|
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 - asmai
101
« on: November 10, 2013, 21:48 »
My site is Ktools. I like the look and functionality, but I don't have time or skills to promote it, and it is hardly bringing in any sales on its own.
For those that use Photodeck or Photoshelter, do they attract customers without a concerted push from you?
Well, some sites have a better SEO than other, so more traffic, but attract customers, i dont think so. For example, my photoshelter site is having most of traffic (well it's also been there for a longer time), but mostly useless traffic that does not translate into sales, not sure why. I thought the same about promoting, i had no idea what to do. I started by sending email (i sent about 100) to potential customers, with my niche, i thought it would do the trick, i even found those who already used my images from agencies and sent them emails. I can tell you now that is totally useless, not for me anyways,at least i could not see any sale from those at all. Advertising is not a good thing for small sites either, i have not tried but have heard that it's only wasting of money. Here is what i did that i find the most effective and takes no time at all : i make sure that my user name on agencies is exactly the same as my site name. I have stopped uploading to all agencies, except SS who has about half of my new stuffs, and pond5 where i can set my price. Buyers who like my images will google my site name, about half of my customers came that way. Also, i put a link to my site anywhere i could (should be relevant of course), even here, on this forum where you may think there are only sellers and no buyers, but you never know, and a relevant link is always good for SEO.
102
« on: November 10, 2013, 11:46 »
That is great news about photodeck. I'll try to set up my shop over New Year. I signed up with them because they have such easy to use features and elegant designs.
What kind of licensing terms did you add? Did you just copy paste the license from somewhere or are there templates that we can use?
I have a personal use license for students/teacher/educational use and then standard and extended licenses, pretty much similar to those of agencies. i limit the print runs to 100,000 for standard license, though. i looked at various agencies terms and made a kind of combination of what is relevant to mine, added in my specific stuffs and put them in "easy language". You are welcome to have a look at mine and even copy whatever relevant for your images. I like the fact that in photodeck, the buyer get the license terms in pdf downloaded together with the invoice and the bought images in one zip file.
103
« on: November 09, 2013, 10:08 »
I have 3 sites : a Photoshelter (8 months now), Photodeck (2.5 months), Symbio (0.5 months):
In terms of functionality and options: 1. photodeck (best); 2. photoshelter; 3: Symbio
In term of cost; 1. Symbio (least costly); 2. photodeck; 3.photoshelter (most costly due to 9% commission).
In terms of earning photodeck is by far number 1: in 2.5 month i earn 3 times more than what i earn with photoshelter in 8 months. 100% earning also helps, especially with big sales. Symbio is too early to judge, i have no traffic yet but got sales from another Symbio member so it's all good for now.
104
« on: November 07, 2013, 21:58 »
Sounds great, Jasmin
I hope many people would join and we could make something out of it. A directory and a shared blog is a great idea to start.
It would be great to have a joined website for science and technology images. I am sure that niche would do very well.
Love the funny scientist photos. That 's how we are stereotyped, crazy and socially naive LOL.
105
« on: November 07, 2013, 12:06 »
For me:
(about 600 clips)
1 and 2. Last year : 1. Pond5, 2. SS. This year P5 and SS equal
3 and 4 : Last year 3. Canstock and 4. 123Rf. This year the other way around
5. The rest (FT, CC, Rev)
106
« on: November 07, 2013, 11:55 »
I did not vote as i was not sure what self-hosted includes. But it more or less matches my results. My 3 sites (Photodeck, Photoshelter and Symbiostock) altogether is in second place only behind SS.
107
« on: November 07, 2013, 10:42 »
I am not really sure i understand what you plan to do exactly but it sounds interesting. I am not a photographer, but illustrator, and a molecular biologist. Here is my site: http://www.alilamedicalmedia.com/I am on micro too but they only have a part of my port, except Pond5
108
« on: October 30, 2013, 19:50 »
I can not help with the bug, but i suggest you just list your email on the contact page, or if you have another website that has a contact form just link to it. That what i do for my site, to avoid complication with too many plugins.
109
« on: October 27, 2013, 13:15 »
deleted
110
« on: October 12, 2013, 15:31 »
I guess the question I'm trying to answer is would I end up gaining or losing buyers if I went credit card only with Stripe.
Can't answer that one. I've never heard or Stripe nor used any site which does.
I will say that I have aborted buying when they use something I haven't heard of.
From the buyer side you will not see the name Stripe, it's just a normal secure credit card gateway. Authorize net would be definitely more popular but you have to pay big fees for that.
111
« on: October 12, 2013, 15:28 »
What if a site only offered credit card payment and not Paypal? Would that stop you from buying there?
If you are wondering for your own site, i would say this is not the right forum to ask. Most of us here are contributors who have a Paypal account and get paid through Paypal so we dont have a problem paying with it. I pay with PP only for small amount and only when i have some balance available from my payments from agencies (not that often because i withdraw my money almost right away normally). I know my friends and family and many people who dont have a Paypal account and they would run away in a heartbeat seeing the Paypal logo. The problem with Paypal is that they really want to make it hard for people who dont have an account to pay by credit cards with them, the option of paying with a CC is hidden so well on their page, at some point they even want you to open a guest account with them to be able to pay with CC. Also, if you have a PP account (they know through your email address) and dont want to pay with it (because you dont have enough balance for example) it would be problem sometimes as they want to force you to pay with it and dont give you the CC option.
FYI, from the sales on my site during the last 6 months with Paypal setup: 100% of payment over 30$ are paid with CC, below 30$ about 60% paid with PP, 40% with CC and i just switched to Stripe a week ago after one test purchase where i see PP requires you to open a guest account and show you no option of CC before you do that (they removed it now but i have no trust they wouldnt do it again).
Yes, exactly. Good info thanks. I have Paypal on my site now and am considering switching to Stripe.
My stats show a lot of abandoned carts. I'm sure some of it is people messing around but some of it seems legit. I did a test purchase and I can see how the Paypal process could be confusing.
I tested Stripe and it's user friendly, simple and almost foolproof for buyers.
I guess the question I'm trying to answer is would I end up gaining or losing buyers if I went credit card only with Stripe.
How'd you get your stats? Is there a way to tell what percentage of Paypal transactions were from credit cards?
When you get a payment in your paypal account there is an info about the buyer. Buyer using credit card is "Unregistered", buyer using Paypal will either be "verified" or "non-verified". Before switching to Stripe i checked the Photoshelter forum and people have good thing to say about Stripe. many of them have problems with buyers who felt like they had to open an account with Paypal in order to buy and they dont like that. It would be best ofcourse if we can have both paypal and stripe but right now maybe we have to experiment to see what is best for our type of clientele, you can always switch back easily. I have just started so i will see and will look at it again in about 6 months or so.
112
« on: October 12, 2013, 08:45 »
What if a site only offered credit card payment and not Paypal? Would that stop you from buying there?
If you are wondering for your own site, i would say this is not the right forum to ask. Most of us here are contributors who have a Paypal account and get paid through Paypal so we dont have a problem paying with it. I pay with PP only for small amount and only when i have some balance available from my payments from agencies (not that often because i withdraw my money almost right away normally). I know my friends and family and many people who dont have a Paypal account and they would run away in a heartbeat seeing the Paypal logo. The problem with Paypal is that they really want to make it hard for people who dont have an account to pay by credit cards with them, the option of paying with a CC is hidden so well on their page, at some point they even want you to open a guest account with them to be able to pay with CC. Also, if you have a PP account (they know through your email address) and dont want to pay with it (because you dont have enough balance for example) it would be problem sometimes as they want to force you to pay with it and dont give you the CC option. FYI, from the sales on my site during the last 6 months with Paypal setup: 100% of payment over 30$ are paid with CC, below 30$ about 60% paid with PP, 40% with CC and i just switched to Stripe a week ago after one test purchase where i see PP requires you to open a guest account and show you no option of CC before you do that (they removed it now but i have no trust they wouldnt do it again).
113
« on: October 08, 2013, 09:40 »
I think they are just very busy trying to rescue the site now, the commission is back to 50% and all the prices are the same now, that was the last big change , about a month ago, and they dont send out email about sales anymore.
My clips uploaded in February are still pending, so i dont upload anymore, payments request are fulfilled after about 2 months, but there are still sales coming in here and there, so i guess i just leave it like that and see how it goes.
114
« on: October 02, 2013, 12:03 »
Probably one of the best outcomes is turning my wife around to the idea and being able to structure family holidays towards awesome travel photos.
I like to use my vacations to vacation. Stressing everyone out to try and get some stocky shots isn't my favorite thing to do, and I don't necessarily want to lug equipment around either. That, and that most places already have people that live there shooting stock all the time pretty much keeps me away from shooting "travel photos". JMO.
I agree with Sean, long gone are the days when you could travel to exotic destinations and make a decent return from your efforts. Unless they are avid photographers, family doesn't want to hear about getting up at 5 am or constantly or crossing a street to get a better angle. Otherwise you'll soon be getting great photo ops of lawyers offices, with people signing Separation Agreements etc. Which in reality are much better earners.
those days likely never existed -- but it's still viable -- we're finishing a 3 week trip thru Utah & Arizona in which i've shot over 3000 images, a few already online & selling. since it's a business, I can expense some of my costs, and it's a trip we would have taken anyway. if travel is a big part of your life then stock can be a good way to extend your resources. not everyone is looking for a full time income - there's a huge continuum between the hobbyists dabbler and yuri and room for many strategies
Agreed, i am an illustrator, no photographer, but i travel a lot and like taking videos, my videos pay off half of my vacations within a few years, and it's good for tax purposes too.
115
« on: September 15, 2013, 19:59 »
Thanks guys, it does look like it's from Veer to me.
116
« on: September 15, 2013, 15:35 »
Found my images for sale on this website http://www.photostock.com.mx/ , with proper copyright credit, wondering if it's a partner site of some site i submit to. Canstock maybe? any idea?
117
« on: September 03, 2013, 12:56 »
If you are concerned enough to have kept following up on this, and are upset that DP hasn't dealt with it, I really don't understand your hesitation to send a DMCA notice directly. You've wasted a lot more energy pursuing DP with no results than it would have taken to just send the DMCA yourself and be done with it in a week or less. 
Maybe i was not clear, I am not really concerned about this image per se. What i am concerned about is the way agencies react to protect our images, how seriously they take it. That is the main reason why i go with them, so i dont have to police the web by myself. I am very happy with Shutterstock for example because i have not yet found my images in use with SS watermark, and i sell a lot more through them. And i sure dont want to send DMCA by myself, i dont want to give away all my info and then i also have to prove that i am the copyright owner, which may not be obvious sometime as my username on agencies is not always my real name, whereas the agency watermark has its name on the image, the image is on their website, they are also a company that is much easier to be verified and have more authority, and they got a big chunk from our royalty to do that.
I definitely can not go round and send DMCA to all unauthorized uses of my images, that would take all of my time and energy, that is why i still sell though agencies, for them to take care of that part for me.
This is just one of the case where i get a chance to see how DP handles this and so i can decide my future relationship with them accordingly.
With all due respect asmai but I provided you with enough information to stop the issue you brought up once and for all.
After all it is YOUR intellectual property and there is nothing written in our contracts with the agencies that they will fight in OUR interest every single time.
Fact is that the watermarked image is free advertising for Depositphotos. It's not a high priority for Depositphotos to have this image removed.
It should be a high priority for you though since the image is being used after all even with a watermark.
This goes two ways, ignore the infringements of your images in the future and keep doing what you're doing or take responsibility for your own copyright right and fight for it yourself. In very, very few instances where a lot of financial damage has been done, an agency might assist you (happened once to me with Shutterstock and some EL issue).
Also I want to add, since you brought up how awesome SS is because you haven't seen any of your images with the SS logo on the web. Simply do a search in Google for free SS illustrations packs free for download. I'm sure your (nice) illustrations might be in there. So much about SS fighting theft of IP. No agency can prevent it - it happens and there is unfortunately not a lot we (or I as an individual) can do about it.
Please dont take me wrong. I appreciate very much the information you provided me. My main issue here, however, is with DP, not the use of this image itself. I can put a stop to the usage of that image, but there will be many more coming, especially from agencies where people can get big size comp download easily and are not enforced to use it right. Granted, there is no contract saying agency should fight for you, and in many cases there is nothing much you (they or we) can do, but a good agency would try to do something about it. And, exactly as you pointed out, it is easy in this case, and yet, DP could not do anything after 4.5 months, and as you said, they might have interest not to remove it to get free advertisement for themselves. So the question is is DP a good agency for me? for us? For me it's certainly no, i am starting removing my images from there today and considering closing account.
118
« on: September 03, 2013, 11:27 »
That is a huge water marked image. Does DP always have this large sized preview images on site?
I know, this is not the preview, it must be a comp download or something like that, so the user must have an account with DP, and yet they cant do anything about it.
119
« on: September 03, 2013, 11:24 »
If you are concerned enough to have kept following up on this, and are upset that DP hasn't dealt with it, I really don't understand your hesitation to send a DMCA notice directly. You've wasted a lot more energy pursuing DP with no results than it would have taken to just send the DMCA yourself and be done with it in a week or less.
Maybe i was not clear, I am not really concerned about this image per se. What i am concerned about is the way agencies react to protect our images, how seriously they take it. That is the main reason why i go with them, so i dont have to police the web by myself. I am very happy with Shutterstock for example because i have not yet found my images in use with SS watermark, and i sell a lot more through them. And i sure dont want to send DMCA by myself, i dont want to give away all my info and then i also have to prove that i am the copyright owner, which may not be obvious sometime as my username on agencies is not always my real name, whereas the agency watermark has its name on the image, the image is on their website, they are also a company that is much easier to be verified and have more authority, and they got a big chunk from our royalty to do that. I definitely can not go round and send DMCA to all unauthorized uses of my images, that would take all of my time and energy, that is why i still sell though agencies, for them to take care of that part for me. This is just one of the case where i get a chance to see how DP handles this and so i can decide my future relationship with them accordingly.
120
« on: September 03, 2013, 10:10 »
LOL. The site AND the image is hosted on Wordpress.
One email to them is enough to have the image removed within 24 hours.
Go here: http://automattic.com/dmca/
They do this real quick for ya.
Are you sure it is that easy?
I just emailed DP to ask specifically if they did submit a DMCA, and they say they did.
I've never had Wordpress to remove an image with an agency's watermark on it - however you are the copyright owner which should be all that matters.
I've contacted Wordpress many times before and their response was always very fast and the images have always been removed.
Thanks for the info, i sent it to DP now, i'll let them do it. They probably did not do it this way (if they did anything at all).
121
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:51 »
LOL. The site AND the image is hosted on Wordpress.
One email to them is enough to have the image removed within 24 hours.
Go here: http://automattic.com/dmca/
They do this real quick for ya.
Are you sure it is that easy?
I just emailed DP to ask specifically if they did submit a DMCA, and they say they did.
they haven't, it never takes 4 and half months, the times I have sent it took less than 1 week
That's what i think now.
122
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:32 »
LOL. The site AND the image is hosted on Wordpress.
One email to them is enough to have the image removed within 24 hours.
Go here: http://automattic.com/dmca/
They do this real quick for ya.
Are you sure it is that easy? I just emailed DP to ask specifically if they did submit a DMCA, and they say they did.
123
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:27 »
I would contact the website as well and also post daily a complaint on their facebookpage until the image is either bought or removed.
Do you need a facebook account for that? I dont have one and i dont want to open one just for this. And , is it DP duty to deal with this? they also have more authority as a company to do so. That is why we pay them huge percentage of commission to deal with this kind of things, no , or am i missing something here? I cant possible police the web for all unauthorized uses of my images from agencies.
124
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:20 »
I had one being used for their main page and contacted the web owner directly- they took it down that same day I called them...
the same website? So that would mean DP actually did NOT contact them??!!!
125
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:15 »
So i found this image of mine used with Depositphoto watermark and reported to them April 15 : http://lifecaremedi.wordpress.com/2012/05/15/brain-section/depositphotos_5732428-human-brain-anatomy/They replied promptly : "Thank you for contacting us! We will solve this situation in no time." June 3, i emailed them to ask what has been done, the image is still there, here is their reply " I have contacted the website, where you found the image and we are still waiting for an answer. Please be patient. I will contact you as soon as we have any updates." Sept 2, nothing happened, i emailed again to ask what are they are planing to do aside from waiting for a reply that will never come, the site owner obviously ignore them. And here is DP answer " We are doing all we can to get the author to take down your image. This may take some time. In any case, the image is protected by our watermark. I would recommend you to also contact the website owner" I dont know, what do you think? Agencies are supposed to handle this kind of things? or is it up to us to handle? the image size is big, looks like it is a comp download so the user must have an account with DP, and they dont do anything but write a note and wait months for answer?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
