|
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 - cidepix
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 [54] 55
1326
« on: May 06, 2009, 18:05 »
Even If I have the greatest idea, I am not going to come here and post it on this public forum so all the microstock representatives can read the plan and prevent it.
I have ideas and I believe many of you do. If we were to arrange a meeting and discuss what can legally be done, I am all for it. It should be private and we should have a lawyer who will study all the terms & conditions of the agencies with us and see what are the best options.
The internet has no law. It is the wild west of modern era. We can work on bringing the power of law on agencies so they can't screw people and their rights. This is a fairly new business which I am sure is benefiting greatly from lack of laws in this area.
1327
« on: May 06, 2009, 17:49 »
While I don't think Fotolia is cooking the books, I definitely don't have a lot of trust in them. The vector price slashing really killed all the trust. I haven't uploaded a file since.
So, say what you want and vent on!
I don't upload my vectors on fotolia anymore. And I never will If they don't increase the price back to max. I do keep uploading them as jpegs only and they sell ok. But I am done with fotolia about vectors. No matter what! They can become the world beater but they will never have my new vectors. I keep the old ones as they are still 8 credits, but if that changes and they lower them it means I am going to delete the entire vector port and probably re-upload them as jpegs. I honestly believe we should find a way to create a microstock revolution. A contributor movement. Imagine what would happen if we all pulled our images off of fotolia. It would surely send a BIG STATEMENT to all rival agencies!
1328
« on: May 06, 2009, 10:48 »
...
I am not saying we should accuse fotolia of anything because it is wrong, but they always tend to do things that upset contributors..
1329
« on: May 06, 2009, 10:44 »
I don't see why you guys react to "ProjectPlus" so weirdly, as if fotolia is the ultimate heaven for photographers.
Have some character!
As far as I can see, microstock contributors in general really deserve to be treated like slaves.
I see where you are coming from: "They change the terms of service twice a week, oh that's alright, they answer my mails!"
They answer my mails too, better than before! Thank you for that.. I believe they improved in that area!
But I also believe if they keep changing terms of service twice a week they won't need anyone to gather troops against them.
Am I wrong? Or will you accept being paid %5 commission in case that happens? Because that is where we are heading with fotolia.
Someone needs to say "The king is naked"!
Oh, he answers my calls, that makes him "NOT NAKED" I guess!
1330
« on: May 04, 2009, 18:58 »
@gostwyck
Do you have any ideas about how to ensure quality control? Also re checking the legal content of the files re rights issues, ownership etc?
And what about secure payment? You need to be able to process credit card payments.
For the market place to gain traction with buyers it would need to have a good reputation.
We all go to yaymicro! and it's done.. %50 commissions! Fair Trade! and get paid in euros. all we need to do is to make agreement and new terms with yay that legally prevents them from selling the site or changing rules twice a week!
1331
« on: May 04, 2009, 18:55 »
At the risk of repeating myself, I ask again about buyers. Who is your market? what to they want? What can you offer that is better than what they have? I'm not being negative; I'm being realistic. Isn't demographics an essential part of any business plan?
We keep talking about being fair to photographers. Do you think the buyers want to be fair to you?
Warren  What we can offer is images, EXCLUSIVELY!
1332
« on: May 04, 2009, 18:53 »
I think we keep shooting ourselves in the foot. Everytime a new site comes on line ... we attack it. I saw CutCaster as just the right vehicle to fight against the monopoly. It could only work, however, if everyone went exclusive there and quit uploading to Getty and Corbis.
The approach we are talking about in this thread is like re-inventing the wheel. If you want to fight the monopoly ... don't use them. Unite behind an independant.
Then the independent gets successful, is bought out and you get screwed, or they screw you.
Not if we write our legally unchangable terms and conditions in advance. No matter who buys it, the terms will remain the same. It is possible!
1333
« on: May 04, 2009, 15:55 »
Imagine now, for example, Shutterstock says: "We are inviting all our contributors to become exclusive for Shutterstock, and to pull out their images from Getty network".
Who would then lose money?
Shutterstock would! SS is very good in the beginning; but the more images you have, the better other sites get.
1334
« on: April 24, 2009, 19:14 »
Regarding the statement that I've seen Whatalife make before regarding the software being only a tool, I agree with you completely, however I think that it's easy to marginalize the importance of the software once you have a respectable command of it's functions. I've drawn (poorly) all of my life and I'll be damned if I can get the friggin' pen tool to make a line like I want, plus a lot of the really cool vectors you see utilize a tool in AI that takes a lot of practice to get good at. Further more you are so limited to what you can create by the AI8 compatibility issue that I spend more time trying to figure out how to fake a transparency than actually drawing.
What if it took Van Gogh years to learn how to simply grasp a paint brush?
There was a friend of mine with awe inspiring sketching skills but with no Illustrator knowledge at all. When she decided to go for vectors, with a little bit of help, it took her a couple of weeks to master the pen tool... So, what matters is really the traditional drawing skills. If you don't master regular sketching on paper; years wouldn't be enough to master the pen tool. You must start from traditional paper to learn doing vectors. Draw on paper and show it to your friends. If you get to the level where you can impress them and hear a few "wow, how . did you do that" then it is time to move to illustrator. Any attempts before getting to that maturity on paper would result in disappointment. I believe putting enough time, anybody would be able to draw. But that "enough time" would often mean years. 
1335
« on: April 24, 2009, 16:48 »
I need some advice. I upload some vector the other day and to my surprise today i find that the one you find bellow was rejected. This vector is also in other site no one rejected the vector.
I now that rejections are part of the game and we must live with it.
But the problem is that i dont agree with the reason. If Dreamstime said that they dont like the vector or they dont because they dont like dragons...i can live with that! But the reason is:
"Poor execution, please pay more attention to detail. The technical execution of this collage needs improvement in order to best serve the concept of the image. For illustrations, please check for: poorly traced images, too simplistic, faceted curves, aliased lines, distorted pixels on lines as well as on various textures and images used within the illustration, moiree due to downsampling."
Please see the image below and give you opinion.
 
Paulo, There is definitely a mistake! Or some open paths! If you submit it again, it should go through!
1336
« on: April 24, 2009, 16:15 »
I think the answer you are looking for is this:
Let's say you have 100 photos versus 100 vectors. If they are good, 100 vectors should make much much more than 100 photos..
i am glad you understood my question , cidepix. and yes, that was the answer i was looking for, as i figured from the impression i got about vectors, that a good vector artist can make more money than a photographer.
i have both an Arts degree and photography, and i can draw well, since i was able to hold a pencil.
but i have to admit that i am a better photographer since i have been teaching that too.
but thanks alot for the insight.
good job . wish you all the best.
No problem! Good luck for whatever you choose to do!
1337
« on: April 24, 2009, 15:32 »
thx for your input so far.
one question really comes to mind between vectors and photography.
we all know that photography can earn you a good sum, eg if you get to be as productive and knowledgeable in the market as Yuri,etc.
would that be the same for vector artists. is there a "Yuri" in vector art who commands as much as photographers in micro?
i am assuming there is, since vector can be used for sign boards,etc.. so the money must not be low. eg. you need a better camera to make a 17MP image than a 2MP . so you need to spend money on a higher res camera. would this be the same for vector artist?
i hope i explain correctly the 2nd question , if not let me know .
You still need to pay for the illustrator software and it costs as much as a decent camera. But yes, you don't need to buy many more additions like lenses and other equipment. You only need adobe illustrator. Photoshop or photoshop elements might be useful to have as well. As I said if you are good yes, there is good money! And yes, it can be much more than your day job! And yes again, it is possible to make even more than Yuri, only if you could draw faster than taking photos. I think the answer you are looking for is this: Let's say you have 100 photos versus 100 vectors. If they are good, 100 vectors should make much much more than 100 photos..
1338
« on: April 24, 2009, 15:11 »
You need to be good to make money. You don't make decent money unless you are good. But it is the same for photography as well. If you can't be bothered to spend time to improve your photographic skills then you probably won't have a chance for vectors as well. As whatalife said, softwares do not draw images, you gotta draw it yourself. If you can draw, then go for it; if you can't, then don't pay any money for software as there will be no decent return. There could be some return, but only good vectors will do the trick. Softwares only simulate real drawing tools like pencil, pen, brush etc. They don't draw it for you! And for model release: Istockphoto asks you to upload a release for almost everything... Silhouettes, icons, basically almost everything needs a release (a sketch or a photo that you took.. Only the photos that you took can be used in your illustrations, you can not use anybody else's photos as a reference file)... So, all I can say: If you can draw to a high standart, then go for it, now! If you can't draw, you can still go for it but don't expect much return...
1339
« on: April 23, 2009, 11:50 »
This is a pretty major reason not to upload there if you can't use Paypal:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/crestock-com/i-think-crestock-is-refusing-to-pay-me/
but why the diff, pixart? if you gave the contributors the choices of being paid at the point of terms of agreement, you should live up to the agreement.
i am sure if the shoe was on the other foot, ie. the contributor not living up to the agreement, the consequence would have been immediate deletion of your account, or whatever.
it should work both way bona fide. like any good business practice.
You are one of the reasons fotolia changes the terms of use twice a week! 
Even if they would pay everything on time, crestock is still not a good place with the worst subscription commissions in the industry.. 0.25 cents!!! and you don't even have any possibility to go up to 0.38 like at shutterstock..
If you support 0.25 then you don't deserve 0.38..
But , I do!
not sure if you are talking to me or pixart. if me, i think you misunderstood what i wrote.
i was saying if a site says they are going to pay with paypal, bank, etc... they should live up to the agreement.
i don't know how this has to do with fotolia changing every two weeks, we're talking about crestock.
Sorry, you are right I didn't pay enough attention.. This has to do with any website who does not care about contributors imo!.
1340
« on: April 23, 2009, 10:28 »
This is a pretty major reason not to upload there if you can't use Paypal:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/crestock-com/i-think-crestock-is-refusing-to-pay-me/
but why the diff, pixart? if you gave the contributors the choices of being paid at the point of terms of agreement, you should live up to the agreement.
i am sure if the shoe was on the other foot, ie. the contributor not living up to the agreement, the consequence would have been immediate deletion of your account, or whatever.
it should work both way bona fide. like any good business practice.
You are one of the reasons fotolia changes the terms of use twice a week! Even if they would pay everything on time, crestock is still not a good place with the worst subscription commissions in the industry.. 0.25 cents!!! and you don't even have any possibility to go up to 0.38 like at shutterstock.. If you support 0.25 then you don't deserve 0.38.. But , I do!
1341
« on: April 23, 2009, 08:51 »
Yeap! Stay away from them.. I think this should be a sticky thread on top of MSG board and I would even place "Avoid Crestock" banner under MSG logo 
1342
« on: April 22, 2009, 16:09 »
The ones I like best are StockXpert (lets me opt out from subs, good returns although decaying lately), DT (good RPD, very effective search, the main problem are subs) and FP.
But liking them doesn't necessarily translates in best earnings.
I will give you 2 downsides about DT.. 1 - Subs, and not being able to opt-out of subs... Probably I wouldn't opt-out with the current 0.35, but it should be there as an option and I would opt-out if it failed to catch up with the common rate.. A subs model like istockphoto has would be ideal..2 - The fact that you can not delete the images for 6 months!.. They are our images and we should be able to delete them whenever we want.. Again, I probably will never delete them but it should be there as an option.. Other than that it is a good place... With 2 above issues sorted, DT would really be a dream website..
1343
« on: April 22, 2009, 15:57 »
Dreamstime for sure. I go back and forth with Istock but at the moment I'm content as the sales this month have been good. As for the others... blah. Only voted for the two.
DT is the clear winner.. Had I only made it a "one vote per person poll" DT would have been a distant winner.. But still I was too confident about the results.. Subscription model at IS is the best one.. No competition in that area.. I think they are getting votes purely because of that and healthy contributor relations.. and of course their big sales potential.. Istockphoto is very professional and reliable.. There is a solution for everything there.. I am very satisfied with them.. Yes their commissions are not the best but we knew they were the industry leaders already and accepted the fact when we signed up.. At least they are not changing terms & conditions twice a week.. They are well aware that terms & conditions are not a toy.. SS is good as well.. They behave like the leaders and consistently raise the commissions.. They are brave enough to do something good for contributors before anybody else does.. I am not surprised a tiny bit about the results.. It was time everybody knew what the CROWD really think of them..
1344
« on: April 22, 2009, 15:14 »
Wow! Awesome feedback!!
Keep it coming! And vote in cidepix's poll if you haven't already!
- Brian
Brian, I see a very big potential in veer.. I had a look at you site and I believe with above average commissions veer has a chance to explode.. With good commissions your gallery will grow very fast.. That is how DT managed to become so big starting too late and coming from the bottom.. It is consistently growing.. I can say they have the best growth rate based on my sales.. Could of course be different for everyone.. They are the business model you should watch carefully I believe.. I have no doubt they are going to become much bigger than they are now..
1345
« on: April 22, 2009, 14:59 »
i have a tear in my eye that www.cutcaster.com isn't mentioned. hahahah just kidding
I thought about it John.. Sorry! The only reason I didn't include it is because then I would have to put too many options.. It can be mentioned in "Other".. Cutcaster is much more reasonable for contributors than many others.. That's the mention I can do for it now
1346
« on: April 22, 2009, 11:22 »
Brian, please check the poll I started: asking contributors their favourite websites..
I know the winner(s) already.. The more you are loved, the more support you will get..
You don't need individual opinions.. That poll will show you which policies are loved the most..
1347
« on: April 22, 2009, 11:05 »
Ok! Time to speak for us Which agencies do you think are more loveble and deserve more support from us.. Based on contributor relations, professional approach, the policies they have, reliability, and earnings if you like.. Thanks for any input!
1348
« on: April 22, 2009, 10:47 »
I prefer a flat fee based on complexity like iStockphoto has. I don't like how some companies allow the individual to download the jpegs instead of the eps file. For the price the buyer can increase the size, change the color, add or subtract details from the vector file; etc.
Only the buyers who pay max price for EPS deserve the right to modify the file.. On IS I have a file which is 10 credits based on complexity.. On DT the same file is currently 24 credits and still selling like hot cakes.. Nobody cares if it is complex.. They still buy it for 24 credits.. DT gets half of it..
1349
« on: April 22, 2009, 09:45 »
Hi MSG'ers:
Do you have a preference for how .eps vector files should be priced on a microstock platform?
A few common setups that other microstock sites use:
a) tiered by file complexity/depth/layers (some vectors cost x, some cost y, and some cost z)
b) flat (vectors cost x)
c) vector is another file size option (vectors have rasterized JPEG versions, .eps vector file is priced equivalent to XXL size JPEG)
d) have another idea? (describe it)
I know that many of you here are more photo-centric, but I think this is a question you all should weigh in on.
We've got an answer in place here, but I want to confirm that we're in alignment with what works for you.
Your input = helpful+awesome
[ edited to include important option that I forgot - thanks Randomway! ]
- Brian
Brian I have got some fiery threads on fotolia forum about this issue:) Mat, who is moderating fotolia forum even told me that "I was treading very close to the line that steps beyond voicing an opinion and concern into the realm of pure disrespect which will not be tolerated in the Fotolia forum" !! Well there is no reason to push it any further there because they will do what they want.. But I stopped uploading vector versions of my illustrations to fotolia and will never upload again unless they change the pricing.. I have been defending the idea that the vector versions should be the most expensive file on stocksites regardless the complexity.. If the buyer doesn't think that file is not worth the max price but still needs the file they will get one of the jpegs anyway.. If you do it just like Randomway said it will be perfect.. As long as vector is the most expensive file I can definitely consider uploading to veer.. If you need an exact model: then dreamstime model is amazing.. That is what I call fair ranking.. About complexity: A very simple file could be very well thought and appealing to buyers.. You might think it is not complex and very simple but this decision will lose you a lot of money because sometimes a very simple file will be selling like hot cakes even if it is 15 dollars.. You will lose a lot of money if you decide that file is worth 5 credits..I don't know if you are aware of the latest joke of fotolia They price the jpegs starting from 1 to 8 and then the vector for 4, 6 or 8.. How hilarious!!! I can produce the maximum size jpeg with that 4 dollar vector.. Anyway, they are not getting any vectors from me.. I decided from now on I am not going to be discussing anything on fotolia forum as it is extremely undemocratic and they call you uncivilized when you voice your opinion very openly.. Democracy and civilization exist today because of people who shouted and behaved uncivilized according to the King's description of civilization.. Thanks to the crowds who behaved uncivilized and revolted against the king of France to cause French revolution.. I can't thank them more for their contribution to humanity.. As long as the EPS is the most expensive file your site will be supported.. I am not going to support another one of the negatives.. We need a good model that we can support and hopefully make it number one, then just desert the rest and leave them to their misery:)) You need to be offering the best model Brian, if you want to be succesfull from this point.. Not a bad model we already have! Think about the long term gains and love you will get.. Not the short term ambitions.. %50 commission is preferable as well.. If you don't pay %50 then you will still need to wait until you can be one of the big 2 (not big 6) for me to upload my EPS files.. I don't need another %30 and I will not be supporting it.. We already have that and hopefully trying to change it.. Somehow we will figure out a way.. Because history is full of revolutions.. Nobody can stand against the crowds.. Kings couldn't, microstock companies can't as well.. Thanks for asking in the first place.. That is "good contributors relations!"
1350
« on: March 06, 2009, 17:48 »
Contributors only need a simplistic brain to know that pulling our images from one agency will not hurt us.
Let me know when you've convinced Yuri to pull all his images of the site he earns the most at, then after you've convinced him let me know when you've convinced Andres for whom it's his second highest earner, of course you'll then have to contend with the likes of Sean and convince him to pull out of iS, and then and then ... you see if you do your research you'll discover that all the big players earn varying amounts at different agencies, we don't all have the same 1,2,3
If we put our minds to it and form this union we are talking about, I am sorry but if we want we can make even BigStock the biggest agency in the world. IF we want we can start talks with X agency and agree on a let's say %60 commission and no subs model and everybody pulls the images off of other agencies and we have a single power that pays us %60. The agency will win too, because %40 of no competition is quite big as well. That would still be more money than any of them are making right now.
And then BigStock becomes a monopoly, reduces our commission to 5% and there's nothing we can do because all the other sites have disappeared!! Have a look at your local college for an economics course
RT I will make a few points that I will always stand for. 1- Any union is better than no union: My points above are a bit utopic but a union will make us part of the decision making process. I bet we won't even need to ask X agency to get our opinion before they implement anything new. 2- We don't really need to convince everybody: Yuri and Andres make big money for themselves but what they make is still very small compared to what we all generate for the agencies. I love Yuri's work but his a few thousand images are only a small part of 5+ million images. 3- Do you really not see If we really manage to be organised and pull our images altogether we won't lose any money. (Even %20 of all contributors will hurt them enough to make them ask us before they do anything) 4- X agency will not have any legal power to lower our comissions to %5 as we will make our own agreement before anything is done. Forget about usual terms of service you are used to.
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 [54] 55
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
