MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: TIFF in 120 MB resolution sold and earned only 35 Cent ??  (Read 2572 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 16, 2013, 10:06 »
-3
Hi
we found a subscription-sale (Resolution TIFF) in our stats - earning 35 Cent .
Now we had a look on the frontend and the only Resolution we could find is this one:

TIFF    5295x7942px (120.3 MB)    44.8cm x 67.2cm@300 dpi

Does that mean that DT sells your stuff for peanuts in a resolution so that any buyer could print your images on squaremeters of canvas????

regards axel


« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2013, 10:11 »
0
Actually it's  a TIFF generated from a jpg-file, so what!?

Ron

« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2013, 10:13 »
-5
Its 42 MP, 120 MB has nothing to with anything. Resolution is not measured in bytes. You might want to polish up on your jargon.

« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2013, 10:19 »
0
As Ron says, but 40MP could certainly fill square metres of canvas without looking bad. All the main agencies sell huge files for next to nothing.

« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2013, 10:29 »
0
Ok - its a blown up JPG.
That means it has at least the resolution we uploaded it.

That in fact means "maximum resolution".

Interesting - some of your responses.

Maybe the enemy is not the exploiting agencies.
Looks like the worst enemy of a photographer is his collegue, who f*u*cks up the whole market, instead of showing solidarity.

Dog eat Dog, right?
Good appetite

Ron

« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2013, 10:36 »
0

« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2013, 11:50 »
+2
Don't want 42 MP images sold for a sub, don't upload at that size, simple.  The TIFFs there earn a bit more on a credit sale for no extra work, otherwise a sub is a sub is a sub and no different to any max size sub sold on any site.

w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2013, 14:22 »
0
Don't want 42 MP images sold for a sub, don't upload at that size, simple.  The TIFFs there earn a bit more on a credit sale for no extra work, otherwise a sub is a sub is a sub and no different to any max size sub sold on any site.

Actually I had a level 3 sub, JPEG, large, RF sell for $2.00 last week.  First time I'd seen that.  Still there today, over a week later, so I assume it wasn't a mistake.  Have no idea why this image sold for $2,00 while all other subs are going for $0.35.

Tone

« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2013, 15:57 »
0
Don't want 42 MP images sold for a sub, don't upload at that size, simple.  The TIFFs there earn a bit more on a credit sale for no extra work, otherwise a sub is a sub is a sub and no different to any max size sub sold on any site.


Actually I had a level 3 sub, JPEG, large, RF sell for $2.00 last week.  First time I'd seen that.  Still there today, over a week later, so I assume it wasn't a mistake.  Have no idea why this image sold for $2,00 while all other subs are going for $0.35.


http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_35047

« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2013, 19:22 »
0
Ok - its a blown up JPG.
That means it has at least the resolution we uploaded it.

That in fact means "maximum resolution".

Interesting - some of your responses.

Maybe the enemy is not the exploiting agencies.
Looks like the worst enemy of a photographer is his collegue, who f*u*cks up the whole market, instead of showing solidarity.

Dog eat Dog, right?
Good appetite

this topic was previously discussed here and nothing happened, anyway like you said its a "its a blown up JPG" so no big deal, enjoy the community here because it is still free, if you don't want to hear others opinion don't ask ;D

we are all in the same boat but its a pretty big one, don't forget that!

« Reply #10 on: November 17, 2013, 08:41 »
+1
Maybe the enemy is not the exploiting agencies.
Looks like the worst enemy of a photographer is his collegue, who f*u*cks up the whole market, instead of showing solidarity.

Dog eat Dog, right?
Good appetite

Why are you f*u*c*k*ing up the market by selling at DT, or, indeed, anywhere on microstock, Axel? It seems that according to your interpretation you are your problem rather than the solution. But you're not eating me, apparently you're eating yourself.
Woof, woof!

ShadySue

« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2013, 09:33 »
0
I addition, don't you read all the information you can find about a site before you start uploading?
(Obviously that can't prevent you from changes they make after you join, but this isn't that sort of scenario.)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
3161 Views
Last post April 09, 2007, 09:40
by phildate
12 Replies
4821 Views
Last post March 07, 2009, 11:16
by Rahul Pathak
55 Replies
13926 Views
Last post April 13, 2009, 04:36
by Milinz
1 Replies
1051 Views
Last post November 21, 2013, 20:41
by Jonathan Ross
15 Replies
4538 Views
Last post December 13, 2017, 16:48
by alexandersr

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results