MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: ZOONAR ! anybody??  (Read 11704 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lagereek

« on: May 03, 2011, 06:04 »
0
I joined them, a collegue recommended this site, especially since large industry, engineering, technology ( my fields) are very popular in Germany!  however the uploading thing is driving me mad, why cant I fill in the keywords, title, releases, etc,  before they go into reviewing?

As it is now, a shot of engineers working inside a giant oil-refinery,   well, it wont show if the shot is released or not and if the reviewer presume its not released,  he will reject it ofcourse.

Lovely and clean interface!  but the uploading and editing, seams somehow to be in reversed order to what we are used to. :-\


« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2011, 06:46 »
0
I don`t understand your point. You can fill out the IPTC metadata fields with every photo software. Photoshop, Lightroom., ACDSee... you can use every programm you like. After that you start uploading to your agencies including Zoonar. We offer FTP and the Zoonar Media Manager for uploading photos to our database.

lagereek

« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2011, 07:00 »
0
I don`t understand your point. You can fill out the IPTC metadata fields with every photo software. Photoshop, Lightroom., ACDSee... you can use every programm you like. After that you start uploading to your agencies including Zoonar. We offer FTP and the Zoonar Media Manager for uploading photos to our database.

Hi Michael!

No, the uploading is OK!  I live on a large horse-farm in the country and the FTP, seams to work badly here. I just uploaded 10 shots, all of oil and gas industry with engineers, etc,  now all the files seams to go to reviewing before I get a chance to edit/submit.

At the moment Im using youre webb uploader and it works very well.

« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2011, 07:01 »
0
yes you simply put the data into IPTC, upload and wait for review

Once reviewed, you put proper licensing data to all accepted images, that's it. No categories, no attaching releases one by one.

Yes, it's a bit unusual but uploading = submitting for review. Similar logic at Graphic Leftovers.

« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2011, 17:28 »
0
They shouldn't ding you for releases that you weren't able to attach before you uploaded. And to my knowledge they don't do this. However, there is one aspect of German law you need to keep in mind. Unlike SS, and IS you can't submit editorial images as RF. You must submit them as RM. ALL RF must have model and property releases...editorial included.

« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2011, 18:47 »
0
They shouldn't ding you for releases that you weren't able to attach before you uploaded. And to my knowledge they don't do this. However, there is one aspect of German law you need to keep in mind. Unlike Shutterstock, and IS you can't submit editorial images as RF. You must submit them as RM. ALL RF must have model and property releases...editorial included.

I don't think that's true. You don't have to have releases at all. It is ultimately the buyer's problem to figure out if a release is required for his usage. Your responsibility is only to make a correct statement as to whether a release exists or not.

If you can point me the the aspect of German law you're referring I would be interested to see that.

And Zoonar does not require you to upload releases at all, neither do you have to make a choice between editorial or commercial. From their FAQs:

"You are not required to add model or property releases at Zoonar. But we reserve the right to ask for a release if your photos are sold for commercial purposes. It is, however, important that you use the correct release settings for your photos or else they cant be sold. If you have a release for one of your photos assign it to the photo in question in the Manage pictures section. Use the drop down menu and select is available. If you dont have a release select is NOT available and if a release is not necessary (only appropriate for photos that neither show people as primary subjects nor copyright protected objects, designs, works of art, buildings and registered trademarks) select not necessary"

Essentially this is the best way to deal with the problem, leave it where it belongs (at the buyer).

« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2011, 20:18 »
0
They shouldn't ding you for releases that you weren't able to attach before you uploaded. And to my knowledge they don't do this. However, there is one aspect of German law you need to keep in mind. Unlike Shutterstock, and IS you can't submit editorial images as RF. You must submit them as RM. ALL RF must have model and property releases...editorial included.

I don't think that's true. You don't have to have releases at all. It is ultimately the buyer's problem to figure out if a release is required for his usage. Your responsibility is only to make a correct statement as to whether a release exists or not.

If you can point me the the aspect of German law you're referring I would be interested to see that.

And Zoonar does not require you to upload releases at all, neither do you have to make a choice between editorial or commercial. From their FAQs:

"You are not required to add model or property releases at Zoonar. But we reserve the right to ask for a release if your photos are sold for commercial purposes. It is, however, important that you use the correct release settings for your photos or else they cant be sold. If you have a release for one of your photos assign it to the photo in question in the Manage pictures section. Use the drop down menu and select is available. If you dont have a release select is NOT available and if a release is not necessary (only appropriate for photos that neither show people as primary subjects nor copyright protected objects, designs, works of art, buildings and registered trademarks) select not necessary"

Essentially this is the best way to deal with the problem, leave it where it belongs (at the buyer).

I had long chat with Michael Krabes (?) about that after several of my "editorial" RF shots got rejected by there third party distributors...and what I said above is what he told me. You must mark editorial as RM, and state in the description "For Editorial Use Only" or all the distributors will deny you and that will be the end of it. I am still trying to decide on my end, whether to delete them and resubmit, as it seems even if I do this they won't be considered. Seems silly...but what can you do. Its their game.

lagereek

« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2011, 00:01 »
0
Hi!  and thanks for your help!  it sorted itself out!  Im not doing edotorials anyway.

I am very impressed with this site! fantastic interface and typical German high quality on just about everything, they are also partners with Mauritius images which have got a very good name, probably the biggest in Germany.

I do have releases on every single shot ( when needed)  but they dont require you to upload them with the files,  you should have them in case youre asked.

cheers!  Christian

« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2011, 05:55 »
0
They shouldn't ding you for releases that you weren't able to attach before you uploaded. And to my knowledge they don't do this. However, there is one aspect of German law you need to keep in mind. Unlike Shutterstock, and IS you can't submit editorial images as RF. You must submit them as RM. ALL RF must have model and property releases...editorial included.

I don't think that's true. You don't have to have releases at all. It is ultimately the buyer's problem to figure out if a release is required for his usage. Your responsibility is only to make a correct statement as to whether a release exists or not.

If you can point me the the aspect of German law you're referring I would be interested to see that.

And Zoonar does not require you to upload releases at all, neither do you have to make a choice between editorial or commercial. From their FAQs:

"You are not required to add model or property releases at Zoonar. But we reserve the right to ask for a release if your photos are sold for commercial purposes. It is, however, important that you use the correct release settings for your photos or else they cant be sold. If you have a release for one of your photos assign it to the photo in question in the Manage pictures section. Use the drop down menu and select is available. If you dont have a release select is NOT available and if a release is not necessary (only appropriate for photos that neither show people as primary subjects nor copyright protected objects, designs, works of art, buildings and registered trademarks) select not necessary"

Essentially this is the best way to deal with the problem, leave it where it belongs (at the buyer).

For RF you need some of the booth release conditions:

model release available
model release not necessary

property release available
property release not necessary

But this is not only for Zoonar. You should NEVER do photos into RF, if you are not sure, that you are not offend some copyrigths like design, logo, trademarks and so far, because RF-Photos can be used for all marketing uses. For example: You have a photo with a jogging man who has adidas sneakers (with the three stripes). Some other sport shops buys this photo and adidias will ligitate that. At the end you the photographer have to pay the amount of loss !!

But: At Zoonar you also can release all RM photos to our partners. So I don`t understand your problem...

« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2011, 06:28 »
0

For RF you need some of the booth release conditions:

model release available
model release not necessary

property release available
property release not necessary

But this is not only for Zoonar. You should NEVER do photos into RF, if you are not sure, that you are not offend some copyrigths like design, logo, trademarks and so far, because RF-Photos can be used for all marketing uses. For example: You have a photo with a jogging man who has adidas sneakers (with the three stripes). Some other sport shops buys this photo and adidias will ligitate that. At the end you the photographer have to pay the amount of loss !!

But: At Zoonar you also can release all RM photos to our partners. So I don`t understand your problem...

This is not how the Zoonar website works. You can enter "release NOT available" and still offer as RF. And I could not find any hint that this is not allowed.
And I don't see the reasoning. On Zoonar the difference between RM and RF is only the allowed number of usages (RM is one single usage with limited print run and limited lifetime, RF is unlimited). Nothing is specified on the context of the usage. Therefore it does not make any difference (for sales on Zoonar) if an unreleased image is offered RM or RF - there is no restriction on something like editorial only usage.
Granted, images with "release not available" are obviously automatically not distributed to some of the partner agencies.
But I don't see the legal problem.
From the photographers agreement:

"Photographer shall guarantee and must prove that persons featured and/or the
owner of the rights to this and/or the owner of rights to featured works [e.g.
decoration, stage scenery, costumes, (public) buildings, etc.] of the visual or
applied art (paintings) and/or its use for artwork has given the required consent
also for use of the picture material at a later date by Picture Agency and/or thirdparties.
If pictures of people or works for which consent has not been given or
which has been given under certain restrictions is submitted to Picture Agency, they
shall be identified accordingly by the photographer in clear written form (e.g. with
the words not for advertising or with the Model Release option is not available
selected). The photographer is liable for the full amount of damages incurred by
Picture Agency as a result of missing and/or insufficient identification."

Therefore I conclude, that it is my duty to clearly mark pictures without releases as such. Not more.

« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2011, 07:08 »
0
Zoonar has a great upload system. Upload, if ur image is accepted you can then refine the details, license, keywords, description (usually done on IPTC) , say if the image has a model release or not. If your image is rejected, well you spent no time on the site other than the time it takes to upload. I wish all agencies did it like this.

« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2011, 09:00 »
0

For RF you need some of the booth release conditions:

model release available
model release not necessary

property release available
property release not necessary

But this is not only for Zoonar. You should NEVER do photos into RF, if you are not sure, that you are not offend some copyrigths like design, logo, trademarks and so far, because RF-Photos can be used for all marketing uses. For example: You have a photo with a jogging man who has adidas sneakers (with the three stripes). Some other sport shops buys this photo and adidias will ligitate that. At the end you the photographer have to pay the amount of loss !!

But: At Zoonar you also can release all RM photos to our partners. So I don`t understand your problem...

This is not how the Zoonar website works. You can enter "release NOT available" and still offer as RF. And I could not find any hint that this is not allowed.
And I don't see the reasoning. On Zoonar the difference between RM and RF is only the allowed number of usages (RM is one single usage with limited print run and limited lifetime, RF is unlimited). Nothing is specified on the context of the usage. Therefore it does not make any difference (for sales on Zoonar) if an unreleased image is offered RM or RF - there is no restriction on something like editorial only usage.
Granted, images with "release not available" are obviously automatically not distributed to some of the partner agencies.
But I don't see the legal problem.
From the photographers agreement:

"Photographer shall guarantee and must prove that persons featured and/or the
owner of the rights to this and/or the owner of rights to featured works [e.g.
decoration, stage scenery, costumes, (public) buildings, etc.] of the visual or
applied art (paintings) and/or its use for artwork has given the required consent
also for use of the picture material at a later date by Picture Agency and/or thirdparties.
If pictures of people or works for which consent has not been given or
which has been given under certain restrictions is submitted to Picture Agency, they
shall be identified accordingly by the photographer in clear written form (e.g. with
the words not for advertising or with the Model Release option is not available
selected). The photographer is liable for the full amount of damages incurred by
Picture Agency as a result of missing and/or insufficient identification."

Therefore I conclude, that it is my duty to clearly mark pictures without releases as such. Not more.

Ok, my mistake. This is how our partner network works !
If you have not one of these release statements:

model release available
model release not necessary

property release available
property release not necessary

you cannot submit the photos to our RF-Partners, because they go to them as normal RF in the sale...

lagereek

« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2011, 10:52 »
0
Well in my opinion, the site is perfect, precision!  the one and only small thing could be the search-engine,  very generic, well at least the searches I have tried. I will take one of my own examples: buyer looking for lets say an oil-refinery, very, very few buyers are in fact interested in the typical shot: a refinery at a distance and shot with the same old telephoto-lens, daytime or evening, its in fact a very common shot from photographers that cant get into the actual area. The buyers Ive got are far more interested in whats happening inside a huge industrial area and the people working there.
Im pretty sure that goes for everything involving corporate, industry, etc.

just a thought really

« Reply #13 on: August 14, 2011, 04:23 »
0
just a questions, is the RM license on zoonar is the same as RM license such as alamy?

I found out some of my RM licensed on zoonar is listed as budget RF on agefotostock...

« Reply #14 on: August 14, 2011, 04:40 »
0
I had some nice sales and was just short of a payout but have only sold 1 in the last 5 months.  Hope it picks up again one day and I can get my money.  Sites with really low sales should have a low payout threshold, there's no incentive when it takes a really long time to reach a payout.  If I do make it, how long will the next one take?

Xalanx

« Reply #15 on: August 14, 2011, 05:19 »
0
I have removed my portfolio there, after some very long time without sales. I got sometimes nice sales (even had one of 80$) but extremely rare. Also, I didn't like the way things are managed with partner agencies. I asked repeatedly support what's going on with the files approved at AgeFotostock and every time the answer was that it takes time to actually see the files there. I couldn't find any of my photos at AGE, in about an year since they started with it. I mean c'mon, how long could it possibly take? Something doesn't feel right about it.
It's just another low earner I "fired", I'm quite confident that I won't miss it.

lagereek

« Reply #16 on: August 14, 2011, 06:05 »
0
I have removed my portfolio there, after some very long time without sales. I got sometimes nice sales (even had one of 80$) but extremely rare. Also, I didn't like the way things are managed with partner agencies. I asked repeatedly support what's going on with the files approved at AgeFotostock and every time the answer was that it takes time to actually see the files there. I couldn't find any of my photos at AGE, in about an year since they started with it. I mean c'mon, how long could it possibly take? Something doesn't feel right about it.
It's just another low earner I "fired", I'm quite confident that I won't miss it.

Today, long after this thread started, I view this agency as a total waste of time. Its a nice site, everything works, EXEPT the search-engine, its really dreadful, probably the worst one of the lot, doesnt show any relevance, popular or anything. Its based on the old trad-agency filing system which was "first pics come, first pic served".
An internet based agency is only as good as its contributors and Search, thats it.

Xalanx

« Reply #17 on: August 14, 2011, 08:47 »
0
I have removed my portfolio there, after some very long time without sales. I got sometimes nice sales (even had one of 80$) but extremely rare. Also, I didn't like the way things are managed with partner agencies. I asked repeatedly support what's going on with the files approved at AgeFotostock and every time the answer was that it takes time to actually see the files there. I couldn't find any of my photos at AGE, in about an year since they started with it. I mean c'mon, how long could it possibly take? Something doesn't feel right about it.
It's just another low earner I "fired", I'm quite confident that I won't miss it.

Today, long after this thread started, I view this agency as a total waste of time. Its a nice site, everything works, EXEPT the search-engine, its really dreadful, probably the worst one of the lot, doesnt show any relevance, popular or anything. Its based on the old trad-agency filing system which was "first pics come, first pic served".
An internet based agency is only as good as its contributors and Search, thats it.

Yes, shortly that will sum it up: total waste of time.

« Reply #18 on: August 15, 2011, 14:07 »
0
Also deleted my Port recently: After a pretty good start Zoonar became really picky and rejected almost all of my images - at one point it just did not make sense any more for me. Too bad, I'd prefer to support smaller sites but not if they are pickier than the large ones...

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #19 on: August 15, 2011, 20:57 »
0
Well, until today I would have agreed! I've been steadily uploading since some time last year, and the last earnings had been on 1 January. I checked in today (to finish the upload of some files to make them available to partner sites) and found that one image had sold on DDP for 45 euros. Not great for 8 months works, but perhaps those partner sites will actually do something at the end of the day!

Steve

« Reply #20 on: September 23, 2011, 14:03 »
0
Just now found my black bear photo on istock:



has been modified and is being resold on zoonar:



Already alerted istock support. Looks like Zoonar doesn't do a very good job of policing.

« Reply #21 on: September 23, 2011, 23:59 »
0
going to pull my port...sales disappeared, views pretty good but don't pay the bills. Had my 2nd highest SS image rejected yesterday with the tag of " Sorry, there is no call for this kind of picture" ...F'm and feed them fishheads...really a waste of time. They'll die before the end of next year. Mr. Krabs, Spongebob could do a better job : )

P.S. and as Franky said, I went from 79% approval to 2%...pretty ballsy for a site with no track record.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2011, 00:20 by anonymous »

lagereek

« Reply #22 on: September 24, 2011, 00:41 »
0
I stopped uploading a long time ago, as you say, waste of time. The site is nice and professioanlly done but the search and everything is too old fashioned, too generic.

Carl

  • Carl Stewart, CS Productions
« Reply #23 on: September 26, 2011, 05:14 »
0
Rejection rate much too high for me, too.  Cultural difference, perhaps?   :-\


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Zoonar.de

Started by gustyx « 1 2 3  All » New Sites - General

50 Replies
20905 Views
Last post December 23, 2009, 08:42
by oboy
5 Replies
6745 Views
Last post September 12, 2012, 08:49
by ctsankov
0 Replies
2278 Views
Last post July 11, 2010, 03:37
by mtkang
11 Replies
5374 Views
Last post July 14, 2010, 03:52
by Michael Krabs
1 Replies
2120 Views
Last post November 26, 2010, 07:57
by Perry

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results