Just uploaded a few. Their uploader doesn't read caption or keywords making this a very labor intensive process. Jeeez!

If you are focused on stock uploads, you can make it easy for yourself. The caption and "albums" you enter haven't been transferred to Getty. Instead, the selected images are keyworded externally as it appears. So spending too much effort on this step yourself seems a waste of time.

Not sure if/how this would change with the addition of Alamy now. But considering that EyeEm is sourcing mainly from their community members who have no idea about keywording for stock, I would expect they keep that part to themselves.

I didn't get that email too (yet).
 Is that retroactive? (The photos already in the eyeem getty collection become non-exclusive or non-exclusivity is only for the new images?)

I was asked to confirm the new distribution agreement for all images selected for the "EyeEm Collection" which contains all the images selected for EyeEm x Getty in the past.

Hi All,
I've an important question here, I am new into the stock world and I've been following the theft reports on this forum. By any means, is it possible that your work matches with someone ACCIDENTALLY and they report you based on assumption that it is stolen?

Thank you!

If you have 500 images in your portfolio, and 1 of them is very, very similar to someone else's, it is unlikely to get reported (or being followed up by the agency).

If you have 50 images and 20 are "accidentally" very similar to other people's works... well, how accidental is that?

And reports are typically not for "very similar" but "(almost) exactly the same". Doing a concept that someone else has already done in the past is not uncommon and unlikely to get reported. Just do it your own way.

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 08, 2016, 14:25

You should do it privately, since if you put it on IS, someone can't use it as a logo.

Sean, thanks a lot for your advice. I assume that the buyer will only use the image as a part of the logo, since I personally will not want my image to become someone's trademark or registered trademark. I will ask. Thanks for pointing that out.

Any suggestions as to pricing?

Very hard to make a guess for someone else given that no one knows the amount of work, the specifics of the image, the customer, the license terms etc.

If you want a blind guess: Not below four digits. Somewhere in the range of $3,000 - $5,000 is not unheard of if we are talking about a serious business. Obviously that will be heavily overpriced if we are talking about the local public library in your village.

I am however missing one of the key metrics: How many times is a stock photo (on average) purchased over its lifetime?

Is it safe to assume that for an enthusiast photographer the average number of downloads per image is 5?

Some may reach 50 or even 100+ downloads, but some or bulk of the photos will not sell at all or just 2-3 times.
 
Is 5 downloads on average per image as "lifetime" download too low or high?

I'd say that's not an unrealistic assumption.

But only if you upload images that meet the market's needs. I do know stock beginners who get about 1 download per month for each 100 images they upload. That wouldn't even add up to an average of 1 download/image if their sales stay consistent for eight years which is unlikely. New images disappear into the back of the searches quickly these days if they don't get downloaded.

Our images are exposed to the same buyers as Offset's through Shutterstock Premier. Just sayin'.

Maybe you are confusing things? There is Offset, it's a separate site where buyers can register and purchase the images shown in the Offset collection only. Those buyers won't see the Shutterstock images. There certainly is an overlap in buyers between the main Shutterstock site and Offset, though, I am sure.

Then there is Shutterstock Premier, an offer for the higher end buyers on the main Shutterstock site who need special licensing. Those buyers will get to see the main Shutterstock images and a hand selected Shutterstock Premier collection (not sourced from the main collection but also not the Offset images). I am not sure if they also see the Offset collection in there but that is an option.

But Premier and Offset is most definitely not the same thing.

Quote

Envato is responsible for determining, collecting and remitting VAT for all Envato Market purchases from EU buyers.

Quote

Envato will report the VAT collection and remittance to the relevant EU member state authorities using our EU MOSS VAT registration.

sounds good but then:

Quote

For clarity, EU VAT is not reported in the author�s name, and we do not require author VAT registration numbers or details.

From:
https://help.market.envato.com/hc/en-us/articles/204416900?_ga=1.81029911.1024980761.1450428179

I dont know if it is possible/legal and the contributor not having to pay more VAT in his own name.
What do youb think is that legal for european contributors?

With all other agencies, this is quite normal: They are selling their product to a EU citizen, then they have to charge the appropriate VAT and send it to the tax offices. That's what already happens for years with Fotolia, iStock, Shutterstock... I am a supplier to a non-EU company. This doesn't fall under VAT requirements. I only have to charge VAT for products/services sold within the EU.

So all of this would affect me only if the contract was a direct contract between me and the end customer. For example, when I sell things on Ebay, they are just offering the platform but the sale is still between me and the customer. So I have to care about VAT requirements.

Interessant, dass ab und zu so alte Beitr�ge wieder auftauchen. Ich stelle aber fest, dass ich hier auch noch gar nicht drin war. 

Halb deutsch (halb Schweizer), seit ein paar Jahren in Berlin zu Hause. 

Maybe you should ask your questions to the "Selling Stock" site. They are an industry news provider who do a lot of research and answer this type of questions.

Obviously they are asking you to pay a few dollars for the research work they are doing on each article but I guess it's worth it.

(*sarcasm mode off* and going back to do my own job now)

http://press.gettyimages.com/wetransfer-launches-new-api-with-istock-by-getty-images-as-their-inaugural-api-partner

Can someone buy my file and transfer it to who ever right from iStock? I thought dropbox had this covered. Is this a need for
the buying community?

The person with the access/money/budget is not necessarily the same person as the one using the file. Imagine the marketing guy picking the image but the graphic designer needs to integrate it into the brochure.

So I guess many downloaded files are being send over email these days already. I can see why and how it happens (and how it still is legal). So why not make it a step easier?

Well but all that aside, I guess it's primarily a mutual marketing agreement between Getty and WeTransfer. Customers from both services get to know the other. Quite common.

I should think thet stocksy makes you exclusive and certainly the client will want exclusivity.

The client does not necessarily want exclusivity. But Stocksy can offer it at a special price (usually in the thousands) because the images are exclusively with them. It's an additional offer that most microstock sites can not offer. If the client is willing to pay for that, a single image sale will make you more than a thousand subscription downloads on Shutterstock, and that's probably a rare sight these days.

June-Dec, 2016

https://www.stockperformer.com/blog/interview-series-brianna-wettlaufer-co-founder-and-ceo-of-stocksy/

She doesn't say 2016 in there. She just mentions the Call To Artists as it is right now and the numbers that were received during that period in the past. Though I would not assume it will start again earlier next year, I would also not take this as an assurance it will open again in June.

There were a few people here using a Panasonic FZ1000 for video. I'm wondering what you think of the quality of the HD video with it's low bitrate. Is it good enough for stock? (I know 4K is the main selling point, but I'm more interested in the quality of the slo motion available in the HD mode).

I just bought one yesterday. The 4k was obviously a key point but I'll certainly play around with slow motion and the built in timelapse feature. Curious to find out myself. The results I have looked at so far are promising. I have few doubts that I'll get good material out of it, even on HD. At the end it's probably mostly not a question of "can it" but "which light conditions do I need to make it work".