pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Grass is NOT greener at the others!!  (Read 20961 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: January 03, 2011, 13:02 »
0
I think the graft these days is mostly on the agency side.

Not how I see it. It seems to me that we do all the graft ... and then the agency walks off with almost all of the money.


SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #126 on: January 03, 2011, 13:13 »
0

I am guessing this was a typo - did you mean perhaps "craft"?  

I think the graft these days is mostly on the agency side.

I wondered about that too...  

Or perhaps it was meant to be "draft".  As in, some of the best pictures were taken when all involved were drinking beer ;D

in Canada that's 'draught'  ;D and speaking of which, I'd like some!

lagereek

« Reply #127 on: January 03, 2011, 14:04 »
0
In England GRAFT, means "hard work in a clever way" but actually I did mean craft. Hows that?

lisafx

« Reply #128 on: January 03, 2011, 14:23 »
0
In England GRAFT, means "hard work in a clever way" but actually I did mean craft. Hows that?

Well, either way, thanks  :)

Here it means bribing politicians! 

lagereek

« Reply #129 on: January 03, 2011, 15:08 »
0
In England GRAFT, means "hard work in a clever way" but actually I did mean craft. Hows that?

Well, either way, thanks  :)

Here it means bribing politicians! 

Bloody hell!  well maybe thats the answer?

« Reply #130 on: January 03, 2011, 16:56 »
0
this is the definition of graft I was thinking of...

"graft 2 
n.
1. Unscrupulous use of one's position to derive profit or advantages; extortion.
2. Money or an advantage gained or yielded by unscrupulous means.
tr. & intr.v. grafted, grafting, grafts
To gain by or practice unscrupulous use of one's position."

Sounds like some of the sites lately...

lisafx

« Reply #131 on: January 03, 2011, 17:11 »
0
this is the definition of graft I was thinking of...

"graft 2 
n.
1. Unscrupulous use of one's position to derive profit or advantages; extortion.
2. Money or an advantage gained or yielded by unscrupulous means.
tr. & intr.v. grafted, grafting, grafts
To gain by or practice unscrupulous use of one's position."

Sounds like some of the sites lately...

It certainly does. 

« Reply #132 on: January 03, 2011, 17:16 »
0
this is the definition of graft I was thinking of...

"graft 2 
n.
1. Unscrupulous use of one's position to derive profit or advantages; extortion.
2. Money or an advantage gained or yielded by unscrupulous means.
tr. & intr.v. grafted, grafting, grafts
To gain by or practice unscrupulous use of one's position."

Sounds like some of the sites lately...
Interesting  __ in the UK 'graft' is an informal expression meaning 'to work hard' (other than the surgical & botanical definitions).

lagereek

« Reply #133 on: January 04, 2011, 04:54 »
0
this is the definition of graft I was thinking of...

"graft 2  
n.
1. Unscrupulous use of one's position to derive profit or advantages; extortion.
2. Money or an advantage gained or yielded by unscrupulous means.
tr. & intr.v. grafted, grafting, grafts
To gain by or practice unscrupulous use of one's position."

Sounds like some of the sites lately...


Interesting  __ in the UK 'graft' is an informal expression meaning 'to work hard' (other than the surgical & botanical definitions).


I know!   still though, dangerous misconceptions between the British/American  English language, isnt it? there are plenty more examples.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 04:56 by lagereek »

« Reply #134 on: January 04, 2011, 05:51 »
0
this is the definition of graft I was thinking of...

"graft 2  
n.
1. Unscrupulous use of one's position to derive profit or advantages; extortion.
2. Money or an advantage gained or yielded by unscrupulous means.
tr. & intr.v. grafted, grafting, grafts
To gain by or practice unscrupulous use of one's position."

Sounds like some of the sites lately...


Interesting  __ in the UK 'graft' is an informal expression meaning 'to work hard' (other than the surgical & botanical definitions).


I know!   still though, dangerous misconceptions between the British/American  English language, isnt it? there are plenty more examples.

and Australian/British/Amercan   
take thong for example which in Australia is a type of footware

ShadySue

« Reply #135 on: January 04, 2011, 06:11 »
0

I know!   still though, dangerous misconceptions between the British/American  English language, isnt it? there are plenty more examples.

and Australian/British/Amercan    
take thong for example which in Australia is a type of footware
I once poured tea (from a teapot, leaves and all, but it was tepid, you'll be glad to know) over an American (in a youth hostel in Luxembourg, when I was a student) who, upon meeting me, said, "Oh, you're Scottish, are you cheap?"
In the UK, calling a woman 'cheap' means she "bestows her sexual 'favours' indiscriminately" (those were gentler days, dear reader).
In the US, apparently it means what Brits call 'mean', which might have got an elbow in the ribs (because as everyone should know - we're not 'mean', we're 'canny'), but not the tea!

In the UK, calling a woman 'homely' means she creates a welcoming home, and probably that she prefers domesticity to business activity; in the US, it seems to mean 'ugly' (or at least what's we'd call 'plain', so that could get Brits into similar trouble in the US.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 09:29 by ShadySue »

rubyroo

« Reply #136 on: January 04, 2011, 08:17 »
0
 :D   Loving these examples.   :D

Way back in the early 90's during an early foray into a forum, I expressed my anger at a troll.  An American woman who agreed with me wrote:

"You really have a way with words when your p*ssed".

...which led to some very confusing exchanges, as I tried to figure out why she thought I was drunk, and she wondered what on earth I was talking about!

« Reply #137 on: January 04, 2011, 08:44 »
0
...

Skill, hard work, etc, is not enough, you gotta be lucky, right place right time and so on.
Lisa!  is a tremendous example of where you DO get with plain hard-work and graft, combined with skill ofcourse. However she will probably agree with me that if we started off today in Micro, it would be a hell of a lot tougher. Everything is virtually covered plus the fact that agencies are beeing destroyed and ruined.
...

I figured there was a discrepancy between the American and British use of the word graft. Too funny!

Getting back to lagereek's statement, I agree. It takes hard work, skill and a little luck. And whether a person is exclusive or non-exclusive, or whether they are full-time contributors or part-time contributors. Maintaining an individual's revenue goals on all the microstock sites nowadays is a task.

« Reply #138 on: January 04, 2011, 10:17 »
0
:D   Loving these examples.   :D

Way back in the early 90's during an early foray into a forum, I expressed my anger at a troll.  An American woman who agreed with me wrote:

"You really have a way with words when your p*ssed".

...which led to some very confusing exchanges, as I tried to figure out why she thought I was drunk, and she wondered what on earth I was talking about!

That's hilarious.

lagereek

« Reply #139 on: January 04, 2011, 11:57 »
0
some years back when I used DPR, I wrote, the guy is a real dope, dope, being an English expression for a nerd-guy or similar. This guy writes me back asking what kind of dope Im smoking?
Dope, dopey person or a hubblybubbly pipe.

« Reply #140 on: January 04, 2011, 12:03 »
0
some years back when I used DPR, I wrote, the guy is a real dope, dope, being an English expression for a nerd-guy or similar. This guy writes me back asking what kind of dope Im smoking?
Dope, dopey person or a hubblybubbly pipe.

LOL!

« Reply #141 on: January 04, 2011, 12:20 »
0
I think keeping your port there is the smart thing to do. I don't know why anyone would delete their images altogether as a number of contributors are claiming to be doing.

I would imagine it is a statement that it isn't ok to drop royalties to 15%.  Otherwise, if 15% is ok, why not 10?


This.

Although I have no intentions of deleting my portfolio at the moment.  Maybe I am a Polyanna but I still hold out hope that when the company is re-sold there will be a movement by ownership to rebuild contributor trust, perhaps even restore commission levels.

« Reply #142 on: January 04, 2011, 12:36 »
0
Vlad, is in a way right here. Its pretty hard judging anything unless youve got a few years behind you and a somewhat large portfolio, I mean you dont even feel the effect of ebb and flow.

Yes Vlad is absolutely correct.  Everyone needs to consider their own data, and the implications of staying or leaving.

In my case, I took a 20% hit (approximately) when I went from independence to exclusivity in 2009.  Independence was clearly more lucrative, but I enjoyed dealing with one company and simplifying my upload process.  When I went back to independence in October, I took a 10% hit...but I only bothered to upload about 1/3 to 1/2 of my portfolio to the various sites.  If I uploaded the whole port, I would obviously be enjoying a pay raise. 

I know where I stand from personal experience in terms of revenue for exclusivity vs. independence.  And I have a very good idea of where I would stand with or without iStockphoto with the projected 2011 commission schedule.  Leaving my portfolio there (but not uploading additional material) is the right move for me now.  It would not take much however to tip the scales toward leaving altogether (a further lowering of commission rates, a decline in sales, etc).

« Reply #143 on: January 06, 2011, 01:51 »
0
Very interesting, djpadavona. Your example suggests that once you are well established either as independent or as exclusive, changing horses is likely to lead to at least short-term loss.

Of course, the result would be different depending on the iStock earnings level you were moving into/out of, and the latest broad-based pay-cut at iStock will also change the balance.

Still, this is the first comment about earnings impact that I've seen from someone who has moved in both directions.

lagereek

« Reply #144 on: January 06, 2011, 02:58 »
0
Yep!  I sanction that. I think changing horses at this point would only lead to troubles, loss of earnings, etc. Theres so many concrete examples of successful photographers within the RM, they got fed-up with their agency, exclusivity and all, they swapped and sure enough, everything went bad. They expected the new agencies to roll out the carpets, special placement in Search, etc, and ofcourse they didnt get any of that and Im talking some pretty respected guys here, no dilletants.

« Reply #145 on: January 06, 2011, 05:28 »
0
.. two posts were removed from the thread that included nothing but a personal spat between two members. .. now moving on..

michealo

« Reply #146 on: January 06, 2011, 06:32 »
0
.. two posts were removed from the thread that included nothing but a personal spat between two members. .. now moving on..

what a pity, I love those personal spat posts! :-)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
3013 Views
Last post July 24, 2008, 13:22
by angel gab

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results