Do you see us as being "cheap beer", Keith? I think that most people who see that the "Chief Knowledge Officer" of a company has that little respect for what they do would be unlikely to give the company a much-needed lifeline by contributing. The man has said very little here- and has already called microstockers "cheap beer" and "serfs". It shows not only a lack of respect for what we do, but also a lack of understanding.
As was said before, this is pretty bad marketing. When a few dick heads in the forums with anonymous names like "freedom something something" wind you up you should ignore it and focus on what you want to do- get contributors and build a brand. All the other people who were silent during the conversation are now thinking "theres no way Im going to contribute there..."
I leant a lot from that exchange- and theres no way that I, as "cheap beer" or "a serf" that already makes over 100 dollars a day from this is going to put my hard work on a site which I do not, and will not trust. The kind of people who speak like that to contributors are just the kind of people who would reduce our cut the moment they have a million images. I recommend getting a new "Chief Knowledge Officer".

I had a quick look at the site.  The prices look similar to imagevortex.  That site doesn't seem to have many sales, even though the image quality is superior to most microstock sites. 

Perhaps 80% of contributors don't make much money from microstock but that is probably the same for most photographers.  At least microstock lets most people have a go and see how well they can do.  I applied to a macrostock site many years ago and was turned down.  Had no problems with microstock and I am pleased with my earnings after just one year.

Now I am trying macrostock again.  This time, I know that my photographs are good enough to sell and I have a lot more confidence.

Microstock is here to stay.  Will designers go back to paying large fees for royalty free images?  That is not likely to happen.  Midstock is the market that seems to be failing.  istock tried it and it didn't work.  Several sites have folded and those that are still going don't seem to have many sales.

Can Zymmetrical make this work when so many others have failed?

I'm not losing much sleep over how Paul communicates; posters in this thread, after trying to roast a member of our site, proceeded to try and roast Paul, based on the opinions that he blogs in his private time.

As with the scenario he depicted, he did walk into a bar and get a pretty rude reception.  Of course ones going to think that bar is full of jerks. Probably some decent folks sitting in the back that'd be fine to talk to but there's some rowdies blocking the way. 

I'd walk away muttering some stuff too if it was a real bar, irregardless if it's 'business related'.  No one needs to put up with microbullying.

Keith,

as much as I appreciated your first go at damage control seeing it as balanced, polite and cool-headed, this part I quoted above is a bit misguided. Here is a suggestion: take a look at three posts between Paul's first entrance and his second response. Do you see anything rude or personal in those? A bit skeptical at most, but what in them warranted the following:

"This forum is like walking in a bar full of drunken rednecks who all believe they are CIA agents...

...you stop checking your miserable earnings for a while and have a curious mind.

...Again, please rest assure that we are not interested in your images . Our site is NOT for cynical microstockers who spend more time on forums that they do shooting images.

... As you might know, freedomsomething , akaTom, vicu, and hughstonelan, it is always a bad idea to mix fine champagne with cheep beer."

There was one poster whop called his blog "useless crap", yes, but as you said yourself it was his personal blog irrelevant to his post and run in his private time. Yet he responds on this forum in his official capacity and speaks in a manner quoted above of your site and related topics, not about his blog content.

I also appreciate his last post attempting at more balanced approach but it's still defensive and somewhat aggressive. I see some points in it that deserve calm discussion but don't you think that the sequence of exchange I cited above would require an apology from Paul first in order to restore normal communication? Really, he entered that bar calling people names before they gave him as much as first glance.

Vicu, sorry for misquoting, "baseless" was what you used, not "useless"... and it's not like I disagree with you on that, lol. I just tried to find anything in responses that could justify those insults Paul hurled at us, and couldn't. Cited your words rather in order to demonstrate that even the harshest thing said here wasn't even remotely enough to warrant his response. Hope I cleared that up.

I'm not losing much sleep over how Paul communicates; posters in this thread, after trying to roast a member of our site, proceeded to try and roast Paul, based on the opinions that he blogs in his private time.

This kind of got to me. When I owned my small business (yes I sold it to go back to school) I would have been very upset with anyone from my organization making rude comments on behalf of my company, even if they were in response to rude comments and made on his "private time". In fact, I would have probably let them go if they were in charge of communications.

Also, iStock didn't sell my "my content, my work" for $50 million and anyone that thinks so doesn't really understand the business of selling content. They don't own the works, they're an agent for the content owners. For $50 million Getty purchased the right to sell my work, nothing more.

Anyway good luck in your endeavor. As for suggestions about your site as you originally asked for:
(1) when I went to your site the drop menus weren't timed long enough (they disappeared before I could click on things)
2) hire someone familiar with business communications (a good bs slinger) and have them be the only person allowed to make statements on behalf of the company.
(3) hire someone with real knowledge of the industry you're in from one of the big boys (the big six to the right) or perhaps from your true competition Alamy.  I know you don't consider yourself a "microstock" site, but you're selling royalty-free licenses so call it what you want but they are your competition.
(4) your content is not on par with your prices. This is the key think you should reconsider. Either lower the prices or recruit the best of the best from each site and have them contribute shots that are exclusive to your site. Otherwise your model is doomed to fail.

Modified.  removed.





         

Hmpfff, this thread leaves me flabbergasted. I have to admit I like this guy's (Paul Melcher) style and guts. I also read his blog extensively. He's French, so maybe I should say about what he wrote in this thread: ce n'est que la v�rit� qui blesse (only truth hurts).

About business communication, well, I have some experience with the (American) corporate world and sometimes I had to puke in silence about those slick hurray hoohoo guys that have it all worked out, business plans, road to success, profit projections, blabla.

They get good notes from their supervisor, get promoted, move on to the next "challenge" ("problems" don't belong in the corporate newspeak) and leave the carnage they caused behind, up to the next one.

The worst that can happen is the failure of the Peter's Principle (everybody gets stuck at a level where they are incompetent) and move on to the top. That's how things like Enron happened. Slick feelgood language is not always the right way to get your point accross and get to the meat.

Now enters Paul Melcher, with a big mouth and a number of truths we conveniently ignore. Why not give the guy a chance?

My main critique at this point to Paul Melcher is that he seems to be quite ignorant about microstock. Sure he mentions Getty, but I didn't see anything about Shutterstock and Dreamstime.

He claims not to run a microstock site, but when you look closely at zymmetrical, it is a microstock site. I challenge Mr. Melcher to explain exactly what the difference is between zymmetrical and any other microstock venture. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, well... I have to assume that it is a duck, until proven wrong.

Maybe Mr. Melcher will claim artists can set their own prices. I wonder if he ever heard about Featurepics? [I love Featurepics, especially since I got a payout last week - I will reach payout on LuckyOliver in 2011]. The content of zymmetrical right now is rather mediocre and overpriced, sure, but it's still in beta, right? At least his beta is more functional than Snapvillage's beta. There are some glitches on the site and I will mail Mr. Melcher those, that's what he asked for.

If Mr. Melcher will be as aggressive and determined in marketing his site and his artists as he was on this forum, he's a winner. I'm sceptical, but let's see...

Basically, I signed up. Shoot me 

Update - Just uploaded 5 shots. I get thrown back at a page that lists my file names + the note "waiting review". Can't see any thumbnail, no tags, no IPTC info. Don't have any idea how and where to upload MRF's and how to attach them. Can't either edit nor review. Thrown back at the home page when trying to access "help". I guess for now, I just leave the link with the other dead sites. Sorry zymmetrical, I'm just a rich redneck that likes cheep bear  but doesn't have that much time to waste. I try again later, who knows.

IMHO, I think we've had enough confrontation, reaching a point were nothing good comes from it.
Regards,
Adelaide

You are correct, madelaide!!! I have always respected your opinions and observations here.
     In my part, I did not realize that I offended, insulted, inflamed, defamed, whatever.  All I did was answer the question of the original poster, George Flopos.  Next thing I know, I'm being insulted by the Zymm-folks.
    Like the majority of the MSG family,  I am on IS, I can compete there and I am making money there!!
           Just stating a fact.
     
     Like this thread started out, we have had threads like this before and it turned out it was someone other than a mere contributor, we had been down that road before. Some owner or manager or CKO trying to bobo us all.
               Just stating a fact.
   
 Then, ............I became 'cheap beer' according to the CKO. 

Well,  I do have time and I do have money and I do like beer.  And those that think they insulted me can rest assured,  I will swill and cry in that beer.........  all the way to the bank.... to make another deposit.
     Whatever.   If I offended Mr. George Flopos or any of the officers of Zymmetrical.com..    I apologize.     -a.k.a. tom
                                                                 

p.s.  Why do I use a  'photog handle' (aka tom)?   For just this very reason, you never know what kind of   people   you are going to run into on the web. 
                             

 

Update - Just uploaded 5 shots. I get thrown back at a page that lists my file names + the note "waiting review". Can't see any thumbnail, no tags, no IPTC info. Don't have any idea how and where to upload MRF's and how to attach them. Can't either edit nor review. Thrown back at the home page when trying to access "help". I guess for now, I just leave the link with the other dead sites. Sorry zymmetrical, I'm just a rich redneck that likes cheep bear  but doesn't have that much time to waste. I try again later, who knows.

Thanks for giving us a whirl.  The older version of our submissions system did indeed show thumbnails, but until we get to a production stage, server resources are unfortunately limited. Resizing images that are up to 100 MB, that we don't even know are going to be accepted (like I said earlier, the rejection rate is around 70%), is a strain on the system that has been removed for now.

If you notice on the photo upload form, (currently IE browser only), you actually get a thumbnail of the files selected on your HD -before- you upload. So this will hopefully lessen the problem of accidental dupes and such being uploaded.

Rest assured, when we go on with our server expansion the list will again display thumbnails.

The EXIF/IPTC data is stored in our submissions database tables, up till now I haven't seen a need for this information to be displayed in the Artist's Submission queue page - after all, you know what camera you use, right?  It's an easy change to make to have it shown, I just need a reason why - otherwise it's just extra KB slowing down the pageload (130 EXIF/IPTC fields x 3 submissions per page adds up to a fair chunk of page bloat).

No tags or editting capability until the files are approved, this is by design. Why tag a file that get's rejected in the end?

Model Release page is visible on your Account Page at http://www.zymmetrical.com/Account/tabid/93/Default.aspx.   Direct link the the Model Release page is http://www.zymmetrical.com/Account/ModelReleases/tabid/1424/Default.aspx.

For now, they are disconnected systems. You have a series of 10 pics of a particular model, upload the PDF or JPG etc. to the model release form, and we put two and two together and match them up to your approved submissions.  Don't want to enforce a 'one-photo, one release form' rule because this would mean uploading duplicate releases.

On our roadmap is to simplify the connection, probably ending up saving our sanity more than the photogs:  when the submission/approval process is going full steam, playing 'match the model release to the pic' is going to lose it's charm pretty quickly. Planned is a dropdown box next to each file in the Art Manager, with a thumbnail and filename link for each model release, so one can quickly select from any uploaded releases.

Thanks again for checking us out, things really are being improved daily - don't let us sink too deep in your bookmarks.