MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia V.2  (Read 65496 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #200 on: July 05, 2007, 14:23 »
0
I wonder if the buyers are allowed to post their compaints on the Fotolia message boards? It would be interesting to see how many problems the buyers are having, if any. And I'm sure they're having at least a few problems.


dbvirago

« Reply #201 on: July 05, 2007, 15:12 »
0
That was the misguided part of Chad's email. If you check the public forums, the buyers are aware there are problems. There have been a few posted on the Yahoo microstock groups board. Some going back to before V2, where the problems are bad enough that they are going someplace else. Hopefully someplace where I have the same images for sale.

That's the part that astounds me about some of these sites. It is very much a free, open, and global marketplace. There is less reason to buy from a broken site than there is to sell at a broken site.

« Reply #202 on: July 05, 2007, 16:07 »
0
I haven't uploaded any images since V2 went live and it is very unlikely that I shall ever do so again.  Certainly not for many weeks or until I can see that things have settled down.

There are better agencies out there; I spend a lot of time and effort on my images and I cannot bear the thought of giving them to a load of incompetent assholes.

My feeling is that FT has damaged itself to such an extent that it may take months or years to recover from this fiasco.  In the meantime there are fledgling professional agencies out there (StockXpert and LO for instance) who would welcome the chance to service those buyers in a professional way.

I am astonished at those photographers who, having been through this experience, seem eager to upload new images even though the site is broken and the agency is a joke.

As I understand it, buyers buy a package of 'credits'; presumably those buyers with remaining credits will want to use them up.  But what will happen after that?  If YOU were a potential buyer of images, would you stick with FT or would you already be looking around for a more reliable agency?

« Reply #203 on: July 05, 2007, 16:14 »
0
Just to add to the above: what I am saying is that the REAL damage to sales at FT may not be happening yet because buyers still have unused credits.  The true picture will only emerge after they have run out of credits and need to take the decision of buying more (or not).

The RISK for contributors is that energy spent uploading pictures into this mess will be a waste of time and only result in even more disappointment.

I could be wrong of course.  It will take time to find out.

I hope FT survive and get their act together because they did show an ability to sell my images to European customers.

« Reply #204 on: July 05, 2007, 18:33 »
0
I actually uploaded a couple of hundred images since last night and the majority were reviewed with positive results, but whether they will ever be found is another matter.

Just sent this to FT support (obviously without the sharply_done comment)

I was looking through my portfolio, I  saw one of my illustrations for edinburgh castle. I checked, it has keywords including Edinburgh but if I click on the Edinburgh keyword

Search results 0 files No content found

If I type Edinburgh into the search box same result.

Another strange search result if I do a search for eiffel tower and click on illustration I see about 6 results. Only one is mine something i uploaded since V2, old illustrations (I must have at least five) don't appear.

If I search for "paris" and click on illustration only three results and my previously found Eiffel tower illustration isn't there even though paris is one of its top seven keywords and it is a conceptual category. An all photos/illustration search for "Paris" gives just 276 files, I scanned through and saw none of my illustrations or photos and not many photos that were obviously Paris.

Last year I used to have at least one photo of the arc de triomphe and notre dame on the first page.

Now in V2 a search for arc de triomphe ordered by relevance gives 2556 results on the first page of 32 photos of only one is of the arch in paris. There are photos of space stations and the earth from outer space higher on the page (by Sharply done how do you do it?)

Incidently "arc de triomphe paris" gives only one result of a statue ?? If I sorted by downloads I did find my photo with 7 downloads on the second page

A search for notre dame (order by relevance) gives lots of illustrations and photos of women (dames) with only three of the Parisian church on the first page of 32 images. putting quotation marks around the notre dame gives no results. However Notre dame cathedral does give more sensible results, but for me three of miy illustrations but none of my photos.

they seem to have an issue with Scotland the islands of arran, mull and skye (c'mon skye is probably the most famous scottish island) gives no results neither does scottish.

Hopefully the search engine can be fixed very soon so sales will return to normal.

After this little exercise I suspected most downloads I have had so far were from buyers who was looking for something else. Other place names give more sensible results.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2007, 19:00 by fintastique »

« Reply #205 on: July 05, 2007, 19:35 »
0
I spend a lot of time and effort on my images and I cannot bear the thought of giving them to a load of incompetent assholes.

I realize that FT gave a lot of valid reasons for frustration, but calling them assholes is uncalled for, IMO. If they end up hurting someone, it will be themselves more than anyone else.

Oh, and if we are making bets on how it's going to end, my bet would be they'll survive this. It takes more than that to bring down company of this scale - unless of course they won't be able to resolve all the technical issues in reasonable time.

« Reply #206 on: July 06, 2007, 01:05 »
0
I decided to wait for FT to upgrade to V2 as soon as they announced it.  I don't mind waiting a few months while they sort out the problems.  There are lots of other sites to keep me busy.  I still get as many sales as before.

« Reply #207 on: July 06, 2007, 02:07 »
0
... If YOU were a potential buyer of images, would you stick with FT or would you already be looking around for a more reliable agency?
Quite possibly a possible possibility, which is why I'm beginning to build a portfolio on BigStock.

... unless of course they won't be able to resolve all the technical issues in reasonable time.
That's going to be the trick, isn't it?

... There are photos of space stations and the earth from outer space higher on the page (by Sharply done how do you do it?)
They're composite images made using a shot taken from an airplane window. Fairly easy to do, really. They're showing up on your search because I used the keywords "arc,arced,arch,arched" to describe the horizon (I have versions where the horizon is flat and level).
« Last Edit: July 06, 2007, 02:11 by sharply_done »

« Reply #208 on: July 06, 2007, 04:09 »
0
Just sending this to FT support

I have a theory that the search engine needs to taught words for instance it has not been taught triomphe so a search for "arc de triomphe"  just gives "arc" results (so sharply_done's out of this world shots appear)

So could please add the following place names

edinburgh mull arran skye hebrides

glen scottish

la Rochelle
Notre Dame
Arc de Triomphe
Marseille

If it just a simple case of teaching the search engine new words, let me know and I can spread the word so we can help you fix the search engine.

end of message

So if they get back to me and/or fix the problem I propose we all have a quick search for place names that are featured in our portfolios then pm me or post them another thread and I can send FT the list, probably best to send from one source to avoid duplication.

I think it would be a bit more productive than name calling and I have nearly 4,000 images there so i would prefer if FT stayed near the top of my earnings list

« Reply #209 on: July 06, 2007, 09:27 »
0
I spend a lot of time and effort on my images and I cannot bear the thought of giving them to a load of incompetent assholes.

I realize that FT gave a lot of valid reasons for frustration, but calling them assholes is uncalled for, IMO. If they end up hurting someone, it will be themselves more than anyone else.

If a hacker manages to steal some social security numbers from the site, my bet is a lot of people will hurt.

« Reply #210 on: July 06, 2007, 09:53 »
0
Well, my answer was in a context of the post I replied to, which concerned whole submitting/search/sales gamut of issues.

On security issue, I am really not sure what the status is. I certainly cannot see anyone's personal information being in plain view. Absence of a lock or "s" at the end of http is disconcerting but to say honestly I never noticed how it used to be on FT site before all this grand change. However, I glanced at My profile pages at other sites and I see no "s" there either. Am I looking in wrong place or otherwise missing something?

« Reply #211 on: July 06, 2007, 10:35 »
0
True, a lot of the sites seem to lack encryption. But they're not asking for my social security number. If they ever do ask for it, I'm hopeful that they'll at least have an encrypted page for me to submit the number through.

« Reply #212 on: July 06, 2007, 13:00 »
0
I really wish that they would encrypt the page where you submit your social security number. It just seems like they don't care if your identity is stolen. Or is the page encrypted somehow? It's an http address and there's no lock in the bottom right corner of the screen, so I don't think it's encrypted.  :(

their lack of getting it together makes the social security numbers vulerable as it's the most valuable thing that can be stolen from the site (no slam against our collective great photos).  totally agree with the concern

I finally found a workaround to the SSN problem...just enter 000-00-0000 into the field.  The database accepted it without a problem.   If Fotolia wants my SSN bad enough, they're going to have to contact me personally.

« Reply #213 on: July 06, 2007, 13:03 »
0
Has anyone emailed support about the lack of SSN encryption?  If so, what is there response?  This is a pretty big security hole.

« Reply #214 on: July 06, 2007, 13:13 »
0
Well, my answer was in a context of the post I replied to, which concerned whole submitting/search/sales gamut of issues.

On security issue, I am really not sure what the status is. I certainly cannot see anyone's personal information being in plain view. Absence of a lock or "s" at the end of http is disconcerting but to say honestly I never noticed how it used to be on FT site before all this grand change. However, I glanced at My profile pages at other sites and I see no "s" there either. Am I looking in wrong place or otherwise missing something?

It is located on our individual profile pages.  If a hacker gained access to my username and password, all they would have to do is navigate to my profile page to find it.

« Reply #215 on: July 06, 2007, 13:19 »
0
Karimala,

yes, I see that. What I meant was, there is no signs of encription on other sites as well. Maybe not as crucial for other sites though since as Whiz pointed out those do not contain SSN.

« Reply #216 on: July 06, 2007, 13:21 »
0
Has anyone emailed support about the lack of SSN encryption?  If so, what is there response?  This is a pretty big security hole.


Yes...I have been asking them about it for six months starting with the following thread when it was first brought to their attention.

http://us.fotolia.com/forum/?thems=30705

In that thread, Chad responded that it would be fixed in v2, but it wasn't.  And the response is always the same lip service BS.  They will get to it, that it's a top priority, yada yada yada. 

As soon as I'm finished with this post, I'm calling the Better Business Bureau in New York to file a complaint.  If anyone else is interested in doing the same, here's their contact info (complaint can only be submitted over the phone or by mail):

Better Business Bureau Serving Metropolitan New York
Website: http://www.newyork.bbb.org
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (212) 533-6200
Fax: (212) 477-4912
257 Park Avenue South
New York NY 10010-7384
Main BBB: http://www.bbb.org/

Global Headquarters
Fotolia LLC
41 East 11th Street,
11th Floor
New York, NY 10003
USA
Tel: 718-577-1321

« Reply #217 on: July 06, 2007, 13:29 »
0
Karimala,

yes, I see that. What I meant was, there is no signs of encription on other sites as well. Maybe not as crucial for other sites though since as Whiz pointed out those do not contain SSN.

You're right.  The only secure site I could find it IS. 
« Last Edit: July 06, 2007, 13:32 by Karimala »

« Reply #218 on: July 06, 2007, 15:48 »
0
My FT update -- almost all of my pending photos got approved with the exception of 5 that I uploaded early in the upgrade process which are still pending approval.  Sold 1 photo so that brings my total to 2 since all this began.  Many thanks to those two buyers.   ;D

« Reply #219 on: July 06, 2007, 16:36 »
0
admart,

I had similar situation. What I noticed was that those earlier uploaded images had numbers very differently structured than lattter uploads. They seem to be just lost in cyberspace, I re-uploaded them and they seem to be normal now. You may want to look at their file numbers, if tyou see them being much longer than latter ones, forget it and upload them again, IMO

« Reply #220 on: July 06, 2007, 18:36 »
0
Well, I called the BBB too late in the day and had to leave a message.  They are supposed to return my call within one business day, so hopefully I hear from them on Monday and can file my complaint.

« Reply #221 on: July 07, 2007, 07:14 »
0
admart,

I had similar situation. What I noticed was that those earlier uploaded images had numbers very differently structured than lattter uploads. They seem to be just lost in cyberspace, I re-uploaded them and they seem to be normal now. You may want to look at their file numbers, if tyou see them being much longer than latter ones, forget it and upload them again, IMO

You got that right - odd numbers on these files.  I will re-upload... thanks for the tip.

dbvirago

« Reply #222 on: July 07, 2007, 08:37 »
0
Thanks for the info, Kari. I had been thinking along the same lines

« Reply #223 on: July 07, 2007, 18:28 »
0
Their sales must be suffering also as they've started deleting threads discussing problems and bugs with V2, specifically the fact that we can't search most of the images on there atm. While their review times have been great, I've had 150 images approved in very short time, this doesn't help if nobody can find them, sigh...

« Reply #224 on: July 08, 2007, 14:25 »
0
Although my sales have been ok in June, even after the transition, they have indeed decreased in the past week.  I can't say however how much is the "northern-summer-vacation effect".

Regards,
Adelaide


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Fotolia down?

Started by Ron Adobe Stock

0 Replies
1962 Views
Last post March 11, 2014, 15:11
by Ron
4 Replies
3093 Views
Last post May 28, 2014, 06:13
by MxR
12 Replies
3727 Views
Last post September 21, 2014, 17:57
by wordplanet
7 Replies
3279 Views
Last post March 08, 2015, 12:57
by Noedelhap
1 Replies
2121 Views
Last post July 25, 2015, 13:17
by dirkr

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle