MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia Launches Dollar Photo Club?  (Read 47008 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: April 26, 2014, 08:07 »
+9
Do you still sell your works on extended license for a subscription price?
Community of russian-speaking contributors will be remove their works from the Fotolia and DPC portfolios. This is due to a violation of the rights of authors and dumping policy pursued by the administration of these stocks.
Deactivation Day - May 1, 2014!


« Reply #126 on: April 26, 2014, 09:54 »
+1
Excuse me but is it possible for BS to offer lower royalties? They added that failed 50,000 DL RC level. And already pay less than SS. How much lower can it go there?

I closed my FT account and I must say, they waited for the end of the month and removed everything and paid me in 30 days. Couldn't have been any smoother or easy.

I closed mine over the partner programs and potential of losing all rights to everything because of mass distribution to unknown agencies, lack of detailed accounting or being able to monitor what was going on with my work. A general plague that's been afflicting microstock.

It would not surprise me a bit to find that SS is offering similar API deals via BS where they pay lower royalties overall.



They will push the API that brings the greatest returns for them, my comment was in reference to using bigstocks API over shutterstocks API implementation.

And yes they have kept pricing stagnant for 9 years to capture market share. If that market shares starts to slide, I do not think they will have any problem devaluing our assets further to garner a larger share of the market.

https://www.bigstockphoto.com/partners/

http://help.bigstockphoto.com/hc/en-us/articles/200303245-API-Documentation

« Reply #127 on: April 26, 2014, 12:21 »
0
Here is a link to Russian petition
newbielink:http://boycottfotolia.org/ru/petition.html#.U1vqIlf85Gw [nonactive]
Now it is translated in English.
newbielink:http://boycottfotolia.org/en/main.html#.U1_ISlf85Gw [nonactive]
« Last Edit: April 29, 2014, 10:42 by Anyata »

« Reply #128 on: April 27, 2014, 12:27 »
-11
Hi All,

I can tell you with 100% confidence that the Fotolia team cares very much for the photographers and respects your opinions and feedback.  Your concerns about being in Dollar Photo Club have been heard and Ive been told that soon an option for contributors to choose will be made available to all Fotolia contributors. In the meantime if you do not want your images sold through Dollar Photo Club send your request via a Fotolia customer support  ticket and you will be manually removed.

A couple of points of interest.  Contrary to what has been posted earlier in this thread, every dollar spent by a Dollar Photo Club member goes towards a download.  Every image downloaded at DPC is paid to the artist through Fotolia immediately.  Monthly members pay $10 per month and receive 10 downloads.  Annual members pay $99 and receive 99 downloads.  Each of those downloads pay a commission to the contributing artist. 
 
Something you may not have considered is that the Dollar Photo Club membership actually is more beneficial to the contributors than traditional subscriptions.  In a traditional subscription if the sub expires, unused downloads also expire. As a result, no commission is paid.  At Dollar Photo Club, even after a member cancels their subscription they can use their unused downloads. As a result, a higher percentage of money spent goes to the photographer. 

Another misconception is the license.  The license sold via Dollar Photo Club is a Standard license.  Members that need Extended licenses are referred to Fotolia to purchase them.  Soon an Extended License will be made available to Dollar Photo Club members at rates similar to those at Fotolia.
 
The simple truth of the matter is this.  The only way for Fotolia and/or Dollar Photo Club to be successful is for the contributors to be successful.  Regardless of what has been written in msg, the interests of FT and of the contributors are aligned.  The goal for all parties involved is to drive sales.  Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.  The site will continue to grow and to push sales in a positive direction for all of us. 

-Mat Hayward

« Reply #129 on: April 27, 2014, 12:48 »
+17
Hi All,

I can tell you with 100% confidence that the Fotolia team cares very much for the photographers and respects your opinions and feedback.  Your concerns about being in Dollar Photo Club have been heard and Ive been told that soon an option for contributors to choose will be made available to all Fotolia contributors. In the meantime if you do not want your images sold through Dollar Photo Club send your request via a Fotolia customer support  ticket and you will be manually removed.

A couple of points of interest.  Contrary to what has been posted earlier in this thread, every dollar spent by a Dollar Photo Club member goes towards a download.  Every image downloaded at DPC is paid to the artist through Fotolia immediately.  Monthly members pay $10 per month and receive 10 downloads.  Annual members pay $99 and receive 99 downloads.  Each of those downloads pay a commission to the contributing artist. 
 
Something you may not have considered is that the Dollar Photo Club membership actually is more beneficial to the contributors than traditional subscriptions.  In a traditional subscription if the sub expires, unused downloads also expire. As a result, no commission is paid.  At Dollar Photo Club, even after a member cancels their subscription they can use their unused downloads. As a result, a higher percentage of money spent goes to the photographer. 

Another misconception is the license.  The license sold via Dollar Photo Club is a Standard license.  Members that need Extended licenses are referred to Fotolia to purchase them.  Soon an Extended License will be made available to Dollar Photo Club members at rates similar to those at Fotolia.
 
The simple truth of the matter is this.  The only way for Fotolia and/or Dollar Photo Club to be successful is for the contributors to be successful.  Regardless of what has been written in msg, the interests of FT and of the contributors are aligned.  The goal for all parties involved is to drive sales.  Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.  The site will continue to grow and to push sales in a positive direction for all of us. 

-Mat Hayward

Sorry Matt, but I have to call the BS card on your feedback, as much as I respect you.  ACTIONS speak louder than words, and we can quantify their actions by the lack of growth, declining commissions, manipulating the search to de-emphasize Emeralds, etc.....we FEEL the results of those actions. They are moving to aggressively further cheapen the market with DTP and whenever anyone posts anything negative about this on their forums they close it down. In my opinion they are very unprofessional and tend to hold grudges.  Example: When Joanne was interested in re-joining FT they said no, we do not wish to do business with you, or something along those lines. They should have embraced such a fine artist and leveraged her assets accordingly. But that's their decision.  FT has proven far beyond a reasonable doubt that all they care about is them, and not one iota about their suppliers.....and I am 100% sure it's because the supply of digital assets will keep them shored up no matter how crappy they treat us and no matter how many contributors might leave.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 12:53 by Mantis »

« Reply #130 on: April 27, 2014, 12:52 »
+18
Another misconception is the license.  The license sold via Dollar Photo Club is a Standard license.  Members that need Extended licenses are referred to Fotolia to purchase them.  Soon an Extended License will be made available to Dollar Photo Club members at rates similar to those at Fotolia.

Well, it's _your_ standard license.  In particular, most other agencies require an extended license for both unlimited reproductions and multi-seat use.  Your "standard license" allows:
"The Member may create a digital library, network configuration or similar arrangement to allow the Work to be viewed by their employees, partners and clients. "
which certainly sounds like a typical multi-seat license.  Unusually, though you prohibit the usage of content by a buyer for more than one client, which is certainly not a "standard license" as seen elsewhere, and which does conflict, imo, with "a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, worldwide, non-transferable sublicense to use, reproduce, modify and/or display the Work, for any purpose other than as prohibited hereunder. "

Also, that last bit indicates unlimited reproductions, and I can't find anything that would say otherwise.  So, that's two typical ELs that you include in your "standard license".

As a buyer, I'd be afraid of the wording of this bit.  Who knows what someone in an image "may find offensive":
"they shall not ... use the Work in a way that places any person in the photo in a bad light or depicts them in a way that they may find offensive"

A vegan may be offended by being in an ad for burgers.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #131 on: April 27, 2014, 13:58 »
+1
As a buyer, I'd be afraid of the wording of this bit.  Who knows what someone in an image "may find offensive":
"they shall not ... use the Work in a way that places any person in the photo in a bad light or depicts them in a way that they may find offensive"

Hmmm.

Stocksy 3c: shall not "use the Content in a way that is considered by STOCKSY in its sole discretion, or under applicable law, that may be considered pornographic, obscene, immoral, infringing, defamatory or libelous in nature, or that would be reasonably likely to bring any person or property reflected in the Content into disrepute;

Shutterstock 13: 13.
Use an Image in a way that depicts any person therein in a way that a reasonable person might find offensive - this includes, but is not limited to the use of Images: a) in pornography, "adult videos" or the like; b) in ads for tobacco products; c) in ads or promotional materials for adult entertainment clubs or similar venues, or for escort, dating or similar services; d) in connection with political endorsements; e) in advertisements or promotional materials for pharmaceutical or healthcare, herbal or medical products or services, including, but not limited to dietary supplements, digestive aids, herbal supplements, personal hygiene or birth control products; and f) uses that are defamatory, or contain otherwise unlawful, offensive or immoral content. You may not use an Image containing the likeness of a person if such use implies that the model engages in any immoral or illegal activity or suffers from a physical or mental infirmity, ailment or condition.

iStock 4a6 "use the Content in a fashion that is considered by iStock (acting reasonably) as or under applicable law is considered pornographic, obscene, immoral, infringing, defamatory or libelous in nature, or that would be reasonably likely to bring any person or property reflected in the Content into disrepute" modified in the following paragraph point that they can be so used with a 'posed by model' sort of disclaimer.

DepositPhotos: "Under NO circumstances can Files be used ... In items or products used to promote racism or other discriminatory practices that could embarrass the File contributor or a person or model in the File;
For the use, demonstration, and posting of materials in a way that would lead to the conclusion that the model in the File approves of or endorses the items or services of any venture or trademark."


AlamyRF 3.9: "If any Image featuring a model is used in (i) a manner that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the model personally uses or endorses a product or service, or (ii) if the depiction of the model in the Image would be unflattering or unduly controversial to a reasonable person, you must accompany each such use with a statement indicating that the person is a model and the Image is being used for illustrative purposes only."

etc etc.

Yet a contributor here has assured us twice that 'erotic writings' are allowed uses by most of the agencies with no 'posed by model' signifier required.

Is there any legal definition of 'reasonable person', 'reasonably', or 'acting reasonably'?


« Reply #132 on: April 27, 2014, 14:18 »
+19
Hi All,

I can tell you with 100% confidence that the Fotolia team cares very much for the photographers and respects your opinions and feedback.  Your concerns about being in Dollar Photo Club have been heard and Ive been told that soon an option for contributors to choose will be made available to all Fotolia contributors. In the meantime if you do not want your images sold through Dollar Photo Club send your request via a Fotolia customer support  ticket and you will be manually removed.

A couple of points of interest.  Contrary to what has been posted earlier in this thread, every dollar spent by a Dollar Photo Club member goes towards a download.  Every image downloaded at DPC is paid to the artist through Fotolia immediately.  Monthly members pay $10 per month and receive 10 downloads.  Annual members pay $99 and receive 99 downloads.  Each of those downloads pay a commission to the contributing artist. 
 
Something you may not have considered is that the Dollar Photo Club membership actually is more beneficial to the contributors than traditional subscriptions.  In a traditional subscription if the sub expires, unused downloads also expire. As a result, no commission is paid.  At Dollar Photo Club, even after a member cancels their subscription they can use their unused downloads. As a result, a higher percentage of money spent goes to the photographer. 

Another misconception is the license.  The license sold via Dollar Photo Club is a Standard license.  Members that need Extended licenses are referred to Fotolia to purchase them.  Soon an Extended License will be made available to Dollar Photo Club members at rates similar to those at Fotolia.
 
The simple truth of the matter is this.  The only way for Fotolia and/or Dollar Photo Club to be successful is for the contributors to be successful.  Regardless of what has been written in msg, the interests of FT and of the contributors are aligned.  The goal for all parties involved is to drive sales.  Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.  The site will continue to grow and to push sales in a positive direction for all of us. 

-Mat Hayward

Mat,

if FT really cares for their contributors, then I'd like them to completely scrap the Dollar Photo Club as well as their mini-subscriptions.
Both of those are simply taking away credit sales. Who in his right mind would spend 10 credits on an XL file, when he can get 10 XXL files for 10 Dollars?

Subscriptions do only work (sort of) for contributors, if there is huge volume and if they are no replacement for credit sales of low-volume buyers. That only works if subscription buyers have to fork out a reasonably high amount (significantly higher than the amount needed to buy a few high-res files on credits) to buy a subscription.

This is the reason why both these initiatives are completely against the interest of contributors.
So, if you care, stop them both.

« Reply #133 on: April 27, 2014, 14:33 »
+1
Is there any legal definition of 'reasonable person', 'reasonably', or 'acting reasonably'?

I was pointing out the difference between (A) what everyone else says and what presumably could be decided by a judge, and (B) letting the person be the final say (per the wording) on what is "offensive" to them:
"depicts them in a way that they may find offensive"

OM

« Reply #134 on: April 27, 2014, 15:32 »
+4
I remember being exclusive at FT many moons ago and this gave me the option to 'opt out' of sub sales which I did for a short period of time. Bad experiment....no sales for weeks because my placement in the search was annihilated. It's the way their algo works.

Why do I get the idea that the same will happen to DPC opt-outees? Because, if there's one thing in which FT shows any consistency, it's making more for themselves by reducing earnings of contributors.

« Reply #135 on: April 27, 2014, 17:43 »
+2
Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.

not that I care but where can we see that wonderful information?

apart from that how can it be positive for FT and contributors if DPC is undercutting FT?

the XXL size (Silver ranking and above) is selling at FT for 36 credits, the same goes for 1$ at DPC

« Reply #136 on: April 27, 2014, 18:20 »
+4
Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.

not that I care but where can we see that wonderful information?

apart from that how can it be positive for FT and contributors if DPC is undercutting FT?

the XXL size (Silver ranking and above) is selling at FT for 36 credits, the same goes for 1$ at DPC

I think it becomes positive because, overall, subs are more profitable for them than OD's.  Of course that isn't profitable for us, but probably substantially for them.  Not to keep pounding on Matt (he's probably a real good guy, just being the messenger more or less) but it's NOT good for contributors if all of our FT sales end up being cannibalized by DPC.  Great for FT, very bad for contributor.

« Reply #137 on: April 27, 2014, 18:32 »
0
Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.

not that I care but where can we see that wonderful information?

apart from that how can it be positive for FT and contributors if DPC is undercutting FT?

the XXL size (Silver ranking and above) is selling at FT for 36 credits, the same goes for 1$ at DPC

I think it becomes positive because, overall, subs are more profitable for them than OD's.  Of course that isn't profitable for us, but probably substantially for them.  Not to keep pounding on Matt (he's probably a real good guy, just being the messenger more or less) but it's NOT good for contributors if all of our FT sales end up being cannibalized by DPC.  Great for FT, very bad for contributor.

sure but I don't think it is that great for FT!

lets do some maths :)

at DPC
contributor gets from 0.2$ to 0.46$ (non exclusive)
FT 0.44$ to 0.8$ per file

at FT
XXL size Silver ranking - 12 credits - (contributor gets 3$, FT 9$)
XXL size can go up to 36$ (contributor gets 14.4$, FT 21.6$)

« Reply #138 on: April 27, 2014, 18:45 »
+2
Dollar Photo Club has already proven to be successful and has resulted in many sales paid out to contributors.

not that I care but where can we see that wonderful information?

apart from that how can it be positive for FT and contributors if DPC is undercutting FT?

the XXL size (Silver ranking and above) is selling at FT for 36 credits, the same goes for 1$ at DPC

I think it becomes positive because, overall, subs are more profitable for them than OD's.  Of course that isn't profitable for us, but probably substantially for them.  Not to keep pounding on Matt (he's probably a real good guy, just being the messenger more or less) but it's NOT good for contributors if all of our FT sales end up being cannibalized by DPC.  Great for FT, very bad for contributor.

sure but I don't think it is that great for FT!

lets do some maths :)

at DPC
contributor gets from 0.2$ to 0.46$ (non exclusive)
FT 0.44$ to 0.8$ per file

at FT
XXL size Silver ranking - 12 credits - (contributor gets 3$, FT 9$)
XXL size can go up to 36$ (contributor gets 14.4$, FT 21.6$)

Right. I think there's two main issues.

1. Sub pack pricing.  For ft they effectively get away with paying us less.
2. They are trying to FORMALIZE a subs program not necessarily to complete against themselves, but to take share from IS, SS, two more or less high volume sub sites. 

My intuition is that while their sub pack pricing may bring them less than their FT pricing they can actually grow revenue through customer volume.  Thats my thinking anyway and it could be way wrong. I haven't bothered to look at pricing on the two sites but they must have data that provides purchase modes & means and done the math that told them to open up DPC. I think they know the weighted purchasing behaviors (how many each sub customer actually uses of their package allotment) of the modes and determined the technical outcome of CHA CHING!

« Reply #139 on: April 28, 2014, 12:41 »
+8
BTW this DPC not a subscription at all.
1) This is a credit pack with 1 credit=1$ ( other sites has 1.4 or about it and only when buying big amount)
2) Price of xxl photo is set to 1$ instead of 7-20 or so on other sites.
So it's double damping scheme masked as a sub system.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2014, 12:56 by GooDween »

« Reply #140 on: April 28, 2014, 14:22 »
+4
Please help to bring this info to maximum artists.

« Reply #141 on: April 29, 2014, 10:47 »
+1
Here is commercial for Dollar Photo Club on YouTube.
newbielink:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E3SkLrkjoY&feature=youtu.be [nonactive]



« Reply #142 on: April 29, 2014, 10:49 »
+1
Good news is Fotolia added the button , now you can remove your portfolio from DPC.

« Reply #143 on: April 29, 2014, 10:53 »
+1
Good news is Fotolia added the button , now you can remove your portfolio from DPC.
It is currently under 'My Profile' and in that under 'Contributor Parameters'

« Reply #144 on: April 29, 2014, 13:48 »
+3
Bad that it's on by default.
and they still try to say us that this is sub site.
This is credit site.
So keep action.

« Reply #145 on: April 29, 2014, 13:54 »
+6
it is NO Sub site,

No Credit site

its an on demand site!!!

« Reply #146 on: May 07, 2014, 03:58 »
0
deleted (wrong topic)

fujiko

« Reply #147 on: May 07, 2014, 06:51 »
+2
It's the new trend on agencies like FT or DP.
Call everything a subscription plan to pay subscription royalties.

Soon they will change the word upload into subscribe and contributors will be subscribing images to them and everything will be a subscription.

« Reply #148 on: May 09, 2014, 20:47 »
+4
I bought dollarphoto.club domain name today!

« Reply #149 on: May 09, 2014, 21:12 »
0
I bought dollarphoto.club domain name today!
lol start a own agency. The Fair Alternate


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
49 Replies
14854 Views
Last post April 08, 2014, 23:25
by leaf
1 Replies
3025 Views
Last post April 08, 2014, 20:32
by EmberMike
28 Replies
14812 Views
Last post October 27, 2014, 14:53
by Shelma1
26 Replies
9729 Views
Last post August 01, 2014, 13:50
by EmberMike
12 Replies
3845 Views
Last post November 23, 2014, 13:39
by Tryingmybest

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle