about this idea that the RAW file is the only way to prove an image is yours.
Much of my microstock work is done in JPEG only. Am I vulnerable?
I don't think so. I haven't shot RAW for 7 years. Easy enough to prove ownership from all the other shots from the same series, sequential file no's, etc (in the unlikely event that it becomes necessary).
-
I don't think there's much to worry about for proving an image is yours if you shoot JPEG, however if you are worried, I read a while back that someone shaved off 5 pixels around the edges before submitting so they could show that anyone nabbing their uploads to claim as their originals was a fraud - they wouldn't have the extra 5 pixel border.
And as far as selling RAW files, I'm in the wouldn't-even-consider-it camp. Even before DT started subscriptions, I didn't offer RAW files. I would consider selling high res 16 bit processed (layered) images for a higher price, but not the unprocessed file. It'd be like going out on a date with no makeup and in my gardening gear - no finish or polish :)
-
I don't think there's much to worry about for proving an image is yours if you shoot JPEG, however if you are worried, I read a while back that someone shaved off 5 pixels around the edges before submitting so they could show that anyone nabbing their uploads to claim as their originals was a fraud - they wouldn't have the extra 5 pixel border.
And as far as selling RAW files, I'm in the wouldn't-even-consider-it camp. Even before Dreamstime started subscriptions, I didn't offer RAW files. I would consider selling high res 16 bit processed (layered) images for a higher price, but not the unprocessed file. It'd be like going out on a date with no makeup and in my gardening gear - no finish or polish :)
I wasn't concerned about copyright issues; just concerned that others seemed to think I should be. Is that confusing? ::)
I do agree with your lack of makeup analogy. 8)
-
... the same for me
But not for me. Nothing to argue about really.
-
sure we have choice - to upload or not :) everyone decides for himself
-
after the "make-up" you lose information that a designer could need
and anyway - the next morning after the date - everything is clear ;D
-
I was thinking these days...
many said that they wouldn't sell RAW for these prices
ok... so what is the normal price for RAW?
what do you think
-
For what it's worth I've gotten several requests for raw files via DT but there was no way to respond and no info on prices and no contact info from whomever requested the files. ??? I emailed DT each time and got no response.
-
really?!
usually you could answer as a comment on a picture