MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What do you strongly like about Dreamstime?  (Read 14880 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ap

« on: October 13, 2009, 20:17 »
0
this is the anti anti-dreamstime thread for those who'd like to air their differences and show their support for this "dream" stock co.

1. great company name - very inspiring and so unstockish, like ss or is, or any name with 'stock' in it.
2. great for newbies, in terms of reviews and acceptance. their qc seems to be based more on subject matter and composition (something a newbie should be able to handle) rather than the technical details of noise and artifact. there is a strong selective aesthetic sense about their choices. so, even though i've managed to get my technical quality up, my acceptance rate has remained the same.
3. acceptance of editorial photos, even for those non newsworthy but illustrative of an event or subject. this is just great for those really 'interesting' photos or a chance to play photojournalist for a day.
4. highest commission pay out per download (for me) in absolute $, not % commission (it averages about $1.19 per download, beating 123rf and is at $.89)
5. there are no tests to pass or hoops to jump through for the newbie. so, you're kind of off and running from the start with your dignity intact as you climb the rungs of success at higher rated agencies.
6. the design and layout for the website is very nice, giving it a real professional edge.
7. they show the key words buyers used to search for your photo - invaluable and entertaining!
8. kudos to achilles for responding to each and every negative query, irregardless whether he's right or wrong.
9. dreamstime became the first microstock site to sign on to the picscout agency irc, which means: "all buyers who lookup a microstock image in the IRC will be directed to Dreamstime exclusively" and "the IRC protects images from theft and misuse". http://www.microstockdiaries.com/

for those who have a different experience, here is the original anti-dreamstime thread:

http://www.microstockgroup.com/dreamstime-com/what-do-you-hate-about-dreamstime/
« Last Edit: October 13, 2009, 22:25 by ap »


« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2009, 07:03 »
0
Great company It's my home their the best at everything my money makers ;D

« Reply #2 on: October 14, 2009, 07:14 »
0
Great profile page;
nice earnings but still behind SS;
nice statistic page;
database exposure numbers;
favorite photographers feature;
their spiral logo;
pending images countdown;
image levels;
monthly uploads feature.

Dan

« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2009, 15:23 »
0
  my  best  amount  for  a  pic  came  at  DT  ($1.44).  I  have  only  3  online  with  one  sale  but  have  been  unable  to  take  more  pic  for  the  last  2  months.  They  are  great  and  a  friendly  forum.

lisafx

« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2009, 16:53 »
0
There's quite a bit to like about them IMO.  Probably the reason they keep winning the "who's your favorite micro" polls.  :D


« Reply #5 on: November 05, 2009, 18:32 »
0
Great company and great layout...BUT...sales have been down a LOT in the last few months.

« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2009, 05:35 »
0
There's quite a bit to like about them IMO.  Probably the reason they keep winning the "who's your favorite micro" polls.  :D
That might change with the next poll. When would that be?

traveler1116

« Reply #7 on: November 06, 2009, 11:03 »
0
There's quite a bit to like about them IMO.  Probably the reason they keep winning the "who's your favorite micro" polls.  :D
That might change with the next poll. When would that be?

Yeah where can I vote.  I won't tell you which site I think should be at the bottom.   ;)
« Last Edit: November 06, 2009, 11:45 by traveler1116 »

vonkara

« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2009, 14:22 »
0
I just made the last one 1 month ago in october. You still can vote if you didn't. Now I don't think a lot of things have changed since October 5

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/your-best-agencies-3-poll/

Would be good to get suggestion on how to improve the poll though

« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2009, 12:37 »
0
Great profile page;
nice earnings but still behind SS;
nice statistic page;
database exposure numbers;
favorite photographers feature;
their spiral logo;
pending images countdown;
image levels;
monthly uploads feature.



Pending images countdown: I think is broken! For the last five days I have uploaded every day and the countdown started at 155 hours and it is still 145 to 150 hours for all five days! They need a new Rolex :)

-Larry

traveler1116

« Reply #10 on: November 07, 2009, 12:41 »
0
^Was it ever anywhere close?
BTW there is a thread for all the things you dislike about DT out there http://www.microstockgroup.com/dreamstime-com/what-do-you-hate-about-dreamstime/, maybe there could be some things people like put in this thread?  Maybe not though?
« Last Edit: November 07, 2009, 12:43 by traveler1116 »

ap

« Reply #11 on: November 07, 2009, 13:23 »
0
^Was it ever anywhere close?
BTW there is a thread for all the things you dislike about DT out there http://www.microstockgroup.com/dreamstime-com/what-do-you-hate-about-dreamstime/, maybe there could be some things people like put in this thread?  Maybe not though?



i'm tempted to migrate there (if i wasn't the op here), simply for the lack of sales at dt. what's happened to our favorite stock site?!

should you be pimping your thread here though?  ;)




traveler1116

« Reply #12 on: November 07, 2009, 13:30 »
0
HA!  I don't think I need to this one seems to be doing just fine, I'm just posting to keep it at the top so maybe someone will have good news.  I was merely trying to see the good in DT but doesn't seem like there is too much, afterall I'm still stuck there for a few months.  BTW after getting rid of 99% of my level 1 images my sales are down 70% and my RPD is about the same as SS I think it was 58 cents last I checked.  Thats a joke especially after we were told that with the change we would get lots of sales (unless i'm misremembering) to move our images up from level one to higher levels, it's like offering a ton of free content and then expecting buyers to pay for similar shots???  Really thats how its going to work?  I haven't seen any upside and apparently many others feel the same.

Just checked my RPD is 58 cents and I have had 6 sales, 5 of them level 2 images.  Who could be happy with that?
« Last Edit: November 07, 2009, 13:34 by traveler1116 »

ap

« Reply #13 on: November 07, 2009, 13:47 »
0
i can only envy you. i have only level one images but the rpd is well over a dollar. so, you're saying most of your sales are subs? so, it doesn't help if your images sell well and reach level 2, 3, or 4 because the buyer will be subs anyways. is there some sort of strange relationship between the popularity of an image and subs?

ap

« Reply #14 on: November 07, 2009, 13:58 »
0
Quote from: Lcjtripod link=topic=9133.msg121771#msg121771 date=1257615461


[b
Pending images countdown:[/b] I think is broken! For the last five days I have uploaded every day and the countdown started at 155 hours and it is still 145 to 150 hours for all five days! They need a new Rolex :)

-Larry

the clock goes both ways. for one image starting at 121 hours, it was approved within 12 hours. go figure!

« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2009, 16:50 »
0
I have a few images there that are exclusive to DT.  It's nice getting the bigger commission when those images sell, so I like the option to have individual exclusive images on DT.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2009, 16:59 »
0
I have a few images there that are exclusive to DT.  It's nice getting the bigger commission when those images sell, so I like the option to have individual exclusive images on DT.

I took all my exclusive image out of the exclusive pool after the cut in commission for non-exclusive members. 
I get really irritated at the RAH RAH RAH SIS BOOM BAH dtdtdt Cheerleader CRAP.  But, it seems to be what it takes to stay on good terms.

I wonder if those cheerleaders are sincere about all that mush?   :-* :-* :-* ;D

lisafx

« Reply #17 on: November 07, 2009, 17:39 »
0

I took all my exclusive image out of the exclusive pool after the cut in commission for non-exclusive members. 
I get really irritated at the RAH RAH RAH SIS BOOM BAH dtdtdt Cheerleader CRAP.  But, it seems to be what it takes to stay on good terms.

I wonder if those cheerleaders are sincere about all that mush?   :-* :-* :-* ;D

Not sure if I am one of the DT "cheerleaders" you are referring to or not.  I certainly haven't made it a secret that I think highly of them.  I also haven't hidden my concerns when I had issues with them or any site (like when commissions were cut recently).

Maybe if my sales had plummeted there like I keep reading that some have I would feel differently, but my sales at DT have remained strong and I continue to think they are a well-run and contributor friendly site.  This is my experience since I joined them in 2005.  Sorry if that sounds like Rah Rah to you. 

Most of the sites have their "cheerleaders".  I may not agree with some of the opinions I read here, but I would not insult people or question their sincerity just because I disagree with them...

« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2009, 18:21 »
0

I took all my exclusive image out of the exclusive pool after the cut in commission for non-exclusive members. 
I get really irritated at the RAH RAH RAH SIS BOOM BAH dtdtdt Cheerleader CRAP.  But, it seems to be what it takes to stay on good terms.

I wonder if those cheerleaders are sincere about all that mush?   :-* :-* :-* ;D

Not sure if I am one of the DT "cheerleaders" you are referring to or not.  I certainly haven't made it a secret that I think highly of them.  I also haven't hidden my concerns when I had issues with them or any site (like when commissions were cut recently).

Maybe if my sales had plummeted there like I keep reading that some have I would feel differently, but my sales at DT have remained strong and I continue to think they are a well-run and contributor friendly site.  This is my experience since I joined them in 2005.  Sorry if that sounds like Rah Rah to you. 

Most of the sites have their "cheerleaders".  I may not agree with some of the opinions I read here, but I would not insult people or question their sincerity just because I disagree with them...


Amen!! I am with you Lisafx. I like DT also.
This started as a POSITIVE thread and I for one would like to see the negative comments gone! There is another thread that is nothing but negative, post the hard feelings there if anyone has them.

-Larry

« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2009, 21:23 »
0
Finally, after 2 weeks of research, I found something I like at DT. Even a photographer without any photo can be favorite for many others.
Example : Tangie.  ;D

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2009, 10:12 »
0
I also like DT.
First of all they're my no. 1 sales (up to now, I just started, and I haven't applied for SS and IS yet).
Second, it seems to be a bit of a mixture with a social networking site, that's not bad to make contacts. It shouldn't get too much though, some of the blog posts are a bit ...
Third, they also seem to like non-microstock oriented pictures, such as landscapes.

Funnily they do not accept very much my microstock-oriented pics, whereas Fotolia does. Consequently I sell almost only the non-accepted things on DT in Fotolia and vice versa... ::)

« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2009, 10:39 »
0
i can only envy you. i have only level one images but the rpd is well over a dollar. so, you're saying most of your sales are subs? so, it doesn't help if your images sell well and reach level 2, 3, or 4 because the buyer will be subs anyways. is there some sort of strange relationship between the popularity of an image and subs?
I had a sub download the past week of a level 5 image and my share was 1.26$. Another sub download of a level 3 image gave just 0.35$. I don't know for sure but the higher yield for subs only counts for level 4 and 5.

My RPD the past 12 months has been: (port size N = almost 1K)
$1.24
$0.91
$1.28
$1.05
$1.39
$1.67
$1.23
$1.18
$0.94
$1.39
$1.12
$1.03
$0.87 (current month)

Hope this gives an idea.

« Reply #22 on: November 08, 2009, 10:47 »
0
Second, it seems to be a bit of a mixture with a social networking site, that's not bad to make contacts.

How? I can't contact anybody on DT. My right to comment on photos was taken away 2 years ago. I have no clue why. The only blog post I ever made there was removed. You can't even put up a decent tutorial there since external picture and video links are impossible. The DT blogs are glorified forum posts and the vast majority is a total time waste.

I don't need social networking on DT, I need sales.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2009, 10:52 by FD-amateur »

vonkara

« Reply #23 on: November 08, 2009, 10:50 »
0
I had a sub download the past week of a level 5 image and my share was 1.26$. Another sub download of a level 3 image gave just 0.35$. I don't know for sure but the higher yield for subs only counts for level 4 and 5.

I just had a level 3 image sold for 0.70$ as subscription

« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2009, 11:05 »
0
I just had a level 3 image sold for 0.70$ as subscription

Strange. Eearnings page:
11/06/2009     n/a      This is a level 3 image     subscription     $0.35     maximum

And on my download history it says:
Download date     Buyer searched after      Image level     Price     Earnings     Resolution     License
11/06/2009 10:18    airport handling    Level 3    subscription    $0.70    maximum (upsized)    RF
11/06/2009 02:02    n/a    Level 3    subscription    $0.35    maximum (upsized)    RF

So I sold it twice that day as sub, once for 0.35$, once for 0.70$, but in my earnings (2 days ago so no issue about database sync) it's only reported once on 0.35$.

Gosh, do we need to check really everything on those sites?  :o  :'(

Image: search for luggage handling: my shot is first. Direct link is here.


« Last Edit: November 08, 2009, 11:12 by FD-amateur »

vonkara

« Reply #25 on: November 08, 2009, 11:42 »
0

Gosh, do we need to check really everything on those sites?  :o  :'(

It seem as I have a couple of level 3 images and I don't remember to had noticed a 0.70$ sale before your post hahaha.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2009, 11:57 by Vonkara »

KB

« Reply #26 on: November 08, 2009, 12:03 »
0
I quit DT for being exclusive to IS shortly. Then I don't care that much as I find absurd getting 0.70$ for a max size image anyway.

Exactly. This is what I've hated about subs from the beginning. At least on SS, we can submit downsized images and not lose anything. But on DT (and now, with their "premium subscriptions", FT), if we want to have images that qualify for the largest possible pay-per-download, we have to be willing to give the maximum size away for just $0.35 or so.

This is stupid thinking on the agencies part, IMO. It also entices me to become exclusive at IS, but I make too much money at the other sites to do so -- so far.

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #27 on: November 08, 2009, 12:18 »
0
hm i haven't had subscription sales on DT yet....that indeed seems disappointing. on FT i have almost only subscription sales, large size for 30c! that's kind of sad....for the maximum size on DT i got 2.40 instead....that's 8 times as much! maybe it needs more time to form an opinion.
in general, however, i prefer DT over FT.

vonkara

« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2009, 13:07 »
0
My last sales...

subscription $0.35 medium (RF) 
subscription $0.35 extrasmall (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
3 credits (2008) $1.27 extrasmall (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
1 credit (2008) $0.37 extrasmall (RF) 
8 credits (2008) $2.96 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.70 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF)   
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
1 credit (2008) $0.50 extrasmall (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
5 credits (2008) $2.14 medium (RF) 
3 credits (2008) $1.16 extrasmall (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum

No comment except, how can I continu creating high quality images for an agency earning me this kind of sales. It's not even worth the upload time anymore.

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2009, 13:14 »
0
oh yeah that sounds kind of disappointing... 35c is really not worth all the work.... maybe a specific designer with a subscription package likes your work and downloads a lot from you.

vonkara

« Reply #30 on: November 08, 2009, 13:32 »
0
oh yeah that sounds kind of disappointing... 35c is really not worth all the work.... maybe a specific designer with a subscription package likes your work and downloads a lot from you.
:D Then I don't want him to buy and use my images  :)

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #31 on: November 08, 2009, 13:42 »
0
hehe....let's track him down ;-) :-)

« Reply #32 on: November 08, 2009, 14:03 »
0
I quit DT for being exclusive to IS shortly. Then I don't care that much as I find absurd getting 0.70$ for a max size image anyway.

Exactly. This is what I've hated about subs from the beginning. At least on SS, we can submit downsized images and not lose anything. But on DT (and now, with their "premium subscriptions", FT), if we want to have images that qualify for the largest possible pay-per-download, we have to be willing to give the maximum size away for just $0.35 or so.

This is stupid thinking on the agencies part, IMO. It also entices me to become exclusive at IS, but I make too much money at the other sites to do so -- so far.

How much do you downsize your images for SS?  I always thought it was not allowed to upsize or downsize images at SS.

vonkara

« Reply #33 on: November 08, 2009, 14:27 »
0

How much do you downsize your images for SS?  I always thought it was not allowed to upsize or downsize images at SS.

When People downsize they mostly do to the minimum which is 4mpx I think.

hehe....let's track him down ;-) :-)
More seriously this is not the the designer fault. They buy a subscription package that worth 200$ to 300$. This is not necessarily inexpensive. The problem is how much images the designers are able to use, the agency share from this package and the licence available especially with the photos.com subscription plan.

Small agencies like StockXpert "was" tend to lower their prices and allow high resolution downloads at buffet price, to get a better share from the micro market. What they didn't thought about it's that, any other agency can follow the instruction and release the same plan.

This will finally end in lower prices and no more share from the micro market IMO. I have doubt about how StockXpert people handled the situation back when they released this plan. It's obvious that they was seeing the end of StockXpert in a near future at that time, to me.

« Reply #34 on: November 08, 2009, 15:08 »
0
Currently (latest 20 dlds) 40% of my sales there were subs, one of them a 70c subs.  There were worse months, but subs really irritate me, especially when I see my best sellers go to these file-eaters. 

KB

« Reply #35 on: November 08, 2009, 16:32 »
0
My last sales...

subscription $0.35 medium (RF) 
subscription $0.35 extrasmall (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
That's very unusual; I don't think I've ever seen a sub sale at less than maximum size. Indeed, why would someone take an extrasmall even if that's all they needed at the moment? Very odd.

I just looked at my last sales. It's random, but I was pleasantly surprised to see I've had just 4 sub sales out of the last 20.

But here's something I've never seen before, and don't understand at all:
2 credits (old)  $0.43     maximum     
1 credit (old)     $0.20     maximum

what? Maximum size pay-per-downloads for $0.43 and $0.20?>:(

What in the world is going on at Dreamstime?

WarrenPrice

« Reply #36 on: November 08, 2009, 18:19 »
0
My last sales...

subscription $0.35 medium (RF) 
subscription $0.35 extrasmall (RF) 
subscription $0.35 maximum (RF) 
That's very unusual; I don't think I've ever seen a sub sale at less than maximum size. Indeed, why would someone take an extrasmall even if that's all they needed at the moment? Very odd.

I just looked at my last sales. It's random, but I was pleasantly surprised to see I've had just 4 sub sales out of the last 20.

But here's something I've never seen before, and don't understand at all:
2 credits (old)  $0.43     maximum     
1 credit (old)     $0.20     maximum

what? Maximum size pay-per-downloads for $0.43 and $0.20?>:(

What in the world is going on at Dreamstime?

A sale is a sale.   ::)

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #37 on: November 08, 2009, 18:23 »
0
mine:

$1.01    medium     (RF)
$1.32    large    (RF)
$0.64    small    (RF)
$1.47    medium    (RF)
$1.68    medium    (RF)
$0.36    extrasmall    (RF)
$2.40    maximum    (RF)

i guess i can't complain, no subscription sales...  :o

« Reply #38 on: November 08, 2009, 18:39 »
0
My last sales...

subscription $0.35 medium (RF)  
subscription $0.35 extrasmall (RF)
....

My last 20:
This is a level 2 image     4 credits (2008)    $1.70     small     (RF)
This is a level 1 image    subscription    $0.35    large    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    1 credit (2008)    $0.37    extrasmall    (RF)
This is a level 3 image    subscription    $0.70    maximum    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    5 credits (2008)    $1.82    extralarge    (RF)
This is a level 2 image    6 credits (2008)    $2.22    large    (RF)
This is a level 3 image    subscription    $0.35    maximum    (RF)

Update: mystery solved. At this time the image was still level 2 but turned 3 right after the download. That's why the new download a few hours later was 0.70 (green). It is then listed level 3 on all sales upstream, so that can cause confusion.

This is a level 1 image    1 credit (2008)    $0.38    extrasmall    (RF)
This is a level 2 image    subscription    $0.35    extrasmall    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    2 credits (2008)    $1.00    small    (RF)
This is a level 2 image    5 credits (2008)    $2.04    medium    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    2 credits (2008)    $0.70    small    (RF)
This is a level 2 image    6 credits (2008)    $2.36    large    (RF)
This is a level 2 image    subscription    $0.35    maximum    (RF)
This is a level 5 image    subscription    $1.26    maximum    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    1 credit (2008)    $0.38    extrasmall    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    subscription    $0.35    maximum    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    2 credits (2008)    $0.74    small    (RF)
This is a level 1 image    subscription    $0.35    maximum    (RF)
This is a level 2 image    subscription    $0.35    maximum    (RF)

In general subs are 50% of total sales for me. In the last 20, there were 9.

Achilles has been answering the subs issue a few times, also on this forum as I remember. It boils down to designers needing a few or many alternative images for a particular design, so that they can present these options without clumsy watermark to the customer. We read before here on this forum how designers hate comps with watermarks.
In fact, only one of those images will actually be used, so Achilles pointed out that sub sales are in fact an extra, those are sales that wouldn't have been happened on a credit package (except the image finally chosen of course).

So it isn't about greedy image hoarders scratching around for bargains, but about some comfort for the designer. Also concerning the max size downloads: imagine you want a crop or a banner out of the image, how can you do that in a credible way for the customer out of a 300px watermarked thumb? Makes you look cheap as designer to the customer. If your webpage is a 800px wide design, you will then have to upsize the thumb to give an idea about the final result, but that might not go well with the customer if he has deeper pockets and if he wants to have a realistic idea of how the result will look like. A designer might try different crops and that doesn't work well from an XS image.

If as designer, you want to evaluate how a particular image will look like (colors, crispness) in large print, you can't do that with a watermarked thumb. Small but vital defects can't be judged on a thumb at all. Take for instance sloppy isolations with plaques less than #FFF. I bought a few like those from LuckyOliver and I was totally p*ssed of I had to redo the isolation all over. So a designer with volume production might prefer to buy an expensive subs package in order to have some comfort in choosing the right and correct image amongst those downloaded. They cost of this might be much less than the designer's hourly wage.

The issue with photographers/illustrators is often that they are unaware of the needs of a designer. I still trust Achilles in the sub decisions as he has a track record of honesty towards contributors, and since he has an overview of what happens on both sides of the fence, contributor needs and buyer needs. Other agents are not as good in this, but apart from the occasional slam, they seems to get away easier with subs.

The "bitter" pill has been sweetened by the higher weight for level 3 and up images in the subs package. You could argue that they just represent a small part of any port, but proportionally, they have more sales or they wouldn't have become level 3+ images in the first place. Finally, DT is the only agent that rewards good sellers with higher yield. On SS, you'll get always your 0.36 (or whatever) independent of # of downloads.

This was a positive thread about DT.  :P
« Last Edit: November 09, 2009, 00:58 by FD-amateur »

KB

« Reply #39 on: November 08, 2009, 20:07 »
0
But here's something I've never seen before, and don't understand at all:
2 credits (old)  $0.43     maximum     
1 credit (old)     $0.20     maximum

what? Maximum size pay-per-downloads for $0.43 and $0.20?>:(

What in the world is going on at Dreamstime?

A sale is a sale.   ::)
Aha! Caught you, Achilles! Using an alias, are you?  ;D

Seriously, those 2 sales are amazing to me. I've been with DT for 3.5 years, but I don't recall credits even that old allowing you to buy a maximum size image for what would be $0.40. So how can this be?

KB

« Reply #40 on: November 08, 2009, 20:15 »
0
So it isn't about greedy image hoarders scratching around for bargains, but about some comfort for the designer. Also concerning the max size downloads: imagine you want a crop or a banner out of the image, how can you do that in a credible way for the customer out of a 300px watermarked thumb? Makes you look cheap as designer to the customer. If your webpage is a 800px wide design, you will then have to upsize the thumb to give an idea about the final result, but that might not go well with the customer if he has deeper pockets and if he wants to have a realistic idea of how the result will look like. A designer might try different crops and that doesn't work well from an XS image.

The "bitter" pill has been sweetened by the higher weight for level 3 and up images in the subs package. You could argue that they just represent a small part of any port, but proportionally, they have more sales or they wouldn't have become level 3+ images in the first place. Finally, DT is the only agent that rewards good sellers with higher yield. On SS, you'll get always your 0.36 (or whatever) independent of # of downloads.

This was a positive thread about DT.  :P

You make some very good points, and clearly DT's sub plan is much more contributor-friendly than FT's (which not only pays you pennies for a maximum size sale, but to add insult to injury counts it as only a 1/4 sale towards your next level). However, I still don't understand the reasoning of giving away 15- 25MP images. If the crop is that tiny a portion of the image, perhaps the designer should find a more appropriate image? It seems to me that limiting a sub sale to a maximum size of around 10-12 MPs would be more friendly.

« Reply #41 on: November 08, 2009, 21:46 »
0
It seems to me that limiting a sub sale to a maximum size of around 10-12 MPs would be more friendly.

Well the contributor has that choice, doesn't he? I will never upload the future 21MP of my 5DMKII on microstock.

In fact, when you upload full size, you do that in the hope that once in a while, an EL will be sold for a billboard or so.
What you get is loads of max size sub downloads by larger design companies, but what the heck? They do it for their comfort. When making a composite, it's much fancier and better looking to start with the max size to cut out the overwhite object (beware of the jpg jitter even at quality 12) then reduce the size of the finished composite. Also don't forget template elements like buttons in one illustration image: they can be very tiny in any other size than max and awkward to extract.

The only danger is that a hit-and-run HeroTurko would download his max quorum and throw the images on the net for "free". That could be prevented by an account manager at the sites that checks the subscription package buyers. I still feel DT is more cautious as to that than for instance FT. But I might be wrong of course. All we can do is look at the track record of the different agencies.

« Reply #42 on: November 08, 2009, 23:29 »
0
...Also concerning the max size downloads: imagine you want a crop or a banner out of the image, how can you do that in a credible way for the customer out of a 300px watermarked thumb?...

Talking about watermark thumbs... What do you all think about the new size of comp images at Dreamstime? I think it's too much for a comp.  Personally I prefer only the zoom option like IS.

« Reply #43 on: November 08, 2009, 23:32 »
0
...Also concerning the max size downloads: imagine you want a crop or a banner out of the image, how can you do that in a credible way for the customer out of a 300px watermarked thumb?...


Talking about watermark thumbs... What do you all think about the new size of comp images at Dreamstime? I think it's too much for a comp.  Personally I prefer only the zoom option like IS.

« Reply #44 on: November 09, 2009, 00:29 »
0
So it isn't about greedy image hoarders scratching around for bargains, but about some comfort for the designer. Also concerning the max size downloads: imagine you want a crop or a banner out of the image, how can you do that in a credible way for the customer out of a 300px watermarked thumb? Makes you look cheap as designer to the customer. If your webpage is a 800px wide design, you will then have to upsize the thumb to give an idea about the final result, but that might not go well with the customer if he has deeper pockets and if he wants to have a realistic idea of how the result will look like. A designer might try different crops and that doesn't work well from an XS image.
IMO this "comfort' should have higher price than 0.35$. If the designer propose 10 different compositions he earns money thanks to 10 of our images. Why he should only pay for one of them?

eyeCatchLight

  • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
« Reply #45 on: November 09, 2009, 00:33 »
0
well i don't know...but this post was a "what do you LIKE about DT" post...  :-[  ???

anyhow i like DT (with my limited experience). Compared to FT you are far less anonymous, you can at least write down who you are, whereas in FT you are just a link to click on. For me personally moreover i have had >70% subscription sales on FT and none on DT so the earnings are better at DT, but this experience is just limited as I started very recently.

be happy!
simone

« Reply #46 on: November 09, 2009, 01:04 »
0
IMO this "comfort' should have higher price than 0.35$. If the designer propose 10 different compositions he earns money thanks to 10 of our images. Why he should only pay for one of them?

Ah but the main point was exactly that he will only use one image out of the ten for the approved design.

« Reply #47 on: November 09, 2009, 04:30 »
0
Achilles has been answering the subs issue a few times, also on this forum as I remember. It boils down to designers needing a few or many alternative images for a particular design, so that they can present these options without clumsy watermark to the customer. We read before here on this forum how designers hate comps with watermarks.
In fact, only one of those images will actually be used, so Achilles pointed out that sub sales are in fact an extra, those are sales that wouldn't have been happened on a credit package (except the image finally chosen of course).
For me "presenting" is a part of his job - so he USES these images (even if only one is a part of final design).
« Last Edit: November 09, 2009, 04:32 by rene »

« Reply #48 on: November 09, 2009, 12:46 »
0
well i don't know...but this post was a "what do you LIKE about DT" post...  :-[  ???
Yeah, I think the haters took it over. Let's see... I like that I make money on Dreamstime because if I didn't I wouldn't contribute there. ;D Was that too obvious? I also like that they tell you what keywords were used to download your image. They also have a decent referral program.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #49 on: November 09, 2009, 13:24 »
0
well i don't know...but this post was a "what do you LIKE about DT" post...  :-[  ???
Yeah, I think the haters took it over. Let's see... I like that I make money on Dreamstime because if I didn't I wouldn't contribute there. ;D Was that too obvious? I also like that they tell you what keywords were used to download your image. They also have a decent referral program.

I certainly didn't mean to come across as a Hater.  I'm not.  I like DT as well as any of the agencies that I HIRED to sell my pictures.  They do a good job of selling.  I do wish they didn't sell so cheap.

Anyway, my point is that NONE of the agencies have YOUR best interest in mind. 
As far as likes, I like a lot of things about DT.  I just don't feel that they are as open an honest as the "cheerleaders" seem to think.  Achilles is just as quick to censor a post as any of the other agencies.  What is left is cheers.   ;D



Dan

« Reply #50 on: November 30, 2009, 16:36 »
0
  my  best  amount  for  a  pic  came  at  DT  ($1.44).  I  have  only  3  online  with  one  sale  but  have  been  unable  to  take  more  pic  for  the  last  2  months.  They  are  great  and  a  friendly  forum.
  I  take  all  this  back.  They  treated  me  dirty  just  a  few  weeks  ago.  They  STINK.

« Reply #51 on: November 30, 2009, 16:40 »
0
Never a dull moment at DT  ;) Love seeing what keywords were used and the multitude of statistics available.

Don't know if they've been doing any "tweaking" lately but my sales are a lot better this month.

ap

« Reply #52 on: November 30, 2009, 16:48 »
0

Don't know if they've been doing any "tweaking" lately but my sales are a lot better this month.

  + 1  :)

« Reply #53 on: November 30, 2009, 18:28 »
0
I've also had a great month at DT, but I really wonder about what I'm making there. I mean, take a look at my last 4 sales there below... How is it that all of those sales are for the same size, same level, same credits and yet my commission is different for each one?

ap

« Reply #54 on: November 30, 2009, 18:38 »
0
 ???

lisafx

« Reply #55 on: November 30, 2009, 18:51 »
0
I've also had a great month at DT, but I really wonder about what I'm making there. I mean, take a look at my last 4 sales there below... How is it that all of those sales are for the same size, same level, same credits and yet my commission is different for each one?

Depends what the buyer paid for those credits when they bought them.  Like Istock and a number of the other micros, Dreamstime sells credits in different package sizes for different price points.  Our royalty % stays the same, but the amount will fluctuate according to the price paid for the credit.

KB

« Reply #56 on: November 30, 2009, 21:00 »
0
I've also had a great month at DT, but I really wonder about what I'm making there. I mean, take a look at my last 4 sales there below... How is it that all of those sales are for the same size, same level, same credits and yet my commission is different for each one?

Depends what the buyer paid for those credits when they bought them.  Like Istock and a number of the other micros, Dreamstime sells credits in different package sizes for different price points.  Our royalty % stays the same, but the amount will fluctuate according to the price paid for the credit.
That makes a lot of sense, and unlike most other sites, DT helps us figure that out by dating the credit plan in our sales record (e.g, " X credits (2008)").

What still does not make sense to me are those 2 sales I noted earlier in this thread. $0.20 and $0.43 for maximum size sales (one was 1 credit, the other 2 credits). I'm sure there's an explanation, but I don't know what it is.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Dreamstime down?

Started by Greg Boiarsky Dreamstime.com

5 Replies
3623 Views
Last post July 26, 2006, 05:58
by Kiya
5 Replies
3482 Views
Last post September 26, 2006, 16:13
by pelmof
20 Replies
6324 Views
Last post January 18, 2007, 11:51
by leaf
15 Replies
6730 Views
Last post July 07, 2007, 12:04
by ManicBlu
158 Replies
38538 Views
Last post October 30, 2009, 22:01
by traveler1116

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results