MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - RT

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 77
1001
StockXpert.com / Re: Getty You're Fired
« on: December 17, 2009, 18:19 »
http://fairtradephotographer.blogspot.com/2009/11/getty-images-youre-fired.html

It seems that the UK agency had placed my images with an agency based in South Africa who had then placed them with Getty Images.


Is that your blog?

1002
Mat,

Could you pass on the request for Fotolia management to come here to discuss their latest price change, I'm sure I'm not the only one with some important questions.

1003
General Stock Discussion / Re: What Future?
« on: December 17, 2009, 16:19 »
........ I post here, to hopefully enlighten and empower people to believe in following their dreams and learn from others how to fulfill my own dreams. We only get one turn on this ride try to enjoy as much of it as you can, life is pretty darn cool : )

You've missed your forte in life, you should be writing song lyrics or politicians speeches, you just missed out on MJ's epitaph otherwise it would have be a good attempt.

1004
RT:  This is by far a better forum to post a rant or to vent your frustration vs.  the FT forum.  Your post in the Fotolia Forum implied that people should consider going exclusive to I-stock.  It should be incredibly obvious why it was deleted.  Sorry for your frustration though.

As for the other stuff.  I guess the best thing to do would be to take your sales month to date or maybe pull them from last month and apply the new rates to those sales.  Find out what your net profit would be.  I'm guessing you would have made more money assuming you have more than a couple of sales per month.  

As I said you're allowing your personal opinion to judge your moderation, I did not imply that people should consider going exclusive to iStock, I said that Fotolia's latest announcement might be the incentive that those who were considering going to iStock as an exclusive needed. As a moderator you should be very careful making assumptions and twisting peoples words because it may get you in trouble. (And note I used the term competitor, at no time did I mention iStock because that's against forum rules)

As for the other stuff, again you don't seem to grasp the finances of running a businesss, when the costs of running a business go up you need the businesses income to go up in line, it's irrelevant whether the same figures now applied to sales figures last year are more because last year your overheads were different, run a business based on your equations and you'll go bust. As for having more than a couple of sales per month, judging on our two portfolios and downlaod figures I'd estimate that I sell a fair bit more than you so yes I sell more than a couple a month, unfortunately I haven't been given back door bump up the rankings and like many others got screwed over last year in Fotolia's ranking re-structure.

I'm not sure you are the best person to try and convince people that Fotolia's latest offering is a blessing from above, you've kind of made a name for yourself, but it would be nice if you could ask a member of Fotolia's mangement to come here so we could have an open and uncensored discussion, whenever I've dealt with the Fotolia mangement team I've always found them to be easy to communicate with which was what I was hoping to do on the forum over there, obviously if you keep censoring threads to your own liking they may never get to see what the contributors really think.


1005
@Matt Hayward,

You can't delete my post here so I'll make my point again and as far as I'm concerned you can ban me from the Fotolia forum as it's pointless discussing anything there if you're going to delete anything that doesn't praise 'Fotolia', you might want to read the forum rules over there as well.

Try and understand the way business works, the dollar amount is not the issue here it's the percentage drop, the reason Fotolia have put up their prices is because the cost of running a business increases each year, well guess what the same applies to contributors who are in this as a business and whilst Fotolia have increased their nett profit percentage from a sale they have decreased ours, I appreciate it's hard to understand if you're doing this for a hobby but I'll try to explain with a simple example: when the cost of running a business raises by a $1 getting an 80c rise is not considered an increase.

And for those that missed my post before it was deleted on the Fotolia forum- all I pointed out was that at the time when the market leader and Fotolia's biggest competitor had made an announcement that was making a large number of contributors seriously think about going exclusive I was surprised to see Fotolia make this announcement.

Sorry my post didn't fit in with your 'yes man' policy over there.





1006
Off Topic / Re: Christmas donations, if anyone wants to help me
« on: December 15, 2009, 19:00 »
I also know one institution which desperate need our money
send it at

imaprick_dot_com

Sorry for offtopic but I cant help myself for this  ;D

I corrected your typo for you

1007
Yes because it takes seconds and iStock's uploading and keywording is unlike any other site so you have to do it separately anyway.

1008
Adobe Stock / Re: Free photos locked in for 5 years at Fotolia
« on: December 15, 2009, 18:39 »
You don't have to agree, but giving away a few free samples to attract customers and boost overall sales is a time honored tradition in business.  

I agree with this, it's an old retail trick that microstock sites have adopted, but in typical fashion they've adopted it with a few twists.

In retail it's generally the retailer that takes the hit not the supplier because the idea of loss leaders is to introduce the consumer to more profitable lines irrelevant of the supplier and thus boost the retailers nett profit. The microstock version still enables the retailer (or agency in this case) to introduce buyers to a more profitable line the main difference is they expect the supplier (i.e. us) to take the hit whilst they take none.

Here's something that anybody considering offering free images in order to boost their sales should try and it will help reinforce my point, go onto any site offering free images and download one, you will get the image and the title will be the agency name followed by the file number, in the exif data will be the creators name which in 8 out of the 10 examples I tried were different to their username on the site, now wait a week and go back to buy an image from the person who's free image you downloaded, you'll know which agency it was because their name is the first part of the title, good luck finding the contributor!

Don't get me wrong I'm no saint and did offer a few images when I started out, I didn't notice any boost whatsoever but I accept that some may have.

Edited to add: I would go for the iStock (not that I'd ever get it) or Shutterstock free image deal where it's featured on the front page, that to me is like good value for money advertising.

1009
Looks like they are already on it.


I agree it's a start but they need to do more, paying more commission and raising prices is great when there's volume of sales which is what the microstock business model is all about, as I said in that thread if they don't market themselves they're not going to be in a position to counteract what iStock will be offering potential exclusives. I get a good RPD at Dreamstime just nowhere near the volume of sales I get on other sites, and I'm not the only one, the table on the right here is great but it doesn't show how much of a gap there is between the number 3 and 4 sites in terms of revenue and volume in peoples sales.

The saying "if you build it they will come" only works in films, in business you have to build it and get off your backside and tell people you've built it, of course you also need to tell the right people which is the most basic rule of marketing. Not doing that caused the demise of LuckyOliver.

1010
Adobe Stock / Re: Free photos locked in for 5 years at Fotolia
« on: December 15, 2009, 17:51 »
5 days or 5 years .. this shouldn't even be a discussion .. give your pictures away for free and you are not going to make more sales .. only encourage the social/business acceptance of free stock photos in the industry ... this is a business people .. don't screw it up for serious photographers because you just think it's a fun hobby .. go start a personal blog and give your stuff away for free there.

Well said

1011
Shutterstock, Fotolia and Dreamstime are the one's that need to pull their finger out and come up with a counter strike, and they need to do it soon or risk losing contributors and buyers. Buyers will go where the images are and contributors will put the images where the money is. And because of the Dreamstime 6 month clause they need to do something really really soon, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out why.


1012
Actually I do use private lightboxes and link to them in some of my shots, but the Deepmeta thumbnail creation is a brilliant way of linking one or two images from a series that wouldn't fit into my lightboxes.

I'd also like to point out that it's all down to the guy that wrote that great piece of software and then let's us use it for nothing, I genuinely hope he has a Happy Christmas.

1013
You're welcome I had problems doing it at first until I worked out the images had to be approved first and that you had to refresh your stats in DM.

Mind you it's probably in the instructions somewhere but obviously being a guy I haven't read them.


1014
Off Topic / Re: Christmas donations, if anyone wants to help me
« on: December 15, 2009, 11:34 »
Maria did you get the money I sent?

1015
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia and Witholding Taxes!
« on: December 15, 2009, 11:33 »
How did you get them to forward your case? They keep rejecting my application and the only answer I can get is a standard "we don't handle that go to the tax center for more info or ask your accountant" I can't even talk to a person.

Yeah I had that a couple of times so I sent them a sitemail explaining that their form was wrong with an explanation, then they contacted me which resulted in me explaining how the tax system works over here which isn't compliant with their standard automated form, in a round about kind of way they admitted that they have created the form based on how the US tax system works which obviously isn't the same around the world.
Their form was telling me that to be a business with an EIN I had to be incorporated, I'm not and don't have to be in the UK and when I got my EIN number from the IRS they were fully aware of this and how the UK tax system works, they even explained what boxes to tick and how to fill out a W-8BEN so that our system works with theirs, of course the Fotolia automated form wouldn't allow this and hence it kept getting rejected.
In the end the guy I had been dealing with sent my details and copy of my EIN letter from the IRS to their finance director, what the outcome will be who knows but one things for sure I'm not subject to tax withholding as far as the IRS are concerned, trying to get Fotolia to realise this seems to be the hard part.

1016
How is this done in DeepMeta?
I'm a DM newbree.

Once the images have been approved and you've refreshed your statistics all you need to do is select all the images you want to link together then right click and you'll see an option to 'create thumbnail links' do that and then go to the iStockphoto tab on the left in DM and hit send updates, It's as simple and easy as that.

1017
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia and Witholding Taxes!
« on: December 15, 2009, 08:27 »
I had problems getting my EIN number being accepted because their automated form wouldn't accept the number and my details, I ended up getting my case forwarded to the finance director and I  sent them a copy of the letter from the IRS, my form was accepted but I still got the bulk standard reply that many have had stating 'may be withheld' etc.

They really haven't got a clue how to handle this situation, I've completed this process on nine other occassions without a hitch of any kind.  ::)

1018
Dreamstime.com / Re: Rejected for HAVING a model release
« on: December 15, 2009, 07:41 »
I'd be pretty certain that the model release policy on Dreamstime loses them sales, buyers are too savvy these days and they're concerned of any possible legal implications, if you were a buyer who wanted a shot that contained a body part would you buy it from the site that says it has a model released attached or the one that says it hasn't?


On the other hand - what possible cause of action does a model who has an unrecognisable body part used commercially have against an image user?

The ridiculous thing about microstock is that there is a requirement for all sorts of releases that just aren't necessary.

Whether a release is necessary is subjective, likewise as to whether a body part is recognisable or not, and as there is no law dedicated to model releases it is also dictated by individual agencies as to when one is required, ridiculous or not that's the way it is.

The point is by Dreamstime not allowing images such as this to have a release attached when one is available and provided by the contributor only makes purchasing that image through them less appealing to a buyer, who could buy the same image at another agency with the assurance that there is a release should there be any legal implications in the future.


1019
Dreamstime.com / Re: Rejected for HAVING a model release
« on: December 15, 2009, 05:15 »
I'd be pretty certain that the model release policy on Dreamstime loses them sales, buyers are too savvy these days and they're concerned of any possible legal implications, if you were a buyer who wanted a shot that contained a body part would you buy it from the site that says it has a model released attached or the one that says it hasn't?




1020
Off Topic / Re: Opening gym, doing research need help!
« on: December 15, 2009, 04:57 »
Marble Arch RT about a 1 min walk from Park land and oxford street.

I have already selected my equipment and the facility im just doing this research to see how accurate ive managed to get too seeing what the majority of people like

thats why im asking what people personally like not what people think other people will like

Anton I was just trying to help, asking people on this forum is all well and good but if they're not your customers I can't see the point. You're setting up in a diverse location where the footfall is a combination of office workers, blue collar workers and tourists and each would have they're own preferences in a gym, you're also in a location with lot's of competition.

If it were me I'd make up a questionnaire and get a student to get out and target the people you want to join with some form of incentive for filling it out, that way you'll find out what people personally like from the people that will be coming to your gym.

 I worked in London for 21 years in different locations and the needs of each area are very diverse, if you're targeting the office workers then things like the facilities would probably be the most important thing because they're likely to be visiting before, after or during a work break and their incentive for going to a gym would most likely be to tone rather than to exercise.

Either way I wish you the best of luck and I shudder of the thought of what the business rates must be!


1021
Dreamstime.com / Re: New Pricing from Dreamstime
« on: December 15, 2009, 04:39 »
Any news about an increase in commissions is good news, however I also feel that Dreamstime should put some effort into their marketing of the site to try and get themselves up there along with iStock, Shutterstock and Fotolia.
At a time when a number of their contributors are being forced into considering exclusivity at iStock a price rise isn't enough, they need to be seen to be actively promoting the site in order to get the volume of sales to make it worth while staying.
I've just bought the yearly review of a trade mag for everyone involved in the 'visual communications' industry, Shutterstock and Fotolia both had full page ad's and iStock where mentioned in a feature, no mention anywhere of Dreamstime and I see the exact same thing in other design related media all the time, it's always the same three microstock names, if Dreamstime don't market themselves properly a price rise is pointless.

1022
Off Topic / Re: Opening gym, doing research need help!
« on: December 14, 2009, 18:59 »
Where in London?

If it's in the city I'd suggest lots of mirrors, coffee machines, steam rooms, hair dryers and an area to sell designer gym wear, if there's any space left over stick in a couple of bikes and maybe a treadmill.

If it's in an area where people go to a gym to actually exercise I'd suggest punch bags and lots of free weights, don't worry about a treadmill or bikes because if they want to run they'll go outside and they probably rode a bike in order to get to the gym anyway.

Like most businesses you need to work out who your target audience is, if you're going after the city workers with money they're more interested in the aesthetics and creature comforts than actually exercising, if you're opening it up in the east end I'd have thought the shittier it looks the better.

As for using a power plate, I think I know which audience you're targetting  :D

1023
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock in the New Year
« on: December 09, 2009, 06:14 »
Of course the 'strongest talent' they'd really like to snare would be a certain Mr Arcurs and his mighty portfolio.

Except that he can't and they know he can't, he's in the same boat as me and many others who sell RF via Macro agencies and distribution partners, were tied in to contracts for 3 years or more, which is why I mentioned the possibility they may be thinking of image exclusivity, it makes sense for them money and marketing wise and at the end of the day that's the only thing they and all other agencies are interested in, as are we.

There is a huge talent base in macro RF that at the moment are not interested in microstock because of the low commission subscription services the majority of the main sites have, if iStock introduced an exclusive image scheme and collection I guarantee they'd attract some of these people because they are used to the "Getty" way of doing business and from a macro RF photographers point of view iStock is the only microstock agency worth dealing with.

1024
With old age, memory is always the second thing to go.  :P

Old jokes never get forgotten though.

1025
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock in the New Year
« on: December 08, 2009, 18:07 »
... but one part of the statement I did find interesting was this:

"We're also hoping to encourage the strongest talents in stock today to consider bringing their best work to iStock exclusively."


Good catch Richard.  I missed that.  Definitely sounds like the door to image exclusivity may be opening a crack.

yeah, interesting take on that sentence.  I would find it hard to believe that iStock would let non-exclusives upload exclusive images but i would be very interested in seeing it happen.  iStock seems very protective of their exclusives and is their trump card in a way.  If they let people upload as partial exclusives it could feel like they are loosening their grip a little.  If they did so however, it might encourage photographers to test the water before jumping all in. 

Why not Getty, Corbis etc have exclusive images and yet do not require photographer exclusivity, the buyer doesn't care whether the photographer is exclusive or not, but having exclusive images is a huge advantage to iStock and that is their trump card, I can understand they would be concerned that some contributors may be tempted to bend the rules which is why the term "strongest talents in stock today" would be very apt, many of us who do this for a living and have a proven sales record are not the kind that would breach the agreement.
Give wholly exclusive photographers 40%, non-exclusives get 20% on normal images and 30% on exclusive one's. Simple and everybody wins even the iStock exclusives because it will bring more buyers through the door.

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 77

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors