Author Topic: Which sites did you gave up on? (Read 21765 times)

CD123 · « **Reply #50 on:** August 25, 2012, 05:47 »

Quote from: Oleg on August 25, 2012, 04:37

Quote from: luissantos84 on August 23, 2012, 14:23
only cutcaster but because I was kicked out after saying they were dead with no sales (I am sure most of you know this but I will keep on saying it)
And after such cases, many photographers still licking ass agencies

Unfortunately it seems like bashing the agencies shows some sort of manhood around here (especially if you make sure you are anonymous so you can "freely speak your mind" without being responsible for your statements).
In my opinion, if you actively contribute to an agency, they deserve your full support, as their success is directly linked to yours. So helping them with advice and support wherever one can and praising good service and/or business decisions is the decent and logical thing to do.

PS: If I have a business and a "supplier" bad mouthed my business I will kick him/her so fast out of there, their heads will spin.
Think it is quite arrogant to stand cupped hand to collect money from someone and slap him in the face with the other.

heywoody · « **Reply #51 on:** August 25, 2012, 06:56 »

"He who bites the hand that feeds him will lick the boot that kicks him." Still, "bad mouthing" is one thing, criticising manifestly obvious flaws is another

Wim · « **Reply #52 on:** August 25, 2012, 07:02 »

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47

Quote from: Oleg on August 25, 2012, 04:37
Quote from: luissantos84 on August 23, 2012, 14:23
only cutcaster but because I was kicked out after saying they were dead with no sales (I am sure most of you know this but I will keep on saying it)
And after such cases, many photographers still licking ass agencies

Unfortunately it seems like bashing the agencies shows some sort of manhood around here (especially if you make sure you are anonymous so you can "freely speak your mind" without being responsible for your statements).
In my opinion, if you actively contribute to an agency, they deserve your full support, as their success is directly linked to yours. So helping them with advice and support wherever one can and praising good service and/or business decisions is the decent and logical thing to do.

Are you kidding me? it's luis? he's not exactly the phantom of stock now is he?
If all agencies would kick people out for what has been said on any forum a lot of the top sellers would be gone already, even Sean, Lisa and a lot of others.
Supporting them in every way? we do that with our work, the support should go both ways, or should we start suing them for not living up to all their promises?
I will support any agency that deserves it. How can one help with advice if support is ignored on most agencies anyway. Decent and logical are not words that come to mind when I think about the micro industry my friend.

John from CC seems like a good guy and when I left his agency for the same reason as Luis he told me I could come back anytime so it's a different experience for everyone, but then, I'm a nice guy

If everyone kept their mouth shut and support agencies in every business decision they make we would probably have to live off 0.1% commissions.

Good weekend all

Mantis · « **Reply #53 on:** August 25, 2012, 07:40 »

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47

Quote from: Oleg on August 25, 2012, 04:37
Quote from: luissantos84 on August 23, 2012, 14:23
only cutcaster but because I was kicked out after saying they were dead with no sales (I am sure most of you know this but I will keep on saying it)
And after such cases, many photographers still licking ass agencies

Unfortunately it seems like bashing the agencies shows some sort of manhood around here (especially if you make sure you are anonymous so you can "freely speak your mind" without being responsible for your statements).
In my opinion, if you actively contribute to an agency, they deserve your full support, as their success is directly linked to yours. So helping them with advice and support wherever one can and praising good service and/or business decisions is the decent and logical thing to do.

PS: If I have a business and a "supplier" bad mouthed my business I will kick him/her so fast out of there, their heads will spin.
Think it is quite arrogant to stand cupped hand to collect money from someone and slap him in the face with the other.

While I agree with you that it is easy to bash an agency (and it does weight heavily on these forums more than praising agencies), I would venture to say that most of the negative posts are warranted. In one of the forum topics of late I recall someone posted a laundry list of legitimate moves agencies make that screw the contributor, broken promises and commission cuts to name a couple. Some people in here, anonymous or not, rely on income from MS to support their families and, frankly, their overall quality of life. 123, for example, plans to use a failed RC system come January, thus squeezing contributors of commissions. Am I supposed to support that? Keep my mouth shut in silent disagreement? No. And when someone starts a topic to discuss it, you can rest assured that most of the posts will be interpreted as bashing when in fact it is very frustrated artists who work hard for their income venting that the value of their work has once again been diminished. This happens with search changes, too, that are tactically set up to maximize income for the agency regardless of the contributor, mostly. Istock is a good example of this. How many people are growing their sales as they upload new content? Not many. Why? It's the unfairness of their search, so we vent (bashing in your words). Very few agencies make decisions that favor contributors. If they did you'd see these forums change, maybe not 100%, but change toward the whooorah tone.

Just my opinion, of course.

Wim · « **Reply #54 on:** August 25, 2012, 07:58 »

Quote from: Mantis on August 25, 2012, 07:40

Just my opinion, of course.

And a good one.

A good example of outing our frustrations here with a positive outcome was the Veer/Alamy thread.

EmberMike · « **Reply #55 on:** August 25, 2012, 09:04 »

Quote from: CD123

...In my opinion, if you actively contribute to an agency, they deserve your full support, as their success is directly linked to yours. So helping them with advice and support wherever one can and praising good service and/or business decisions is the decent and logical thing to do...

The companies most frequently bad mouthed around here are the recipients of criticism because they aren't always acting decently and logically themselves. I'd be ashamed and embarrassed to openly support a company that operated in a way that was detrimental to the industry or hurt me as an individual contributor.

Companies are deserving of praise based on how they act, and not on the simple fact that we do business with them.

ShadySue · « **Reply #56 on:** August 25, 2012, 09:37 »

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47

PS: If I have a business and a "supplier" bad mouthed my business I will kick him/her so fast out of there, their heads will spin.

Yeah, that attitude is why there are so many sweatshops out there, and so many millionaires benefitting from them.

ShadySue · « **Reply #57 on:** August 25, 2012, 09:46 »

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47

So helping them with advice and support wherever one can and praising good service and/or business decisions is the decent and logical thing to do.

Do they welcome our 'advice and support'?
Sometimes raising issues does make a difference, but not often enough.

'Praising good business decisions' is all well and good, but as the business matures, we're off the koolaid into the hard world of reality, and know that what might seem good seems to lead to something bad along the way.
e.g. Vettan/Agency/editorial at first seemed like, woo-way, more scope for us, but it was really a way of ingesting a huge pile of sometimes only semi-exclusive stuff, which didn't need to fulfil the normal criteria of IQ or keywording and selling them at a premium, to the confusion of buyers and the detriment of the brand.
So even seemingly good ideas can bite us on the bum later on, and everything is now greeted with a degree of healthy scepicism.
There are similar stories from other agencies, of course.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #58 on:** August 25, 2012, 10:13 »

if iStock had that business logic, 95% of the contributors would have been kicked out over the last 2 years

(guess I don´t need to say why and what everybody talks about)

what can you say of an agency having 1500 files of yours during 2 years and have sold you 2 files for 1.17$? they are alive? I believe agencies need to understand what we are saying, not feeling offended, I havent said that John or Cora were dead, I have said that for me they (Cutcaster) were dead, people need to chill out when they see they haven´t progressed much and accept their failures like we do when we work on a concept/picture and it doesn´t sell as we have pictured

how many times have you heard contributors here complaining about DT, FT, IS? yes its a long list and I believe there isn´t a single contributor that haven´t attacked them at least once, havent you CD123?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #59 on:** August 25, 2012, 10:16 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 25, 2012, 09:46

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47
Quote from: Oleg on August 25, 2012, 04:37
Quote from: luissantos84 on August 23, 2012, 14:23
So helping them with advice and support wherever one can and praising good service and/or business decisions is the decent and logical thing to do.
Do they welcome our 'advice and support'?
Sometimes raising issues does make a difference, but not often enough.

'Praising good business decisions' is all well and good, but as the business matures, we're off the koolaid into the hard world of reality, and know that what might seem good seems to lead to something bad along the way.
e.g. Vettan/Agency/editorial at first seemed like, woo-way, more scope for us, but it was really a way of ingesting a huge pile of sometimes only semi-exclusive stuff, which didn't need to fulfil the normal criteria of IQ or keywording and selling them at a premium, to the confusion of buyers and the detriment of the brand.
So even seemingly good ideas can bite us on the bum later on, and everything is now greeted with a degree of healthy scepicism.
There are similar stories from other agencies, of course.

I haven´t said that Sue, sorry

luissantos84 · « **Reply #60 on:** August 25, 2012, 10:16 »

delete please

ShadySue · « **Reply #61 on:** August 25, 2012, 10:59 »

Quote from: Oleg

I haven´t said that Sue, sorry

Sorry, I somehow lost the quoting chain.
I've deleted it in my original.

velocicarpo · « **Reply #62 on:** August 25, 2012, 11:29 »

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47

Unfortunately it seems like bashing the agencies shows some sort of manhood around here (especially if you make sure you are anonymous so you can "freely speak your mind" without being responsible for your statements).

Well, I am one of those anonymous poster. I believe in free speech. If I would be an Agency I would welcome criticism and overlook too hars comments or bashes and would live the concept as free speech - as an agency too. Sadly, the past had shown that many Agencies have a very low self esteem or moral values and even consider constructive criticism as a reason to block accounts etc. This leads for me to the conclusion:
Yeah, you are right. Actually I would prefer to be able to speak with my name since this would give my statements more value. But playing a clean game requires two sides who play under the same rules. As long as Agencies do not show the needed maturity to handle criticism I stay anonymous.

Also, please note that there is the psychological effect of self censorship. This emans that many people will not express their true opinion in order to avoid some potential or estimated consequences. Therefore, even if we talk about insults against myself, I prefer a true statement over a political correct one.

CD123 · « **Reply #63 on:** August 25, 2012, 12:03 »

The point was to give praise where it is due. To assist where assistance is due and required by sites which still upheld some level of ethics. The point was never made not to criticize where it was due. Just think some balance is required.

Those who never has anything good to say about any site, specializes in "spitting" at everything and everyone opposing their opinions and preaches that Microstock has turned evil and has nothing good to offer any longer, should, like some showing some backbone here and are prepared to put their stock where their mouths are, just leave the industry.

That's just my 5 cents worth.

PS: Yes of course I have criticized sites where I felt it due, with my user name known. Criticism can be given in a decent manner. I do not have to hide behind anonymity to cover ill mannered statements. If I get booted for that, it goes, in my opinion, to the bad of the site and am I better of without it. Your choice on how you do it.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #64 on:** August 25, 2012, 13:47 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 25, 2012, 10:59

Quote from: Oleg
I haven´t said that Sue, sorry

Sorry, I somehow lost the quoting chain.
I've deleted it in my original.

the quoting is mess ahah (looks like working now)

luissantos84 · « **Reply #65 on:** August 25, 2012, 13:58 »

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 12:03

Those who never has anything good to say about any site, specializes in "spitting" at everything and everyone opposing their opinions and preaches that Microstock has turned evil and has nothing good to offer any longer, should, like some showing some backbone here and are prepared to put their stock where their mouths are, just leave the industry.

I agree totally BUT it doesn´t mean we need to eat everything they throw at us, I remember Photodune paying 25% and we got them to pay 33% (not saying it is enough) but as a "community" we made that happen. There are a few examples on Veer too. Agencies need to take criticism like we do here when there are "attacks". Kicking out doesn´t seem correct/ethic and back at that time when they (Cutcaster) kicked me out, I have talked with many contributors and there wasn´t one saying they had the right attitude.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #66 on:** August 25, 2012, 14:18 »

I really wonder how and why they are a fair stock agency

http://www.fairstockphotoagency.com/

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #67 on:** August 25, 2012, 17:09 »

I left 123RF over disagreement on how my image/revenue was used.
And, Cutcaster after learning how payouts were calculated.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #68 on:** August 25, 2012, 17:36 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on August 25, 2012, 17:09

Cutcaster after learning how payouts were calculated.

please elaborate

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #69 on:** August 25, 2012, 17:58 »

Not much to elaborate, Luis. After John had promised me 50% on All Sales to settle an earlier disagreement, I found that all credit card charges were being deducted from MY 50%.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #70 on:** August 25, 2012, 18:15 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on August 25, 2012, 17:58

Not much to elaborate, Luis. After John had promised me 50% on All Sales to settle an earlier disagreement, I found that all credit card charges were being deducted from MY 50%.

at paypal?

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #71 on:** August 25, 2012, 18:40 »

RacePhoto · « **Reply #72 on:** August 26, 2012, 10:11 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 25, 2012, 09:37

Quote from: CD123 on August 25, 2012, 05:47
PS: If I have a business and a "supplier" bad mouthed my business I will kick him/her so fast out of there, their heads will spin.
Yeah, that attitude is why there are so many sweatshops out there, and so many millionaires benefitting from them.

That's why I won't feed and encourage the parasites that feed off the people who will put up everything they have, anywhere, in hope of making a few dollars more. Some day folks will wake up and see that supporting the low paying and non-paying sites, is a waste of time and effort and that it cuts into sales at the good, working, agencies. It drags down prices and dilutes the industry.

Sweatshops by choice, now there's another good one.

It's right up there with, make money selling those photos you took with your pocket camera, that are just sitting on your hard drive. Maybe 5-6 years ago, but the requirements, review standards, time investment, equipment investment and dedication have changed. It's not a little entertaining cottage industry marketplace anymore.

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #73 on:** August 26, 2012, 12:00 »

FT - Allows POD's and have cheap EL's

Yaymicro - No sales period

AYCS - Also no sales period not even on the ones for order

Photodune - Waiting for next response from support on uploading procedure! Why compress an already compressed JPEG? And they say my titles have a # sign in them which they dont but the album does because they are all cataloged by catalog #!

Istock - They are a joke.

EmberMike · « **Reply #74 on:** August 26, 2012, 12:29 »

Funny how the timing of this thread worked out. I'm taking istock off my "giving up on them" list. For now, anyway. With the new policy allowing text in vectors, which effectively opens the door for most of my 2012 work to now be uploaded to istock, I'm willing to give them another chance.

My fear is that the rumor may be true and new royalty rate cuts may still be on the calendar for some time later this year. Taking the time to upload a bunch of new stuff only to be slapped in the face in a few months if the cuts do happen would be enough for me to stick a nail in that old coffin once and for all. But as it stands now, and despite the already very low rate I'm getting, istock does still manage to convince people that images are worth more there than elsewhere in microstock, and if people want to pay the high price so that I can still get a decent commission (even if it's at a low percentage), then I'm willing to give it one more try.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Which sites did you gave up on? (Read 21765 times)

CD123

heywoody

Wim

Mantis

Wim

EmberMike

ShadySue

ShadySue

luissantos84

luissantos84

luissantos84

ShadySue

velocicarpo

CD123

luissantos84

luissantos84

luissantos84

WarrenPrice

luissantos84

WarrenPrice

luissantos84

WarrenPrice

RacePhoto

ruxpriencdiam

EmberMike

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors