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 - Jonathan Ross
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 37
76
« on: February 04, 2013, 21:14 »
Kind of have to agree with you on most areas Racephoto.
Very tough and the depth of this topic has not even been close to being covered. There is soooo much that would have to take place and it would have to start with so many different pieces fitting together.
Good post, Jonathan
77
« on: February 04, 2013, 21:10 »
Hi All,
We started a co-op agency between 21 photographers called Blend Images. Let me say that it was a very tough uphill climb and took 21 of the most flexible people I have ever met as well and many of the top shooters in the industry at the time of building. I would be happy to offer up reasons why it would be very difficult but not necessarily impossible. If I do see someone starting to put this together or you need any support I would be happy to share anything I can from my own personal experience to help in any way.
Cheers, Jonathan
78
« on: January 28, 2013, 22:56 »
How did the frog cross the road? He was stapled to a chicken  J
79
« on: January 28, 2013, 22:54 »
Hi All,
We make sales monthly there and they have grown every month since we signed. We have a lot of images there but still if it is the right image, Like the bridge I showed there is Fine Art America.
Best, Jonathan
80
« on: January 27, 2013, 13:55 »
Hi Kona,
I think building this is super cool and part of what I hope the future holds for each of us. One question, how do you get the buyer to know you and follow you? I have had a terrible time trying to make this happen for my own agency and others as well. I would love to know this part of the puzzle. Great efforts and please keep up the work. I am no tech geek by any means if I can help in any other area of development like agency knowledge or anything of the sort you can count me in.
Best, Jonathan
81
« on: January 27, 2013, 13:43 »
Hi All, If you have some fine art style work., it can even be location stuff. We have seen very good sales through Fine ASrt America at Spaces Images and you can upload images as an individual there. I have spoken to severalm people that do well there with the right image. We have an image up there now that is selling really well every month. Here is the link to it. http://fineartamerica.com/featured/long-rope-bridge-skip-nall.htmlHope this helps, Jonathan
82
« on: January 27, 2013, 13:39 »
Thi is a toughy but an old goodie, Why do mice have such small balls? Because not many of them know how to dance. Get it, takes a while  Best, Jonathan
83
« on: January 26, 2013, 14:49 »
Hi all,
I have obviously stepped a bit over the line here as some posts show so I will back off and let you all continue this topic. I will be reading but I will avoid posting on this topic as I have shared all I have to. Best of luck and I sympathize with all you Micro stockers I also have 3500 Micro images with 2100 at Istock so I am just as much a part of this issue as everyone here.
Cheers,, Jonathan
84
« on: January 26, 2013, 12:48 »
Hi Lisa,
You are also welcome. Please do not assume things like some others do here it is pure speculation and I thought you were a bit above that. I stop by here regularly but there has not been anything that my input can help with lately. Also, how does the number of times I post have to do with anything, one post from a person that shares their identity for me out weighs 20 posts from someone we have no idea who they are or if they are even involved in stock. His post was informative to a pint but it didn't speak os business where he lost his cool and that that was a good way to communicate with his boss. Unfortunately he lowered himself to name calling in that post which did not add to his information it was just rude, those couple of comments did not inform or help anyone here on the site, they were just him poking the bear. If you believe having your business called names is appropriate then that is your choice, I think it is a bit childish I prefer to stick to facts when posting on a forum. I also got PM's from people here and at Facebook that wanted more information and I happily helped them all out with absolutely no personal gain. Once again trying to help out here and through PM's has appeared to be of little help and resulted in name calling. Heck, if people want I can sling crap as good as the next guy but I resolve myself to speak in a respectful manner to anyone that is a fellow stock photographer unless they show reason not to then I just avoid them in the future and do not reply to their PM's for help and guidance.
Best of luck Lisa, Jonathan
85
« on: January 25, 2013, 19:28 »
Hi Sharpshoot, Actually it was posting at MSG that opened my eyes to forums that do not make their posters share their information. It has helped me to try and reply in an orderly manor when in the beginning I was just blown away and took these rude posts very personally as I had never experienced such behavior before on a site where we are all trying to achieve the same goal. If the name calling really bugged me I would have been out of here ages ago on the contrary it has helped to deal with all kinds  Cheers, Jonathan
86
« on: January 25, 2013, 19:22 »
Hi Cobalt,
I agree with you especially on the image exclusive issue, it keeps the agencies honest and does not allow photographers to be put into this very situation.
Cheers, Jonathan
87
« on: January 25, 2013, 19:19 »
It was business ShadySue.
Jonathan
88
« on: January 25, 2013, 19:18 »
Thanks for the reply Snufkin,
I have no issue with you disagreeing but I do believe in being a gentleman with people that are sharing information, just common courtesy. It seems most of the people that post in this manor here are also hiding their information. I have been here helping with what information I can without calling people names and have been open with my profile from the beginning. I know a lot of you say " if I share my info then the agencies are going to get mad at me and delete my stuff ". I believe that if you share your opinion with others in a positive orderly manor then you will not have any issue with reasonable agencies. I have shared things one on one with the top folks at Getty that they didn't necessarily want to hear but we were able to have a reasonable conversation because there was no name calling and my images have never been deleted at Getty because of our interaction. It just lowers you to a level that changes your credibility. Just my 2 cents but those that hide themselves and their identity that make up names and call peoples information nonsense just don't carry any weight with their comments and they certainly do not help us all figure out what is best to resolve the situation. I would be happy to share with you anything I can about any inside information but when it is received with name calling then it is no longer a gentleman's conversation. One more thing I think most will agree on ( outside of MSG ) if you are going to make such statements then back them up by sharing who you are, or else what you say holds little water.
Best, Jonathan
89
« on: January 25, 2013, 19:00 »
Hi JPSDK,
This is the last one for me because this is turning into just repeating what has already been gone over. We did not take images from image providers at Blend that were not aware of the issue, we did not handle it like Istock did we gave them a measly 62 images on a one time deal. I cannot share what our plans are with Getty that is confidential but we did not just take images from our photographers and add them to this group of 62 without some form of reciprocation that's business. Please do not confuse the Istock deal with what happened elsewhere without some form of information to support your statement. If you had an image taken from the Blend site without your knowledge please contact me so we can make it right for you.
Thanks, Jonathan
90
« on: January 25, 2013, 18:48 »
Hi CC, Thanks for the feedback my biggest issue here is the Trolling. If you don't have to share who you are then you can say or make up stories about your work all day long and non of us are the wiser, it could all be B.S. for all we know. Someone else posted here that one of their images was taken from Blend without their approval I offered to help and try and solve the issue but this person was also a Troll and did not reply. I cannot take their word they are telling the truth because once again they are hiding off line. I agree CC this deal is a concern for people in the Micro market I have completely agreed with that position in my earlier postings. It is a bad deal if your number 1 images are being put into this collection without your notice. Many Micro sales are for " in house use " if the buyer doesn't have to buy your images from Istock for in house use then you are definitly losing money. I have never said this was good for Micro but please understand the dealings with image placement, acceptance rates, options for future development are all part of doing business with Getty for Blend and soon for Spaces as well. If Blend gave up 62 images and by doing so moved their position up the ranks on the pages at Getty then it is a big win for Blend and their photographers as we will see much higher returns with better image placement. This is just a scenario but to say that negotiating with the biggest reseller to gain more ground for Blend is a bad move then I am sorry you have not played this game from the other side of the net. I feel your pain please everyone realize this that is why I have been looking into it and posting what I can find out just trying to help with the information I can share but some people still like to shoot the messenger  Cheers, Jonathan
91
« on: January 25, 2013, 17:57 »
Thanks Snufkin,
I find your post a bit disrespectful. I am here trying to help I do not have to make excuses for my agency or for Blend they are allowed to conduct business the way they and I see fit. I am here trying to help share some information on what I know is taking place with our agency and Getty Images to hopefully add some insight for all photographers. If you are mad at Getty then please direct your frustration at them if you don't agree with what I said a simple " I do not agree " works better than calling a post someone spent the time to offer up as "nonsense" or making up silly names about our agency " Bend " when I am trying to share info. Posting this information does not benefit me or my agencies in any way it is shared to try to help, I thought we were trying to help each other out here with information on the topic?
Jonathan
92
« on: January 25, 2013, 00:11 »
Hello aremafoto,
I think this is something you need to take up directly with the CEO or editors at Blend. If you are unhappy about an image of yours that you feel will not sell again or your sales are not good at Blend they want to know. One thing to consider, your image base price at Blend is much higher and those images will not be purchased for basic in-house use as is limited in the Google Docs agreement. You made a sale you did not do as much damage to your image sale on that one image being it is priced out at Macro RF prices keeping it from being chosen for in-house use generally speaking. This was also to strengthen Blends position and relations with the largest distributor of imagery in the world, and that it did. In the end of the day you have to ask yourself " am I happy with what my agency is doing for me and if not is there someone else that could do better ". If so then I think you should shoot the largest % of your work for that agency that makes you the most return but I would still never rely on just that one agency, things have a way of changing fast in this business. Just my 2 cents. If you would like to PM me for support on the issue I would be very happy to help in any way I can.
Thanks, Jonathan
93
« on: January 24, 2013, 23:51 »
Hi ffNixx,
I did answer it earlier when I said it was 62 of our bottom feeders that were agreed upon by Blend and Getty from our Legacy collection. Getty did not just pull our files. If you reread what I already wrote I think you will find I clearly stated this prior.
Jonathan
94
« on: January 24, 2013, 13:12 »
Hi Lisa,
I think you were probably misunderstood. That happens a lot on forums sometimes it is a language barrier sometimes it is because they didn't read the entire post and sometimes it is because they have their own position and when they read your words they are misinterpreted because of what they already believe. I can see from reading a lot of the posts here that this is a very emotionally charged conversation for some. My only advice when making business decisions is to remove yourself emotionally as much as you can from your decision making. I know that is easier said than done but I would be out looking for as much solid information as possible rather than speculating. Here are replies to three posts that I feel are speculation and not based on fact. Getty did not make a huge sale here if you knew the sale price it would blow your mind, very small. Getty did not make a deal to continue to feed Google anymore content and last Hughstoneian Getty makes $1 million dollars a year off of just my sales, they actually make more and if I deleted my account they would not bat an eye. So my concern on this deal is that if you want to really make a stand and have people take notice you have to pull your entire collection especially the best sellers or don't bother. To remove your bottom feeder images is only helping Istock and Getty out by clearing out the trash to add new stronger content, this has to hurt Istock in order to work. Once again this is only my opinion but it is based on some facts like the price they made for this sale. It was peanuts to Getty so I do not think Getty wants Google to take over their business these are very savvy business people that want to and hopefully will make Getty stronger I guarantee that is what Getty wants in the long run. Keep up the info sharing I think that is always a good idea but be carful not to believe all you read without first doing some investigating.
Best, Jonathan
95
« on: January 23, 2013, 21:20 »
Hi JS,
Thanks for the feedback. I did mention that in my post if you read it you will se that I said if it were my number one sellers and I didn't get a choice then I can understand the frustration with the deal. I get it, I am trying to live with what tomorrow will bring because If I try to fight today's battle today I am usually to late can garentee you it isn't going to be more money in the stock industry for individual photographers. The days of 7 figure returns are long gone and I think that photographers that want to stay in the business full time will have to diversify their options a great deal to pay the bills. Just like desk top publishers before the computer came out, those cut and paste folks were put out of business or had to adapt to survive very quickly. I am sorry to say that the best has come and gone but I do believe for those that are great at the craft of lighting, strong business skills as well as very strong people skills will be the ones with the best chance of making it. I have diversified a few years back seeing the writing on the wall. That was when my wife and I decided to start our own stock agency and do some investing. I was also speaking to another person that said " to survive today you must deversify outside of your own business " and I completely agree with his statement. The more you can put away for a rainy day and invest for long term while there are good investments available ( like property and several others in this down turned economy, must be long term at this point in the U.S. at least ) then I think your families security is even more assured.
Cheers, Jonathan
96
« on: January 23, 2013, 16:13 »
Great post Stockastic,
I agree that every movement is started by one individual and then waits for others to make it grow the more that join the cause the bigger the difference would be to Istock. If you guys got them to pull half of their exclusives images from Istock I think they would have to listen. Best to you on your decision.
Cheers, Jonathan
97
« on: January 23, 2013, 15:37 »
Hi All,
Thank you Sean for sharing where you got the post it was a big help when I spoke with Rick at Blend. I see so many different reasons on this post for why people are pulling their images from Istock but the one I see the most is " they aren't making me the money I used to " That unfortunately is what happens when there are more photographers then their are buyers, it is sad but true. I can all appreciate your concern for the loss of income, I lost 90% of my Macro income when Istock was 2 years into sales so I understand what it feels like to lose a great deal of your income from something you believe is a bad idea ( the reduction of average sales from $138 per image sold at Getty each to a dollar back when Istock started sales ) that was what took place when Micro hit the market but we had to evolve to survive and keep our families with food on the table. I would suggest that for the few that will pull their entire content and I say few because of the millions of images Istock has in it's collection, I admire anyone that stands by their beliefs enough to stop their families income and stop being exclusive that takes real strength to stick to your principles no matter what the cost. I know I would never pull my content from a company that can replace me overnight and put my family in financially jeopardy but that is me once again my hat is off to those that want to stand behind a belief and try to make a change. Unfortunately I don't think you pulling your content from Istock is going to hurt anyone but yourselves but once again I respect everyone's right to do as they choose and those that do pull their entire collection I applaud. I have spoken directly with Blend about our images that were used. They were from our Legacy collection images that have been with us from the start and are no longer making sales. For our company to sell 62 images that were no longer selling from our 100,000+ collection is a good gesture and a strong building block in our future relations with the biggest reseller of imagery in the world. Do I like the situation No, I would prefer it didn't happen this industry is under enough pressure already. I think it is business that needs to take place for Blend especially during such turbulent times in our industry to strengthen our relations with such a giant in the business for a small offering of 62 images sold for $12 each. If this was to continue further I would have great concern especially if it were images of mine that were making solid sales but for Blend this was not the case. I have no problem with the deal Blend made but that does not mean I agree with what took place elsewhere. If Istock pulled your top sellers for this deal then I can understand the issue but I cannot speak from the Micro side especially Istock. Please I am only the messenger here so keep that in mind. I like to share information at MSG but if I am attacked for my position I hope you understand why I will not reply, it just takes to long and doesn't resolve anything. Open questions and responses I would love feedback from all that have their finger on the true pulse of this matter. I have seen a lot of emotions get in the way of smart business decisions and I hope you are all thinking this through in great detail for what works best for you at this time for your own business. I wish you all the best on your decision and support everyone that chooses to do whatever they want I understand it is your income we are speaking of and that can be devastating so please think this through in great detail. As for people pulling a few hundred of your images from Istock I say either go for it and make your stand and leave Istock or just leave your images up. Taking a few hundred of your non sellers is not really supporting what is being asked of in this group support concept " to pull your entire collection from Istock".
Thanks for taking the time to read, Jonathan
98
« on: January 22, 2013, 20:17 »
Hi Lisa,
Yes, this is a concern for every stock photographer as it breaks the contract on being able to resell your images without your permission. I will definitely get back to everyone hear as soon as I have CLEAR info. Once again Sean, would you please share where you got this post from Rick it will help everyone if I can get where you found this post, what public forum please.
Thanks, Jonathan
99
« on: January 22, 2013, 18:49 »
Hi Leaf,
Don't know about another post I was going off the message Sean had posted in this link. If it is somewhere else it is very hard to know if you are not in that thread. Please share the link to the other thread so I can reply there instead of here.
Thanks, Jonathan
100
« on: January 22, 2013, 18:37 »
Hi Sean,
Can you share where you found this post from Rick, what open forum was it posted on? Very important if I am to approach the board on this topic to gain more information. Happy to share what I find out.
Thanks, Jonathan
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 37
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|