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 - FD

Pages: 1 ... 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82
1976
Largest disapointment: Dreamstime WMY despite 30% port increase. Too many max size sub downloads. Action: only upload downsized 21MP>4MP. Since only level 2+ images make money on DT, stop new uploads and just cash in.

1977
Software - General / Re: How to blog?
« on: October 30, 2009, 12:52 »
You can generate the Joomla!™, WordPress™, Drupal™, Blogger™, DotNetNuke™ and HTML templates for 'Commercial Resale', you can use and include the Artisteer headers and backgrounds but you cannot include the sample images when you resell.
Sounds obvious. But with the full 130$ purchase, you are free to sell as you wish? I don't like the workarounds, since it seems unfair to them. Next week or so, I'll try their demo.

1978
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Dreamstime Ups Collection of Free Images"
« on: October 30, 2009, 12:41 »
If the sites really are marching us towards free images, can someone please explain the business plan?  I think they make more money selling our images than they would giving them away.

So why are they so eager to tout about it?

1979
One a day releases, this is funny. What next are you going to need every model release to be notarized? ps I blame lawyers, not the agencies for this kind of stupidity. Pets need releases, now buildings need releases, silhouettes need releases, pictures in the pictures need releases, what the heck?

I've got a model signing anything and it was rejected for LCV or "lighting" at most sites. Kubrik might have gotten away with candle light in Barry Lyndon but stock sites have a different agenda.  ;) (PS - the notary couldn't attend since there was a brownout and the bridge to town was flooded by a typhoon - photography is fun)


1980
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Dreamstime Ups Collection of Free Images"
« on: October 30, 2009, 12:04 »
It is that, but it's also a part of microstock's relentless march towards free images.  The subtle pressure to make your images free, or to sign on to other gimmicky discount plans, won't let up.
If that might become the norm, the agents are very vulnerable since they rely on the contributors. One idea: what if contributors bundle their free images on one site and share the ads revenue themselves?

1981
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock dropping ODs?
« on: October 30, 2009, 11:33 »
Anyhow Shufter same BigStok same...

Would you care to elaborate that in English? English is my third language, and to me it sounds like "me Tarzan, you Jane".  :-\

On topic: I had 2 ODs the past 24hrs so they don't seem to be phased out in general.

1982
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Dreamstime Ups Collection of Free Images"
« on: October 30, 2009, 11:17 »
It's just a gimmick to get more free images to attract new buyers.
Not even that. Freebee hunters almost never become buyers. Whoever wants a usable well licensed shot will go to the paying images since the choice is much wider there and the time searching through sub-par images isn't worth the time/money of the possible gain of 2-3$. For an independent contributor, the larger market share of site A vs. site B doesn't matter, since it's a zero sum operation for his pocket.

Let's see. DT has a long history of a having a good attitude towards its contributors, so it's just a storm in a glass of water.  ;)

1983
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Dreamstime Ups Collection of Free Images"
« on: October 30, 2009, 11:10 »
Well this confirms what the "database cleanup" is actually about.
According to a very recent post from Achilles in the DT forum, the donators will get a boost in the search rank. Ahum...  ;) Your choice, of course.

1984
Cutcaster / Re: anyone out there selling?
« on: October 30, 2009, 07:59 »
Remember that not everybody wants to buy a subscription, no matter how small the package.  The idea of getting the image you need without having to worry about having to fulfill a subscription may be appealing to many people. Indeed, the3dStudio is using that approach and are selling more.

3Dstudio sells nothing for me. You could differentiate not only by content, but also by size. Currently I have a 5DMKII but there is no way I'm going to upload the full sizes to unlimited-size subscription sites like SS, DT or FT. CC and ZYM wil get them.

1985
Dreamstime.com / "Dreamstime Ups Collection of Free Images"
« on: October 30, 2009, 07:41 »
From Reuters (link):
Quote
Several Thousands Of Free Stock Photos Added In First 24 Hours Of Enhancement
NASHVILLE, Tenn.--(Business Wire)--
Serban Enache, CEO of Dreamstime, one of the world`s leading digital image stock
photography agencies, announced the company`s initiative to up the number of
images made available ABSOLUTELY FREE.

In January 2007, Dreamstime made available an assortment of images under its
FREE umbrella. The FREEselection-an original and revolutionary sector that has
attracted bargain hunters from around the globe-is a successfully proven concept
that has secured Dreamstime`s footprint in the industry as one-stop-photo-shop
giant.

Dreamstime has nearly doubled the number of images available ABSOLUTELY FREE
(increasing its FREE library of images by 10% in the first three hours of the
FREE upgrade as effected on October 27th).

It's all about more market share for companies. No word about benefits for contributors. I didn't know that giving away images from contributors was a revolutionary sector.  :-\

1986
However, no one has really addresed what the point of having someone hold up a release for a picture proves.

That it was actually them. I came across models that were all too happy to pose for their facebook etc... for their personal promo and to show off, but refused to sign a MR for stock. It would be tempting for some to let a friend sign the release then, claiming the real "model" filled in fake info. I'm talking about the Philippines where photo IDs are rather exceptional and do cost a day wage. The model holding up the signed release would be a great safeguard in those cases.

Not wanting to hijack the thread, but has anybody cooked a generic istock release with the logo cloned out? I tried it last night but I got stuck in Word. I don't like to let sign two releases: one for iStock, and one for all the rest.

1987
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Share my problem on IS with you
« on: October 30, 2009, 06:38 »
What is a MOO card?

1988
Software - General / Re: How to blog?
« on: October 30, 2009, 06:28 »
The product I am using is Artisteer which creates templates for a few well know frameworks

Great link. Thanks. Does it also allow to generate templates for sale from our own image products?

1989
New Sites - General / Re: photocase.com
« on: October 30, 2009, 01:34 »
Very unique, indeed. Look at this one. When I type English keywords (try "business"), I get strange and irrelevant results. I can't imagine anything selling there, so the posters that had sales, could you please put up a link to the sold image? Just curious...

1990
Off Topic / Re: Free hosting???
« on: October 30, 2009, 01:30 »
I have a resellers account with http://www.redfoxhosting.com/ and like any good service you "pay for what you use"

An offer like that sounds much more genuine. I'm renting out webspace/traffic to some friends for 1 euro/month via add-on domains. Real webhosting doesn't have to be expensive.

1991
Off Topic / Re: Free hosting???
« on: October 30, 2009, 01:20 »
i don't think you're wrong. i'm not sure how you did it though.

They crossed my path before. The OP is a "new" member, so some lights started blinking. When I mentioned Hostgator and Namecheap, I didn't give my referral links, right? If I would do so, I would mention it's a referral link.
About 000webhost : Google for "000webhost scam". One example (read the comments before they are removed): here.

1992
Off Topic / Re: Free hosting???
« on: October 30, 2009, 00:56 »
wow, some great sleuthing there
Prove me wrong.

1993
Software - General / Re: How to blog?
« on: October 30, 2009, 00:53 »
I recommend it to all of my clients who have various styles of website including joomla, plain html, and integrations between the two.
I do turnkey installs too, mostly in WordPress and Joomla. The Joomla customers keep returning when they screwed up something, since the relation between articles, categories, menu links and plugin position can be very counter-intuitive. The WordPress customers never return, and I see their content growing.

1994
Shutterstock.com / Re: 101,867 new photos added in the past week
« on: October 30, 2009, 00:20 »
At what point do you think it might start to level off?
Probably at the point where many small players stop shooting for microstock and stop uploading. The large image factories will become the norm. This will first happen in the high cost of living countries like the US and Western EU. In the low cost of living countries like Eastern Europe this process will take much longer. The nanostock world of 2015 might look like large Russian and Serbian image factories selling mostly to the West (and India, as far as they harbor a lot of outsourced graphic work).

Did you see any iPod, printer, laptop, sneakers, T-shirt not made in China recently? Welcome to globalization. Images don't have to be transported with ships or planes, they travel cost-free with the speed of light. The only issue in outsourcing is fine-tuning Western needs to alien cultures. So let's all write blogs with Photoshop and lighting tricks, with content hinst and our trade secrets - and educate our future competition fast. :)

1995
Software - General / Re: How to blog?
« on: October 30, 2009, 00:03 »
Don't hesistate: use WordPress. It's very light and easy to manage by a non-IT person. The other platforms might have more advanced possibilities but they are more time-consuming to manage. Many free templates and plugins available.

1996
Off Topic / Re: Free hosting???
« on: October 29, 2009, 23:54 »
Today I just found this free host with:
Check it out [urr=http://www.000webhost.com/219172.html]http://www.000webhost.com[/url]

I don't like you put your referral link here in a very sneaky way. The 000webhost lives off referrals an linkfarms. They live off clicks. I hope you got some cents in your referral account there for the clicks you harvested here.
Anybody serious using them as hoster will make them rich with their content attracting traffic. There is no such thing as a free lunch. What's more, their free domain is probably owned by them, not by you, so if ever you attract some fans and traffic, and you then want to move to a real hoster, you will have lost your domain, associated PageRank and external links, and they will sell it to a domain shark.

The only way to make a site profitable is to register a domain in your own name (I use namecheap dot com), then find an independent hoster like Bluehost or Hostgator.

1997
Dreamstime.com / Re: Database cleaning
« on: October 28, 2009, 10:21 »
People don't know what a license is, or that images have 'owners'.  Buy giving away images and requiring attribution to the site and photographer, it is making people aware that there are rules when using images.  To go from there, to having them pay $1.00 isn't a big step.

Oh how smooth all those corporate newspeak. Freebees hunters only will learn how to get more freebees easily. Real customers even don't look at the free section since (a) they know the selection is very limited and sub-par, and (2) their (searching) time costs more. The step from freebee-hunting to even pay 1 cent for an image is tremendous. You will have to set up an account, have paypal, go through the email confirmation, etc...

Free images just serve the sites. Freebees hunters don't even look at who made the shot. If I want to give images for free, I'll do it on Flickr and reap in the traffic myself.

1998
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock guarantee?
« on: October 28, 2009, 09:00 »
Sounds like someone got re-ject-ed...
That or Wild Dingo is back.

1999
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock guarantee?
« on: October 28, 2009, 03:58 »
Copying concepts that are easy to reshoot has become the norm apparently on stock. Although the practice can be easily called 'infringement' (derivative work), it is so widespread that it is like fighting a tidal wave. Whenever you have a well selling concept, you can be sure that the lurking copycats will reshoot it and 6 months later your own shot slowly gets drowned on page 2 or 3.

It happens everywhere and in all directions, so I don't understand why you are singling out iStock exclusives. Adding to that, I don't believe designers/buyers do care for it. As long as they have the shots they want, it's just fine.

2000
Dreamstime.com / Re: Database cleaning
« on: October 27, 2009, 08:08 »
If they don't want to sell the files then that's fine with me but they should seek our confirmed acceptance before awarding themselves the files for free. Taking them without our confirmed consent is basically theft as far as I'm concerned. What if you don't get the email for whatever reason? They could be giving away your best-sellers on other agencies for free.
I just objected on the DT forum against the default. I hope some others will join. The default should be delete.

Pages: 1 ... 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors