Author Topic: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1 (Read 308826 times)

pkphotos · « **Reply #1400 on:** June 04, 2014, 08:37 »

Quote from: pkphotos on June 04, 2014, 02:30

SUCCESS! Let's keep up this effort. A few hours ago I did a quick search on DFC, found the number one ranked photo for a particular subject, did a google search, found and emailed the photographer via their website. I received a rapid response from them having alerted them to this thread, and they promptly opted out their 1500+ high quality photos. That took me minimal effort. If we all had two or three successes using this method we'd make a big impact on DPC

EMAIL SENT TO ANOTHER PHOTOGRAPHER, WHO PROMPTLY OPTED OUT!!!!!!!!!! This time the photographer had over 8000 photos and they are A+ grade creative photos. This photographer opted out with one simple email. Therefore it has to be assumed that a large number of photographers are not aware of DFC. I simply point them to this forum thread and give them a bit of encouragement.

It'd be great if some of you give it a go, simply find a photographer name in DPC, google their website and email them. It's that easy.

EmberMike · « **Reply #1401 on:** June 04, 2014, 08:52 »

Quote from: pkphotos on June 04, 2014, 06:28

It requires a united effort from united photographers. 5 minutes less time browsing this forum spent emailing one photographer with photos on DPC is effort well spent

I disagree. DPC numbers are going back up again. This effort is going nowhere.

I'd much rather see people spend 5 minutes doing something to help a good company. Upload some images to a small company that pays 50% or more. Post to fb or twitter about a good company you support and encourage people to check out. Instead of emailing contacting contributors to get them to opt out, maybe contact contributors and encourage them to upload to a lesser-known site that pays well.

I view things like this as equally (if not more more) important than trying to get DPC numbers down (which obviously isn't working anyway). Imagine if we rallied around a small company in the same way we tried to rally against DPC and added 7 million images to an up-and-comer. Fotolia doesn't care if we took away 7 million images from DPC. But maybe they'd take more notice if we took away 7 million images and then helped push one of their competitors a little further up in the tiers.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #1402 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:05 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 08:52

Quote from: pkphotos on June 04, 2014, 06:28
It requires a united effort from united photographers. 5 minutes less time browsing this forum spent emailing one photographer with photos on DPC is effort well spent

I disagree. DPC numbers are going back up again. This effort is going nowhere.

I'd much rather see people spend 5 minutes doing something to help a good company. Upload some images to a small company that pays 50% or more. Post to fb or twitter about a good company you support and encourage people to check out. Instead of emailing contacting contributors to get them to opt out, maybe contact contributors and encourage them to upload to a lesser-known site that pays well.

I view things like this as equally (if not more more) important than trying to get DPC numbers down (which obviously isn't working anyway). Imagine if we rallied around a small company in the same way we tried to rally against DPC and added 7 million images to an up-and-comer. Fotolia doesn't care if we took away 7 million images from DPC. But maybe they'd take more notice if we took away 7 million images and then helped push one of their competitors a little further up in the tiers.

This is a bit of a false dichotomy, no? It's not one thing or the other. You can email contributors about DPC and upload to sites that pay a higher percentage, if you wish.

The more photographers know about it, the more they might tell their friends to opt out as well.

Desintegrator · « **Reply #1403 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:09 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 08:52

Quote from: pkphotos on June 04, 2014, 06:28
It requires a united effort from united photographers. 5 minutes less time browsing this forum spent emailing one photographer with photos on DPC is effort well spent

I disagree. DPC numbers are going back up again. This effort is going nowhere.

I'd much rather see people spend 5 minutes doing something to help a good company. Upload some images to a small company that pays 50% or more. Post to fb or twitter about a good company you support and encourage people to check out. Instead of emailing contacting contributors to get them to opt out, maybe contact contributors and encourage them to upload to a lesser-known site that pays well.

I view things like this as equally (if not more more) important than trying to get DPC numbers down (which obviously isn't working anyway). Imagine if we rallied around a small company in the same way we tried to rally against DPC and added 7 million images to an up-and-comer. Fotolia doesn't care if we took away 7 million images from DPC. But maybe they'd take more notice if we took away 7 million images and then helped push one of their competitors a little further up in the tiers.

I partly agree, partly not.

Generally agree about the a positive approach could be better, like supporting the good thing instead of fighting against the bad.

Still, these efforts are never in vain. As you can see there are still contributors with no idea about DPC. Even if we can't stop DPC, they at least deserve to know what's happening to their images, to the stock market, and the more opt out the better.

Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers, which for many of us seems to be way more hopeless than finding other contributors. Basicly that's way we are using agencies. I have really now idea who are the people who actually buy stock images, where to find them, where to contact them. That kind of an invisible world for me. Of course it can e different for some of you.
But i' seeing much better chance to find contributors to inform than to find buyers.

EmberMike · « **Reply #1404 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:11 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 04, 2014, 09:05

This is a bit of a false dichotomy, no? It's not one thing or the other. You can email contributors about DPC and upload to sites that pay a higher percentage, if you wish.

The more photographers know about it, the more they might tell their friends to opt out as well.

Sure you can do both. I was commenting more on the idea of taking 5 minutes and doing something. I'd personally rather use 5 more minutes to do something to add to a good company than worry about taking something away from a bad company. Especially when taking images out of DPC clearly isn't working anymore. The image count is back over 21.8 million and rising.

My point is that we've done the "let's pull our images" thing for years at various agencies and it hasn't done much. And as hard as it is to get people to rally behind a good company I really wish we'd at least try. It can't be any less effective than what we're doing now.

I'm just tired of being negative about things and I'm looking at ways to make positive change. Focusing on the negative and the companies behaving badly isn't helping us. It's time for a new strategy.

ShadySue · « **Reply #1405 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:16 »

Quote from: Desintegrator on June 04, 2014, 09:09

Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers,...

Risky strategy - contacting buyers is a double-edged sword.
Assuming buyers don't know already about DPC, there would be a highish proportion who would be delighted that there is a cheaper place to buy images.
Some would be concerned about fair trade, and might respond in the way contributors would like. I'm sure a lot think we're not chained to our cameras/computers in a sweat shop, so if our work is somewhere, we're happy with the deal.

EmberMike · « **Reply #1406 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:17 »

Quote from: Desintegrator on June 04, 2014, 09:09

...Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers, which for many of us seems to be way more hopeless than finding other contributors. Basicly that's way we are using agencies. I have really now idea who are the people who actually buy stock images, where to find them, where to contact them. That kind of an invisible world for me. Of course it can e different for some of you.
But i' seeing much better chance to find contributors to inform than to find buyers.

That's understandable. We're contributors so the contributor world is more accessible to us. Buyers, maybe not so much.

If contributors are who someone has access to, then by all means, contact contributors. But maybe instead of just asking them to opt out of DPC, also mention a good company you recommend. I'd have to assume that if so many contributors aren't aware of DPC (probably contributors who don't participate in this forum, read contributor blogs, etc) then they might also not know about some of the good lesser-known companies available to them. I think we could see just as much positive change for a good company as we've seen in negative change for DPC, adding more images to a good agency and giving them more to work with, more to sell, more to offer their customers.

Desintegrator · « **Reply #1407 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:21 »

Quote from: ShadySue on June 04, 2014, 09:16

Quote from: Desintegrator on June 04, 2014, 09:09
Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers,...
Risky strategy - contacting buyers is a double-edged sword.
Assuming buyers don't know already about DPC, there would be a highish proportion who would be delighted that there is a cheaper place to buy images.
Some would be concerned about fair trade, and might respond in the way contributors would like. I'm sure a lot think we're not chained to our cameras/computers in a sweat shop, so if our work is somewhere, we're happy with the deal.

I was meaning informing buyers about fair agencies and driving them there to buy our images. There's relly no use in telling them how bad DPC is, as it's not bad for them..

Desintegrator · « **Reply #1408 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:25 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 09:17

Quote from: Desintegrator on June 04, 2014, 09:09
...Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers, which for many of us seems to be way more hopeless than finding other contributors. Basicly that's way we are using agencies. I have really now idea who are the people who actually buy stock images, where to find them, where to contact them. That kind of an invisible world for me. Of course it can e different for some of you.
But i' seeing much better chance to find contributors to inform than to find buyers.

That's understandable. We're contributors so the contributor world is more accessible to us. Buyers, maybe not so much.

If contributors are who someone has access to, then by all means, contact contributors. But maybe instead of just asking them to opt out of DPC, also mention a good company you recommend. I'd have to assume that if so many contributors aren't aware of DPC (probably contributors who don't participate in this forum, read contributor blogs, etc) then they might also not know about some of the good lesser-known companies available to them. I think we could see just as much positive change for a good company as we've seen in negative change for DPC, adding more images to a good agency and giving them more to work with, more to sell, more to offer their customers.

yes, that's good approach. When explaining why is DPC bad for the market it's convenient to include examples of agencies which show progress in selling images at higher price points and even giving better commissions.

marthamarks · « **Reply #1409 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:27 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 09:17

...also mention a good company you recommend. I'd have to assume that if so many contributors aren't aware of DPC (probably contributors who don't participate in this forum, read contributor blogs, etc) then they might also not know about some of the good lesser-known companies available to them. I think we could see just as much positive change for a good company as we've seen in negative change for DPC, adding more images to a good agency and giving them more to work with, more to sell, more to offer their customers.

In case one of those unaware contributors happens to read this thread... what would your recommendation be if somebody asked you to name a "good lesser-known company"?

Shelma1 · « **Reply #1410 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:30 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 09:17

Quote from: Desintegrator on June 04, 2014, 09:09
...Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers, which for many of us seems to be way more hopeless than finding other contributors. Basicly that's way we are using agencies. I have really now idea who are the people who actually buy stock images, where to find them, where to contact them. That kind of an invisible world for me. Of course it can e different for some of you.
But i' seeing much better chance to find contributors to inform than to find buyers.

That's understandable. We're contributors so the contributor world is more accessible to us. Buyers, maybe not so much.

If contributors are who someone has access to, then by all means, contact contributors. But maybe instead of just asking them to opt out of DPC, also mention a good company you recommend. I'd have to assume that if so many contributors aren't aware of DPC (probably contributors who don't participate in this forum, read contributor blogs, etc) then they might also not know about some of the good lesser-known companies available to them. I think we could see just as much positive change for a good company as we've seen in negative change for DPC, adding more images to a good agency and giving them more to work with, more to sell, more to offer their customers.

Recommending other agencies is a good and helpful strategy, and I've been doing that on Twitter.

If you want to encourage folks to upload to and support other sites, why not start a thread about it?

EmberMike · « **Reply #1411 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:50 »

Quote from: marthamarks on June 04, 2014, 09:27

In case one of those unaware contributors happens to read this thread... what would your recommendation be if somebody asked you to name a "good lesser-known company"?

Stockfresh.

EmberMike · « **Reply #1412 on:** June 04, 2014, 09:54 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 04, 2014, 09:30

...If you want to encourage folks to upload to and support other sites, why not start a thread about it?

I have, and those threads generally don't go anywhere because as a community, we are pretty terrible at getting behind anything in a positive way. We're really good at pointing out everything that's wrong with an agency, which is exactly what happens when anyone tries to get people to rally behind 1 or 2 good companies. Everyone has some problem with any company suggested. Or people get all pissy because they got rejected by that company. Or in the case of the company I'd recommend (see previous post) people can't let go of the past and will shun a good company out of spite.

I'd love to start another thread about this. But I'm not sure that we're at a place yet where enough people can put their egos aside and have a real discussion about what's good for us collectively. Those threads always devolve into more complaining and bickering.

PhotoBomb · « **Reply #1413 on:** June 04, 2014, 10:00 »

Just heard from another big contributor, 20,000+ images that they have opted out.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #1414 on:** June 04, 2014, 10:01 »

Well, now I need to know what Stockfresh did to have people shun them.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #1415 on:** June 04, 2014, 10:52 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 04, 2014, 10:01

Well, now I need to know what Stockfresh did to have people shun them.

I don't shun them, but I have no hope that they'll ever do the marketing they promised. My files are still there, but sales are very, very sluggish.

Peter (owner) originally said he'd start marketing once they reached xx million images. They reached that ages ago, but as far as I know, they've done nothing.

There's no spite, but once you start breaking promises, why would contributors root for you?

Shelma1 · « **Reply #1416 on:** June 04, 2014, 11:14 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 09:54

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 04, 2014, 09:30
...If you want to encourage folks to upload to and support other sites, why not start a thread about it?

I have, and those threads generally don't go anywhere because as a community, we are pretty terrible at getting behind anything in a positive way. We're really good at pointing out everything that's wrong with an agency, which is exactly what happens when anyone tries to get people to rally behind 1 or 2 good companies. Everyone has some problem with any company suggested. Or people get all pissy because they got rejected by that company. Or in the case of the company I'd recommend (see previous post) people can't let go of the past and will shun a good company out of spite.

I'd love to start another thread about this. But I'm not sure that we're at a place yet where enough people can put their egos aside and have a real discussion about what's good for us collectively. Those threads always devolve into more complaining and bickering.

Fear and anger...the two great motivators. People are angry that their images are suddenly being sold for a dollar, and fearful that it will have a negative impact on earnings. It finally reached a point where fear and anger overcame inertia.

It's a hard sell to get people to do all the work required to upload to a new agency, and even harder to convince them they need to help with marketing because the owner isn't doing it but is still keeping 50% of sales (in the case of StockFresh, for example).

If there was a site with both great royalties and great sales, I'm sure everyone would be behind it in a New York minute. But for now it seems the easiest and most motivating thing to do is try to squash DPC to at least protect the earnings we're getting from all the work we've already done.

Rinderart · « **Reply #1417 on:** June 04, 2014, 11:30 »

If ya go back to the beginning, we have come a long ways But, we have a long ways yet to go and the last thing or Place we should never be. Is going backwards.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #1418 on:** June 04, 2014, 15:20 »

Quote from: Rinderart on June 04, 2014, 11:30

If ya go back to the beginning, we have come a long ways But, we have a long ways yet to go and the last thing or Place we should never be. Is going backwards.

I would love to go backwards a couple years to when we were making good money and the websites treated us good. Can we please go backwards to that?

Will · « **Reply #1419 on:** June 04, 2014, 15:27 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 09:54

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 04, 2014, 09:30
...If you want to encourage folks to upload to and support other sites, why not start a thread about it?

I have, and those threads generally don't go anywhere because as a community, we are pretty terrible at getting behind anything in a positive way. We're really good at pointing out everything that's wrong with an agency, which is exactly what happens when anyone tries to get people to rally behind 1 or 2 good companies. Everyone has some problem with any company suggested. Or people get all pissy because they got rejected by that company. Or in the case of the company I'd recommend (see previous post) people can't let go of the past and will shun a good company out of spite.

I'd love to start another thread about this. But I'm not sure that we're at a place yet where enough people can put their egos aside and have a real discussion about what's good for us collectively. Those threads always devolve into more complaining and bickering.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/protect-the-market/

pkphotos · « **Reply #1420 on:** June 04, 2014, 18:40 »

Quote from: EmberMike on June 04, 2014, 09:17

Quote from: Desintegrator on June 04, 2014, 09:09
...Also to do the thing you described we need to contact buyers, which for many of us seems to be way more hopeless than finding other contributors. Basicly that's way we are using agencies. I have really now idea who are the people who actually buy stock images, where to find them, where to contact them. That kind of an invisible world for me. Of course it can e different for some of you.
But i' seeing much better chance to find contributors to inform than to find buyers.

That's understandable. We're contributors so the contributor world is more accessible to us. Buyers, maybe not so much.

If contributors are who someone has access to, then by all means, contact contributors. But maybe instead of just asking them to opt out of DPC, also mention a good company you recommend. I'd have to assume that if so many contributors aren't aware of DPC (probably contributors who don't participate in this forum, read contributor blogs, etc) then they might also not know about some of the good lesser-known companies available to them. I think we could see just as much positive change for a good company as we've seen in negative change for DPC, adding more images to a good agency and giving them more to work with, more to sell, more to offer their customers.

Talking about the issues isn't productive. Enlightening unaware photographers that their photos are on DPC is. The fact that both photogs I emailed were unaware about DFC and then took immediate opt out action means we can achieve a lot if we take ACTION. You take a million photos out of DFC and it hurts them a lot, especially if you are emailing contributors with photos that appear at the top of searches.

EmberMike · « **Reply #1421 on:** June 04, 2014, 21:37 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 04, 2014, 10:01

Well, now I need to know what Stockfresh did to have people shun them.

They sold out. Which, on the surface, I suppose is a valid concern, that they'll just do it again and we'll be left holding the bag.

Except they didn't truly "sell out" like some folks would have you believe, selling to Getty and getting StockXpert shut down in the process. They sold to Jupiter, which was then sold to Getty and StockXpert got closed in that deal because StockXpert and iStock were too similar. Getty already had iStock, no need for StockXpert.

I honestly don't believe that the StockXpert crew thought that they'd end up in the hands of Getty or that StockXpert would be closed. They probably thought that in the hands of Jupiter, StockXpert could go on for a long time. Who knew that Jupiter (and everything they owned) would go to Getty shortly thereafter?

And really, who cares anyway? You can't fault them for selling to Jupiter, and really who can be upset about what Peter and company did with StockXpert while it was still up and running? We made a lot of money with StockXpert. I was making about $500 per month towards the end. Sure I would have liked to see that continue. But I don't blame Peter for what happened. I have no idea what they got in the Jupiter deal but I imagine that few of us would have turned down that kind of money either, if given the chance.

Rinderart · « **Reply #1422 on:** June 04, 2014, 23:55 »

I thought Peter and Stock Expert was a great site, very sad what happened. best reviewers anywhere. wonderful Site. I made a lot of Money.

Question...... are we still On This DPC thing. Are we petering Out like we do most things??

Svetlana · « **Reply #1423 on:** June 04, 2014, 23:56 »

Recent numbers:
Fotolia: 28,746,698 images
DPC: 21,845,945 images
Difference: 6,900,753 images

WindyTai · « **Reply #1424 on:** June 05, 2014, 01:43 »

Great work "pkphoto"

I appreciate your effort!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1 (Read 308826 times)

pkphotos

EmberMike

Shelma1

Desintegrator

EmberMike

ShadySue

EmberMike

Desintegrator

Desintegrator

marthamarks

Shelma1

EmberMike

EmberMike

PhotoBomb

Shelma1

Jo Ann Snover

Shelma1

Rinderart

PixelBytes

Will

pkphotos

EmberMike

Rinderart

Svetlana

WindyTai

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors