I would be happy if the French government banned subscriptions.

Quote from: stockmarketer on July 18, 2011, 20:16

Quote from: gostwyck on July 18, 2011, 20:00
Can you or anyone actually explain what this dispute is about? The thread title says 'fraud' which obviously is something that does need regulation.

The blog referenced in the other post describes it this way:

"French law designated as void  any sale of goods, product and services that is priced at infinitesimal price.  For example, if one was to purchase one image on Istockphoto for let's say $5 and use this image for a book, a magazine, an ad campaign, a brochure, on a TV set, in a Movie set, over and over again for 70 years ( life of a copyright), it would amount for less than a cent per usage. Under this law, that pricing is so low that it would not constitute a sale. Thus become illegal."

By definition, such a law would make all microstock contracts illegal. Any image sold without  predefined usage with a time limit would constitute an infinitesimally small price (less than 1 cent). One image at screen res for a site with 1 million visitors/year gets under 1 cent/use pretty fast even if it cost $1,000 to purchase. And don't mention subs pricing!

Quote from: madelaide on July 18, 2011, 22:03
I would be happy if the French government banned subscriptions.

I have been wondering for a while if there are any buyers with annual limit subscription plans, which we suppose to get from 1.7 to 3.1 depending ranking

I guess the investigators would be interested in what we've been discussing too:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/image-sleuth/visionbedding-com/msg211134/?topicseen#new

Fotolia telling contributors that they sell extended licenses for printing derivative products, when actually it seems they may strike up shady deals with suppliers to sidestep the extended license fee, which will often leave the contributor with one tenth of the promised payment.

Maybe i can explain the UPP request:

UPP, who is an association for professional Photographers in France, wants investigations on Fotolia because french government has given to Fotolia the "Hadopi" label. This label means that Fotolia is a fair photo agency, "Hadopi" is a french government stupid project against internet fraud.
Upp claiming that microstock agencies going to kill all professional photographers in the world, because they selling photos at very low cost and for unlimited use.
Actually, more and more photographers are dying because of the microstock competition, and because professional magazines are buying low cost and bad quality pictures instead of high quality and high price pictures. That's the request of UPP: kill the RF licence to avoid the death of the photographers and the declining quality of the photography. UPP claiming also that RF license isn't a fair license in France.

Quote from: Smithore on July 23, 2011, 12:55
Maybe i can explain the UPP request:

UPP, who is an association for professional Photographers in France, wants investigations on Fotolia because french government has given to Fotolia the "Hadopi" label. This label means that Fotolia is a fair photo agency, "Hadopi" is a french government stupid project against internet fraud.
Upp claiming that microstock agencies going to kill all professional photographers in the world, because they selling photos at very low cost and for unlimited use.
Actually, more and more photographers are dying because of the microstock competition, and because professional magazines are buying low cost and bad quality pictures instead of high quality and high price pictures. That's the request of UPP: kill the RF licence to avoid the death of the photographers and the declining quality of the photography. UPP claiming also that RF license isn't a fair license in France.

+1

Belgium to...

Quote from: Smithore on July 23, 2011, 12:55
Actually, more and more photographers are dying because of the microstock competition, and because professional magazines are buying low cost and bad quality pictures instead of high quality and high price pictures.

That's the request of UPP: kill the RF licence to avoid the death of the photographers and the declining quality of the photography.

This is both ridiculous and offensive.  I am a professional photographer and with free will I submit my images to be sold Royalty Free.  What an arrogant and ignorant claim that Microstock is resulting in declining quality.  I know the subject of Micro vs. Macro has been beaten to death so I won't go on but man that gets my blood boiling.

Mat

'Actually, more and more photographers are dying because of the microstock competition, and because professional magazines are buying low cost and bad quality pictures instead of high quality and high price pictures.'

Lol, sounds like French photographers are the equivalent of that Luminous Landscape guy and his tree in a field pic from 8 years ago.  'Bad Quality', my croissant.

Suppose France (and maybe even Belgium) decide that the RF model is unfair.  Suppose they then ban those kinds of licenses in their countries (a bit of a stretch I would say).

So what?  The rest of the world goes on it's merry way looking for the lowest common denominator.  France would accomplish nothing.  Photographers won't benefit either.

I've heard economists say that cheap always drives out quality.  It sucks but that's the world we live in.

These words are not mine but from the UPP, be aware!!
But in some way, you can understand this:
for example, in some times, nobody gonna to pay a professional photographer to go taking pictures of specific rares animals for doing a reportage, the magazine prefer pay some cents to download again and again the same pictures of this animal. So the information quality and pictures rarities going to an average level, like wikipedia is an average encyclopedia.
Personally i think that it's only internet effect, who is a so new technology in the human history, and everything is going evolve further...I hope.

Quote from: MatHayward on July 23, 2011, 17:16

Quote from: Smithore on July 23, 2011, 12:55
Actually, more and more photographers are dying because of the microstock competition, and because professional magazines are buying low cost and bad quality pictures instead of high quality and high price pictures.

That's the request of UPP: kill the RF licence to avoid the death of the photographers and the declining quality of the photography.

...  What an arrogant and ignorant claim that Microstock is resulting in declining quality. 

On top of that (I don't disagree, but I think something else is very important too), what arrogance to tell a business what it may and may not buy. If a business has decided what is "good enough" for their needs, who cares if someone else - government or cheesed-off ex-supplier - doesn't like or approve of their choice?

I think the bad quality claim is ludicrous, but even if it were true, that's the magazines' issue to decide, not theirs.

Likewise I won't go into the micro vs. macro,  typographers vs. desktop publishing,  live musicians vs. dastardly recorded music or the many other arguments of this sort over the years.

Let's hope his movement succeds and this business HAS TO move on to something bigger and better, from all I can see the photogs are impotent to do anything, so if this doesn't get a kick in the ass it will just go on like this untill sales dilute to nothin'. You can rant all you want but it's inevitable that this business model will eat itself for the photographers.

Quote from: lthn on July 23, 2011, 20:31
You can rant all you want but it's inevitable that this business model will eat itself for the photographers.

That's the spirit!  I have never been able to wrap my mind around this type of hypocrisy.  If that is how you feel, why are you participating?  This subject has been covered so many times in so many ways but the root remains true.  The need for current, high quality photographs will not go away.  As the internet world continues to grow exponentially so does the need for relevant photographs. 

What will happen in my opinion is that the cream will rise to the top and the days of mediocre photography will end soon.  Lazy/passive photographers that only upload a couple hundred images every couple of years will struggle hard to find any success and will drop out. 

Mat

Quote from: MatHayward on July 23, 2011, 22:13

Quote from: lthn on July 23, 2011, 20:31
You can rant all you want but it's inevitable that this business model will eat itself for the photographers.

That's the spirit!  I have never been able to wrap my mind around this type of hypocrisy.  If that is how you feel, why are you participating?  This subject has been covered so many times in so many ways but the root remains true.  The need for current, high quality photographs will not go away.  As the internet world continues to grow exponentially so does the need for relevant photographs. 

What will happen in my opinion is that the cream will rise to the top and the days of mediocre photography will end soon.  Lazy/passive photographers that only upload a couple hundred images every couple of years will struggle hard to find any success and will drop out. 

Mat

Or it could help being a staff member for a (non specified) stock agency to have a serious boost.... ahum...
Patrick.

Quote from: MatHayward on July 23, 2011, 22:13

Quote from: lthn on July 23, 2011, 20:31
You can rant all you want but it's inevitable that this business model will eat itself for the photographers.

That's the spirit!  I have never been able to wrap my mind around this type of hypocrisy.  If that is how you feel, why are you participating?  This subject has been covered so many times in so many ways but the root remains true.  The need for current, high quality photographs will not go away.  As the internet world continues to grow exponentially so does the need for relevant photographs. 

What will happen in my opinion is that the cream will rise to the top and the days of mediocre photography will end soon.  Lazy/passive photographers that only upload a couple hundred images every couple of years will struggle hard to find any success and will drop out. 

Mat

"The need for current, high quality photographs will not go away."

That's yada-yada, who said it will go away? It just won't grow while the stock database will. Have you ever heard of oversupply? It creates huge economic depressions.

"As the internet world continues to grow exponentially so does the need for relevant photographs."

Yeah... whatever more stuff on the net has to do with stock sales... ohh, actually it has. You want to know wthats one of the many things that make the internet grow? All those pics being uploaded every day to microstock sites : P

That wishful-thinking mantra about an endlessly growing market is total nonsense. It reminds me of communist propaganda speeches about their countries economies outdoing it's previous year's performance two times every new year... face it: the # buyers is very limited indeed, while the # new pics that can be produced is unlimited. You basically expect a couple of graphic artists with workstations to spawn every time you press the exposure button. Dude, it's bullschitt  : )

Quote from: lthn on July 23, 2011, 22:46


That wishful-thinking mantra about an endlessly growing market is total nonsense. It reminds me of communist propaganda speeches about their countries economies outdoing it's previous year's performance two times every new year... face it: the # buyers is very limited indeed, while the # new pics that can be produced is unlimited. You basically expect a couple of graphic artists with workstations to spawn every time you press the exposure button. Dude, it's bullschitt  : )

You should probably consider giving up then. 

Seriously, what is the point of even being here if that is what you truly believe?

Good luck,

Mat

Quote from: patrick1958 on July 23, 2011, 22:17

Or it could help being a staff member for a (non specified) stock agency to have a serious boost.... ahum...
Patrick.

You got that right Patrick, that would be great!

Quote from: MatHayward on July 23, 2011, 23:44

Quote from: patrick1958 on July 23, 2011, 22:17

Or it could help being a staff member for a (non specified) stock agency to have a serious boost.... ahum...
Patrick.

You got that right Patrick, that would be great!

I don´t anything against you or FT or other agency but looking at your port it does look you have a lot of advantage no? tons of similar? and some isolations that aren´t actually cleaned or other? do you have any sort of review?

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 23, 2011, 23:56

I don´t anything against you or FT or other agency but looking at your port it does look you have a lot of advantage no? tons of similar? and some isolations that aren´t actually cleaned or other? do you have any sort of review?

Ouch! 

I have to disagree with your critique.  I see a portfolio with a lot of diverse subject matter, and very natural-looking lifestyle images.  It's very enjoyable to see such a variety of realistic people images, rather than the bland, cookie cutter stuff the micros are choked with. 

Mat, hats off to you.  You have managed to build almost exactly the same size port as I have, of quality images, and while working full-time at a "real job" too.  Does your wife ever see you?! 

my comment was regarding newest pictures and isolations.. not the subject or the quality of pictures

Lisa, thanks very much!  No, my wife never sees me but as you can imagine she prefers it that way   That was a joke for those of you that don't speak sarcasm.  It is a challenge being a restaurant Manager has hours that are not for everyone so I choose not to sleep.  It takes a real effort as everyone knows to continue to shoot and upload.  I've not done many weddings the last couple of years so that's freed up a lot of time I didn't have.

Luis...If I could somehow spell out the sound of a raspberry with my tongue sticking out at you I would!    Yes, my images are reviewed and I am sad to report I have had thousands of images rejected.  Somewhere around 3,500 I think.  I don't know the reviewers, they don't know me.  All my isolations are done in camera so you are right, they don't all have the crisp white painted look many best sellers have.  It's a work in progress and I am constantly trying to evolve my style and technique to improve.  I need to get a few more lights to really have it the way I want.  I've actually been shooting on black a lot lately too.  Plus, if you are referring to the gym photos in my most recent, those were taken in a gym against a gray wall.  They weren't supposed to be white.

I appreciate the feedback from all (but mostly from Lisa).

Mat

Quote from: MatHayward on July 23, 2011, 23:43

Quote from: lthn on July 23, 2011, 22:46


That wishful-thinking mantra about an endlessly growing market is total nonsense. It reminds me of communist propaganda speeches about their countries economies outdoing it's previous year's performance two times every new year... face it: the # buyers is very limited indeed, while the # new pics that can be produced is unlimited. You basically expect a couple of graphic artists with workstations to spawn every time you press the exposure button. Dude, it's bullschitt  : )

You should probably consider giving up then. 

Seriously, what is the point of even being here if that is what you truly believe?

Good luck,

Mat

"Seriously, what is the point of even being here if that is what you truly believe?"

I know that attitude. "dont you tell your opinion coz me no want it"... and that often comes from ppl living in a country proud of its 1st amendment!

Quote from: lthn on July 24, 2011, 01:32
I know that attitude. "dont you tell your opinion coz me no want it"... and that often comes from ppl living in a country proud of its 1st amendment!

Perhaps because some of us go to the trouble of understanding that Amendment, and know where it does and doesn't apply.  First, it refers to censorship by the government, not to private entities.  As the old saying goes, Freedom of the Press applies to anybody who owns one (a printing press back in the day).  It doesn't require that anybody publish someone else's rantings just because they want to rant.  And secondly, just because someone can't be censored doesn't mean they have to be listened to.  As Harlan Ellison once wrote, it isn't that we all have the right to our opinions.  No, what we have the right to is an informed opinion.  Free speech doesn't make a foolish utterance less foolish.

"face it: the # buyers is very limited indeed, while the # new pics that can be produced is unlimited"

The number of possible buyers is the same as the number of possible contributors.  And the number of uses buyers can come up could be just as unlimited.

Quote from: sjlocke on July 24, 2011, 02:57
"face it: the # buyers is very limited indeed, while the # new pics that can be produced is unlimited"

The number of possible buyers is the same as the number of possible contributors.  And the number of uses buyers can come up could be just as unlimited.

Sorry, this is inaccurate.  MS attracts a bazillion contributors who want to get rich quick.  We compete for buyers.  If you look at the decline of buying activity at IS, for example, and the increase at DT and IS, it tells me, inferentially, that buyers are way limited.......at least in terms of comparing them to the number of contributors. It's caddywampus at best.