MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Dreamstime.com => Topic started by: Danicek on April 23, 2010, 05:21
-
Just noticed 3 of my older files were removed from DT today. They moved them into 'rejected files' saying that they were 'approved by accident'.
The interesting thing is that they were active for few months and were selling (not in huge numbers, but still). Since they are now removed and only thumbs showing in rejected files, I don't have way to check how many times they sold exactly. Yet looking at my sales history, they show 3 times in last 40 sales.
Is this a new trend to remove few months old files that sold couple of times? I've to admit I'm rather disgusted. Not that it would be a huge loss anyway. But why?
The full reason is:
- File approved by accident. We apologize for the inconvenience but the image needs to be removed.
- Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series. Your submission should not duplicate content already in your portfolio or content which you plan to upload separately in the future (ie. collages based on your images). Please be more selective and choose only the best shots or illustrations. Avoid submitting simple variations on the same subject or duplicating content already in your portfolio (including from collages). You can create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image). That will help the file sell better and generate higher royalties via our level-based system.
EDIT: Ok, so noticed one important thing - there were 4 'similars' in my portfolio. And the removed files were 3 of them leaving only one. So looks like they are going through 'similars' and removing what they thing is too similar.
-
These DT "similars" are starting to get really ridiculous...
Soon if an image buyer needs a horizontal version of a vertical photo he/she needs to shop it elsewhere.
-
These DT "similars" are starting to get really ridiculous...
Soon if an image buyer needs a horizontal version of a vertical photo he/she needs to shop it elsewhere.
DT is acting as if they can't afford anymore storage space anymore...
-
i wonder if that's the reason big guns stopped the uploads. anyway since my sales are still ok i don't mind it. :P
-
i wonder if that's the reason big guns stopped the uploads. anyway since my sales are still ok i don't mind it. :P
My sales stink. I don't know what happened but sales volume is just a fraction. Just the increase in commission is making it almost bearable.
-
==== You can create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image). That will help the file sell better and generate higher royalties via our level-based system.
i noticed this new explanation on latest rejects for similars. i submit similars all the time, since i cant predict which of 5 similars dt will like, and sometimes they take all 5.
but my question is - has anyone had success in submitting 'sets'? i see it all the time for illustrations, but wondered if anyone had luck with sets of images - mountains, food, people, doors, etc - in the past i've those rejected saying they'd rather see the individual images [and their separate sales] . similar are montages, where diff images are combined, so a designer would have to spend a lot more time finding all the individual images. dt is the only one of the majors that accepts http://cascoly.com/trav/montage.asp (http://cascoly.com/trav/montage.asp)montages.
steve
-
DT is usually so smart about the way they do business, I hope there is something I just can't figure out by their new position on similars. On the surface it feels that they are trying to push customers into Istock's arms because not only do they have the exclusive library, also have all the similars that DT has refused. It's like DT only wants 1 in 4 customers or they only the horizontal ones.
- scratching my head
-
Good luck!
Do you really want to put now 10 images in one file and sell it for .35c on subscription - 0.03c per image?
==== You can create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image). That will help the file sell better and generate higher royalties via our level-based system.
i noticed this new explanation on latest rejects for similars. i submit similars all the time, since i cant predict which of 5 similars dt will like, and sometimes they take all 5.
but my question is - has anyone had success in submitting 'sets'? i see it all the time for illustrations, but wondered if anyone had luck with sets of images - mountains, food, people, doors, etc - in the past i've those rejected saying they'd rather see the individual images [and their separate sales] . similar are montages, where diff images are combined, so a designer would have to spend a lot more time finding all the individual images. dt is the only one of the majors that accepts [url]http://cascoly.com/trav/montage.asp[/url] ([url]http://cascoly.com/trav/montage.asp[/url])montages.
steve
-
==== You can create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image). That will help the file sell better and generate higher royalties via our level-based system.
I did that once, just for DT. The collage was rejected with the reason "please upload images separately". ;D :o
-
==== You can create sets of similars (several shots included within the same image). That will help the file sell better and generate higher royalties via our level-based system.
I did that once, just for DT. The collage was rejected with the reason "please upload images separately". ;D :o
eheheh good one! never had one like that, just the opposite
-
These DT "similars" are starting to get really ridiculous...
Soon if an image buyer needs a horizontal version of a vertical photo he/she needs to shop it elsewhere.
Don't laugh - this happened to me last week - I couldn't believe it - submitted one horizontal execution and one vertical and the 2nd was rejected for being "similar" - even worse, the images contained type so it was not as if you could rotate the file to turn a vertical horizontal as the type would be upside down - for the first time ever with a DT rejection I was furious - that said, I contacted support and made my argument and they ended up reversing the decision and accepting the refused file. But that's quite a mistake in my book, especially as I am buyer who searches for vertical or horizontal images all the time.
-
Surely this will kill off DT, why are they persisting with this? I can understand making a mistake for a few months and changing it but this has been going on too long. I just can't get motivated to upload there any more, my earnings are well down and they must be losing buyers when they notice that other sites offer them a much better choice of images.
If they really want a smaller high quality collection, they should just delete all files that don't sell after a year. That gives the buyers the opportunity to see them, now they aren't being given that choice.
-
Surely this will kill off DT, why are they persisting with this? I can understand making a mistake for a few months and changing it but this has been going on too long. I just can't get motivated to upload there any more, my earnings are well down and they must be losing buyers when they notice that other sites offer them a much better choice of images.
If they really want a smaller high quality collection, they should just delete all files that don't sell after a year. That gives the buyers the opportunity to see them, now they aren't being given that choice.
not sure if they are losing buyers at this stage - they still have a good selection of images IMO - but if this policy does continue, in the longer term, i am not sure they won't start losing them as their selection of newer images dwindles. I cannot get a handle on the reasoning behind their actions - I agree with you - why not delete images a year old plus that are not selling? And as for deleting previously approved images saying they are 2 similar where those images have had 3 sales? That just makes no sense 2 me ... they must have something in mind they are doing that we are not privy 2 ... but what?
-
I've always been a DT fan BUT, I have a fairly large-scale client dealing in deodorant / shampoo products that needs a series of "similar" shots of the same woman/same outfit. We looked on DT and they liked the 2 images of a sexy blond woman but could not find any more with her in the same series (she had other shots in different outfits.) Upon searching IS and SS, found the same series with an additional 6 and 7 respectively (wound up purchasing from IS as client didn't want to pay for sub.)
...there you have it.
-
I've always been a DT fan BUT, I have a fairly large-scale client dealing in deodorant / shampoo products that needs a series of "similar" shots of the same woman/same outfit. We looked on DT and they liked the 2 images of a sexy blond woman but could not find any more with her in the same series (she had other shots in different outfits.) Upon searching IS and SS, found the same series with an additional 6 and 7 respectively (wound up purchasing from IS as client didn't want to pay for sub.)
...there you have it.
Yep! In my experience having a series of similars can often prove useful to designers. Why are DT not getting this ???
-
One of the biggest gripes that designers have with microstock (as stated on forums for designers) is the lack of series.
It doesn't seem like it would take a rocket surgeon to visit designer forums and ask them what they would like to see in a microstock site. Perhaps if the sites worried about things like what designers want, we'd all make a bit more!
-
I completely agree that the "similars" policy as it is being implemented by DT is counterproductive. However as contributors we don't have much say in it.
I doubt things will change until more buyers like Hoi Ha and Anonymous write DT and let them know specific examples of this policy costing them sales and even customers.
-
I think even slight variations in face expression can decide which image will buyer want to buy. Sometimes two similar images of a smiling woman can look very different if one smile looks fake, and the other looks more natural.
-
One of the biggest gripes that designers have with microstock (as stated on forums for designers) is the lack of series.
Exactly right - we do use series quite often as a design technique - but then Dreamstime has to know this, right? They certainly have data on what is being downloaded etc. I am thinking it might be a crop of new, over-zealous reviewers that don't really get what they are doing - hopefull it is not a distinct policy but more of a clean-up effort going a bit wrong. I have faith in Dreamstime that it will get sorted - I think:)
-
I completely agree that the "similars" policy as it is being implemented by DT is counterproductive. However as contributors we don't have much say in it.
I doubt things will change until more buyers like Hoi Ha and Anonymous write DT and let them know specific examples of this policy costing them sales and even customers.
I am having my say by not contributing any more images to DT. It wont make any difference to them but I refuse to go along with this policy.
-
I completely agree that the "similars" policy as it is being implemented by DT is counterproductive. However as contributors we don't have much say in it.
I doubt things will change until more buyers like Hoi Ha and Anonymous write DT and let them know specific examples of this policy costing them sales and even customers.
I am having my say by not contributing any more images to DT. It wont make any difference to them but I refuse to go along with this policy.
amen. My DT sales went south a long time ago... I haven't uploaded there in a long time.. this particular issue does not affect me as I do not do studio style series photos. However, IMHO, it would seem to me if I was a buyer, I'd like to see a series of similar photos of a subject I had a need for.. but that's me. What really blows my mind is the statement "ACCEPTED BY ACCIDENT". All that does is destroy professional credibility with DT.
My issue with DT cropped up a few weeks ago when I got these emails telling me that someone objected to keywords on my photos. Those 'someones' being other photographers. The cases in point were to say the least, moronic. One example, a landscape picture taken in Yosemite Meadow had 'objectionable' keywords such as 'yosemite' , pine (as in the trees in the picture) , and the odd word... 'meadow'.
I had 4 of theses. I fired off an email to DT... but, have received no response. The real kicker was when I went to look at the ports of the people objecting. Low and behold, if I had the time to waste, I could have legitimately ripped thru their port and protested darn near every pic. These people had some real testicle fortitude!! Where's their flippin heads? Don't they realize anyone could just turn the tables on them??
I let DT know what an unprofessional policy it was IMHO. morons....
I have been considering closing my account there for some time... perhaps now, I will. Not making any significant $$ there to make it worth the hassle of checking it. I'm over payout... I'll probably shut it down in the next few days. In fact... seriously, at one time I was with 15 agencies... now down to 8, not counting Stinkstock...
I am thinking of going down to just IS and SS and also keeping Alamy... all the rest are peanut money to me. I always swore I'd never go exclusive... but... as long as SS and IS keep sending me similar money.. ah, time will tell. 8)=tom
-
Not that it matters, Tom, if you are leaving the site, but when you get those notices about flagged images, it doesn't mean the words have been changed. They still have to be checked by an admin. Only if the admin approves the changes will they be removed. It's worth adding a note to the admin on the file explaining why you disagree with the flag.
I don't like getting the flags either. 9 times out of 10 they are flagging very relevant words, and if you check the port of the contributor who flagged them you will often find competing images.
I can sympathize with the folks who vote with their feet and leave a site they don't like. In my case DT is 13 - 15% of my income, so I would rather stick around do the best I can within the rules they have, even if I do voice objections sometimes.
-
It would be nice if Dreamstime would place a notice of consequences for the flagger when it is an obvious attempt to get back at the photographer. I don't think they should even allow a photographer to flag another photographer. I believe that should be done by the buyers only. The way it is, it opens the door for mischief by one photographer at the expense of another. That shouldn't be allowed.
-
I completely agree that the "similars" policy as it is being implemented by DT is counterproductive. However as contributors we don't have much say in it. ...
It is so sad that it has come that far. It really makes us feel like we are not really a part of this whole thing at all.
But you are right!
-
Eye-opening. I had no idea that photographers could flag images like that. Ridiculous. A waste of everyones time. Testicle fortitude. Ok. That is my giggle phrase for the day. Love it v
-
Tom - if you leaving Dtime is because of the flagging i think you should re-consider - if you are leaving for other reasons then so be it and best of luck - but the flags are completely meaningless unless an admin agrees after a review of the flag. It has no impact on you at all and nobody can see the flag(s) except the admins and you. If a flagger abuses the system in any way, they lose the ability to flag again - and there are warnings posted about this when someone flags an image. Finally, the terms that may appear as flag terms might not be the terms the flagger was referring to - when an image is flagged you need simply to look at your search terms, and if you think they are correct, ignore it and that's the end of it. if you think there are terms others may not understand, then explain it in a comment ot the admins. But, assuming your search terms are by and large correct and not spam, then you have nothing to be concerned about. just ignore the flags. Competing photgraphers cannot gain anything by flaggin other photogrpahers images and stand to be penalised if it is found that what they are doing is not correct.
As a buyer I can tell you honestly that D-time - and IS - now have the best search functions in the business because they have worked on getting rid of the spam - all and all this is good for everyone.
-
My issue with DT cropped up a few weeks ago when I got these emails telling me that someone objected to keywords on my photos. Those 'someones' being other photographers. The cases in point were to say the least, moronic. One example, a landscape picture taken in Yosemite Meadow had 'objectionable' keywords such as 'yosemite' , pine (as in the trees in the picture) , and the odd word... 'meadow'.
I had 4 of theses. I fired off an email to DT... but, have received no response. The real kicker was when I went to look at the ports of the people objecting. Low and behold, if I had the time to waste, I could have legitimately ripped thru their port and protested darn near every pic. These people had some real testicle fortitude!! Where's their flippin heads? Don't they realize anyone could just turn the tables on them??
I let DT know what an unprofessional policy it was IMHO. morons....
Same thing happened to me . Some guy flagged one of my photos for a completely relevant keyword ( a medical term ) and when I made a search with that word guess whose photos came up competing side to side with mine . Needless to say I was pissed . To match the example above the guy's port was full of irrelevant keywords .
It would be nice if Dreamstime would place a notice of consequences for the flagger when it is an obvious attempt to get back at the photographer. I don't think they should even allow a photographer to flag another photographer. I believe that should be done by the buyers only. The way it is, it opens the door for mischief by one photographer at the expense of another. That shouldn't be allowed.
ditto
-
I might be wrong but i think the flags arent inspected anymore.
I never flagged an image but 2 months ago i bumped into a picture of a "white rabbit sitting in the grass" with among the keywords: horse, cat, dog, deer, black, sky, clouds, blue (theres no sky in the picture), .... i flagged it. A month later it was stil there so i flagged it again.
Nothing has happened to the image so i asked in the DT forums if there still was a big backlog. Never got a reply from staff, only from a contributor who said he stopped flagging as well because nothing ever happens with them.
I wouldnt worry too much when i get a flag :)
-
Also, you should consider that earlier, the flagging symbyl had a very stupid layout, so it was not uncommon for buyer to think they were putting the pictures in a lightbox when they clicked on a flag. So it is not a good idea to write an angry message to the flagger; he might be someone who tried to buy your picture but clicked on the wrong symbol.
I got a picture removed because "Reason: This doesn't look like a "staged" shot and can be qualified as sensitive content (cruelty towards children)." Ok, now I now; only fake looking pictures allowed. (No, I didn't slap the kid about to get the shot; She crashed into a fence on her bike, and willingly posed for the shot before we washed away the blood).
-
Eye-opening. I had no idea that photographers could flag images like that. Ridiculous. A waste of everyones time. Testicle fortitude. Ok. That is my giggle phrase for the day. Love it v
You didn't catch this one above which gave me a good laugh at the combination of two common phrases to make one with no meaning?
It doesn't seem like it would take a rocket surgeon...
Still the thread that someone started about going exclusive with DT had to be the most blatant troll of all time. I mean, people drop DT for poor sales and the reviews and arbitrary policies have become a joke, add the farce with the flagging keywords which seems almost random. I had my whole collection locked at one point. Someone has the "testicle fortitude of a rocket surgeon" to say they want to go exclusive on DT. Now there's a real side splitting laugher. ;D
What someone may start is a pool for next agency to close, which would include Yay (wow, now with 1 million images), Deposit Photos (will pay 25c to own your image for the closet of free credit sales) or DT which seems to be self destructing or committing suicide before our eyes?
-
Tom - .............. Finally, the terms that may appear as flag terms might not be the terms the flagger was referring to - when an image is flagged you need simply to look at your search terms, and if you think they are correct, ignore it and that's the end of it. if you think there are terms others may not understand, then explain it in a comment ot the admins. But, assuming your search terms are by and large correct and not spam, then you have nothing to be concerned about. just ignore the flags. Competing photgraphers cannot gain anything by flaggin other photogrpahers images and stand to be penalised if it is found that what they are doing is not correct.
Thanks to everyone's advice... I consider all advice I am given..
I personally can't stand keyword spamming... I will be the first to admit that when I got into this biz years ago, I went crazy with keywords because, that's what I saw everyone else doing. At the time, I thought it moronic in many cases, but again thought, 'this is what you do'. In the last few years I have many times gone back and removed words that should never have been put in there. I do make an effort to police my own files. Now, I am careful about what I put in my keywords. I have come to learn that more is not necessarily better. thanks again to all for advice and support 8)=tom