Author Topic: LO should really consider this....hope bryan's reading (Read 13116 times)

ichiro17 · « **on:** August 17, 2006, 21:32 »

As an uploading 'artist' (quotations because well...) I don't really care too much about 'community action' or whatever it is they call it. I'd rather have the 30 cents in my pocket instead of downloading someone else's photos and I get nothing but a photo that I can't really use for anything because I'm not a designer. So how about if LO starts handing out credits and allowing us to convert them to coin....doesn't have to be 30 cents, could be 20 cents per photo....otherwise the point of these stupid tokens is lost on me

kacper · « **Reply #1 on:** August 18, 2006, 01:28 »

I'd have to agree. 30 cents in a pocket is better than a token any day if you're not a designer.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #2 on:** August 18, 2006, 01:39 »

Has anyone tryied downlaoding your own photos. Is it against the rules.

I agree it is pointless for me to be able to buy photos. I take photos and would only uses ones that are significant to me in some way.

fintastique · « **Reply #3 on:** August 18, 2006, 02:45 »

So how many of us are actually designers as well??

Wisent · « **Reply #4 on:** August 18, 2006, 04:36 »

I'm currently studying to be a designer but i would also rather have money then tokens. Tokens are useless for designers unless they feel good about paying the company expenses out of their own pocket. And the handfull of succesfull self-emploid designers don't have the spare time to take pictures so i guess this feature is pretty useless.

fintastique · « **Reply #5 on:** August 18, 2006, 05:37 »

How about an option photographer/designers can be paid in credits and photographers get a small cash bounty 5-20c per photo depending on how generous they are feeling and you can opt into one or the other scheme.

And until they realize there is a whole wide world of photographers outside the US of A where a cheque in dollars is worthless and start up paypal or moneybookers accounts. Their cash is not much use either.

jjneff · « **Reply #6 on:** August 18, 2006, 07:33 »

I agree 100% I loaded up 39 pictures which are good ones and do well on other sites and only got 2 views in 2 weeks. Not for me if it is not cash I won't bother!

ichiro17 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 18, 2006, 08:08 »

Hopefully Bryan is watching and reading because from the beginning I thought this token program was hogwash. Besides, if they are going to pay out the 30 cents anyways, why not pay it to the guy thats building their library and helping them out....lets not forget something: They would and will be no where without us, the photographer

Fotolia paid out money and its gotten them very far. And they paid out more too. So why give 30 cents to someone else when you can reward the loyalty of the photographer instead of sending out e-mails saying not to download your own photos or those of friends or whatnot.

Either way, it shouldn't matter for LO, because the same amount of cash flow outwards will occur.

The BALL is in your court LO

Boylet · « **Reply #8 on:** August 18, 2006, 08:24 »

Hmmm ... let's see.... if I download someone's photo and he download mine, do we both get paid

kacper · « **Reply #9 on:** August 18, 2006, 16:36 »

Quote from: Boylet on August 18, 2006, 08:24

Hmmm ... let's see.... if I download someone's photo and he download mine, do we both get paid

Apparently so. But the whole I'll download yours if you download mine... well, I appreciate the concept, but I just don't find it appealing. My girlfriend is joining LO soon, so hopefully her photos will get accepted, and this way I'll get to download her stuff

leaf · « **Reply #10 on:** August 20, 2006, 15:29 »

It says on Lucky Oliver's site that we are not supposed to download our own images.

If you start trading credits with eachother, you will get an email fairly quickly from Lucky Oliver that this is frowned upon as well.

I would have to agree, that credits are pretty useless to me, it would be great to be able to get something that is of value to me the photographer if they are first going to give something out.

dbvirago · « **Reply #11 on:** August 20, 2006, 17:46 »

Agreed. Not sure what the tokens are for. We can buy photographs, just not from other photographers. Guess that narrows it down.

phildate · « **Reply #12 on:** August 20, 2006, 20:40 »

I'm confused about the tokens too...I do some small design projects at times and download other people's photographs. What is wrong with using the tokens for this purpose? Or if we see a nice pic for our desktop? Can you clarify why we have tokens Bryan?

Boylet · « **Reply #13 on:** August 21, 2006, 03:53 »

One possible reason for adapting the "token" concept is probably to differentiate the site from others. Not much on the purpose of use but instead to supplement with the "retro" feel/look when using the site. Then again, putting marketing functionalities aside, this just puts an additional overhead to the photographers in tracking their sales.

Another reason I can think of is that they used token instead of $$$ and currently gives away some for free, is to encourage photographers to download other photographers' picture. They probably anticipated that photographers would ultimately want to cash-in the free tokens immediately and thus would have less impact on the traffic of the site and would only benefit the photographer owning the token. By limiting the use of the free token to buy other's photo would induces traffic and would give the semblance to the photographer whose photo was downloaded that the site isn't dead.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 21, 2006, 07:54 »

In response to Boylet:

Not a fan of 'fake' traffic. There are a few steps that need to be taken to make the site work, so I would hope that they do it that way. I know you're just trying to justify what they are doing, so this is not an attack on your argument. I just think they are better off letting us cash them in.

Boylet · « **Reply #15 on:** August 21, 2006, 08:52 »

Quote from: ichiro17 on August 21, 2006, 07:54

In response to Boylet:

Not a fan of 'fake' traffic. There are a few steps that need to be taken to make the site work, so I would hope that they do it that way. I know you're just trying to justify what they are doing, so this is not an attack on your argument. I just think they are better off letting us cash them in.

No offense taken here ... I'm just looking for a sane explanation to an otherwise impractical approach. Sure hope Bryan could shed some light on the matter otherwise I'll run out of reasons ...

ichiro17 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 21, 2006, 09:06 »

I'm glad no offense was taken. I don't want to harass or make anyone feel uncomfortable in the community like some people have on SS forums (hehehe and have been censored from everywhere).

I think that LO should be investing in the community of photographers that will make their product work well for them. I htink that is the best way to go and this token for others but not for me program just doesn't cut it. We all would like the money more than the other guy and Fotolia saw this (unfortunately I missed out on that) but its worked wonders for them - I sound like a broken record -

Where in the world is Bryan? lol - reminds me of something........

thad · « **Reply #17 on:** August 21, 2006, 09:48 »

i'd be happy to ~~spend~~ swap my forty something credits. if only to see if they send an email when one makes a sale..

bryan_luckyoliver · « **Reply #18 on:** August 21, 2006, 10:09 »

I shared a gallery space in Sausalito with an artist for a year. It was a part time thing- perhaps a hobby gone wrong- where I worked the studio space once a week. She lived in it.

It was a pretty cool experience. I learned a lot about people on the strip. Artists would occasionally give their work to each other for favors, gifts, or just to say thanks for being a friend. I thought it was a neat gesture considering that I was selling to tourists most of the day.

LuckyOliver is still early in development- we don't have many community tools yet for being a 'community site'- but we'll get there. I'm hopeful that as we continue to grow you'll notice that we do things differently. We realize there are many sites trying to sell photos. We also know that doing things like everyone else is certain death.

The tokens are a small way of saying thanks. It creates some activity- however not all our business decisions are purely money driven. We're focused on creating a solid business that is built on ideas, energy and people. For a pure photographer the tokens may not mean much, but I'm assuming no harm is done with a few of 'em sitting in your piggy bank!

Thanks for the input...I look forward to seeing more of everyone's work. The images submitted are truly amazing. It's very inspiring and has me shooting more photos!

rosta · « **Reply #19 on:** August 21, 2006, 17:49 »

On a slightly different note..is there a way to check on our submitted photos? I submitted five last week with nary a word and I want to be sure they are in line somewhere to be reviewed.

IRCrockett · « **Reply #20 on:** August 21, 2006, 20:41 »

They've been really good about approving photos. Pretty much all of mine have been approved either the same day or the next. On the right hand side of the Submit Photos page under the upload more box there should be all the thumbnails of pending images. If they aren't there then they probably aren't queued for review.

hospitalera · « **Reply #21 on:** August 25, 2006, 03:01 »

They are getting a little bit funny in their approvals, a fractal was rejected because of: "it's a little too primitive for what we're looking for. Try another one." The same fractal got approved at SS AND sold in the first hour! Otherwise they have accepted pics of mine that most of the other sites have rejected... What's about a little bit reviewer training? ::)SY

fintastique · « **Reply #22 on:** August 26, 2006, 05:50 »

I see from the latest LO newsletter that they have introduced affiliate earnings

$5 for a new buyer

$1 for a new photographer when they have first three photos accepted (they might want to start checking IDs)

and they used one of Leaf's photos in the newsletter.

Amanda · « **Reply #23 on:** August 26, 2006, 12:14 »

Okay, I have to put my two cents in. I am primarily a designer and I do photography as well on the side. I signed up with LuckyOliver because I thought it was potentially, an interesting site for a source of stock photography and to try my hand at submitting some photos. I am not disappointed by the fact you can't convert tokens to money. I see it as a gift, a thank you. You didn't earn it - they gave it to you for free. It's like people complaining that McDonald's won't give you money if you tried to return the toy they got free with a Happy Meal. Sure they may be useless to some strictly photographers - but are they any worse off if they weren't given tokens? Heck, if you load up enough photos - you could buy out someone's exclusive rights photo and resubmit to LuckyOliver and add it to your portfolio! Another perspective to this idea is that it is also rewarding people who are using the site other than uploading photos. I am a designer - I do use this site to download photos that I need for jobs. It's nice that Bryan and Co. recognize people who do submit material and who also download material by giving these tokens. By fostering that relationship you will get long-term loyalty from designers such as myself which is going to eventually benefit you, the photographers.

dbvirago · « **Reply #24 on:** August 26, 2006, 15:14 »

I don't agree with your analogy. It's like McDonalds gave you a toy with your happy meal and said, but you can't play with it or thanking their customers with a coupon worth 0% off their next meal. . You are a designer and photographer, so the tokens have some value. They are a thank you with some meaning. To us photographers, we are amassing huge somes of 'tokens' that don't mean anything. No we're no worse off than if we weren't given the tokens, but we were - so they should mean something. I'll bet they mean something somewhere on LO's accounting system.

Quote from: Amanda on August 26, 2006, 12:14

Okay, I have to put my two cents in. I am primarily a designer and I do photography as well on the side. I signed up with LuckyOliver because I thought it was potentially, an interesting site for a source of stock photography and to try my hand at submitting some photos. I am not disappointed by the fact you can't convert tokens to money. I see it as a gift, a thank you. You didn't earn it - they gave it to you for free. It's like people complaining that McDonald's won't give you money if you tried to return the toy they got free with a Happy Meal. Sure they may be useless to some strictly photographers - but are they any worse off if they weren't given tokens? Heck, if you load up enough photos - you could buy out someone's exclusive rights photo and resubmit to LuckyOliver and add it to your portfolio! Another perspective to this idea is that it is also rewarding people who are using the site other than uploading photos. I am a designer - I do use this site to download photos that I need for jobs. It's nice that Bryan and Co. recognize people who do submit material and who also download material by giving these tokens. By fostering that relationship you will get long-term loyalty from designers such as myself which is going to eventually benefit you, the photographers.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: LO should really consider this....hope bryan's reading (Read 13116 times)

ichiro17

kacper

CJPhoto

fintastique

Wisent

fintastique

jjneff

ichiro17

Boylet

kacper

leaf

dbvirago

phildate

Boylet

ichiro17

Boylet

ichiro17

thad

bryan_luckyoliver

rosta

IRCrockett

hospitalera

fintastique

Amanda

dbvirago

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors