Quote from: ShadySue on November 24, 2015, 23:12

Quote from: Monty-m-gue on November 24, 2015, 22:10
Fortunately, there *are* some stock agencies that want to distance themselves from this kind of deceptive behaviour and create sustainable business practices for both agency and photographer. Feed them, starve the charlatans.

Care to name names (of those with open access).

I'm not sure there are many with open access, I'm afraid  (with the exception of perhaps Pond 5 and maybe GL). The agencies that are providing a sustainable future tend select their contributors diligently and curate their collections with great care. They also offer minimum 50% royalties (yes, iStock, that is both possible and sustainable). I see a future where crowd sourced agencies continue to erode royalties whilst talented contributors gravitate away from them and towards the agencies that *are* working to create a sustainable future. The better paying clients will increasingly follow the more talented contributors whilst the crowd sourcing agencies will continue to dilute their own ponds with more of the same...

Quote from: op on November 24, 2015, 22:02

Quote from: stockastic on November 24, 2015, 18:41
It's not much different than a subscription; the whole idea is to get the real money in upfront 'fees' which contributors never see, then pay royalties on a token  'sale price'.    If you're at an agency and your conscience bothers you for more than a moment, just say that buyers are really paying for search functionality, not imagery.  Eventually I think some agencies will stop using the word "royalty" altogether. 

There's nothing we can do except stop giving our work to companies that operate like this.

And what to do when stock companies copy what the others do and all end up doing the same thing?..

Fortunately, there *are* some stock agencies that want to distance themselves from this kind of deceptive behaviour and create sustainable business practices for both agency and photographer. Feed them, starve the charlatans.

Quote from: jjneff on November 24, 2015, 02:15
This is a fact I have been exclusive there since 2006. This program is confirmed.

...and it's definitely the case that Getty keeps 100% of the fee that clients pay to be part of the programme - and only pass on a royalty based on the sale of the heavily discounted license..?

Quote from: stockmn on November 23, 2015, 18:07

Quote from: jjneff on November 23, 2015, 11:27
To be fair the $6 is a promotion of some kind not all 4k or HD is that low. That being said 18 out of my 28 Dl's in Oct. were below $20.00. I have a few at really good prices but those 1 and 6 dollar sales kill me.

It's called Premium Access. It's where large companies pay getty $$$ upfront every year to be able to license a large quantity of images or footage at highly reduced rates. G keeps all the money upfront and pays the contributor their contractual royalty percentage on very small dollar amount sales. They've been doing this for years and it blows. It's just a way to payout less to contributors.

^ Is this true? Is this how Getty does business? Is this a known fact or speculation? Does anyone have any evidence to support this assertion..??

He's with Stocksy.

Quote from: nuno on November 10, 2015, 18:08
To clarify:
There's a minimum price agreement with each of the distributors that factors in the distributor's share so our photographers will continue to see comparable payouts to what they've come to expect from 500px even after the distributor's share. There is no maximum price guarantee and early reports are indicating some great royalties for our contributors.

There is no villainous intent. Quite a few of us have worked or been photographers in the business for a while which is why when we started looking at these partnerships they were for very strategic reasons with very specific requirements. As mentioned, it's an opportunity for us to work with sales and marketing teams all over the world who know their regions better than we ever will and expand our photographers reach by working with a single agency.

Hi Nuno, can you say who these partners are?

$5 - that's a joke. I'm out.

more 0.29 SOD's rolling in today.... just as 0.36 FB SOD's have dried up. Coincidence..?

Some 0.29 sales here over the previous couple of days too. No explanation. Come on SS we expect better of you.

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on October 16, 2015, 18:55

Quote from: Monty-m-gue on October 16, 2015, 18:53
it's a bit of a joke expecting *anywhere* to take and sell 'sloppy seconds' these days.

not on the micros. never has been an editing process and never will be.

Yeah, whatever.

it's a bit of a joke expecting *anywhere* to take and sell 'sloppy seconds' these days.

I see about as much 'name calling and swearing' in this thread as I see accuracy in your review of Adobe Stock.

Quote from: anathaya on September 24, 2015, 10:37
Anyone else getting many SODs of $0.66? I don't where they come from, but I got some today and yesterday.

I got one yesterday. Never had one before.

Jeff, did you receive an email from them telling you how 'rad' your work is..?

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on September 03, 2015, 11:44
Don't forget this guy.  He's added even more!
http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

He was obviously stoned when he came up with the idea...

Yep, it's September - the traditional time for initiatives and innovation. Adobe have put their cards on the table. Istock, you're up next...

This just in from Adobe / Fotolia:
   
"As you know, Adobe acquired Fotolia earlier this year and later launched Adobe Stock, a stock image service integrated into Adobe Creative Cloud. As a result your images are now available to the world's largest creative community.

We're pleased with the early adoption of the product and we're happy to see that many of you have already shared your feedback of increased sales.

We will be running a promotion from September 1st to September 20th to further ensure that your images are receiving the maximum amount of exposure to potential new clients and to accelerate awareness of the site.

For a limited time, we will be offering a 50% discount on all single images purchased, £2.99 per image instead of the usual £5.99.

We wanted to inform you that, regardless of this discount occurring, your commission will be unaffected and you will continue to generate royalties at the current rate.

Many thanks
Fotolia/Adobe Stock Team"

Quote from: Painter on August 13, 2015, 14:01

Quote from: Monty-m-gue on August 13, 2015, 13:46
Maybe a stupid question - but how do you know if you've got an image in a 'for-sale' layout?

On the list of sales it says you got a sale of "your image id" via "Canva layout id".

Thank you.

Maybe a stupid question - but how do you know if you've got an image in a 'for-sale' layout?

It wouldn't surprise me to find Canva doing a deal with one of the Big 4 to use the images direct from them - cut out the expense and hassle of ingesting our work into their collection. We, of course, would get a fraction of a fraction of a royalty...

Image sold yesterday. Now "unavailable". grrrrrrr....

It seems to me that whatever Canva's opaque deletion policy is - it doesn't match with what buyers actually want. Like Jo Ann, Canva seem to be targeting my best selling work for the chop but are leaving swathes of material that doesn't sell on Canva - or any other site for that matter. It really is puzzling and infuriating.

Quote from: Daisy on July 30, 2015, 23:01
Aaron,

Please answer the main question:
Will you be increasing your royalty rate accordingly?

Aaron,

Please answer this question which - until now - you have studiously ignored.

Aaron, where are you?

...and you're going to match the fairer royalty split of your competitors, right? In each and every case?? Otherwise this policy is quite simply not good for contributors.