Author Topic: Know anything about Dreamstock? (Read 14553 times)

Phil · « **Reply #25 on:** June 18, 2010, 17:53 »

think I'll wait until the site is out of beta, got a good buyer base, generating earnings and starts on the commission increases

. I've put to much time into new sites and I dont see this model being sustainable for either the agency or photographer.

lisafx · « **Reply #26 on:** June 18, 2010, 18:34 »

Quote from: dreamstock.com on June 18, 2010, 16:23

You are assuming the 10c rate per subscription download will stay this low forever, this is not the case. You may remember that Shutterstock raised their download payout from 20c to 25c in 2006 and increased this as years pass by. We will be doing the same.

Furthermore, some of you get paid 25-38c depending on how many downloads you achieve at Shutterstock and other similar stock sites, we will be introducing a similar program in the future.

Welcome to the forums Dreamstock, and thanks for posting.

Unfortunately, giving away images for .10/download for now on the promise that it may increase in the future sounds like a recipe for disappointment to me.

I am not participating in Thinkstock because of the low royalties. Yet they are owned by the most successful stock agency in the business, and pay two and a half times what you are offering.

I agree with Phil. If your agency ever gets to the point where they can deliver the royalties and traffic that Shutterstock can, then I would be more than happy to invest my time in uploading there.

studioportosabbia · « **Reply #27 on:** June 18, 2010, 18:58 »

For those who joined Dreamstock, don't bother uploading your Christmasfiles: with this $ 0.10 concept they'll be gone before the fall

trek · « **Reply #28 on:** June 18, 2010, 19:10 »

Dreamstock needs a better business plan. 10¢ royalty.... only a fool would participate.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #29 on:** June 18, 2010, 20:06 »

Quote from: scoutingstock on June 18, 2010, 19:10

Dreamstock needs a better business plan. 10¢ royalty.... only a fool would participate.

I would make it more simple.. pay for the uploads and almost everybody will join, also no locking files..

Actually they pay 50$ for 1000 photos LOL

pancaketom · « **Reply #30 on:** June 18, 2010, 20:07 »

Simple math, at 100$ a month from the buyers, how much do you think they will be able to pay out to the photographers? Unless there are a lot of buyers coming from somewhere (hopefully not the places that pay us more now), I don't see this working out well.

Also I don't send SS my full size images, that way they can't sell full size for the sub cost (well, they can get upsized ones, but so can anyone upsize any image they get at a small size).

Please come back when you are paying out .30 or more per download, I think you will get a lot more interest here then, unless of course everywhere else is up to .50 by then.

--=Tom

luissantos84 · « **Reply #31 on:** June 18, 2010, 20:29 »

Quote from: pancaketom on June 18, 2010, 20:07

Simple math, at 100$ a month from the buyers, how much do you think they will be able to pay out to the photographers? Unless there are a lot of buyers coming from somewhere (hopefully not the places that pay us more now), I don't see this working out well.

Also I don't send SS my full size images, that way they can't sell full size for the sub cost (well, they can get upsized ones, but so can anyone upsize any image they get at a small size).

Please come back when you are paying out .30 or more per download, I think you will get a lot more interest here then, unless of course everywhere else is up to .50 by then.

--=Tom

if I may ask you something.. do you downsize the pictures to agencies that have subscription plans or just SS?..

nruboc · « **Reply #32 on:** June 18, 2010, 21:57 »

Quote from: dreamstock.com on June 18, 2010, 16:23

You are assuming the 10c rate per subscription download will stay this low forever, this is not the case. You may remember that Shutterstock raised their download payout from 20c to 25c in 2006 and increased this as years pass by. We will be doing the same.

Furthermore, some of you get paid 25-38c depending on how many downloads you achieve at Shutterstock and other similar stock sites, we will be introducing a similar program in the future. Is it worth noting that our subscription service permits only "Medium" image resolutions to be downloaded. Sites such as Shutterstock allow full size image downloads. We feel if customers want to purchase large image resolutions they should buy your images with credits ($4 an image with 50% commission going to you) and not pay just 25c-38c for a full size resolution.

2002 called, it wants its business model back.

Beach Bum · « **Reply #33 on:** June 18, 2010, 22:32 »

Is it April 1st?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #34 on:** June 18, 2010, 22:32 »

Quote from: dehooks on June 18, 2010, 22:32

Is it April 1st?

ehehhe

Digital66 · « **Reply #35 on:** June 18, 2010, 23:16 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on June 18, 2010, 13:58

it is INSANE

It's good to know this time you are not cheerleading a new subscription plan agency!

This kind of new "agencies" are born because there are photographers willing to accept anything. You see.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #36 on:** June 18, 2010, 23:23 »

There are roughly X number of images licensed in the world. Starting a new agency and selling DLs does not increase the number of images licensed in the world it only displaces some sales from somewhere else. Therefore taking less for an image on DreamerStock just diminishes the amount of money generated by picture sales which diminishes everyone's income. It's kinda simple. Best thing to do is not contribute a single image and let DS die before they a get even a sputtering of life.

Digital66 · « **Reply #37 on:** June 18, 2010, 23:48 »

Quote from: dreamstock.com on June 18, 2010, 09:56

Quote from: pancaketom on June 16, 2010, 19:10
I wonder how tight the fine print is, as even I could make money downloading an unlimited number of my own images for 10 cents a pop. (or maybe we could just make a microstockgroup account that buys one of each of our images every day. I'm sure I have 100 crap rejects somewhere on my hard drive...

This is against our terms of service. While we welcome genuine downloads, we have strict policies against those who register accounts to artificially inflate download numbers for their associate photographers. Accounts/photographers involved in this scheme will be removed from our service.

If you have any other questions, feel free to visit us, we're generally on live chat.

Hmmm...

They already have an excuse not to pay commisions: "Sorry, we regret to inform you that sale for file ###### was not genuine"

The only way the can make this model work, is by taking advantage of naive and desperate contributors and paying them practically nothing.

nruboc · « **Reply #38 on:** June 19, 2010, 02:49 »

Quote from: lisafx on June 18, 2010, 18:34

I agree with Phil. If your agency ever gets to the point where they can deliver the royalties and traffic that Shutterstock can, then I would be more than happy to invest my time in uploading there.

^^^ Yes!!! I would advise matching ShutterStock royalties, possibly paying for uploads, and then you're on your own in differentiating your site and marketing it to attract new or existing subscribers. Good luck!!

Microbius · « **Reply #39 on:** June 19, 2010, 03:29 »

$100 unlimited downloads seems like an open invite to image thieves (Heroturko and co.) At that price for the whole library they'd be mad not to sign up! They'll make it back on Google ad words in a day.
Oh and just to agree with what others have been saying if people aren't downloading all they're entitled to on sites where they pay more for their subs (and as we know they never do or the model would collapse) there is no way they are going to be downloading more on this cheap assed site.
Surely the owners of he site have done their research enough to know this, so why try and spin us a line?

FD · « **Reply #40 on:** June 19, 2010, 03:42 »

Quote from: dreamstock.com on June 18, 2010, 09:56

DreamStock is still in beta but we will be aggressively promoting it in the coming months as we are well financed from some big investors/banks.

Good for you. It might make perfect sense from an agent's viewpoint, but it's detrimental to the photographers in the long run. You are undercutting our fine agents' (iStock, Dreamstime, ShutterStock) prices and you will - if successful - draw sales away from them. For an insulting 10 cents, I don't even bother. For that price, I'd rather give it away for free on Flickr. I can't even pay props for a shoot, based on that kind of "commission". Cost > earnings means the end of nanostock. Good luck, but if you might succeed, I just stop shooting for stock and start shoot weddings again.

FD · « **Reply #41 on:** June 19, 2010, 03:46 »

Quote from: lisafx on June 18, 2010, 18:34

I agree with Phil. If your agency ever gets to the point where they can deliver the royalties and traffic that Shutterstock can, then I would be more than happy to invest my time in uploading there.

We don't need another subs agency than ShutterStock. ShutterStock is fine for me.

Beach Bum · « **Reply #42 on:** June 19, 2010, 06:43 »

Quote from: Zeus on June 18, 2010, 23:23

There are roughly X number of images licensed in the world. Starting a new agency and selling DLs does not increase the number of images licensed in the world it only displaces some sales from somewhere else. Therefore taking less for an image on DreamerStock just diminishes the amount of money generated by picture sales which diminishes everyone's income. It's kinda simple. Best thing to do is not contribute a single image and let DS die before they a get even a sputtering of life.

Exactly!

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #43 on:** June 19, 2010, 07:28 »

Quote from: nruboc on June 18, 2010, 21:57

Quote from: dreamstock.com on June 18, 2010, 16:23
You are assuming the 10c rate per subscription download will stay this low forever, this is not the case. You may remember that Shutterstock raised their download payout from 20c to 25c in 2006 and increased this as years pass by. We will be doing the same.

Furthermore, some of you get paid 25-38c depending on how many downloads you achieve at Shutterstock and other similar stock sites, we will be introducing a similar program in the future. Is it worth noting that our subscription service permits only "Medium" image resolutions to be downloaded. Sites such as Shutterstock allow full size image downloads. We feel if customers want to purchase large image resolutions they should buy your images with credits ($4 an image with 50% commission going to you) and not pay just 25c-38c for a full size resolution.

2002 called, it wants its business model back.

Hahaha! Seriously, glad to see you independents are gathering together to reject this ridiculousness.

cathyslife · « **Reply #44 on:** June 19, 2010, 07:29 »

Quote from: FD-amateur on June 19, 2010, 03:46

Quote from: lisafx on June 18, 2010, 18:34
I agree with Phil. If your agency ever gets to the point where they can deliver the royalties and traffic that Shutterstock can, then I would be more than happy to invest my time in uploading there.
We don't need another subs agency than ShutterStock. ShutterStock is fine for me.

I agree. I like Shutterstock, always have, and unless someone comes up with something better, I'm sticking with SS. 10 cents to start doesn't sound better.

Maui · « **Reply #45 on:** June 19, 2010, 08:08 »

Not to mention that the site has no imprint, no address, no telephone and no way to contact them apart from a mail form. Yeah, looks very trustworthy.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #46 on:** June 19, 2010, 09:01 »

Quote from: FD-amateur on June 19, 2010, 03:46

Quote from: lisafx on June 18, 2010, 18:34
I agree with Phil. If your agency ever gets to the point where they can deliver the royalties and traffic that Shutterstock can, then I would be more than happy to invest my time in uploading there.
We don't need another subs agency than ShutterStock. ShutterStock is fine for me.

sorry, but I want 2 Shutterstock's but Dreamstock ain't the second, too bad...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #47 on:** June 19, 2010, 09:12 »

Quote from: Digital66 on June 18, 2010, 23:16

Quote from: luissantos84 on June 18, 2010, 13:58
it is INSANE

It's good to know this time you are not cheerleading a new subscription plan agency!

This kind of new "agencies" are born because there are photographers willing to accept anything. You see.

I sometimes give more credit than the new agency deserves, it is because I am still young at microstock.. After a year I am feeling other things and these days I upload to agencies that are worth

FD · « **Reply #48 on:** June 19, 2010, 09:33 »

Quote from: Maui on June 19, 2010, 08:08

Not to mention that the site has no imprint, no address, no telephone and no way to contact them apart from a mail form.

Yes they have covered all their traces well in the whois etc... That in itself points to a certain location, as we can expect. Also the abundant use of "beautiful" for all woman and the improper use of the article "the"

To make sure, have a look at their busiest photographers. These are probably the guys that put together the site. Take their top-placed images (of course they give themselves priority in the ranks), and match their keywords with the ones on, for instance Dreamstime. Bingo. Most have their info set on 'confidential', but look at their referrals (they have cozy networks always), and ... bingo.

Say no more...

lisafx · « **Reply #49 on:** June 19, 2010, 10:17 »

Quote from: FD-amateur on June 19, 2010, 03:46

Quote from: lisafx on June 18, 2010, 18:34
I agree with Phil. If your agency ever gets to the point where they can deliver the royalties and traffic that Shutterstock can, then I would be more than happy to invest my time in uploading there.
We don't need another subs agency than ShutterStock. ShutterStock is fine for me.

Totally agree! I wasn't actually suggesting they ever WOULD have the traffic and commissions of SS. Just saying it isn't worth even discussing until/unless they do.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Know anything about Dreamstock? (Read 14553 times)

Phil

lisafx

studioportosabbia

trek

luissantos84

pancaketom

luissantos84

nruboc

Beach Bum

luissantos84

Digital66

PeterChigmaroff

Digital66

nruboc

Microbius

FD

FD

Beach Bum

Sean Locke Photography

cathyslife

Maui

luissantos84

luissantos84

FD

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors