Thanks for that.  I guess the keywords then are:

Please note that we will be addressing the artist name on the image details page for copyright acknowledgment post-launch.

Hopefully post-launch means immediately after launch, and not a few years down the road.

I have opted back into subs, but I must admit, it is with a bit of a sick feeling.  I hate to endorse 30 cents per download, but I will give this a whirl because I am grateful to StockXpert for not saying "our way or the highway" and I will see what happens.  Hopefully we can distinguish between the two plans in our sales reporting.

The rest of this post might be moot if the (c) has changed, if it did I missed it.

One thing that troubles me though is that images say "property of Photos.com" or "Jupiter Images".  Did I miss where this point changed at all, or are we still anonymous contributors to this program?  What about the name brands that everyone has worked so hard to build. 

Are we anonymous so buyers cannot easily search our names on another site to find their ppd's for different prices?

But, when it comes to "search fairness" we will not all be equal?  The buyers won't be able to find a style they love - and click through to, say, Yuri's portfolio and shop there for more images.   Maybe the sales will be more evenly spread out? 

I'm still uncomfortable if my Intellectual Property will be flogged without my name beside the copyright.

On Photos.com, only "Super", "Ultra", and EPS sized files are sold as PPDs. "Super" roughly equates to an "XL" Stockxpert image, and an "Ultra" roughly equates to an "XXL" Stockxpert image. An image is categorized as "Super" if its longest side has a length between 3300 and 4824 pixels. An image is categorized as "Ultra" if its longest side is longer than 4824 pixels. If, however, your Stockxpert "XXL" image falls below the pixel length range for an "Ultra", it will be available as a "Super" PPD and EL.

Ah.... yes.  The "Super" is just short of a 16mp camera and that excludes a majority of us from PPD's.

But does that exclude us from subscribers Photos.com's?

Should I be jumping around screaming whoo-hoo, I qualify for 30 cent downloads only!!! or am I missing something?

Viva la Revolution!

Lucky me, I missed the carp (although I experienced millions of floating walleye last summer at my sisters cottage in Sask BLECH!!!).  I guess it wasn't last Saturday it was the Saturday before (two weeks this weekend).  Their place is near Pefferlaw.  You are nearby aren't you?

OMG, I noticed the vests last night.  How lovely.  They have an assigned number on the back, something like "Photog 4402".    Is this normal? To give the photographers a "uniform"?

And, are the photos censored I wonder by that crazy government?

How much money do you think is sitting in the inventory that press booth?

Hey Penny, I was in your part of the world last week.  Spent Saturday night on Lake Simco.

Hey, number one search placement on Yahoo!  And not bad on Google either, top 5. 

And, thanks for pointing out the tip.  I'll leave the pricing up to your team in the future.  This will make your fast upload super fast for me.

Congrats!  Nice photo.  All that blue copy space must be a designer's dream. 

Hehe - I thought of that too... but they can use our photos as they like in promos can't they, why would they pay?  The only one I thought I was ever paid for promos from was LO.

so wut category duz that put u in cuz u seem 2 have lotz to say w/out whinging?

I just refreshed and earnings from the 8th are back.  Hopefully the rest will follow.

I was wrong - the 8th was the month - I'm still missing everything.

A trial would be by individual definition.  It doesn't mean "I'll opt-in and never think about it again", it means "I'll opt in but I won't be passive in my evaluation".

- I think that StockXpert contributors are pretty loyal and want to help them grow and for the time will give them the benefit of trust but are uncertain or overwhelmed by the attention this subject has received.
- Perhaps they feel they have been rewarded by the subs program at StockXpert, but are hesitant about the photos.com subs program yet they do not want to opt out of the StockXpert subs program
- Perhaps they are uncertain, but can't stand the immediate thought of lost income
- Perhaps they have read too much in these forums and want to try it out for themselves.

One quote I've read on StockXpert forum that is sticking with me was something like this:  "I'm going to buy all the Ron Chapple photos and open myself a Ron Chapple Store on e-bay and keep all the profits for myself."  Sorry to single out Iofoto, but that is what someone else posted on StockXpert.   I am thinking that if I found a store with my products that were purchased legally on photos.com I would opt-out pretty fast. 

Many reasons.  And many reasons to opt-out on trial basis as well.  This is just the beginning.  The next partnership may be fabulous.  Or the terms of this photos.com agreement may change.  Who knows.