Author Topic: Here we go: 500px eroding prices (Read 14763 times)

MarcvsTvllivs · « **Reply #25 on:** August 19, 2015, 01:44 »

Quote from: trek on August 18, 2015, 17:10

Thumbs up to 500px for jumping in with proactive contributor support. Makes me want to join. But please fix the watermarks! Maybe add a move to center watermark option for contributors who worry about such things.

Ideed! Great support. I personally don't mind the watermark issue, either.

skyfish · « **Reply #26 on:** August 19, 2015, 07:45 »

Quote from: PR Image Factory on August 13, 2015, 22:30

I think the biggest issue is all about watermark for me!!!

Joining. Still don't want to upload more images there just because of this problem.

MarcvsTvllivs · « **Reply #29 on:** August 21, 2015, 11:15 »

After going through the all my images to see what collection they're in and doing some more tests I must say that I am pretty unhappy with the way this was done. Or rather: I just don't understand what 500px is going for here.

(1) The only one of my images which ever sold for a large amount on 500px (as I said before, $275 for me, so my calculator tells me it must have been a pretty impressive $392.8571428571429 gross sale price) is one of the relatively few of my images that are now in Core. It is somewhere on page four of the search for all main keywords. Really? A customer willing to pay almost $400 bucks for an RF image is no vote of confidence to you? I don't get it.

(2) The collections make absolutely no sense in general. Prime images don't look better. Prime images aren't better fits to what people look for.

In fact, I have a little pet test that I just happened to find while searching for an image one day: I search for "Harvard". This search is a great test because it reveals the weaknesses most sites' search engines have with strong, distinctive single keyword searches. I would wager that like me, 99.9% of people searching that single keyword want a nice representative image of Harvard University campus. Now, on sites that are absolutely terrible with single word searches (I am looking at you, Alamy), what will come up is tons of images of vials in a lab or whatever, and of a vintage airplane that is apparently called Harvard. The effect is that people have to wade through tons of things (or bother to improve their search) to find what they want. Try the same thing on Shutterstock, and the relevance of images is awesome.

The effect with 500px Prime's new system is absolutely ridiculous. Search for this one keyword only in Prime collection images, and instead of the many great Harvard campus images on 500px being drowned out by the wrong stuff, they don't show up at all, and there is no trace of their existence. There are only four results. These: https://prime.500px.com/search/keywords=harvard&availability=prime_collection So instead of thinking "there is just too much stuff here and the system doesn't get what I want" one is left thinking "this site has very few images and apparently none of them relate to my needs".

TL;DR: What are you even trying to do here, 500px?

The site hasn't become more searchable, and the new lower price tier still isn't cheap enough to be anywhere near competitive with normal (micro)stock. So what are you doing, 500px? I don't get it.

Mantis · « **Reply #30 on:** August 22, 2015, 15:40 »

Quote from: nuno on August 19, 2015, 08:48

Quote from: skyfish on August 19, 2015, 07:45
Quote from: PR Image Factory on August 13, 2015, 22:30
I think the biggest issue is all about watermark for me!!!
Joining. Still don't want to upload more images there just because of this problem.

It's still high on our list of things to do. While we focus on trying to get our contributors more sales by building features infront and behind the scenes, we're also working on things that our photographers are asking for. It's a balancing act no doubt wehn you have limited developer resources (we're hiring btw). Having said that, there is currently work being done on watermarking including reaching out to photographers on 500px and even in communities like this one to figure out what our next iterations will be.

I would think protecting copyrighted assets would be highest on the list before you even launched the site.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #31 on:** August 24, 2015, 08:29 »

If you want Harvard University campus why don't you search Harvard University campus. https://prime.500px.com/search/keywords=Harvard+University+campus Buyers are smart enough to figure that out, why can't you? A one word search is not a good test of a search. Many word search is much better. The search fails the most on IS. If it's not an exact match to all the words it returns, no results.

How does 500px have 50 million images?

MarcvsTvllivs · « **Reply #32 on:** August 25, 2015, 03:36 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on August 24, 2015, 08:29

If you want Harvard University campus why don't you search Harvard University campus. https://prime.500px.com/search/keywords=Harvard+University+campus Buyers are smart enough to figure that out, why can't you? A one word search is not a good test of a search. Many word search is much better. The search fails the most on IS. If it's not an exact match to all the words it returns, no results.

One word searches, especially for big names, are super common. Just check your dreamstime sales history (they tell you the search term). Or try Alamy measures, lots of one word searches (which, considering how terrible Alamy is with one word searches, is surprising). And as I said, they can work very well, as they do on Shutterstock.

wordplanet · « **Reply #33 on:** August 25, 2015, 09:37 »

The price difference between the two categories doesn't seem that great until you get to the largest size, but it does seem to make some midstock and some premium which isn't a bad idea - however, closing the collections based on "likes" by photographers active on the site doesn't seem like a great way to curate a collection IMHO.

I felt 500px had a lot of potential but only have a handful of photos on there since they seem to want us to buy into the system and I don't think the sales level justifies paying them to license my work, and honestly I was concerned I'd spend time uploading and find they had changed it to pay to play - and uploading was so cumbersome if you wanted your own watermark - now 500px prime has a tiny watermark but allows right click downloads which makes it way too easy to steal images. I feel like their commitment to protecting my work just isn't there. I really want them to succeed because I like their prices and it seems like in many ways they are really committed to photographers but their lax attitude toward image protection leaves me leery. I feel torn because I want to support a place that is working toward fair prices for photographers.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #35 on:** August 28, 2015, 13:04 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on August 24, 2015, 08:29

If you want Harvard University campus why don't you search Harvard University campus. https://prime.500px.com/search/keywords=Harvard+University+campus Buyers are smart enough to figure that out, why can't you? A one word search is not a good test of a search. Many word search is much better. The search fails the most on IS. If it's not an exact match to all the words it returns, no results.

How does 500px have 50 million images?

not a good question to ask Havard graduates. real story here next...
1995 or around that, my family visited Boston to see Cheers and then went in to visit Harvard. we asked several of the geniuses there where Cambridge , not the University but the part of Boston area (Cambridge Street) where they had brazilian restaurants , Brazilian record shops,etc.. We got a blank stare from each of the brains.
We later ask the guy cleaning trash and he told us it's not far, ...
and we found it, not very far from Harvard.

now, that (asking for direction to a place not far ) is a lot simpler than expecting a Harvard grad to use "search"

Mantis · « **Reply #36 on:** August 28, 2015, 18:02 »

Quote from: nuno on August 26, 2015, 03:07

Let me just correct some misinformation:

Quote from: wordplanet on August 25, 2015, 09:37
The price difference between the two categories doesn't seem that great until you get to the largest size, but it does seem to make some midstock and some premium which isn't a bad idea - however, closing the collections based on "likes" by photographers active on the site doesn't seem like a great way to curate a collection IMHO.

The collections aren't curated by likes, there are actual editors (humans) who review photos and handpick photos for the Prime Collection.

Quote from: wordplanet on August 25, 2015, 09:37
I felt 500px had a lot of potential but only have a handful of photos on there since they seem to want us to buy into the system and I don't think the sales level justifies paying them to license my work, and honestly I was concerned I'd spend time uploading and find they had changed it to pay to play

You never have had to have a paid membership to contribute to the marketplace. If the concern was the limited number of uploads you get after your first 3 months (free premium membership) I'll gladly upgrade your account if you're interested in contributing to the marketplace and need to get your first batch up.

Quote from: wordplanet on August 25, 2015, 09:37
I feel like their commitment to protecting my work just isn't there. I really want them to succeed because I like their prices and it seems like in many ways they are really committed to photographers but their lax attitude toward image protection leaves me leery. I feel torn because I want to support a place that is working toward fair prices for photographers.

Watermarks are a small enforcement measure which is gradually becoming obsolete - but we will address ours and are currently in testing of new watermarks to ease concerns. The reality is watermarks are not the end-all solution - after a photo is licensed, your work is out there unwatermarked - possibly in higher resolutions with minimal protections. Try searching torrents by stock photo agency name. Not sure the savvy internet thief is wasting their time right-clicking on stock site photo pages but rather using Google Image search or just finding torrents of collections. /rant

We have a very active license compliance service that scours the internet and fines infringers on content marked as exclusive to 500px (money we pay back to our contributors - not sure how many other agencies do that). We're also very active with DMCAs and have some rudimentary technology to prevent easy "right-clicking" of unwatermarked images. TLDR; Watermarking is not the only way we're protecting our contributor's work, but it is something we're looking to improve.

It's only becoming obsolete because the agencies get greedier by the day and are willing to risk OUR assets (not their assets) for a more appealing look so as to hook buyers. In the meantime, once the word is out that people can snag large displayed images freely we are left with less legal remedy options than that of a licensed asset. By not putting a large watermark on the image you offer up that smorgasbord.

Once an image is licensed by any agency there is a risk of abuse. That's not new to 500PX. Image misuse post purchase has been a risk since the invention of RM, it was just harder to do and a less frequent occurrence. We have a lot more legal leverage after an image is properly licensed, but when you offer up a way to nab freebies you degrade copyright.

NONE of your excuses above justify not watermarking our work. I am just laughing at your silly statements.

Dumc · « **Reply #37 on:** September 10, 2015, 02:56 »

So, does anybody knows what is the difference between prime and core collection?

I mean, which files are sold as prime and which as core?

Dumc · « **Reply #38 on:** September 11, 2015, 07:52 »

Ok, I just read a whole thread. Apparently prime has "best" photos, which is odd, because I found there some photos that looked like a "snapshot".

wordplanet · « **Reply #39 on:** September 11, 2015, 08:57 »

Nuno, I appreciate your offer but I'm still not sure that I'm comfortable with the site. I went on to prime and was able to right click and download a 560 x 373 pixel image which is large enough for a blogger to use, no watermarks, all the ITPC info other than the RAW data stripped out. I deleted it immediately but if I was looking to find gorgeous images for a blog and was unscrupulous, it would be so easy.

I recognize that anyone can steal images once they've been licensed and are on the web or via a google images search which gives you one that's often 800 pixels wide, and I'm still considering making more of an effort with 500px because I like your concept.

My concern wasn't that I had to pay to upload photos, but rather that over time you would change that and become a stock agency where everyone had to pay for the privilege of having their images available on your site. I guess I'm still on the fence about 500px but I appreciate your coming in here and responding to my concerns as well as your effort to get fair prices for photographers, though $300 for prints for resale seems very cheap and gives me pause, especially since that seems to be a big focus of your business. Stocky photos for mugs is one thing but fine travel and nature images that can be reproduced to compete with those same images on POD sites is a concern. I recognize other sites sell those licenses as well, but it seems to be a big focus on 500px.

I'll send you a PM if I decide to take you up on your offer to let me upload more images. The site is beautiful and I am committed to supporting sites that aim for fair pricing. I appreciate your efforts in that direction and your taking the time to come on here and respond to my concerns.

Nikovsk · « **Reply #40 on:** October 02, 2015, 10:49 »

They're rejecting all my SS best sellers. Waste of time.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Here we go: 500px eroding prices (Read 14763 times)

MarcvsTvllivs

skyfish

nuno

nuno

MarcvsTvllivs

Mantis

YadaYadaYada

MarcvsTvllivs

wordplanet

nuno

etudiante_rapide

Mantis

Dumc

Dumc

wordplanet

Nikovsk

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors