|
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 - bunhill
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 62
676
« on: April 06, 2014, 06:06 »
And 24 pages later of blabber, there's still nothing worth getting excited about in this offer, for a non-exclusive.
I disagree with you for two reasons as follows: 1. The 'iStock Essentials' check box is available in general search. Although listed under a 'subscriptions' heading, it is not something which only subscribers are going to see. It is the new alternative to the price slider - a one click short cut to the lowest priced content. It effectively makes the price slider obsolete. Searching for content to buy it would likely be my default. Whether I was on subscription or not. And the best of the lowest price content is non exclusive. Because exclusives currently have their work mostly in higher priced collections. 2. The content available in the less costly of the two subscription programs is dominated by very high quality non-exclusive content. As an example, do a search for 'business' - which is probably one of the most important keywords. Then select the 'iStock Essentials' option. This limits the search results to only show images available at the lower price point. Make sure to select either 'best match' or 'most popular'. I think you will agree that there is some great work on offer. Now, finally, select 'Only from iStock'. You can see that the best content at the lower price subscription point is non-exclusive. I am interested, not complaining.
677
« on: April 05, 2014, 08:09 »
Whenever in the past PP sales have started to show up in the previous month's graph, it showed in real time sales of the current month as amounts came in chunks. Yes your current balance would have increased as the payments came in. But in the accounting the money was belong added to previous month's total. I can understand the possible confusion. Your current balance should have increased as a result of the PP income being reported. Is it possible that any sales income you received was offset by money removed the because of the over-payment ?
678
« on: April 05, 2014, 07:52 »
Sue is right Herg.
It's possible you are talking at cross purposes.
Feb sales reported in March would have been added to your Feb sales total. Your Feb chart and balance should show the total of all sales on the graph for Feb.
679
« on: March 31, 2014, 18:05 »
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS
Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?
680
« on: March 31, 2014, 03:29 »
I totally agree that iS made a huge error of judgement in pricing S images so much higher than M.
You're agreeing with something I have not written or implied since I don't see things in these superlative terms.
681
« on: March 28, 2014, 16:57 »
how much time do you waste taking the metro out to Belleville every day?
What do you mean - out to Belleville ?  It's only 15 mins walk max from the Canal St Martin or 3 stops to the Marais on the Metro. I tend to avoid the main tourist areas anyhow. If you get bored of noodles buy some ingredients. The markets are fantastic and cheap. Paris is probably one of the best places on earth to buy fantastic ingredients for very little. I am quite happy to make my coffee in the morning. ETA: yep I like the cultural things too. But the private galleries are all free anyhow. And there must be hundreds. I like the cinema though - that can be pricey. Also - noodles was just an example really. The north african places are cheap to eat too - e.g. cous cous etc. Anyhow - all I am saying is that you can live very well on a lot less than people imagine if you think it through and do not live like a tourist. Eg walk home at night instead of getting a taxi if the metro has stopped running etc.
682
« on: March 28, 2014, 04:26 »
Back to the original topic - Bravo to the LPB! Wish there was still a trade association in the US with the stones to do the same.
LPB is not a trade association. It's a trade union. It's the National Union of Journalists. Like any union it is political and factional. I wonder how many people unanimously voted for this motion at the branch meeting. NUJ has an agenda. That is not a criticism. The primary aim of a union is to defend at all costs the jobs of the membership - even to the point of excluding new entry and competition. Often in the face of inevitable change. NUJ has been opposed to journalists multiskilling, social media etc. In general they are very cautious of changes to the existing established models which undermine any status quo. That is certainly understandable. But it also potentially inhibits innovation - and it may work against the interest of those who are not part of the union. And if the road is only going in one direction then it may also not be best to oppose a thing without consideration ...
683
« on: March 28, 2014, 04:05 »
I would not dream of spending $100 a day anywhere
oh really ?
try Paris or London, the cheapest dorm room in a guesthouse will cost you at the very least 30$/night with no breakfast included.
a mcdonalds meal or any other fast food chain selling junk food will be 7-10$/meal.
I have had this conversation here before! I regularly stay a month at a time in Paris. The apartment costs me 850 per month. That's 2 rooms, separate bathroom, kitchen, washing machine etc. And I could do it very much less expensive than that if I wanted. Weekly Metro ticket recharge is 20. A bowl of chicken noodles at lunchtime is 5 in Belleville. A baguette costs 1. The tap water is potable. So that's about 40 per day max. Which is about $55. Add say another $5 for the ingredients to cook an evening meal.
684
« on: March 27, 2014, 16:35 »
In the UK many feel that the NUJ (LPB is the NUJ) has long been rather pointlessly resistant to inevitable change - especially as that affects the evolution of media. The Guardian's well respected columnist Roy Greenslade who is also the former editor of the left wing Daily Mirror wrote this item in 2007 about why he was quitting the union. I believe that some of what he wrote then is echoed again today in the union's reaction to this latest storm in a teacup. (FWIW - IMO today there is a whole generation which has grown up in a world in which the NUJ and the print unions no longer seem especially relevant - because the media is no longer really so much about the big papers and broadcasters.)
685
« on: March 27, 2014, 13:43 »
Traveling always costs about four times more than staying at home. Although some people who pack light, backpack, take a bike or stay at hostels, do make it places for much less than even a cheap budget minded person like myself.
I travel with 7Kg of cabin luggage which is the Asian limit or 10Kg on European flights. I have a really good lightweight cabin bag. I stay in Airbnb - normally studio apartments, tower blocks, suburbs etc .. but if I was on a tight budget I would be quite happy to rent a room in a house or even on someone's sofa. I will eat street food if in Asia or at hawker markets - or at very inexpensive non tourist restaurants and markets if in Europe. Tourist restaurants are all rubbish anyhow - the best places if you can find them are never expensive. I am also very happy to eat noodles and veg or rice every day. We get the bus from the airport (I hate talking to taxi drivers most of the time anyhow and buses are a great way to find out about a place). I would not dream of spending $100 a day anywhere - nothing like that. Unless renting a car. And if I was short of cash would be quite happy to rent out my home whilst away. ETA: none of this is really about saving money. It's about the fact that spending more does not in my experience enhance the experience of a place.
686
« on: March 27, 2014, 08:38 »
Technically I plan to replicate every possible angle of what is already available from places publicly access-able ... I aim for making technically correctl replicatiopns of what already sells Rent a boat if you don't like the beaches - or find somewhere you can dive off the rocks and read. Find a good fish restaurant where the locals eat and the mother makes the bread every morning. Isn't that what summer in the Greek islands is all about ? (+ spinach + feta pastries and ice cold bottles of Mythos beer obviously  Why go somewhere lovely and waste the time replicating photos which already exist ?
687
« on: March 26, 2014, 09:11 »
However, there is to be a two-tier sub system, whereby a buyer can have access to Main files only or Main, S and S+ (not Vetta).
So if you have old non-sellers, you might like to suggest them for Main, or not.
Whatever. They can move them to Main at their whim anyway.
They've already been moving files from S+ to S, and in my experience and that of others, it's not only files that didn't sell at S+ which have been switched.
(See the collection changes thread on the exclusive forum)
Good idea IMO them inviting us to submit a lightbox of content we would like moved to Main. My lightbox includes nearly all of my S content including old flames and a few S+ too. I cannot see a strong case for the S collection from a buyer perspective (which is what counts). (Tip: you can add images to a lightbox in bulk one search page at a time and then weed out the exceptions. It took me a while to figure out how to get around having to add them one at a time. Maybe this helps someone else too.) Personally I think that two price points would be simpler for customers. And a single subscription program including all content. But, not being party to the decision making process, I am perhaps not taking into account some important detail.
688
« on: March 21, 2014, 06:54 »
Rents in Singapore are also relatively (very) expensive. And you need to book months in advance to get a good bargain there on Airbnb. Good job they didn 't choose KL. I was there last week - the haze is terrible because forest fires outside the city. It's actually quite hard to breath some days - also exhausting. Bangkok is very hot and airless atm too.
At least HK is coastal and therefore has a breeze. I wonder if there is a GI office in HK. There is one in Singapore.
689
« on: March 16, 2014, 04:11 »
The history of photography is about the images and how they relate to the society and how the society understands what the images mean. The technology is only relevant in so much as how it affects what images are produced and how they look. It's all about the society.
Broadly, since 1839/40, fashions in photography have tended to cycle periodically between stylistic artsyness and pseudo-objective observational realism (which tends to be more about story telling and is therefore inherently subjective). Both tendencies have resulted in fantastic work. Sometimes artsyness, especially, has been a reaction to the technology.
Every age has been a golden age. There is no period since 1839/40 in which people have not been producing fantastic work. Sites like luminous landscape tend IMO to be obsessed with gadgets, composition, process etc
690
« on: March 14, 2014, 00:02 »
Do you really think many bloggers will choose to put the embed viewer on their website?...
No, I don't. But it seems to be what Getty is hoping many bloggers will do.
To me it seems as if some might rather than many will. And that is how I see this whole thing in general: ie very much in terms of it being an interesting experiment - test the technology and the effect, see where it goes etc. And sometimes one idea comes out of another - we have all experienced that as creatives and it is also definitely true in business. I still cannot understand what seems like an over-reaction here and on a few blogs. This is about non commercial use and not about bloggers per se.
691
« on: March 12, 2014, 09:24 »
I am in Malaysia at the moment. Travelled down from Thailand a few days ago and driving on to KL tomorrow morning. Today I have heard some very silly conspiracy stories - eg UFOs etc. On the radio this morning it was mentioned that the authorities had been receiving spurious reports from people not understanding that satellite images including eg Google Earth are not real time and are often months or years old.
Are the images in the link even current - I cannot see that here?
692
« on: March 09, 2014, 21:23 »
I was quoting bunhill. the "groupthink" term isnt from me. Sorry if my quote looked funny....
It was quite clear where the groupthink term came from - no worries there. I was trying to avoid giving any attention to the poster of that comment as I try not to "feed the trolls" and I ended up blending things badly in my post.
it's completely exasperating that you consider me to be trolling. For simply expressing a different perspective. My use of the term 'groupthink' was in relation to exactly this kind of attitude - ie that there should be only one way of considering a thing.
693
« on: March 09, 2014, 11:37 »
But of course it is easier to play the blame game and assume everyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid. That's what the msg group often seems like to me: Shutterstock good, Getty bad. Black and white. I find it disappointing and depressing that some people who were once so bullish about the old microstock model, when that was disrupting established markets a decade ago , can now be so negative about the inevitable further evolution of these models. As if only some change is good. Why not be more positive and interested ? Surely any business should position itself where it believes the market will go. Personally I believe that free will completely replace cheap in some uses. That certainly does not mean that pictures stop selling or that people who own and manage content will stop earning money from it. Surely an interested conversation about the what-ifs are what this thread should be about. Instead of worrying etc.
694
« on: March 09, 2014, 09:50 »
Are you sure you shouldn't spend more time over in the getty forum with the real "professionals"?
So the unwashed masses of msg can continue to discuss how to make money with the agencies on the right. IMO it is shocking the way in which anyone who does not go along with the groupthink here gets dismissed. Often people who have years of background in these markets and how image is sold. Whilst anything anti-Getty is popular, however wild or ignorant of the actual economics. People here especially should be savvy re the implications of an internet economy and at least see the logic and benefits behind Getty beginning to gradually address and explore the way in which the licensing model must begin to change in response to how images are used. Especially people who were once happy (and right) to justify as inevitable the old microstock model when that was the new thing which disrupted a previous very brief status quo. Also - IMO at every stage every historical iStock controversy has turned out to be nothing much (with the possible exception of f5 which was idiotic IMO and signalled how out of their depth the old team were) . Why not step back and take a calmer longer term view. React to how things actual happen instead of seeing everything as a 'sky is falling' event.
695
« on: March 07, 2014, 22:20 »
it seems to me as if they are trying to treat you as if you were the vendor - as if BS were simply a marketplace.
On the plus side - if this redefines BS as a marketplace then the point of sale is presumably where the artist lives ... in which case witholding tax should no longer be an issue for anyone.
Long story short - IMO they are currently the vendor and they
pay you a royalty from what they earn when they make a sale. In which case any VAT liability is with them. Deducting it from your royalty would be outrageous.
696
« on: March 07, 2014, 06:31 »
You seem to be mistaking "viewing images for free" with "using images for your own purposes for free".
Most images are free. Free to use including reposting and re-tagging. That effectively includes, in many cases, commercial use. Though when you start to drill down into the definitions of what uses are permitted or not then the 'majority' are going to find that a much more arcane debate. Most images are free to use - how most people use their internet. You could wish that most images were not free to use. Even school project use would be paid. The same as some people might wish that mictostock had never been invented or that photographers had not chosen to support subscription sites. But the majority of people uploading their images (ie the majority of today's content producers) do not care if some company or organization they have friended or followed chooses to repost (ie use) their content. Anyhow - this will probably turn out to be no big deal. Just an evolution. Just like all of the previous predicted catastrophes !
697
« on: March 07, 2014, 05:15 »
You never agree with the majority, your point of view is always the opposite, regardless if you agree with it or not.
If you ask the 'majority' of people, you will find that they do not believe that there is any reason why they should not use whatever image they can find anywhere. Try suRveying opinion amongst the people you meet. You will also find that many of the same people think that downloading movies, music, software cracks etc is fine too. Or DVDs from the market etc. I disagree with the majority - though the majority here would likely agree with me . But I recognize that I am not going to change what the majority think and therefore it is more interesting and constructive to think about where that leads. But of course you mean that I often disagree with the majority here. Well so what ? Do alternative perspectives disturb or offend you ?
698
« on: March 07, 2014, 04:57 »
The "majority of images" are not free. They are. Look at all of the content shared for free daily on Facebook and Weibo for example. And many companies are increasingly replacing a website with social media. This defeatist attitude etc It's not defeatist. It's about recognizing changing trends and profiles.
699
« on: March 07, 2014, 04:49 »
Basically they are pretending the artist might benefit with sales, will they plan to make Billions for themselves when Getty is sold. All that money will be made riding on our files. This is not whatsapp. It does not suddenly create millions of potential new users. Therefore it does not IMO directly inflate any valuation. I believe that this is much more strategic and nuanced than that. It certainly builds in future potential value. And I want them to have a good valuation - because that will reflect objective confidence in strategy. And it challenges other companies definitely (but nobody from microstock is allowed that complaint TBH). I have consistently argued here that free is an inevitable part of the challenge which cheap faces. In some ways this is free challenging free maybe. Or maybe I had too much sun today. (I never understood people going nuclear over Google Docs either FWIW). To me it seemed sensible for them to be in the room with Google.
700
« on: March 07, 2014, 04:19 »
I cant believe you take this point of view. How can you not see that this is upsetting for people selling images to bloggers and websites? Stock is not solely big ads and large projects.
I said it before, I believe the majority of my sales is just that, bloggers and websites. How can I not see the Getty move as a major blow to my market potential?
The majority of images already are free , even commercially, to many users. And IMO all of the roads are going in the same direction: ie non commercial use is not going to provide long term viable sales. It is already too much challenged by free, creative commons and social media sharing. And by a perception you cannot change that images are free. This is about non commercial use. It is also about SEO and marketing. It is also about engaging non commercial users - not necessarily as full clients yet ... but certainly more like clients than the people who use whatever they find somewhere or steal from a torrent site.
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 62
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
