MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: How many of you would?....  (Read 3294 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 08, 2008, 04:07 »
0
... take a part in some microstockers organization - some kind of syndicate, or something like that? with some strict rules.
 on example - one of basic rules would be - if agency blackmails some of members, or all the contributors for various reasons - whole organization to give-back -either with "no, we do not agree with this - we'll delete all of our images" ? -and to be ready to act that way?
 


RT


« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2008, 04:48 »
0
Not me, I'm in this business for myself and I will make my own business decisions, I'll also decide what action I choose to support at the appropriate time.

And IMHO if anybody does sign up to your idea now, when the time came they would do exactly what I've described above.

All these sort of suggestions sound good on paper but remember one thing, we are all independant competing against each other in the same industry, the union theory could not, would not and has not worked.

« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2008, 05:22 »
0
I would do this. That's why syndicates are made for, and it works in practice. I am a member of a syndicate and it works really good. We could finally protect our selves from agencies that act cruel sometimes. And we could finally get some more money for our work they sell (don't tell me they can't give us more).
It is possible to make some organization like this. But, again, unfortunately, I doubt it's really possible to do it easy. There are too many people like RT who don't believe in this idea. 

RT


« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2008, 06:54 »
0
There are too many people like RT who don't believe in this idea. 

Exactly my point!

But on a serious note we are already in a syndicate - here and other forums like it, there have already been situations where we as a syndicate have influenced decisions by some of the microstock sites, but it was done independently by each member under their own freewill.

To be dictated too by an organisation is something I and many others who operate independently will never do, and that is what the OP is suggesting.


« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2008, 09:36 »
0
 here where i live, we say something like: " if there is a willing - there is (must be) a way" .

- in every business people that do some job are individual competitors - but, there is also something called "loyalty to the profession"
 every good change in the history was done when there was a critical mass of individuals who were willing to make these changes. - and  yes - "everyone told them it's impossible" .
 from the other hand - monopole is a good thing in business  ;) - for one that have this monopole. - and we-contributors are in the position to have monopole on the industry. microstock images are ours - not our ma's, or aliens, or whoever.. - WE have images. customers buy images. not sites, not customer supports, not ftp uploads, not... - the main reason why we are all here are our images.

 of course this would be hard, but impossible? - not.
 i just wondered. (remember StockXpert recently ;) ) - if we want something (or do not want) - there has to be (and there always is) a way.

RT


« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2008, 11:51 »
0
- in every business people that do some job are individual competitors - but, there is also something called "loyalty to the profession"
 every good change in the history was done when there was a critical mass of individuals who were willing to make these changes. - and  yes - "everyone told them it's impossible" .

I've highlighted the very point I was trying to make, and therefore I think you're arguing with yourself.

We are all individuals, we may at times have a collective understanding but we all make our own decisions based on our individual and independant situations and as such your suggestion:

"some kind of syndicate, or something like that? with some strict rules.
 on example - one of basic rules would be - if agency blackmails some of members, or all the contributors for various reasons - whole organization to give-back -either with "no, we do not agree with this - we'll delete all of our images" ? -and to be ready to act that way?"


will never ever happen, do you honestly think anyone will delete all their images based on the decision of the syndicate! of course they won't.

« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2008, 11:58 »
0
Who would decide what was fair and unfair?
What would be the criteria for allowing a photographer in the "guild"?
Would you weigh a new portfolio the same as you would weigh an established portfolio?
Would someone fresh and new have the same opinion "weight" as someone that has been around a few years?

See, I was cautious about the StockXpert issue, but all I read were angry mobs with pitchforks wondering who brought the match to light the fire.

Companies give us approximate dates they are going to start something, and at 12:01am that morning, people start bitching that things aren't happening yet.

It's these hysterical individuals that would keep me out of an organization such as this.  If they were controllable, they wouldn't be posting such nonsense in the first place. But if you lock them out, then you become another one of the "Nazi" forums that only post good things.

So, thanks, but no thanks.  If the micros don't pay enough, go midstock. If your quality isn't up to midstock standards, then you have something to work toward, don't you?

Gebbie

« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2008, 12:39 »
0
My father grew up in the "golden era" of unions.  When they were actually doing good for workers by forcing companies to improve working conditions and stop taking advantage of people.  But things got to a point where unions were no longer an agent for positive change and themselves just became bullies.  Today's unions (here in the U.S.) bear little resemblance to those of the past.  Today they care more about keeping power than the actual works in the unions.

A "Microstock Union" or Syndicate would probably do some good early on and force positive change, but in the end they would destroy the industry altogether.  It's their nature as the people in charge become corrupted by their power.

What would work better would simply be to spread the work among MS submitters about forums like this and get them to participate in open discussions.  From those open discussions, enough may band together for a single cause or two (such as what happened with StockXpert).

« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2008, 14:21 »
0
yes, i agree with the posts above completely too.
but again... if there is enough of faith - the hills can be moved.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2008, 20:25 »
0
If something affects a whole group of people, most people will stick together. An example being the StockXpert issue.

If the issue affects one person most people will only help that person if it also does not put themselves at risk or cause loss of some sort. It's human nature.

« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2008, 02:42 »
0
yes, but, helping other people is also in the human nature.  and thirst for justice either.
well... let's put this that way... i am also a sport-shooter, and sportfisherman. - angler. (means, that i catch fishes on some wooden/metal/plastic baits - one by one).
(i'm just to go on the river today :) ) - when i see a group of fishes active, i am mostly able to catch 'em all. o.k. - i'm a C&R, but, if i would not be the one - there would not be any fish in the river behind me. - whole school of fishes - with "one by one" method would be grounded.
  -when i catch one - this is not other fishes problem, and whole group actually is not really affected. - and, again, one-by-one - thay are all gone.. (hm... i just become a poet, on English language  :) :) ) -and if i would drop a fishing net - that would be noticed by whole school as a "general" problem, and they would all try to escape, and most of them would - i would catch only a few.
 interesting? one-by-one - and all fishes gone,
 catch'em all - and almost all are free.
 and you got my point - if fishes were organized, and have a good communication - when i drop my lure in the first cast - if whole bunch were alarmed, and act as one body - to swim away - i would catch none.
have a good day my friends, until tomorrow.
"gone fishin' "

« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2008, 03:54 »
0
Ok, maybe noone will delete all images online, but we could make some organisation to stand beside us when someone of us need help. Maybe deleting all images is to much to ask, but together we are stronger and we could surely make some things work out faster

« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2008, 04:15 »
0
of course that acts would never ever be necessary . - when you have an atomic bomb - you actually do not have to use one. -that's pretty enough for the other side to know that you have one, and that you won't hesitate to use one, -if you have to.
that's how every business works. fair deal? hm... not sure... pretty fair? - sometimes..
 and there is only one atomic bomb on this market - our images. only one side has one -we - the contributors. problem is that is broken apart on small selfish portfolios of each of us.
 just imagine that strength which starts with "we - the Contributors ..."  ;)
 well' 11 15'. my fishing-start time is 11 30'. so..


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle