pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stock "factories" slowing uploads?  (Read 31466 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 14, 2010, 20:43 »
0
Strange thing, this month big "guns" (Yuri, Iofoto, Monkeybusiness) have not any uploads at Dreamstime. Usually they upload hundreds/thousands files. Are they preparing something? (boycotting new uploads limits or going exclusive)


« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2010, 22:32 »
0
maybe they all joined the PPA and finally figured out that running a microstock image factory has the highest expenses and bottom of the barrel profits compared to all the "non-celebrity-status" fields of professional photography. So now they are going to focus on the general public and make irregular uploads to micro simply for the fact that it allows a portrait studio the opportunity to generate and justify an insane amount of tax deductions on things that normally could not be classified as an expense for a portrait business.  :D ... That would be the smart thing to do from a financial viewpoint.

« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2010, 22:57 »
0
Deduct what exactly?

« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2010, 23:11 »
0
Deduct what exactly?

Anything appearing in a stock photo  ;)

nruboc

« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2010, 23:36 »
0
Strange thing, this month big "guns" (Yuri, Iofoto, Monkeybusiness) have not any uploads at Dreamstime. Usually they upload hundreds/thousands files. Are they preparing something? (boycotting new uploads limits or going exclusive)

Interesting, good observation

« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2010, 23:48 »
0
the best deductions that you can add to your studio from micro are travel related expenses that would not normally be associated with your regular business practice like hotels, extended mileage and all the stuff on the way like food, drinks, etc. Simply running the studio you will also have mileage, etc. but it will for the most part be localized. Now add in the micro accounts and you can now count that as an extension to your studio.
So let's say my wife and I just dropped the kids off to spend the weekend at the grandparents .. we're driving in the car and I say "hey we don't have any appointments this weekend let's head out to the rockies" ... we stop by the house, grab some clothes .. and the camera bags of course (it's a business trip after all) . 10 hours later we're in Denver and ready for a weekend of fun shooting. Come home upload a few shots and now we have another 3,000 miles to throw in the books .. plus hotels receipts, restaurant receipts and a few souvenirs that we will use for props in something or other. The deduction for mileage is rated pretty high in the US .. so in a few days we could easily make the total deductions for that expedition come up to 5 times the actual cost of the trip.
Now you have tons of additional deductions that can offset the fact that you are making 2000-5000% profits per client with the portrait end .. lower your income (on paper) and the best part is you put little work into a huge return vs. a ton of work into a small return.
Basically micro could fall completely in the crapper but I'd still upload here and there simply because I profited so much in the long run by claiming it as a loss.

Corporations do this all the time. It's not uncommon for a manufacturer to keep a crap factory in operation simply so they can claim it as a loss every year to offset the primary plant ... same principle .. microstock is the crap factory you keep in operation.

« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2010, 00:48 »
0
Saying you claimed a deduction of five times more than you spent is probably not a good thing to say on a public forum. Neither is saying you charge your clients 200-500 times more than your cost. That kind of stuff can come back to haunt you ...

« Reply #7 on: April 15, 2010, 01:19 »
0
Strange thing, this month big "guns" (Yuri, Iofoto, Monkeybusiness) have not any uploads at Dreamstime. Usually they upload hundreds/thousands files. Are they preparing something? (boycotting new uploads limits or going exclusive)

Interesting, good observation

Yes, it looks like the what-will-yuri-do six month clock has started ticking ... September will be an interesting month. That he has cohorts will make it doubly so - heads up all you lifestyle shooters!
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 01:26 by sharply_done »

« Reply #8 on: April 15, 2010, 02:41 »
0
I just can't imagine Yuri going exclusive, unless he is being paid a big fee.  Perhaps he is now concentrating on the macro sites?  It could just be the Easter break, lots of people take time off this time of the year.

« Reply #9 on: April 15, 2010, 03:04 »
0
He's uploaded to istock on April 5th. And he's been uploading video there.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 03:06 by averil »

« Reply #10 on: April 15, 2010, 03:33 »
0
Andresr is still uploading but I think he is not very concentrated on this task. Take a look on titles and keywords of his last images (especially the reading man) ;D

« Reply #11 on: April 15, 2010, 04:34 »
0
.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 05:50 by gostwyck »

lisafx

« Reply #12 on: April 15, 2010, 08:29 »
0
Deduct what exactly?

To continue the interesting, but OT tax discussion...

I am not as liberal with my deductions as Randy ;), but I do deduct all my props, mileage, meals when I entertain models (which is often since it is part of their "reward" package for modeling), gift cards I give out when a model's picture reaches 500 or 1000 downloads, etc.  I also deduct computer and office related expenses along with the obvious deductions for gear. 

« Reply #13 on: April 15, 2010, 14:14 »
0
Andresr is still uploading but I think he is not very concentrated on this task. Take a look on titles and keywords of his last images (especially the reading man) ;D

Hey Rene, thanks for pointing out. I just fixed some will fix the others later because there were too many mistakes. It was in the actual uploads the mistake rather than the embedded keywords ..... one uploader less at the company and  thanks to your remark as I found tons of mistakes everywhere made by him.

« Reply #14 on: April 15, 2010, 19:04 »
0
Saying you claimed a deduction of five times more than you spent is probably not a good thing to say on a public forum. Neither is saying you charge your clients 200-500 times more than your cost. That kind of stuff can come back to haunt you ...

No reason to not discuss it publicly. It's 100% legal. The US federal gov sets a rate for mileage and that rate is a lot more than the actual cost of the travel expense. For example, 2009 standard mileage was rated at $0.55 per mile. If you're driving a vehicle that gets 30 miles to the gallon then you can deduct $16.50 per gallon .. If the price of gas is $2.50 per gallon it become pretty obvious how you can benefit from racking up the business miles traveling by car. If I drive 30 miles to shoot micro will it turn a profit .. sure .. if I drive 4000 miles to do a single nature micro shoot will it be a profit .. nope it's most likely a loss .. however, you just had an awesome trip taking photos and racked up $2200 in mileage deductions and only spent $334 in gas doing it .. you just profited $1866.

As for the markup .. 2000%-5000% markups is standard practice in professional portraiture, senior graduation and weddings in the United States ... has been for decades .. going beneath this level is only common to the MWACS .. no offense moms I didn't invent the term  ;) .. and they tend to not get any real business anyway .. typically they have little photographic experience and combined with their lack of business management they never stay in the game long .. at least not on a competing level. General public pays for your skill, technical perfection and creativity .. if they want to get prints done for less they can go grab a point n shoot and let their drunk uncle or their friends mom take them and have them printed up at Wal-Mart.

To continue the interesting, but OT tax discussion...

I am not as liberal with my deductions as Randy ;), but I do deduct all my props, mileage, meals when I entertain models (which is often since it is part of their "reward" package for modeling), gift cards I give out when a model's picture reaches 500 or 1000 downloads, etc.  I also deduct computer and office related expenses along with the obvious deductions for gear. 

You can also add in some extra mileage when you are just out scouting new locations to take your models for their shoots. That can add up over the course of the year.

ap

« Reply #15 on: April 15, 2010, 21:17 »
0
this is all really interesting and thanx for the tax tips on tax day.  ;)

but, er, have you ever been audited? as an individual or company?  :o

« Reply #16 on: April 15, 2010, 23:14 »
0
this is all really interesting and thanx for the tax tips on tax day.  ;)

but, er, have you ever been audited? as an individual or company?  :o

nope I've never been audited .. I triple check everything before the taxes are filed. The percentage of americans who get audited every year is actually extremely low .. like 1% and it's normally because they have a bunch of errors or they might be creating extremely high expenses on an extremely low income. So if you used my method and you're only photography income was from stock .. then yeah that is not going to look right at all to the IRS. However, if you are marketing yourself in non-stock fields like portraiture, seniors and weddings then your dealing with a much larger profit system and your income should more than justify the additional expenses generated from the stock work. That is unless you're running your business with MWAC management. If you are charging $10 for an 8x10, have senior packages starting at $199 with unlimited poses or advertise weddings on craigslist for $500 all day all images on CD ... you're in the realm of the MWAC and your camera will eventually end up in a pawn shop somewhere.  :P

« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2010, 04:24 »
0
I agree with Randy that most countries have a 'base rate' that you can claim for vehicle expenses if you don't want (or can't)  log actual expenses.  Sometimes there is stipulations weather you have to log actual expenses and miles used for private / work or when you can just claim the fixed rate.

That said, your vehicle expenses are a lot more than just gas.  You are also racking up more miles on your vehicle which is lowering the resale value, using the engine which will require repair, tires, oil, insurance, etc.etc.  I don't actually think the fixed rate is so far off what it really costs - of course it depends on what vehicle you are driving and I agree with Randy that if you are driving a very cheap vehicle you will probably end up on the plus side.

« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2010, 10:44 »
0
Confused... rene starts the thread talking about uploads by the big guns and soon everyone is talking about tax!  ???

« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2010, 12:51 »
0
Confused... rene starts the thread talking about uploads by the big guns and soon everyone is talking about tax!  ???

Also called getting off topic. And I for one lose interest in the entire thread. The TAX posts should be cut and pasted into a new thread. That way the original post could be commented on.

My 2 cents.

-Larry

« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2010, 03:01 »
0
Confused... rene starts the thread talking about uploads by the big guns and soon everyone is talking about tax!  ???
Thank you Dunsmore. Even Leaf is against me ;)
Back to the topic. After check today, Yuri, Iofoto and Monkeybusiness have uploaded to different sites this month but not to DT.

« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2010, 03:12 »
0
Andresr is still uploading but I think he is not very concentrated on this task. Take a look on titles and keywords of his last images (especially the reading man) ;D

Hey Rene, thanks for pointing out. I just fixed some will fix the others later because there were too many mistakes. It was in the actual uploads the mistake rather than the embedded keywords ..... one uploader less at the company and  thanks to your remark as I found tons of mistakes everywhere made by him.
You are lucky, I was tempted by 0.02$ prime but I was in a good mood.  ;)
Funny that after all this "flagging campaign" DT's reviewers still don't do their work correctly.

« Reply #22 on: May 30, 2010, 01:10 »
0
May is almost finished. Still zero uploads for many of best microstockers:
Yuri, Monkeybusiness, Iofoto, Avava, lumaxart (0 images in portfolio), Redbaron, PhilDate, BelleImages and many others
I don't think that all of them are going to be exclusive somewhere. Yuri said in SS forum, in thread related to DT (the topic seems to be deleted now) that he stopped uploading to Dreamstime because he works only with "professional sites"  Maybe others think the same, DT in not worth to work with.

« Reply #23 on: May 30, 2010, 01:36 »
0
This can't be good for DT.  Would be nice to know the reasons why these people are no longer uploading and if DT care?  Surely not having those people on board is going to lose them business?  Other contributors might give up on them and buyers might look elsewhere for all those missing images.  

I sometimes get annoyed that they reject images that sell on other sites, they seem to want higher quality to sell as subs and that wont work, see what has happened to crestock.  Their similars rejections can also get tedious, letting the buyers decide what they want is sensible, not leaving it to the reviewers.

I might consider giving them higher quality images for higher commissions and if I could opt them out of subs but they are not offering us that.  Something is going to have to change or I don't like the future for DT.

« Reply #24 on: May 30, 2010, 01:55 »
0
May is almost finished. Still zero uploads for many of best microstockers:
Yuri, Monkeybusiness, Iofoto, Avava, lumaxart (0 images in portfolio), Redbaron, PhilDate, BelleImages and many others
I don't think that all of them are going to be exclusive somewhere. Yuri said in SS forum, in thread related to DT (the topic seems to be deleted now) that he stopped uploading to Dreamstime because he works only with "professional sites"  Maybe others think the same, DT in not worth to work with.

didn't lumaxart put their whole portfolio up for sale and i thought Iofoto's gone back to doing macro only

« Reply #25 on: May 30, 2010, 04:38 »
0
May is almost finished. Still zero uploads for many of best microstockers: ... PhilDate

Phildate froze his port as "Phildate" but he is still happily uploading on DT under his other account, eastwestimaging.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #26 on: May 30, 2010, 06:15 »
0
didn't lumaxart put their whole portfolio up for sale and i thought Iofoto's gone back to doing macro only
Iofoto's had images accepted at iStock this past week.

« Reply #27 on: May 30, 2010, 07:00 »
0
Hi Rene,
there we go again :)
Dreamstime 'not - professional'?
Would you like to hear the whole story?
Not hard to find it, I remember reading it right here, on this forum.
Seeing how much interest you show to anything related to Dreamstime, I'm surprised you missed it.

Yuri's people were trying to upload previously rejected images. I would say that's not very professional either. And they were told to stop.
Then Yuri himself asked Achilles for some kind of 'special treatment'. I don't know the details but I know the outcome. Achilles refused.
He might have been a bit harsh, I don't know.
Yuri didn't like it and the 'not professional' story was born.
Voila!
But I agree. Yuri is a problem and I wish he would start uploading again.

Meanwhile you're fixed on Dreamstime, you're wasting a lot of energy chasing contributors' stats on DT and seem unable to let it go. That's a burden you don't need.
You're a professional, working with a professional agency, you're wearing a crown, plenty of precious gems and your life is good.
Let the less fortunate go on their merry way.
You're all set.

Ah, and by the way. After so many threads and so many months, you have failed to show me a single, valid reason to stop uploading to Dreamstime.
Can you think of one?
'Cause I can't.

« Reply #28 on: May 30, 2010, 08:11 »
0
I've heard the Yuri story before, and there is no way any of us knows exactly what transpired, but I am finding this to be kind of unprofessional...

I have been having a heck of a time this morning with searchs and looking at peoples portfolios on DT. I enter search terms and come up with 0 results...I searched the word "man". That can't be right. And when I go to someone's profile page and click their portfolio button, sometimes it goes to their port, sometimes it says 0 images found. That's not right, either. It happens on my portfolio too sometimes. Sometimes it does go to my portfolio, but when I click to page 2, it says no images found.

Something is definitely wrong. That doesn't seem like it would be an issue on my end, so I have to presume the search engine at DT is hosed.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2010, 08:13 by cclapper »

« Reply #29 on: May 30, 2010, 08:53 »
0
I've heard the Yuri story before, and there is no way any of us knows exactly what transpired, but I am finding this to be kind of unprofessional...

I have been having a heck of a time this morning with searchs and looking at peoples portfolios on DT. I enter search terms and come up with 0 results...I searched the word "man". That can't be right. And when I go to someone's profile page and click their portfolio button, sometimes it goes to their port, sometimes it says 0 images found. That's not right, either. It happens on my portfolio too sometimes. Sometimes it does go to my portfolio, but when I click to page 2, it says no images found.

Something is definitely wrong. That doesn't seem like it would be an issue on my end, so I have to presume the search engine at DT is hosed.

Everything at DT seems OK, I checked and didn't come across any problems. Maybe these search problems were just a temporary glitch.

« Reply #30 on: May 30, 2010, 09:13 »
0
Everything at DT seems OK, I checked and didn't come across any problems. Maybe these search problems were just a temporary glitch.

Not a temporary glitch, no. Just went to your portfolio on DT using Safari. I usually use Firefox. I clicked on your portfolio button under your picture and the page said no images found. I went to my profile page and clicked portfolio...it went to my portfolio. I clicked to another page, it worked. I clicked to a third page, it said no images found.

It's an intermittent, random problem, apparently on DTs end because I'm fairly certain it wouldn't be happening to me on 2 different browsers.

« Reply #31 on: May 30, 2010, 09:18 »
0
I have the same picture, cclapper. Your portfolio won't show (I can see my own, but not always), and the search for "man" yields no results. "man business" still gives a skillion though, and so does "woman".

« Reply #32 on: May 30, 2010, 12:05 »
0
I just went in and tried "man",  first click on search provided nothing, second time nothing, third time over 6000, forth and fifth nothing, seventh and eigth got results.  Very strange and random.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #33 on: May 30, 2010, 12:57 »
0
Has any one contacted Dreamstime about this? That "glitch" can be very costly to us as well as Dreamstime. I wouldn't keep hitting the search button if it didn't work the first two times....I'd go somewhere else.

« Reply #34 on: May 30, 2010, 13:06 »
0
I just went in and tried "man",  first click on search provided nothing, second time nothing, third time over 6000, forth and fifth nothing, seventh and eigth got results.  Very strange and random.

Exactly. Random and intermittent. Unreliable. Yes, Donding, BIG problem for buyers. I'll go see if anyone has reported on DT forum and if admin has acknowledged.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #35 on: May 30, 2010, 13:14 »
0

I just went in and tried "man",  first click on search provided nothing, second time nothing, third time over 6000, forth and fifth nothing, seventh and eigth got results.  Very strange and random.

Exactly. Random and intermittent. Unreliable. Yes, Donding, BIG problem for buyers. I'll go see if anyone has reported on DT forum and if admin has acknowledged.

I clicked on your port and it went to your main page but "no images found" under your port, same thing with mine. I sent customer service a note about it, hopefully they are already aware of the problem and working on it.

« Reply #36 on: May 30, 2010, 13:16 »
0
Others are reporting on DT forum, I also sent a message to support.

EDIT: Sorry to hijack the "factories slowing down uploads" thread. We should probably post this stuff under the DT Down thread.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2010, 13:18 by cclapper »

« Reply #37 on: May 30, 2010, 13:20 »
0
CClapper,
I'm sorry, I haven't spoken with either of men ever. Achilles or Yuri.
But if it comes to unprofessionalism I think Yuri should talk to his people again. It might be that they know more.

Dreamstime seems to have a problem with the site right now.
I'm sure they'll fix it soon, but does this have anything to do with the agency
being 'unprofessional'?
Because I'll have to disagree.
Of such glitches I know a lot worse.

« Reply #38 on: June 29, 2010, 19:13 »
0
Yuri has uploaded 3 images this month. The war is over?

WarrenPrice

« Reply #39 on: June 29, 2010, 20:11 »
0
Yuri has uploaded 3 images this month. The war is over?

Were they similar?   ;D

LSD72

  • My Bologna has a first name...
« Reply #40 on: June 29, 2010, 21:29 »
0
I know Yuri has been uploading over at the 3D Studio. I did a few uploads about a day ago...and then I was buried behind 7 pages of his in a matter of a few minutes.

« Reply #41 on: June 29, 2010, 21:31 »
0
Yuri has uploaded 3 images this month. The war is over?

Were they similar?   ;D

ahahah

« Reply #42 on: June 30, 2010, 03:33 »
0
Yuri has uploaded 3 images this month. The war is over?

Were they similar?   ;D

silly question of course they were LMAO !!!!

« Reply #43 on: June 30, 2010, 04:26 »
0
Unless he really uploaded 50 images and only 3 got through because of similars in which case the war is back on ;)
Yuri has uploaded 3 images this month. The war is over?

« Reply #44 on: July 15, 2010, 08:56 »
0
Yuri has uploaded 3 images this month. The war is over?

Were they similar?   ;D
Now it's official, Yuri is uploading to DT. And yes, they are similar. Yuri seems to be a winner of this conflict. Upload's rules were changed and series are accepted again.
Yuri 2:0 Achilles  ;D

« Reply #45 on: July 15, 2010, 09:02 »
0
Now it's official, Yuri is uploading to DT. And yes, they are similar. Yuri seems to be a winner of this conflict. Upload's rules were changed and series are accepted again.
Yuri 2:0 Achilles  ;D

Rules were changed for Yuri and Yuri's series' are accepted again, or everybody's series are accepted again?

« Reply #46 on: July 15, 2010, 09:04 »
0
Maybe Yuri & Serban kissed and made up over a pint of Guiness in Dublin last month?

lisafx

« Reply #47 on: July 15, 2010, 09:39 »
0

Now it's official, Yuri is uploading to DT. And yes, they are similar. Yuri seems to be a winner of this conflict. Upload's rules were changed and series are accepted again.


Where did you here this?  I am still getting "similar" rejections.  I echo Cathy's question - Is this a change for Yuri only, or for everyone? 

« Reply #48 on: July 15, 2010, 10:33 »
0
Where did you here this?  I am still getting "similar" rejections.  I echo Cathy's question - Is this a change for Yuri only, or for everyone? 
My deduction. Achilles said that rules were the same for everybody, included Yuri. Then I took a look to Yuri's recent uploads.
Conclusion: similar are accepted now.

« Reply #49 on: July 15, 2010, 10:40 »
0
Did he hire a new intern or something?  All those "girl isolated on white doing random things" images. :)

« Reply #50 on: July 15, 2010, 11:32 »
0
Pretty wild speculations and assumptions on DT these days; be friendly or they will boycot your portfolio with their magic button, they keep your AR down artificially, yuri 2:0...
Still havent seen any evidence for any of those accusations  ???

« Reply #51 on: July 15, 2010, 11:56 »
0
Perhaps Yuri just got lucky with a lenient reviewer?  I don't upload much to DT any more, I just can't see the sense in them rejecting images that would probably sell well.  Lots of other sites accept them and if DT don't change this policy, I think they will fall out of the big 4 and become a second rate site.  Its a real shame because they do so many things better than the other sites.

« Reply #52 on: July 15, 2010, 12:49 »
0
Yuri pumped 500 images online this month - and I don't agree that the rules don't apply to him but everyone else.

He has major financial leverage there - a rough estimate would be that DT earns about $100,000 a year just because of him if not more.

DT would be stupid to drop someone of that caliber but now it appears that he makes the rules. Obviously not fair to other contributors.

IMO, he should be selling his stuff on the Macros anyway.

Dook

« Reply #53 on: July 15, 2010, 16:45 »
0
Did he hire a new intern or something?  All those "girl isolated on white doing random things" images. :)
I noticed this, too. He is probably researching new markets or doing macro. By uploading not so good pictures of his second or third shooter he's sending us a message that micro is more about quantity than quality.

« Reply #54 on: July 15, 2010, 17:29 »
0
Yuri pumped 500 images online this month - and I don't agree that the rules don't apply to him but everyone else.

He has major financial leverage there - a rough estimate would be that DT earns about $100,000 a year just because of him if not more.

DT would be stupid to drop someone of that caliber but now it appears that he makes the rules. Obviously not fair to other contributors.

IMO, he should be selling his stuff on the Macros anyway.

I doubt very seriously that the financial department gives two craps about putting man hours into puckering up for 100K over a 12 month span. They probably net more than that every 30 days off interest on their holdings alone. I'm sure there's plenty of eye rolling and laughing behind the scenes going on there right now LOL.

« Reply #55 on: July 15, 2010, 17:47 »
0


I doubt very seriously that the financial department gives two craps about putting man hours into puckering up for 100K over a 12 month span. They probably net more than that every 30 days off interest on their holdings alone. I'm sure there's plenty of eye rolling and laughing behind the scenes going on there right now LOL.
[/quote]

Their "holdings"? Dreamstime is not some multi-national conglomerate. My guess is that, excluding reviewers, Dreamstime has less than 10 employees.

« Reply #56 on: July 15, 2010, 18:52 »
0


I doubt very seriously that the financial department gives two craps about putting man hours into puckering up for 100K over a 12 month span. They probably net more than that every 30 days off interest on their holdings alone. I'm sure there's plenty of eye rolling and laughing behind the scenes going on there right now LOL.

Their "holdings"? Dreamstime is not some multi-national conglomerate. My guess is that, excluding reviewers, Dreamstime has less than 10 employees.
[/quote]

I wasn't referring to stock holdings I was referring to contributor holdings. All the money that is being held by the agencies until payout balance is reached .. you think the CEO stuffs your money in a bed mattress for safe keeping? Nope I'm sure it sits in an bank account drawing interest turning a profit ... for them .. it's not your bank account. :P

WarrenPrice

« Reply #57 on: July 15, 2010, 18:55 »
0


I doubt very seriously that the financial department gives two craps about putting man hours into puckering up for 100K over a 12 month span. They probably net more than that every 30 days off interest on their holdings alone. I'm sure there's plenty of eye rolling and laughing behind the scenes going on there right now LOL.

Their "holdings"? Dreamstime is not some multi-national conglomerate. My guess is that, excluding reviewers, Dreamstime has less than 10 employees.

I wasn't referring to stock holdings I was referring to contributor holdings. All the money that is being held by the agencies until payout balance is reached .. you think the CEO stuffs your money in a bed mattress for safe keeping? Nope I'm sure it sits in an bank account drawing interest turning a profit ... for them .. it's not your bank account. :P
[/quote]

I think they may be multi-national.  I know they have offices in Nashville, Tennessee.  And, probably a LOT more than ten employees.  Dreamstime is pretty well heeled ... I think. 

« Reply #58 on: July 15, 2010, 19:30 »
0


I doubt very seriously that the financial department gives two craps about putting man hours into puckering up for 100K over a 12 month span. They probably net more than that every 30 days off interest on their holdings alone. I'm sure there's plenty of eye rolling and laughing behind the scenes going on there right now LOL.

Their "holdings"? Dreamstime is not some multi-national conglomerate. My guess is that, excluding reviewers, Dreamstime has less than 10 employees.

I wasn't referring to stock holdings I was referring to contributor holdings. All the money that is being held by the agencies until payout balance is reached .. you think the CEO stuffs your money in a bed mattress for safe keeping? Nope I'm sure it sits in an bank account drawing interest turning a profit ... for them .. it's not your bank account. :P
[/quote]

Well who knows if DTs cashflow is so immense that can afford to store wads of cash in low-interest bearing accounts, when they have lots of bills to pay too. My guess is that, like most compaines, 90%+ $ goes out the doors in the form of bills paid.

« Reply #59 on: July 15, 2010, 19:54 »
0
Yuri pumped 500 images online this month - and I don't agree that the rules don't apply to him but everyone else.

He has major financial leverage there - a rough estimate would be that DT earns about $100,000 a year just because of him if not more.

DT would be stupid to drop someone of that caliber but now it appears that he makes the rules. Obviously not fair to other contributors.

IMO, he should be selling his stuff on the Macros anyway.

He is a major financial leverage everywhere, so why wouldn't  he deserve special status?
Why wouldn't it be fair?
What would you do if DT is your private company?

lisafx

« Reply #60 on: July 15, 2010, 22:35 »
0

He is a major financial leverage everywhere, so why wouldn't  he deserve special status?
Why wouldn't it be fair?
What would you do if DT is your private company?

Well there's fair, and then there's logical. Is it fair Yuri might have a special deal at DT?  No.  Is it logical?  Yes. 

I can't blame Dreamstime for wanting to accommodate it's top selling artist.  And fair or not, how many of us would turn down a special deal if it was offered?   8)

« Reply #61 on: July 15, 2010, 23:39 »
0
Now it's official, Yuri is uploading to DT. And yes, they are similar. Yuri seems to be a winner of this conflict. Upload's rules were changed and series are accepted again.
Yuri 2:0 Achilles  ;D

Ah, another keen observer.  ;D

The scene is enchanted Dublin, early June. All wizards were there, defying the volcano ashes of Mordor. In a dimly lit beer cavern full of Guinness fumes and candles smoking, they couldn't escape each other. Ellen of Oz, Jonathan Gandalf and Yuri Legolas conspired over their new "free" business model, the model to control them all. One Greek god noticing them brooding in a dark corner got scared, and so they made the deal and sealed the pact with the sweat of all too rough feathered rejects. And that's it.  :-X

There are more things between Getty Macrostock and Thinkstock Nanostock, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Try to bring it up in the DT forum.  Make sure you mention a BME too. ;D

« Reply #62 on: July 15, 2010, 23:58 »
0
What would you do if DT is your private company?
If it was my private company, I would make contributors happy being the best stock site around with 50% commissions. Then, gaining speed, I would introduce subs for peanuts.  Finally in the top 4, I would lower commissions down to 30% suddenly and sell it as god's gift compared to the 20% of iStock. For the more brain challenged ones, I would make the site a feelgood place with wows and yays on the forum all over.

When profits consequently soared through the roof, I would sell it off and live happily ever thereafter. I would keep Rolmat as a servant though, to pour me Daiquiri on the rocks under a palm tree.  :P

« Reply #63 on: July 16, 2010, 03:06 »
0
I think DT have made the right decision to accept similars from Yuri, if that is the case.  The rest of us combined are far more important than Yuri.  If a lot of us have lost confidence in DT because of their current review policy and have stopped uploading, they are going to lose lots of money.  They need to change the review policy for all of us.

« Reply #64 on: July 16, 2010, 07:06 »
0
I don't have a problem with them taking Yuri back and I don't have a problem with them accepting Yuri's similars. I looked at his latest uploads, and even though it is the same model from the same angle wearing the same clothes, she does have different expressions and movements, and each and every one might be able to be used in a design.

What I have a problem with is not extending that same courtesy to other contributors. Since I don't upload similars like that, I can't speak from personal experience. Since lisafx has said that she is getting rejects for similars, and since I know that she is a good photographer, with good sense about the similars, then I think that DT is making a big mistake by allowing one contributor special rights on this similars issue. And I have no doubt there are others on this forum who are also good photographers who are submitting similars "responsibly". It's not fair or logical to them either.

« Reply #65 on: July 16, 2010, 08:41 »
0

He is a major financial leverage everywhere, so why wouldn't  he deserve special status?
Why wouldn't it be fair?
What would you do if DT is your private company?

Well there's fair, and then there's logical. Is it fair Yuri might have a special deal at DT?  No.  Is it logical?  Yes. 

I can't blame Dreamstime for wanting to accommodate it's top selling artist.  And fair or not, how many of us would turn down a special deal if it was offered?   8)

I would.  ;)

lisafx

« Reply #66 on: July 16, 2010, 08:46 »
0
Since lisafx has said that she is getting rejects for similars, and since I know that she is a good photographer, with good sense about the similars, then I think that DT is making a big mistake by allowing one contributor special rights on this similars issue. And I have no doubt there are others on this forum who are also good photographers who are submitting similars "responsibly". It's not fair or logical to them either.

Thanks for the vote of confidence Cathy :).  

I just got two more batches reviewed with quite a few "similars" rejects.  My normally 95%+ approval ratio at DT has sunk to 85% recently.  So clearly this exception is only for Yuri.  

As you point out, Cathy, the "similars" were only similar in that they were the same models and subject matter but the action and emotions in each one were totally different.   I understand what DT is trying to do here, but they are painting with way to broad a brush...  

Since approval ratio affects image placement at DT this may ultimately affect my uploading there too.   Not that it matters.  I'm not a big-fish like Yuri...

« Reply #67 on: July 16, 2010, 09:16 »
0
As you point out, Cathy, the "similars" were only similar in that they were the same models and subject matter but the action and emotions in each one were totally different.   I understand what DT is trying to do here, but they are painting with way to broad a brush...

I totally agree.  

Quote
Since approval ratio affects image placement at DT this may ultimately affect my uploading there too.   Not that it matters.  I'm not a big-fish like Yuri...

Maybe not as big a fish as Yuri, but I would definitely call you a big fish.

« Reply #68 on: July 16, 2010, 09:22 »
0
There's more little fish than big ones in the sea...

Yuri has spat his dummy out and the tantrum has been rewarded. All's fair in business and war, but is it ethical and fair? No.

DT's acceptance ratio and correlation to search results is restrictive. It prevents me from uploading everything there.

I know what I'd do as DT's boss. If an image passes the reviever but is not wanted in their library, then reject. If it does not pass the reviewer, reject and affect the acceptance ratio. A two tier system.

Just a thought, I normally have one a day.

Rgds

Oldhand

« Reply #69 on: July 16, 2010, 10:54 »
0
This policy might work if

1.  Contributors always know the right ones from a series to upload.
2.  Reviewers are perfect and never reject the most appropriate image from a series.
3.  Buyers are happy with any image they find and don't want variations to choose from.

As none of those are true, this policy is flawed and is going to damage DT.

« Reply #70 on: July 16, 2010, 11:16 »
0
Actually I thought it had some mileage. Submit 5 from series, all pass QC, only keep two, no damage to accpetance ratio. I take your point though, maybe too much discretian left to the reviewer.

I really mean the idea for when I send in a brilliant illustration, technically perfect and not my fault the reviewer didn't understand the concept and rejected it. Harm done to my accceptance ratio and put's me off uploading certain pictures..

No more thought's for today it's fish and chips on a Friday here in England!

Olldhand the traditionalist

« Reply #71 on: July 16, 2010, 11:22 »
0
No more thought's for today it's fish and chips on a Friday here in England!

Yum! All the talk of big fish must have made you hungry!  :D

« Reply #72 on: July 16, 2010, 11:41 »
0
Too right - I hope my wife didn't forget the scraps...

« Reply #73 on: July 16, 2010, 11:51 »
0
Actually I thought it had some mileage. Submit 5 from series, all pass QC, only keep two, no damage to accpetance ratio. I take your point though, maybe too much discretian left to the reviewer.

I really mean the idea for when I send in a brilliant illustration, technically perfect and not my fault the reviewer didn't understand the concept and rejected it. Harm done to my accceptance ratio and put's me off uploading certain pictures..

No more thought's for today it's fish and chips on a Friday here in England!

Olldhand the traditionalist
I was referring to the current DT policy of rejecting anything that is slightly similar in a series or anything that is similar to images they already have.  Your idea might help but is only patching up the problem.  I still think they should be far more lenient with reviews and give the buyers more choice.

« Reply #74 on: July 16, 2010, 12:55 »
0
Hi Lisa,
but you *are* a big fish, of course you are!
Let me tell you a short story to cheer you up a bit.
Real life, it happened 2 days ago. It's not an isolated example, the same thing happens virtually all the time.
It's about your images vs Yuri's.
To cut a long story short - we've got a new customer. Late evening college, adult education, opening in September. They want to set up a web site.
For their home page they are looking for a few images of, quote 'happy, smiling, mature students'.
This is how their lightbox looks like : Monekybusiness, Yuri and you.
And the winner is ...
... Lisa Fx!

Reason for rejecting Yuri's images, quote, mot a mot - 'Beautiful photos but the people don't look real and their teeth are too white'  
In the end your classroom series was the winner, congratulations!
See? You're a bigger fish than the big fish :)
But of course, by now, almost all my customers know your story - lovely American photographer, this is her husband, this is her daughter. Hard working family, real people, please help funding expensive college fees for a very smart young lady :)
Having such a beautiful portfolio certainly helps :)

As a side note, possibly for a future project - more women students in your classroom?

Back on topic - I like Dreamstime and I'm really happy Yuri is back. It is very important to have him there, this is good news.
I hope this 'too many similars' policy gets a review soon. For Yuri, Lisa and all of you.
The more beautiful, commercial images on Dreamstime, the more buyers and the more chances I have to sell one of mine.
Hopefully they'll reconsider.

lisafx

« Reply #75 on: July 16, 2010, 13:27 »
0
Eirann, thank you!  You have made my day, my week, and probably my month!  It's reassuring to know that sometimes my snaggle-toothed, bed-headed "real people" can sometimes carry the day ;D

And if people know my background it's probably because I never shut the he11 up!  LOL.

You and I are definitely on the same page RE: Dreamstime.  They are a great agency.  Hopefully the more flexible reviewing policy we are seeing in Yuri's portfolio will eventually apply to the rest of us :)

« Reply #76 on: July 16, 2010, 14:02 »
0
But again, are we sure Yuri 'won' this battle? For all we know he just could have bumped into a lenient reviewer; search results show definitely not all similars are rejected (also from other submitters), some reviewers seem to be a lot more strict on this one than others.

« Reply #77 on: July 16, 2010, 14:12 »
0
But again, are we sure Yuri 'won' this battle? For all we know he just could have bumped into a lenient reviewer; search results show definitely not all similars are rejected (also from other submitters), some reviewers seem to be a lot more strict on this one than others.

I agree. It must depend on the reviewers. Many small fish still have endless series of the same subject. Someone linked a search result with about 50 images of the same pizza here recently (that was nowhere near showing various expressions ;D) . The DT reviewers do seem to actually look into portfolios - I've had quite a few rejects for "too similar" images that were several batches apart from eachother. It does p me off quite a bit, because I am responsible with similars, as cclapper put it, and I never submit more than 3 of one subject, mostly one horizontal, one vertical, and often one tilted (I shoot food).

« Reply #78 on: July 17, 2010, 04:25 »
0
I have said it before: If I a map of Kentucky is rejected just because I also have maps of 20 other US states in my portfolio, it is not only stupid, it is downright moronic, and I don't have any patience for such unprofessional nonsense.

« Reply #79 on: July 17, 2010, 06:17 »
0
I have said it before: If I a map of Kentucky is rejected just because I also have maps of 20 other US states in my portfolio, it is not only stupid, it is downright moronic, and I don't have any patience for such unprofessional nonsense.

I guess it depends on the type of map you are submitting. If they are photos of maps from a Rand McNally or similar type of map book, they ALL should have been rejected because that material is copyrighted. If the map is an out-of-focus part of your photo and some other object is the main focus, then you would be right and it would be moronic.

« Reply #80 on: July 17, 2010, 06:31 »
0
I guess it depends on the type of map you are submitting. If they are photos of maps from a Rand McNally or similar type of map book, they ALL should have been rejected because that material is copyrighted. If the map is an out-of-focus part of your photo and some other object is the main focus, then you would be right and it would be moronic.

They are complex illustrations, made by myself. No photos.

« Reply #81 on: September 05, 2010, 11:23 »
0
it's amazing with the type of double standard "same photo rejection" applied to us and to people like yuri

« Reply #82 on: September 05, 2010, 11:51 »
0
I still think it should be fair.

DT has its technical requirements that need to be met (not including the similar "excuse" - simply checking exposure, focus, composition, commercial value) on an image by image basis.

If Yuri can get similars through the review, all other contributors should as well. While he gets his stuff (most likely 100%) accepted, other contributors still get the similar "excuse".

Like I said, as long as the images are technically worth being accepted then don't make a difference between Yuri and others.

Whether your company or not - it WILL leave a sour taste in many contributors' mouths and this may come back to you some day...

« Reply #83 on: September 05, 2010, 12:52 »
0
I still think it should be fair.
Nothing is fair in life and death. Some people die young, some old. All contributors were created equal, but some are more equal than others. It's like that in every business.  ::)
Somebody that buys 10 generators in China will perhaps get 5$ of the price per unit and he will have to deal with a sales lady in a small back office and go by bus.
Somebody that orders a full container with the monthly production of the plant will be fetched by limo, received by the bowing CEO, dined and wined, and he can virtually name his price. It's unfair! It's... like that.  ;D

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #84 on: September 05, 2010, 13:38 »
0
Hey, I like travelling with public transport - and sales ladies are usually nicer than CEOs.

OR...

when the stock factories will be dead and gone because this business will be unsustainable for them, we'll possibly still be here - justice in the end
« Last Edit: September 05, 2010, 13:42 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

vonkara

« Reply #85 on: September 05, 2010, 16:20 »
0

Reason for rejecting Yuri's images, quote, mot a mot - 'Beautiful photos but the people don't look real and their teeth are too white'  
In the end your classroom series was the winner, congratulations!


Well said ! There is 2 ways to see stock photography IMO. The designer way that want simple, real looking, not over edited, not cropped and not necessarily smiling people. And the stock photographer side that often think more the model look plastic, better it will sell.

Which was true sometimes, a couple of years ago. Things changed from what I see lately, because of the overabundance of plastic designs the last couple of years...
« Last Edit: September 05, 2010, 16:33 by Vonkara »

« Reply #86 on: September 06, 2010, 12:01 »
0
I still think it should be fair.
Nothing is fair in life and death. Some people die young, some old. All contributors were created equal, but some are more equal than others. It's like that in every business.  ::)
Somebody that buys 10 generators in China will perhaps get 5$ of the price per unit and he will have to deal with a sales lady in a small back office and go by bus.
Somebody that orders a full container with the monthly production of the plant will be fetched by limo, received by the bowing CEO, dined and wined, and he can virtually name his price. It's unfair! It's... like that.  ;D

yes life is not fair it never will be. what about apartheid system in south africa? do you go and tell them life is not fair and the people should just accept it ? policy and life are different things.

traveler1116

« Reply #87 on: September 06, 2010, 14:06 »
0
This can't be good for DT.  Would be nice to know the reasons why these people are no longer uploading and if DT care?  Surely not having those people on board is going to lose them business?  Other contributors might give up on them and buyers might look elsewhere for all those missing images.  

I sometimes get annoyed that they reject images that sell on other sites, they seem to want higher quality to sell as subs and that wont work, see what has happened to crestock.  Their similars rejections can also get tedious, letting the buyers decide what they want is sensible, not leaving it to the reviewers.

I might consider giving them higher quality images for higher commissions and if I could opt them out of subs but they are not offering us that.  Something is going to have to change or I don't like the future for DT.

What?  It's Dreamstime that's why they stopped uploading. 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2423 Views
Last post September 13, 2011, 09:53
by sc
11 Replies
6116 Views
Last post December 13, 2011, 20:14
by stockastic
4 Replies
2714 Views
Last post May 05, 2013, 05:38
by ShadySue
0 Replies
1902 Views
Last post May 28, 2013, 15:40
by The Mighty Jungle
9 Replies
4657 Views
Last post March 23, 2015, 16:51
by heywoody

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle