Quote from: gostwyck on February 09, 2012, 21:39
I've opted in but I can't imagine that these licenses are going to be frequent enough to make a difference to income.

However, what I think is interesting is that SS appear to be reacting to a demand from customers. The fact that they mentioned 'other agencies' may be a sign that such customers are migrating from said 'other agencies' and want the same uses.

Interesting - I took the 'other agencies' bit to be a statement intended to make you realize that if you sell on other sites you probably already have agreed to this without being asked...and thus likelier to opt in on SS.

Quote from: lisafx on February 09, 2012, 23:27
I don't think the poll is all that indicative.  Ideally I would like to see higher numbers than $1,000.  Once you are over 1k there is no way to indicate whether your sales are up or down. 

I would agree, the poll is only so accurate...  I think it would be just as useful to ask if your sales are up, down, or about the same.  I also wonder if the votes are simply averaged - if you vote 10 and I vote 0 at best you would expect the average dollar value to be $500, but an average vote of 5 is a dollar figure much lower.  Exclusives have to decide if they vote 0 for the other sites

The only claim I've seen about being superior to full frame is specifically related to resolution.  As a camera being compared to the 5D MkII I'd say the differences in operation, lens choices, and ergonomics will be a much bigger practical difference than sensor performance.  To me the statement from Fuji (on sensor performance) is more about taking their camera seriously than saying it is a good alternative to a 5D MkII.  They are very different systems - designed for different things.

I don't think this system is targeted at your typical microstock shooter   Very interesting, though !

In this thread http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_23946 (which unfortunately has expired - maybe you can talk them into it again!) they talk about e-mail to allow uploads without being online, and then following up later to activate the whole portfolio...

Quote from: flashon on December 16, 2011, 13:20
got a "1979SUCKS" discount code, anyone? 

Too funny

You can just send an e-mail and they switch your account over in a month.  I can't answer the question definitively about whether you can make the 30 days notice part of the 6 months timeline...  But the way it reads:

"...an Exclusive Contributor may terminate their status as an Exclusive Contributor with thirty (30) days prior written notice to Dreamstime.com. If an Exclusive Contributor terminates this Agreement prior to the passage of six (6) months, Dreamstime.com reserves the right to..."

I would say if you are giving 30 days notice to terminate, then you haven't actually terminated prior to the 30 days being up...  I would want to clarify with their support, though, as you stand to lose all the exclusive earnings and upload bonuses if you get it wrong.

Usually they seem to feature 'success', but this week they seem to be featuring 'potential'...  In many ways that makes a lot of sense - helps someone with a strong or unique portfolio jump ahead a bit.

Quote from: StockCube on December 08, 2011, 21:29
I didn't realise I could do that Megastock, thanks.

Hope it works out   I personally found that going the other way, other sites wouldn't take my top sellers from DT...  Seems to go both ways!

Quote from: StockCube on December 06, 2011, 21:39
The first time it was rejected for being part of a series of three and therefore too similar, the second time for needing a model release.  The other two in the series were accepted last year, but unfortunately they are not as good as this image.

I would like to try to speak to an admin regarding this image to try and see if I can put their fears at rest.  I am not in the habit of doing this and in general I am very happy with my acceptance rate at DT.  I am not a stirrer or a trouble maker, but would just like the chance to have a fair hearing and a chance to have my best seller at a top tier agency.

I know nothing about the best way to approach this and so if you could give me any pointers I would be grateful,

Many thanks.

I would suggest disabling the other two 'similars' if you are confident this one shot is the best, and resubmit with that information and see what happens.  You can always reenable the other two if it doesn't work out.

One really nice thing about it is that you can test the waters with some of your images and get a feel for whether standards have risen since your content was put up somewhere as an exclusive...  Useful to know before you even make your decision to drop exclusivity somewhere.

Anyone else find it ironic that this mostly pro assignment article was illustrated with a microstock image from iStock?  Especially considering the anti-micro comments

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6301575099/stock-or-assignment-whats-right-for-me

I can't imagine anyone using this article as the basis for a career changing decision!

Quote from: cclapper on November 03, 2011, 13:35

Quote from: holgs on November 03, 2011, 12:42
Yep nice to see some good news for a change. Guess they realized just how much this cuts into PPD sales. I think in many cases this sort of thing doesn't lure new buyers, just cuts prices for those that are already buying from the site.

Agree.

I do applaud them, though, for trying to think of new ways to encourage buyers, and then discontinuing when it isn't making money for anybody.

I've always been impressed with how Dreamstime rolls out changes, keeps contributors informed, responds to ideas and criticism on the boards - and then isn't afraid to admit something didn't work and roll it back.  The Print on Demand is another that comes to mind...  It is kind of refreshing to see that something that seemed on the surface to be good for the agency at the expense of contributors wasn't good for either party!

Confirmed on the DT boards: http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_29332

Quote from: AttilaTheNun on October 27, 2011, 05:10

Quote from: Megastock on October 26, 2011, 21:15Dreamstime pays $1.05 for the level 5 subs.

I just had one a few hours ago of 1.26$ (level 5, exclusive). Many of my level 4-5's are exclusive. (I started a thread on the DT forum some time ago as to why it pays off to make your level 4-5's exclusive there if (and only if) they don't sell well elsewhere). For instance yesterday: Editorial, exclusive : 17 credits (2010) $9.35 = 55% but I had cases of 60% too.

In all these subs discussions there is an elephant in the room as to DT. The elephant is the level system. This is quite unique in the microstock world (as far as I'm aware). In fact, it is a Darwinian "Vetta", determined by sales on an image per image base, not by some editor's decision. On other sites, you'll just have to live with subs and hope for PP sales that deliver the largest share of our revenue anywhere. On DT, a sub sale is a sale that makes the image also climb up on the level scale. Not to mention the recent introduction of the level 0 (still 1 credit to buy) that becomes level 1 (3 credits to buy) just after one single sale (included a subs sale).

So imho, the subs system on DT can't be compared with any subs system anywhere else. To address the concern of OP : DT seems to handle the subs temptation (for buyers) well, especially in view of the recent introduction of the 1-week subs plan. My subs are still around 50-60% but not increasing, and my RPD (I'm not an illustrator) has been around 1.5-1.6$ the past 3 months, more than before the 1-week subs plan.

Apparently DT runs a tight ship with 1 captain-photographer in control while other sites fell to the multi-headed "corporate" temptation, a temptation that brought us in the economic mess in the financial world we are currently in.

You can compare Dreamstime subs to other sites and I think you will find they pay a lot more due to the level system, as you suggest   On the 'exclusive' tab on the earnings page (http://www.dreamstime.com/exclusivity.php) it shows you your last 50 credit and sub sales, and makes it easy to see what you are actually getting from sub sales on DT.  Personally, I'm getting $0.61 per sub on average which handily beats any other site by almost double...  I didn't see a drop in RPD after the introduction of the weekly sub, either.

Dreamstime pays $1.05 for the level 5 subs.  As per the above comment, though, you can get less than those amounts. 

What is crazy is that as low as the sub prices are most sites will pay even less for a small or extra-small size credit download:

RF: $0.20
FT: $0.20
DT: $0.25-ish
SS: $0.81 (is that right?  I've never received less)
IS: ??

When you look at it this way it kind of makes the actual claimed royalty percentage almost meaningless

Quote from: jsnover on October 25, 2011, 18:38
I get the credit variation spiel - but in all the subscription sales  I've received from DT since June, it's been 35 cents per for images at levels 0-1-2.

Credit sales are often less than subs (for small sizes), but are below 35 cent subscription sales common for other people and I've just been lucky so far?

I have had thousands of sub sales and only recently have I had a few of the sub 35 cent variety - maybe five or so.  Support told me they were partner sales...  Apparently they don't sell a lot of subscriptions through partners!

On a semi-related note I find it 'interesting' that despite the sites having very different royalty rates and so on, Shutterstock is the only one where I feel I actually know what to expect to get from a sale.  I don't know why DT bothers to list maximums - it is very misleading and just plain wrong when you consider the likelihood of a buyer purchasing credits at the 8-pack rate to buy a level 5 image for 19 credits   Wouldn't be so bad if they listed minimums as well...  All that said they are still providing my highest RPD...I'm getting $0.60 per subscription sale on my last 50.

I can't think of why any agency wouldn't want to embed their metadata (with your name), just for the off chance that someone finds the image and wants to buy it, or needs to go back and purchase an extended license...  Seems like a win for both sides.

With the new Google image search these days it would be pretty hard to argue in a court that you reasonably tried to find the copyright owner if it is for sale online at a major stock agency...  (Not saying one can't claim it and try to get away with it of course!)

Quote from: AttilaTheNun on October 15, 2011, 01:33
Does it come with a some hints as how to earn it back from 0.25$ subscriptions?

LOL - In less than an hour at 12 fps you can shoot enough photos to only need 1 sub each to pay for the camera !  Might have trouble with so many similars on DT, though

For me it is pretty simple, I don't really want an internet search on my name to lead to a bunch of forum posts rather than my portfolio or other more relevant content...  As for trust - it is the internet, there is no way to know if anything I post is really linked with my claimed name, if my portfolio that is linked is really mine, etc.  You have to evaluate comments at face value anyways.  If someone links to a stunning portfolio, are you suddenly going to take their advice on how to run your business?  I tend to make posts where I can add fact or information, rather than commenting on other people's business or portofolio.  I'm not here enough to become known, so what is the point of giving my name?  It isn't a secret either, though

Quote from: somethingpretentious on August 05, 2011, 08:15
With their new weekly subscriptions there will only be more and more subs on DT as buyers old credits run out  - smart move from DT to intransparent cut contributors commission and keep a larger cut to them selves...

When I used to calculate the value of credits from the royalties, I was surprised to find that most of my sales come from the 100 or 200 credit pack size.  That still holds true for most of my credit sales.  There has always been a monthly sub that is cheaper than a 200 pack, yet people were still buying those credit packs.  All the evidence we have is anecdotal (since we have no idea if overall sales are up or down, how many of our sales are actually weekly subs, etc.), but one could just as easily argue that the availability of weekly subs will mean fewer monthly subs, and that sub use will go down overall.  There will always be credit sales as people need them for extended licenses, and then they need to use up the rest.

We can be cynical about DT's motives, but if the weekly sub is more attractive than the monthly, they may well be paying out MORE royalties - I have to think someone can make better use of the subscription over a shorter time frame.  Much harder to log in every day for a month and use the whole sub than for a week.  I still think the jury is out on whether a weekly sub is more attractive to a monthly sub buyer, or a credit buyer.  I can see people in both groups who would be attracted by the option, and people in both groups who wouldn't.  The question is how many and in which group.

The proof in the pudding is what happens with RPD and sales.  Since credit packs expire in a year, and subs could expire monthly or yearly, it may be a while before we really know the impact of this change.  Since they brought in the weekly subs, I still haven't had a month that was lower than the previous year for both revenue and RPD - but I can also see that if one is non-exclusive with a lot of level 0 images that would likely be a much different story....

+50% over last July on DT.  Up 35% if you take into account the number of images online...

Quote from: lisafx on July 01, 2011, 15:46
I've done quite a few of the assignments.  I find it worthwhile.  I think it does generate traffic to your portfolio, and also gives you the highest return per image sale you can get.  Not only are they level 5 automatically, but you also get (I believe, but can't find it right now) 60% of the sale. 

So yeah, I think it's a good deal.  And 12 months isn't a long time to commit to unless you are seriously considering artist exclusivity somewhere else. 

Exclusive images get the 55% royalty rate for a non-exclusive contributor: http://www.dreamstime.com/sellimages...

As for the gray checkbox - all exclusive images are now greyed out, not just assignments.  You have to go through support to remove exclusivity from ANY image. You can check it to make an images exclusive, but not the other way around.

That would be a dumb decision on their part - I know I outsell many contributors with portfolios over 5,000 despite having half that many photos.  I think they would be smarter to base it on sales.

To answer your question - I guess I would be purged

Quote from: heywoody on June 24, 2011, 12:28

Quote from: Daevid on June 24, 2011, 11:36
So far this month, Dreamstime is beating iStock for me for the first time. I hope it continues at this pace, because it's making up for my iStock losses.

How is this possible?  I have <7% of my Dreamstime images on IS yet revenue from IS is 75% of Dreamstime 

How would your income at DT compare if you eliminated all but your top selling 7%?

So a quick visit to the agencies that have signed, and without logging in I'm able to download preview images that have no attribution (not just thumbnails, but the layout or comp images).  It is kind of silly to support a code of conduct that you don't actually support in practice, isn't it?  I think including attribution in the downloads or previews is a great idea.

One issue I see with including a minimum royalty (50/50 or whatever) is how subs factor in.  Since the actual royalties paid are determined by how much use is made of the subscription purchased is it kind of tough to promise any minimum royalty on subs.  As a matter of fact, the same is really true of credit packs too.  If you buy a credit pack and use a portion to buy a photo and the contributor gets 50% for that image, but then the buyer ultimately doesn't use the whole pack - contributors didn't really get 50% of what the buyer spent...  Not to mention how contributors who never collect a payout figure into all this

Enough grumbling, though, my one positive suggestion to add to the code of conduct is that in addition to the attribution in downloads, the license terms should also be added.  Especially for something like a one year license from Dreamstime, or an extended print license, etc.