MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - photoshow
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9
101
« on: May 14, 2009, 14:32 »
Thanks Phil, and yea its a bit of a trip but a great excuse for a trip to the US.
Steve Lovegrove came from Australia to our last workshop
102
« on: May 14, 2009, 05:04 »
Weekend With The Masters May 29-31, 2009 $475.00 Early registration Special - Register and pay by 5/27 and only pay $400, you save $75 FREE LODGING AVAILABLE CONTACT ME FOR DETAILSThat's 2 complete days of hands on instruction from 2 working professionals, one on one shooting time with professional fashion glamour and nude models and a full use commercial release (nudes resticted from MS Use) for $200 a day. You can't rent a studio for $200 a day We will maintain a 2:1 Photographer to Model Ratio and will be limiting this event to 10 photographers. To Register Visit Vegas Vision Lights join the group and RSVP for Weekend With The Masters Internationally known fashion photographer Billy Pegram has joined with professional commercial stock, editorial fashion, glamour photographer Bobby Deal to present a series of seminars entitled, Weekend with the Masters The first seminar will begin Friday, May 29th with a meet and greet at Vegas Vision StudiosThen on Saturday and Sunday, attendees will watch Billy/Bobby shoot both fashion and glamour, then will schedule with the models for small group and individual sessions with guided instruction. The seminar will take place at a, gracious and luxurious 7,200 sq. ft. Private Mansion that offers many indoor and outdoor locations for shooting. Experienced fashion/glamour models will be available, some of whom have shot for Playboy and other national and international publications. We will maintain a model to photographer ratio of 1:4 or better throughout the workshop. Models will provide attendees with a full commercial release. While models are compensated for their time at the workshop we do ask that you show them the same consideration that you would show any service industry professional and offer them a tip based on performance at the end of the workshop. This is an incredible experience to watch, learn, and shoot with the pros. Attendees will learn the secrets of posing models, special lighting techniques, and other valuable and practical methods focusing on improving your skills as a fashion/glamour photographer. Learn the secrets, the tricks and the techniques of photographing high fashion and glamour models that will set the mood and help you to develop a unique and personal style that allows your work to stand out in the crowd! Seize the opportunity to shoot Playboy or high-fashion style under the tutelage of internationally recognized fashion/glamour photographer Billy Pegram. Study specialized lighting techniques for both studio and location from professional commercial stock, editorial fashion, glamour photographer Bobby Deal, . What: A full two-day seminar preceded by an evening meet and greet at Vegas Vision Studios. When: Meet and Greet May 29th, Instruction and shooting May 30th , and 31st. Where: On location in a spectacular private residence in exciting Las Vegas, Nevada. You can take a photo tour or the home we will be shooting in at Workshop Location Photo TourAbout Your Instructors Bobby Deal spent much of his life as a serious amateur photographer before turning Pro in 2001. Commercial stock photography is the core of Deals work as he now licenses in excess of 40,000 images per year! Moving to Las Vegas in 2008, he opened Vegas Vision Studios, a 6,000 sq. ft. commercial studio complex to serve the needs of both photographers and the video production community of Las Vegas . In addition to teaching hands-on workshops and running the day-to-day activities of the studio, Deal also continues to shoot local, regional and national stock, fashion and glamour assignments . Deal has a strong knowledge of studio and location lighting, which, combined with his love for the dramatic and artistic world of glamour and fashion photography, lends his photographs an intensely individual style. Billy Pegram is an internationally known fashion photographer, director, producer, and writer. His photos have appeared in media around the globe for clients such as Fila, Swatch, Michael Flatleys Lord of the Dance a wide variety of haute couture designers, including Isis Couture, Billionaire Mafia, Helly Hansen, Bikini Bay , and many others. Billy's creativity combined with a natural tendency to teach others led Amherst Media, Inc. to request a series of five books as teaching tools for aspiring photographers. Four are completed and are available at local book stores. They are: 1. FASHION MODEL PHOTOGRAPHY Professional Techniques and Images 2. THE MAKING OF A MODEL 3. POSING TECHNIQUES For Photographing Model Portfolios, 4. LIGHTING TECHNIQUES For Model Portfolios. The fifth book PROFESSIONAL TECHNIQUES FOR PHOTOGRAPHING THE FIGURE MODEL will be in the stores in 2010. MEET THE MODELS
103
« on: January 01, 2009, 22:39 »
and may our cheesecakes be as soft and tasty as photoshow's 
 My cheesecakes are always soft and tasty!
104
« on: January 01, 2009, 15:28 »
Wishing you all a prosperous New Year
105
« on: December 25, 2008, 04:03 »
Yea I got a wonderful Christmas gift this year. Yesterday our landlords bank came to the door and told us we have 72 hours to move. Seems that for the last year I have been paying the rent but the landlady has failed to pay the mortage. So today for Christmas I am moving
Man, that sucks. The people at that bank definitely need a talking to ... who's in charge there, Henry Potter? (reference to the film 'It's a Wonderful Life')
... hope it all works out for you.
Yea it will all work out wonderfully in the end, if it's not alright then it's not the end :-) In all seriousness we have a deal working for a great townhome in a great part of town and just a few minutes drive from the studio. It will take us 30-45 days to close the deal but it is a sweatheart deal so I can cope with staying in the studio until it is done.
106
« on: December 25, 2008, 04:00 »
Christmas is about religion. and it pisses me off that people give gifts on Christmas and pretend like they know what its all about when they aren't christian. Make your own holiday and give gifts if thats the case. and you know what, Festivus sounds really good for people like them. Maybe the airing of grievances will enlighten them a bit. I just hate how people adopt religions when it suits them.
NO Christmas is about the birth of the son of God not about religion. Religon is a man made concept meant to help mankind explain and understand that which can not be understood. One does not have to have a tie to organized religion to be spirtual and or be Christian. I don't need a priest and a congregation to have a personal relationship with the son of God or to live by a simple set of spiritual principals and religion is not a mandate of Christmas celebration.
you also don't need jeepers or christmas for principles either...what you need is a book by john stuart mills or nietzsche ...or umm...say the ridiculous laws the govern whatever country you live in
funny, those principles are a direct result from that very 'religion' that you don't need as part of the Christmas celebration. the idea behind church and congregation is a sense of community, something that lacks at the very deepest core of society...and the isolationist perspective is a wonderful way of demonstrating that...sad to see it spreading...
i'm not having this argument...its not worth the effort
i'm going to go have my christmas meal, which ironically is with me and other people, not the son of God, who respectfully declined my invitation this year
Enjoy your meal and your fellowship, I shall be doing the same in a few hours.
107
« on: December 24, 2008, 20:57 »
Christmas is about religion. and it pisses me off that people give gifts on Christmas and pretend like they know what its all about when they aren't christian. Make your own holiday and give gifts if thats the case. and you know what, Festivus sounds really good for people like them. Maybe the airing of grievances will enlighten them a bit. I just hate how people adopt religions when it suits them.
NO Christmas is about the birth of the son of God not about religion. Religon is a man made concept meant to help mankind explain and understand that which can not be understood. One does not have to have a tie to organized religion to be spirtual and or be Christian. I don't need a priest and a congregation to have a personal relationship with the son of God or to live by a simple set of spiritual principals and religion is not a mandate of Christmas celebration.
108
« on: December 24, 2008, 18:01 »
The older i get the more cynical i get about xmas. Hard up families expected to buy presents they can ill afford. That baby in Bethleham has alot to answer for in my opinion
You know it's the hypocritical event of the year - as over here 70% don't even go to church or regard religion. So what are they celebrating? Time to cop on!
Christmas is about creepers not religion. One does not have to go to church and hail an organized religion to have a personal relationship with creepers. LMAO I love it the forum censerd my post renaming JC to creepers
109
« on: December 24, 2008, 14:52 »
So sorry to hear that Bobby - are we talking the studio or where you live? If the studio, where will you put all your gear?
Yea we were forced out of our home the studio is fine and is where I will be staying for the next 30 days or so. The commute to work this AM was killer, there was an accident in the hallway at the interchange to the low key studio and traffic was backed up for tiles :-)
110
« on: December 24, 2008, 13:57 »
Yea I got a wonderful Christmas gift this year. Yesterday our landlords bank came to the door and told us we have 72 hours to move. Seems that for the last year I have been paying the rent but the landlady has failed to pay the mortage. So today for Christmas I am moving
111
« on: December 23, 2008, 14:44 »
And the greed of Fotolia rises its head yet again. It is really quite amazing what people will let an agency get away with.
112
« on: December 05, 2008, 13:02 »
... Where Bobby says this: "Yes Chad it is true I called you Greedy *insult removed* and that was / is the truth. I did not call you fuckers and rapists even though the truth is you are raping your contributors. And Chad you NEVER GAVE ME... I thought that english was your native language perhaps I was mistaken. The quote you site is what I meant and it seems perfectly clear to me.
He says he did not call them "...rapists" and then does exactly that in the rest of the sentence. - i.e. "the truth is you are raping your contributors..." that is unambiguously calling them rapists.
The degree of offense taken by someone due to being called a "greedy *insult removed*" is not up to you or me or bobby to determine it is up to the person offended as with any other epithet.
And as far as my providing evidence I make no claims that require any more than what is in the threads (but you do have to read them - sometimes carefully.) You all seem to accept whatever bobby says as gospel but in fact we have only his word as to how offensive he was or what else transpired in the telephone conversations mentioned.
This seems to me to be somewhat analagoous to a business manager/owner stopping into a bar where one of his employees is mouthing off about how his greedy so-and-so boss(es) are cheating him. How that would be handled is completly up to the manager and has nothing to do with free speech.
fred
Regarding "Rapists":
Let me break down my argument into bite-sized numbered chunks: in chronological order: 1. Chad / Fotolia claims Bobby called him/Fotolia a) F*kers b) *insult removed* c) Rapists publicly 2. This is an accusation of Libel 3. Based on this alleged Libel, Fotolia terminates its relationship with Bobby 4. Therefore, in my mind, as the termination is based on an alleged act of libel, Fotolia should satisfactorily prove this act of Libel before the action they took 5. As a reaction to Fotolia's accusation, and under provocation, Bobby then called them rapists. This was not a smart thing to do (please refer to my previous post re: children's tactics) 6. This does not, in my mind, remove the need to see evidence of Bobby calling them F*kers and Rapists before the accusation was made (you cannot make an accusation of misdeed, then provoke said misdeed)
All I am asking is for you to show evidence of Bobby's statements from before the accusation.
You say I am taking what Bobby says as gospel. I could accuse you of the same. What I'm looking for is logical evidence, based on what is publicly available. You could say that this is unnecessary, but I like to think "Innocent until proven guilty".
Regarding offensiveness of "Greedy *insult removed*"
Yes, Fotolia took offense to Bobby, and they reacted in a certain manner. Does this reaction improve their standing in my eyes, or does it reinforce any negative perceptions that I had?
I could, as a terrorist, blow up a car bomb and kill people because a particular author spoke badly about my religion. I am severely offended. Nobody can argue against that ("no, you are not offended"). It's perfectly in my right to be offended, and many like-minded people will feel similarly offended and that I am fully justified in any actions I do. There will be others who feel my actions were not fully justified.
Also, extending your boss - employee anology. If an employee mouthed off about me, and I fired him, it's within my rights. (let's just ignore any existing discrimination / employee rights issues for the moment). The issue here is how do the other employees feel. In this situation, some of the "employees" side with the guy who got fired. Some of the employees are siding with the employer, quite vocally so.
By the way, No, English is not my native language.. so you are correct on that point.
"It also seem perverse that the lower rankings are being riled up against a policy that mostly effects the upper rankings that can't be bothered to do it for themselves."
I am in complete agreement with you on this one. As I mentioned before, I think fulltimers who are in the upper rankings actually have the most to lose in the longterm by not acting.
Oh, I agree the quote does not provide any direct evidence of bobby having called FT management rapists before they removed his account. The whole thing is just a matter of his word against theirs - I know of no other direct evidence. However, the careless (devious?) way in which bobby used the language in his reply to call them rapists, indirectly indicates to me that he may have done so in the past.
The matter of Libel is clearly up to some court somewhere to decide - do not think it would work in the U.S. - not really my concern.
FT certainly needs to be concerned about how this affects their relationship with contributors but I really think that only a small percentage of their contributors are even aware of this case. My understanding is - I am possibly mistaken - that a very small percentage participate in this or any other forum. So I would hope they would concentrate their energies on improving the business, especially given current world economic conditions.
FT's reaction to the offense was up to FT and I don't think any of us really know the nature or frequency of the offense or if a warning was given - just their word vice bobby's word. It would have been much better if this were all in writing that FT could produce - and should have been ( a big strike against FT management if there is no written record.) But telephone conversations can get heated and perhaps this is the reason for their action.
I don't think FT is too worried about the reaction of the contributors to bobby's removal - most won't even be aware as I stated above - but they probably do have legal concerns and probably have everything documented. However, they are unlikely to publish it unless it is beneficial to any legal action that may result.
I must say your english seems as good as mine (not necessarily a compliment I guess) and certainly much better than I would do in any other language.
fred
Fred, you really should not waste your time trying to Speulate. The phone conversations about this between myself and Chad were polite and professional. There was no name calling. I have been a passionet defender of the rights of microstock contributors with all the agencies for years now. Fotolia knows this and felt they needed to try to remove me from the equation and spread a little intimidation in the process. At this they have been partially successful in that they have created intimidation among the lower ranks in the masses. However they have failed at silencing me. For what it is worth the greatest defense against lible and slander are the truth. I can call some one a greedy *insult removed* and if it is the truth then there is no wrong. They may feel personally affronted by that truth but it does not change the fact. Now we are talking about a company led by a man who 1. Instituted subscription sales and tried to pay us 22 cents per download when the current market rate was 30 cents (I am not calling them rapists but this could be seen as a figurative rape) 2 . recently made unannounced attempts to take away referral earnings 3. Changed the ranking levels with no discussion and no annuncment just as a significant number of long time contributors where on the threshold of reaching their goals. 4. Refused to give subscription sales the same weight in the ranking scale as a standard sale. Instead forcing us to give away 4 sub sales to equal one sale for the purpose of rank increase even though their is no difference in the license terms for either sale. So I don't see that I spoke out of turn or in any sort of devious manner. The facts speak for them selves and this is only the recent past with Fotolia. Now for Editorial, oh excuse me I mean Iriz.......... yea what ever you are still the same trol you have always been and I see no further need to even communicate with you.
113
« on: December 04, 2008, 20:16 »
To heck with signing petitions. Show some true support, and pull your images if you don't want to be abused by this company anymore.
I'm a nobody at fotolia ... at all microstock sites, as a matter of fact. But, I have signed the petition with the comment that I would remain insignificant until the wrongs documented in this thread are corrected. I strongly believe that we are our own worst enemies. If you want to pull your images, please, do so. But would it hurt to add your name to the total count on the petition? If you are pulling your files anyway ... it won't hurt to get Fired. 
I hope all who agree that contributors have been wronged will sign the petition. You owe it to yourselves to take action ... any action, but do SOMETHING.
WarrenPrice
PS: Thanks, Bobby. I hope having guts has not cost you too dearly.
It has cost me a few hundred a month but it is not money I can not live with out. Experiance shows me that at least a portion of the business I would do at FT will simply follow me to a different agency. I will survive, the finacial loss is minimal in the long run. Given the track record of FT making changes that were unfavorable to us over the past year it would not have been long before I shut down with them on my own anywise. At least this way it gives a bit of voice to the reality of doing business with Fotolia
114
« on: December 04, 2008, 20:12 »
OK well, the demands of running my business are interfering with me keeping up here today but let me say that to those that would post Chads remark from the Yahoo group here to raise question against me and to those who want to know what I said to Fotolia all you have to do is go to the micro stock group forum to see my direct response to Chad.
Bottom line yes we have history Yes I did call them Greedy ( a point of fact I will stand on) Yes I did refer to the situation in this very thread as "*' No I did not call them F*ckers I learned a long time ago there is no profit in that sort of language in a debate. Rapists? No I never directly called them rapists but I suppose I could have some where in time said something that could have been taken in a context to the effect that the contributors were getting raped (figuratively) in a situation though I don't specifically recall this.
115
« on: December 04, 2008, 19:59 »
If they had gotten a worse black eye over the introduction of subs, would they have pulled the current stunt?
No, they probably wouldn't and your comment only echoes what others have said on here already. Bobby is simply not going to get the support he is seeking and if you look at the numbers signing the petition - which is a futile exercise IMO - there is no significant numbers coming out in unity for this one man crusade against the autocrats.
What's more, I think it's rather selfish to try and drum up support for what amounts to a rash decision on the part of one contributor. Looking at the issue and the comments made one might reasonably conclude there was impulse involved here. Now the whole debate seems to have turned into a face saving exercise with the "isn't it awful fraternity" trying to be seen to say all the right things because one of our own has been injured or fallen on his own sword more to the point.
Iriz, you are no more here then an anonymous shill. Why not come out from behind your cloak and show us you are who and what you claim to be? There was no compulison in my response to Fotolia. My response to Fotolia was measured against direct experiance and history with Oleg and Chad but I suspect strongly that you know this already.
116
« on: December 04, 2008, 14:52 »
Bobby, I sympathise that your account was deleted.
However unlike the majority of people who have shown support I'm also a businessman and am fully aware that you are also, I appreciate that you have in the past taken part in a public campaign against certain changes, as have many, but like you I only do what is in my best interests, I'd be interested as to the nature of the phone call you made, where you asking for some kind of special treatment?
At the end of the day Fotolia have done nothing illegal in changing their terms, they owe you nothing, you are a supplier and nothing more, as such they have the right to terminate your account, you keep stating you were close to Emerald and now it would take three years, so what! were they supposed to wait for you to get to Emerald before making any changes, you had as much chance as the others who did reach that level but you didn't and they did, that's business.
You've mentioned them lining their pockets (or words to that effect) ummm... they're a business and how they run it and what they do with the proceeds is their business, they have just raised the price of the credits we get paid which I notice hasn't been mentioned much. Tell me when you have a good month do you give your models extra money? Do you explain to them how you spend your profits?
As has been pointed out they made it very clear anybody bad mouthing them would have their account deleted, you can't say you weren't warned, I would advise you to be careful regarding your future actions and statements on public forums regarding Fotolia because you could end up in a legal battle, you're pissed we can all see that and my advice would be to move on.
I'm annoyed about the recent change on Fotolia, however nothing they have done has changed the way my images are represented which is what I choose an agency for, they have just raised the commision I receive on any sales which IMO is a good thing.
As for the petition thing, then sorry I'm not signing it, and to whoever wrote it no he hasn't been fired because he didn't work for them.
Will I stop uploading there, nope sorry they're a reasonable source of revenue for me, and in case you're interested yes I was close to a rank change, but that's business and I have the freedom of choice whether to use them as a representative for me or not. Same goes for iStock and their recent best match change which has effected me far more than Fotolia, again it's my choice.
I keep seeing a lot of people saying things like 'standing up for our rights' etc ..... what rights exactly? We do not work for them we are all self employed (technically speaking) they are an agency we we choose to represent our work in return for a commission on any sales they make on our behalf. Apart from any rights regarding the usage of our work under the license they sell for us we don't have any. For those who are going to stop uploading in support of Bobby, your choice but at the end of the day who do you think is going to lose out the most?
Bobby I wish you well for the future.
I did not make a phone call and I did not ask for special treatment. I sent an email that expressed my displeasure with the change and informed that I would cease uploading new content but not remove the nearly 5,000 images I already had there.
The phone call came from them the next day telling me they were deleting my account.
While their changing the terms of ranking may not be illegal it most certainly is unethical to have so many work for so long toward a published goal only to move the goal miles and miles down the road just as a large number of contributors who have worked long and hard are on the threshold of reaching that goal.
A proper move by Fotolia would have been to grandfather existing contributors to the original goal at least until they reached their next level upgrade and then they could apply the new standards. To move the goal that so many worked so hard to reach is tantamount to punishing those who have made you a success for working hard to help you build your business. Would you freeze your work staffs earnings because they worked hard and made you a success?
117
« on: December 04, 2008, 13:57 »
I agree with Joanne 100%
The only thing that has ever worked against any of the agencies has been the treat to cut off the supply. Remember we own the content therefore we do own the power. The question is do we have the courage of our own convictions to exert that power or are we going to surrender that power to the agencies by not standing up for ourselves.
In the end it always comes down to the actions of the masses. It is not the single voice of a large contributor that extracts change. Even though the contributor is large the lone voice is small. It is the rakus voice of the many that combine to rise above the din and be heard. It is the voice of the many that bring about change and it is the power of the many that can break through seemingly impenetrable barriers.
I was dropped from Fotolia not because I spoke against them. I was dropped because they felt that is would send a message of of their ultimate strength and superiority over all of you. It is a message meant to intimidate and tame the beast that is the masses. It is all bravado though, they can not remove the masses, to do so would be seriously detrimental to their business. If the masses unite they can and will bring change. If the masses cower under the intimidation of the agencies then they can only expect for more and more oppressive behavior to come down the pipe in the future.
So in truth this is a fight that belongs to all of us regardless of which agencies we are or are not with.
118
« on: December 04, 2008, 12:37 »
I have nothing against solidarity. As I said I'm not fond of the changes or the way things get handled on that site either. What I'm saying is that your rush to write your petition has some fundamental problems. FT is not an agent or an employer. Bobby was not an employee. He was an Independent Contractor. The T&C clearly states this. Bobby was not fired. He was removed from the site per the T&C that he agreed to when he signed up.
Good luck with your petition.
How can you say Fotolia is not an Agent? That is exactly what they are. Yes they are also the same T&C that were in place when I signed up (one of the first 250 members) that led me to belive that I had a goal of advancment and that goal of advancment was well definded and documented. Then as a large number ofd us reach the threshold of obtaining that goal of advancment Fotolia without prior notice moves the goal so far down the road on us so as to effectively postpone it by 3 years!
119
« on: December 04, 2008, 11:12 »
Despite what everyone says the only solution is to continue to stand up against unfair treatment from the agencies. The banding together of many small contributors who are publicly vocal can and does work, we have proved it in the past with Fotolia, Shutterstock, Dreamstime, StockXpert and even IStock.
Apathy and acceptance of the abuse will only bring more abuse. If you all want to be treated fairly by those who distribute your products you have to demand that fairness. Fotolia shut down my account to create exactly the type of fear based apathetic response that is happening. Without great risk there can be no great gain. If the small and medium contributors band together and are vocal they can effect change, we have done it before.
It is not the big contributors that can effect that change, even the biggest of us make up only a fraction of a single percentage point of the database at any given agency which has already been pointed out means I or any other single contributor is in fact dispensable. What is not dispensable is 500 or 5000 smaller contributors showing solidarity and support each other against unethical, abusive treatment.
Dreamtsime, Shutterstock, Istock they all effectively give the contributors a raise every year. Either by raising the commission percentage or by raising prices. With this unannounced change to the ranking system Fotolia has effectively deferred giving the contributors a raise for approximately 3 years. They can say that it was done to remain competitive if they want but the truth is the move was made to put more money in their pockets at the expense of your pockets. There is a large percentage of us who have been with Fotolia since the beginning who seriously contributed to helping them build their success and the bulk of us were on the verge of a Ranking increase. So while we helped to build their success they punished us by taking away the carrot that has been dangling in front of us for the past 3 years. Personally I can not stand for that type of abusive totalitarian treatment. I don't care how many agencies delete my accounts I will continue to stand up for what is right hopefully you will too.
There is a strength in many small voices speaking together. Unfortunately I can only speak with you not for you so if you want to effect change you have to take risks and make noise. If you are loud enough they will hear you and they will make changes.
120
« on: December 03, 2008, 22:59 »
Calling things by their true names and shining the light of publicity upon shameful practices is generally helpful in reining in unsavory behavior.
I totally disagree. There are very few MS sites that seem to handle adverse commentary well and fotolia is definitely not one of them. DT is another in case you 're interested....
I think my experience with all these agencies over the last 4 years says you're mistaken. They don't like it when contributors speak out and work as a group to further our interests, but we have, as a group, managed to make a number of changes happen or not happen by refusing to just say "Yes sir!!" when a site tried to unilaterally change something that hurt contributors.
The sites don't like it, but up to a point they put up with it - it's a power struggle pure and simple. FT threatened to close my account, but they didn't go through with it. Hence my complete lack of surprise that they actually did it this time. If we keep quiet about this sort of stuff it just emboldens the agencies to pull an even bigger one next go around - and you know that there will be a next time, especially as the economy's not in great shape.
It is just about impossible (IMO) to get a regular group acting for contributors, but on an ad hoc basis you can often find enough people to work together to try and even the balance of power out a little when dealing with the agencies.
And this is why they have tried to eliminate me from the move this time because they know I was at the heart of the push against the subscription plan they originally announced, and I was at the heart of the push with StockXpert when they tried to screw us around with the Jupiter Unlimited fiasco as I have been at the heart of the issue everytime an agency (even DT) has tried to make a change that I believed to be adverse to the contributing community. I have to say that Dreamstime has proven to be one of the few that truly seems to have a desire to see to it that we are treated fairly. They may run their forum with an Eastern Block Iron fist but their business practices are definately above board. I can not say the same for Fotolia. What I love is that Oleg and Chad think they have silenced me but the truth is that they have actually given me voice. They have already done the worst to me thay can do, as long as I play by the rules from here forward there is really nothing else they can hit me with. I wonder how they are going to respond to my request for an Audit? or to my demands for continuation of payments for referral sales from Emerald level photographers I referred to them that they are still obligated to pay me for the next 2 years? Yea the referral program had no mandatory tie to a contributor account I do believe that regardless of their desire to cease doing business with me they have no legal ground on which they can wiothold those earnings.
121
« on: December 03, 2008, 19:40 »
Calling things by their true names and shining the light of publicity upon shameful practices is generally helpful in reining in unsavory behavior.
I totally disagree. There are very few MS sites that seem to handle adverse commentary well and fotolia is definitely not one of them. DT is another in case you 're interested. The guy who runs that has an ego as fragile as a Canon sensor and you 'll get banned just for spelling his name wrong. Fotolia have sent out a very clear message by dumping Photoshow and it's desgined to intimidate. We don't give a crap who you are "if you speak out against us we will punish you" is the message. Interesting.
Trust me Iriz, I have been around this industry long enough to know the CEO's of these companies on a first name basis and have their direct phone numbers, including Serban at DT. The hardest part of dealing with many of them are simply getting past the cultural differences with them. I do agree that the forums of other agencies is not the place to fight this battle but it is a battle that should and will be fought non the less. You are correct the message Fotolia hopes to send with the bouncing of my account is one of intimidation and intolerance to any sort of questioning of their authority. It is my hope though that there are many more among us that will question their authority, that will point out that Fotolia is an Agency Not an Employer and that will continue to fight against unethical business practices from them or any other agency that wishes to undervalue the contributors that make their high style of living possible.
122
« on: December 03, 2008, 18:23 »
I just received confirmation from Chad "Hello Bobby, As discussed in our phone conversation today Fotolia has decided to close your account. I have just spoken to my engineers and we have sent you your remaining money plus removed your images from the website and all partner sites. Please note that a $1 fee was incurred to send you the money on Paypal"
The funny thing is *E* think they have now silenced me LMAO. I guess Oleg has not paid attention these last 3 years.
I can't say I'm surprised - *E*. I'm sorry that it came to this Bobby and I do hope that if the folks running that place think this will cower other contributors that it doesn't happen. I can't see what else they can be hoping to gain by tossing out a contributor. You spoke up and helped during the fight to get improved subscription terms and I guess they view your forthrightness as "trouble". Just lovely way to run a business.
Lump of coal for FT's stocking this Christmas 
Oh Joanne, I am sure that is exactly how they viewed me. I have always had an earful for them as I have had for any agency that has tried to give us the stinky end of a short stick. I am also sure that they expect that the news of me getting tossed will have a cowering effect on the masses but personally I am hoping that the masses in this industry are smart enough to realize that if they continue to lay down and take this type of treatment from AGENTS that WORK FOR THEM then it will not be long before the masses are so downtrodden by these greed driven tyrants that the masses will be little more then indentured servants to the masters in the eyes of the agents. Hell they are already treating us as such as it is. Lets be serious what they did with this last move ensured that no contributor would receive a commision increase for 2 to 3 years. This was not about keeping up with competition it was about keeping up with an executives high standard of living. Nothing more nothing less. It was motivated purely by greed.
123
« on: December 03, 2008, 18:15 »
Thanks, appreantly though Oleg does not see me as a highlevel contributor even though I have spent most of the past 3+ years firmly entrenched within the top 50 ranking even with 3 previous upload boycotts.
I just received confirmation from Chad
"Hello Bobby,
As discussed in our phone conversation today Fotolia has decided to close your account. I have just spoken to my engineers and we have sent you your remaining money plus removed your images from the website and all partner sites. Please note that a $1 fee was incurred to send you the money on Paypal"
Wow! This is surprising!
Did you ASK to have your account closed or was your phone conversation heated enough to cause them to want to remove you?
If so it is a good indicator that none of us is a big enough fish to be irreplaceable. Very sad to hear.....
No nothing like that. I sent an email last night directly to Oleg telling him that even though I had recently resumed uploading there after evaluating the effect their sub sales where having on my bottom line that I was going to once again cease adding new content because of the current bait and switch tacttics they were subjecting us to. I like a great many other contributors who have been there a long time was on the threshold of evelvatring to Emerald and based on current sales level the new allocation needed to reach that level would push that goal 3 years down the road for me. I told Oleg that I felt this move on their part was purly motivated by greed. Chad called me this morning and with no discussion informed me that Fotolia had choosen to cease doing business with me as it was obvious that they did not operate their business in a way that I could favorably agree too. BTW even after all the brewhaha's I have had with Oleg, Chad and Matt I was Never banned from their forums.
124
« on: December 03, 2008, 14:55 »
. I have had Fotolia on the do not upload list for 3 months because of the way they handled the subs and the fact that every sub license fotolia issues on one of my image pays me 8 cents less then Shutterstock does. However just last week I looked at my stats and saw increasing sales at a rate that I felt offset the loss on subs so I start uploading again. Then tonight I visit their forums and discover this wagon load of greed and it is back to no more new uploads for them for me. This change pushes Emerald 3 years instead of 3 months away for me.
The only difference this time is that now my upload ban for them is permanent. As long as they are owned by the same greedy management that they are owned by now I will never give them another image.
Bobby:
I have to applaud you for your effort to try and make a change. It is extremely rare that a high level contributor actually does anything about most of the drastic changes that are taking place.
I wish that some of the other high level contributors (and you know who you are) would take a stand as well. Maybe this industry would change a little for the better if they did.
Thanks, appreantly though Oleg does not see me as a highlevel contributor even though I have spent most of the past 3+ years firmly entrenched within the top 50 ranking even with 3 previous upload boycotts. I just received confirmation from Chad "Hello Bobby, As discussed in our phone conversation today Fotolia has decided to close your account. I have just spoken to my engineers and we have sent you your remaining money plus removed your images from the website and all partner sites. Please note that a $1 fee was incurred to send you the money on Paypal" The funny thing is they think they have now silenced me LMAO. I guess Oleg has not paid attention these last 3 years.
125
« on: December 03, 2008, 05:17 »
*. I have had Fotolia on the do not upload list for 3 months because of the way they handled the subs and the fact that every sub license fotolia issues on one of my image pays me 8 cents less then Shutterstock does. However just last week I looked at my stats and saw increasing sales at a rate that I felt offset the loss on subs so I start uploading again. Then tonight I visit their forums and discover this wagon load of greed and it is back to no more new uploads for them for me. This change pushes Emerald 3 years instead of 3 months away for me.
The only difference this time is that now my upload ban for them is permanent. As long as they are owned by the same greedy management that they are owned by now I will never give them another image.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|