Author Topic: New license revealed (Read 6962 times)

Dreamstime News · « **on:** February 01, 2008, 07:01 »

>February 1, 2008 (05:22) - posted by Achilles
<span class=h7>New license revealed! As of today, Dreamstime accepts non-model released and non-property released images that are directly pertinent to current events, news and political stories, and social and cultural scenes. Read more...</span>

le_cyclope · « **Reply #1 on:** February 01, 2008, 17:31 »

Well it was a matter of time before one agency closed the gap between RF photos and "press" type photos.

Now every stock photograph is a potential press photograph... Wonder what will be their reaction!

Papparazzi, grab your camera and get out!

Claude

vonkara · « **Reply #2 on:** February 01, 2008, 17:45 »

That's great. But George Bush already been close to me when last summer he was at Montebello. It's not going to happend an other time shortly

grp_photo · « **Reply #3 on:** February 01, 2008, 18:36 »

Imho it's dumb to submit editorial images to Microstock-agencies and news related editorial even more.
Just another bad move from Dreamstime after the subscription-prison.

madelaide · « **Reply #4 on:** February 01, 2008, 18:39 »

Finally newsworthy as newsworthy actually means.

Regards,
Adelaide

stokfoto · « **Reply #5 on:** February 01, 2008, 19:22 »

Quote from: grp_photo on February 01, 2008, 18:36

Imho it's dumb to submit editorial images to Microstock-agencies and news related editorial even more.

I agree with that unless they apply a different pricing structure to it I don't see much point uploading editorial content a microstock site.

epixx · « **Reply #6 on:** February 01, 2008, 23:04 »

Quote from: stokfoto on February 01, 2008, 19:22

Quote from: grp_photo on February 01, 2008, 18:36
Imho it's dumb to submit editorial images to Microstock-agencies and news related editorial even more.
I agree with that unless they apply a different pricing structure to it I don't see much point uploading editorial content a microstock site.

Agree

faber · « **Reply #7 on:** February 01, 2008, 23:50 »

Quote from: epixx on February 01, 2008, 23:04

Quote from: stokfoto on February 01, 2008, 19:22
Quote from: grp_photo on February 01, 2008, 18:36
Imho it's dumb to submit editorial images to Microstock-agencies and news related editorial even more.
I agree with that unless they apply a different pricing structure to it I don't see much point uploading editorial content a microstock site.

Agree

Agree

madelaide · « **Reply #8 on:** February 02, 2008, 10:33 »

Quote from: stokfoto on February 01, 2008, 19:22

I agree with that unless they apply a different pricing structure to it I don't see much point uploading editorial content a microstock site.

I don't have much experience with truly newsworthy images, but I believe it's more likely that an EL will be used, at least for printed editorial content?

Regards,
Adelaide

null · « **Reply #9 on:** February 02, 2008, 11:47 »

Quote from: grp_photo on February 01, 2008, 18:36

Imho it's dumb to submit editorial images to Microstock-agencies and news related editorial even more.
Just another bad move from Dreamstime after the subscription-prison.

Why? DT is just widening their customers base. SS has it already and I have some editorial there that sells like cake. It can only benefit the photogs, and that can't be said necessarily of the subscription move.

For real news, the approval process takes too long. But in the message of Achilles on the DT forum, he also mentioned educational and cultural shots in a general sense. We'll just have to see how their criteria evolve.

Karimala · « **Reply #10 on:** February 02, 2008, 13:34 »

No thanks.

I've been selling editorial photos at SS since the beginning (Sept. '05), and it's just not worth it. My most important, historically significant editorial shot has only earned $10.95 since January 2006 (it's a photo of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger being sworn in at his inauguration). I have since stopped uploading editorial photos to SS. So until DT adds an opt out on subscriptions for editorial, all of mine will be headed to midstock and macrostock agencies.

vonkara · « **Reply #11 on:** February 02, 2008, 13:50 »

Quote from: stokfoto on February 01, 2008, 19:22

Quote from: grp_photo on February 01, 2008, 18:36
Imho it's dumb to submit editorial images to Microstock-agencies and news related editorial even more.
I agree with that unless they apply a different pricing structure to it I don't see much point uploading editorial content a microstock site.

I agree that if these pictures can be used for some kind of news journal... they must pay for the appropriate extended license

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New license revealed (Read 6962 times)

Dreamstime News

le_cyclope

vonkara

grp_photo

madelaide

stokfoto

epixx

faber

madelaide

null

Karimala

vonkara

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors