MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: Database cleaning  (Read 9671 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 20, 2009, 16:10 »
0
Database cleaning
Quote
We've been receiving suggestions from many contributors about a database cleaning. Since 2007 Dreamstime has the largest growth in the industry. Although our submission procedure allows us to retrieve only the best content, there are still images that simply don't sell. The selection criteria increased significantly and the quality of recent imagery has significant improvements from one week to the next. It's time for a clean-up.

We plan to select all images that are older than 3 or 4 years old and had no sales. Each contributor who has such images will receive an email upon the initial selection.

The files will still be available for sale for one more month. During this month, the contributor will have to decide whether he wants to donate the image to the free section, re-keyword it via keymasters or simply disable it.

If the image is donated, the exposure received may increase his commercial sales. This was debated many times, so please check the forums for more details. We expect a few thousand to be donated to the free section which will strengthen our community overall.

If the image is keyworded (only via keymasters), it will be removed from this area and its date reseted. A good image may be saved by different keywords. Considering this is a paid option, the contributor will have to consider well which of the files truly have potential.

This procedure should clean the database. Common subjects will see many files removed, allowing new&better submissions to take their place.

As always, your feedback is welcome.


« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2009, 16:51 »
0
Not bad - I've been anticipating many agencies to take these types of steps. It's only natural, with the exception of Alamy, most traditional agencies will only represent a photo for 3-4 years and then either ditch it, or renew a contract to represent it if it sells well. Makes total sense to me.

« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2009, 16:57 »
0
I guess if image has not been sold for 4 years nobody would hardly miss them ;-)

« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2009, 07:20 »
0
I just got my email saying I have some old images without sales.

Just a note as well, that if you do nothing to these images they will go into the free section.

I clicked on the link to see the images (and remove them) - but it returned a blank page.  Perhaps they are still working out a few kinks in the system - or everyone trying to access the same page is causing problems.

edit:  Update - the page seems to be loading correctly now.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2009, 08:29 by leaf »

« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2009, 07:39 »
0
I just got my email saying I have some old images without sales.

Just a note as well, that if you do nothing to these images they will go into the free section.

I clicked on the link to see the images (and remove them) - but it returned a blank page.  Perhaps they are still working out a few kinks in the system - or everyone trying to access the same page is causing problems.


Same here. I get a blank page too.

I am really annoyed that the default action is to send them to the free section __ this is not what I agreed to when I signed up to the agency.

If they don't want to sell the files then that's fine with me but they should seek our confirmed acceptance before awarding themselves the files for free. Taking them without our confirmed consent is basically theft as far as I'm concerned. What if you don't get the email for whatever reason? They could be giving away your best-sellers on other agencies for free.

« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2009, 07:54 »
0
I hope they get this ironed out quickly. I most definitely don't want my images to go to the free section and yes, the default should be that they get removed and if you want to donate to free section, you take action.

« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2009, 07:59 »
0
Agreed - I also feel the default should be removing them from the database - or at least a dollar bin idea.  However, I assume their free images will really get a boost from lazy people who do not care to remove their images or those who don't follow their accounts any longer.  'Free' sure seems to be a traffic driver for the sites so I understand why they want it, but as an individual I don't see giving away MY images a direct advantage to me.

Anyhow, here is the link to where the images which have not sold in three years 'should' show up.
http://www.dreamstime.com/oldfiles.php
« Last Edit: October 27, 2009, 08:02 by leaf »

« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2009, 08:05 »
0
Agreed - I also feel the default should be removing them from the database - or at least a dollar bin idea.  However, I assume their free images will really get a boost from lazy people who do not care to remove their images or those who don't follow their accounts any longer.  'Free' sure seems to be a traffic driver for the sites so I understand why they want it, but as an individual I don't see giving away MY images a direct advantage to me.

Anyhow, here is the link to where the images which have not sold in three years 'should' show up.
http://www.dreamstime.com/oldfiles.php


I agree. I think most would agree that it should be removed by default, if the file is not wanted for sales. Denis

« Reply #8 on: October 27, 2009, 08:08 »
0
If they don't want to sell the files then that's fine with me but they should seek our confirmed acceptance before awarding themselves the files for free. Taking them without our confirmed consent is basically theft as far as I'm concerned. What if you don't get the email for whatever reason? They could be giving away your best-sellers on other agencies for free.
I just objected on the DT forum against the default. I hope some others will join. The default should be delete.

« Reply #9 on: October 27, 2009, 08:35 »
0
Ok, I just went through the process and it was quite painless.

So no I don't agree with the fact that the images default to Free, I DO appreciate that dreamstime made it VERY easy to deal with the images and sent out an email with a link.  It took me all of 30 seconds to delete a handful of old, embarrassing images :)

I also think it is a good idea for Dreamstime to do a little database clean up and keep their offering tight.

And if we have to find the positives in this, perhaps we can look at it this way.  Even though I don't want to offer MY images for free - I am still reaping the benefits of the Dreamstime free collection (which brings in buyers), which will be built upon the lazy people who don't want to disable their images.

« Reply #10 on: October 27, 2009, 08:50 »
0
Even though I don't want to offer MY images for free - I am still reaping the benefits of the Dreamstime free collection (which brings in buyers), which will be built upon the lazy people who don't want to disable their images.


How do you know this Leaf? Have you got any data on the scale of these benefits that you believe you are reaping? Maybe you could interview Serban and ask him to divulge some statistics to prove his case?

Personally I'm sceptical. People who go hunting for free images are unlikely to be big spenders and the availability of free images just undermines the entire market and furthers the assumption of many that anything on-line is public-domain anyway.

Note that IS and SS, the two biggest selling (note the word SELLING) microstock agencies, don't have free sections. In my view 'free' images are a desperate measure by smaller agencies to hoover up the crumbs left by more professional agencies.

« Reply #11 on: October 27, 2009, 09:35 »
0
iStock are giving away nearly 400,000 images on stock.xchng - the site they aquired from StockXpert earlier this year.

http://www.sxc.hu/

It is heavily branded and linked back to iStock and when you do a search you see iStock images in the first line which you can buy.  iStock also has a free image of the week like Shutterstock (however that is quite different than having an entire free collection).

I don't have any hard numbers but both Fotolia and iStock who spoke on the Photoplus panel for 'Microstock: What We Learned in 2009' talked a bit about free images and how they were a BIG referral for them.  They also used the argument that they were teaching people about licensing.  People don't know what a license is, or that images have 'owners'.  Buy giving away images and requiring attribution to the site and photographer, it is making people aware that there are rules when using images.  To go from there, to having them pay $1.00 isn't a big step.

I am with you though - my gut feeling is that I don't like the free images and am very skeptical as to the long term benefits of them.

« Reply #12 on: October 27, 2009, 10:03 »
0
Does anyone know if deleting your old, unsold images affects your acceptance ratio?

« Reply #13 on: October 27, 2009, 10:19 »
0
Short pain... deleted 7 pages of unsold files.
If they didn't sell up till now.. they most probably won't sell after new keywording... would only cost me money.. donating them  for free... nope... no way.

Patrick h.

« Reply #14 on: October 27, 2009, 10:24 »
0
Can someone please tell me the criteria for the database cleaning?

For example, how old does the image need to be?

What other criteria are there?

And where are you receiving the notification?  In your email account, or in your DT account?

« Reply #15 on: October 27, 2009, 10:27 »
0
There is a link in the email that takes you to a page with the old photos only on it.

« Reply #16 on: October 27, 2009, 10:29 »
0
Can someone please tell me the criteria for the database cleaning?

For example, how old does the image need to be?

What other criteria are there?

And where are you receiving the notification?  In your email account, or in your DT account?

Notification was both on Dreamstime and personal email.

The images must be 3 years old or more and have 0 sales.

« Reply #17 on: October 27, 2009, 10:36 »
0
Can someone please tell me the criteria for the database cleaning?

For example, how old does the image need to be?

What other criteria are there?

And where are you receiving the notification?  In your email account, or in your DT account?

Notification was both on Dreamstime and personal email.

The images must be 3 years old or more and have 0 sales.

For now they only selected images older then 4 years and unsold.

See there forum and Achilles' latest post.

Patrick H.

« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2009, 10:39 »
0
I really don't like that they will put images in the free section if we are away for 30 days or miss the message.  I hope they change that and I have replied to the thread in their forum.  They should just delete them if we take no action.

« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2009, 11:34 »
0
Can someone please tell me the criteria for the database cleaning?

For example, how old does the image need to be?

What other criteria are there?

And where are you receiving the notification?  In your email account, or in your DT account?


Notification was both on Dreamstime and personal email.

The images must be 3 years old or more and have 0 sales.


For now they only selected images older then 4 years and unsold.

See there forum and Achilles' latest post.

Patrick H.


ah yes, you are right.
Here is a link to the thread for those interested
http://www.dreamstime.com/forumm_19023_pg1

RT


« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2009, 12:24 »
0
I don't have any hard numbers but both Fotolia and iStock who spoke on the Photoplus panel for 'Microstock: What We Learned in 2009' talked a bit about free images and how they were a BIG referral for them. 

Big referral for the sites absolutely, but for the contributor no evidence that I have seen to suggest it will increase your sales, in fact I've seen the exact opposite and even tried myself a couple of years ago on 123 and I saw no increase whatsoever in my revenue.

The sites are more than willing to give away our images because it costs them nothing, say for instance they give away 10,000 images and get maybe $100 back in increased sales, how much of that is the individual contributor going to see?

If giving away free images is such a good thing as the site owners suggest lets see them put their money where their mouth is and give away some images at the sites expense, i.e they give away the images but we still get our commission, shouldn't be a problem for them because of the big referrals they'll get from it  ::)

Dreamstime latest offering will mean a number of your images that are selling on other sites will end up for free on DT, they should concentrate on selling those images not giving them away.

Unfortunately there are enough stupid people out there that will believe this hype.




« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2009, 12:29 »
0
Maybe I'm wrong but, in my view, making lots of images available for free it's a sign of weakness.

lisafx

« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2009, 13:37 »
0
Somehow I managed to miss the notice on DT and in e-mail.  Thanks for posting the link, Leaf.  I had a bunch of files ready to disable - the process was easy, as reported.

I do agree that "disable" should be the default, rather than "free". 

« Reply #23 on: October 27, 2009, 13:48 »
0
If Dreamstime start offering images for free on a default basis after they were originally uploaded for sale, they're on pretty shaky ground legally. You can't have someone upload something on the basis of one legal set of conditions, then turn around some time later and "default" them to be given away for nothing. Its actually a breach of copyright if they do. Just because someone becomes inactive, doesn't mean they give implied consent to have their images used without payment of a royalty.

If they haven't run this past a lawyer, maybe they should.

« Reply #24 on: October 27, 2009, 14:58 »
0
If Dreamstime start offering images for free on a default basis after they were originally uploaded for sale, they're on pretty shaky ground legally. You can't have someone upload something on the basis of one legal set of conditions, then turn around some time later and "default" them to be given away for nothing. Its actually a breach of copyright if they do. Just because someone becomes inactive, doesn't mean they give implied consent to have their images used without payment of a royalty.

If they haven't run this past a lawyer, maybe they should.

That's a good point Holgs. If someone discovered one or more of their images had been put into the free section without their express consent, which subsequently had hundreds of downloadeds (from what I read the free images are very popular), would DT then offer (or be liable) to pay a reasonable royalty per download?

There can only be one reason why Serban has elected to make 'Donate to Free' as the default option __ because he's hoping to get a windfall of free images from contributors who are out of touch with what is going on.

What about the case of contributors who have died and whose portfolios are providing an income to family members who perhaps don't keep fully up to date with the microstock world? Seems very harsh to send their inherited images into the free section if they don't respond quickly enough.

Microstock InsiderEnvato Elements

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
1576 Views
Last post October 16, 2014, 13:34
by ruxpriencdiam
1 Replies
1433 Views
Last post September 15, 2015, 20:46
by Danybot
1 Replies
1492 Views
Last post January 23, 2017, 08:54
by LDV81
51 Replies
9536 Views
Last post July 20, 2018, 07:32
by tiero
10 Replies
1851 Views
Last post November 06, 2018, 11:19
by thor_odt

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements