Quote from: Level6 on December 28, 2021, 00:42

Quote from: ppdd on December 28, 2021, 00:25
Pexels is owned by Canva, FWIW

]

Thanks! did not know that, searched their domain registry and last time I looked it came up in Iceland.  either way they have a ton of good video and photos both editorial and commercial and the site is so easy to use, just click, download and done, no sign up required.

So if they are owned by Canva then that's Canva's money losing busing which comes in handy at tax time, it's not abut luring customers to Canva, haven't come across a link yet that lures me to Canva, looks like they run the free site at a loss for tax purposes.

Canva owns Pixabay as well. Getty owns Unsplash. These were all recently acquired for millions of dollars, and not for tax purposes.

Pexels is owned by Canva, FWIW

GL Stock had 3 million image and you could have bought it for 15k. It's a tough business.

Unsplash has some nice posts showing what it costs to run.

You can see that they currently spend about 100,000/month just to host the site.

https://medium.com/unsplash/what-does-unsplash-cost-in-2019-f499620a14d0

This can be done much more cheaply, but it's instructive to see what's out there.

Quote from: Brasilnut on December 01, 2019, 13:03
Within 5 mins I spotted more than dozen thieves proliferating at SS...

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/red-apple-covered-rain-drops-1522140569?src=-1-1

Just follow the peach trail and it will lead you to many accounts that lead to many more into infinity...

In this particular case, that image has been places in the public domain, so selling it is not illegal. But it violates SS terms, I'm sure. So it's not stolen, which is why SS probably isn't that concerned. Original image is probably this: https://pixabay.com/photos/apple-fall-juicy-food-autumn-1122537/

EDIT - Saw your original post. This isn't new information.

GLStock is for sale - not sure how that bodes for getting paid.

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on June 29, 2017, 09:44

Quote from: Spinfield on June 28, 2017, 23:48

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 28, 2017, 20:17
Old thread alert.

Very cute... You got 3 "+" from your fans.

Your first ever post was to call someone a "mother f**ker" and a "dumbass", your fourth to revive a 3 year old thread and your sixth to patronise/ insult one of the main contributors to the forum.

We could be in line for the greatest first ten forum posts ever! Can't wait to see what numbers 7-10 bring!!

Awww, you smushed the troll. All their posts have gone Lorem Ipsum.

This thread is from 2014, FYI.

You guys are putting a lot of effort into giving feedback on a site that is just a referral generator for this guy. He means "TripAdvisor" as in "things in one place" and it's a very incomplete comparison. I'm surprised anyone replied, let alone thoroughly.

Quote from: salparadis on May 04, 2017, 12:26

Quote from: CrFx on May 04, 2017, 12:07
I don't think such website are any reason for decline.
People are sharing images under CC license which flikr, davientart and many others have been doing from years.
Such websites usually have a complicated licensing option.

SS the other end, has a huge customer base of 1.4 million people in 150 countries which still makes it too far from the catch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutterstock

Pixabay offers public domain, CC license is complicated you have to attribute and it's mostly for nonprofit use. And finding suitable picture is much more easier on pixabay than on flickr.

Well, actually the license could not be less complicated. All the images are CC0 public domain, so you can download all you want and do anything you like, even resell and redistribute, with no attribution. There are no complications - maybe you have a typo and we're saying the same thing.

There are two ways to look at this. We live in a world where there are a lot of free images available and there are a lot of people who are interested in using those images, many of whom have never purchased a stock photo and would never consider looking at a paid site. I know we all hate them, but free sites drive literally hundreds of thousands of visitors per day to Shutterstock in exchange for a cut of the purchase. This saves Shutterstock millions of dollars yearly in advertising costs in a very efficient and cost effective customer acquisition strategy.

They've replied to my support ticket with an actual working link, but I'd already logged in with my existing email and password. No change either way - still no useful data.

My invite didn't work, but I could log in with my email (NOT username) and current password at https://esp.gettyimages.com/

I got mine with the "Sorry" subject, but there is nothing in the "Follow your unique link" so there's nothing I can do. Total screwups.

Quote from: Clippn on January 27, 2017, 09:16
Hello LP Productions,

My name is William Hunter. I am a contributor turned brand ambassador for Clippn.
Yes, we take 50% of any of the money we generate for you. The upside is you simply upload the raw footage right off your card of choice and we do the rest.
While we do take 50% I think it's worth mentioning that we also get a better deal with the agencies than a standard contributor.
Please check out https://goo.gl/oYHLpk

Let me know if you have any other questions.

William Hunter
Clippn Brand Ambassador
[email protected]

That link does not work.

Fotolia is Adobe Stock - Adobe bought Fotolia. They operate sort of independently at the moment, but you're dealing with Adobe either way. They do seem to have some of their links and borders scrambled - I think they assume that all contributors started at Fotolia to get to Adobe Stock.

Quote from: Bauman on January 21, 2017, 21:50
Thanks cascoly.

Unfortunately seems that also the cia world factbook requires credits:

"Copyright Notice

Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Central Intelligence Agency Web site is in the public domain and may be reproduced, published or otherwise used without the Central Intelligence Agency's permission. We request only that the Central Intelligence Agency be cited as the source of the information and that any photo credits or bylines be similarly credited to the photographer or author or Central Intelligence Agency, as appropriate."

Where can i find a source of free flag images for microstock ?

It's a request, not a requirement. It's not possible for an image to be in the public domain and have attribution requirements. That's why it's public domain.

Quote from: Pauws99 on January 10, 2017, 18:35

Quote from: rosn123 on January 10, 2017, 16:03
Just found one of my images for sale as a poster for $29.95 on this website https://printmeposter.com/search/christian/1/poster_photo_143389163.html

Is this genuine? How do I know if they've bought the correct licence?

Thanks

Ros

Edit: Apparently they are a partner of Bigstock so all okay.

I thought it might be but how did you find out?

There's a huge BIGSTOCK watermark on the previews.

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on December 14, 2016, 15:21
On all-free-download I got a popup window with a shutterstock thumbnail in it. Clicking you go to SS with a search, and looking at the URL it says the source is:

&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Nguyen%20Duy%20Phi&utm_source=38874

Does that mean that Nguyen Duy Phi is the person behind this portfolio on all-free-download?

Actually, that means that's the affiliate account name (odd that it's a person and not a site) - so that's the account that generates the kickback from the Shutterstock affiliate program and thus probably the person behind all-free-download. You could complain to Shutterstock's Global Director of Affiliate Marketing...

Quote from: steheap on December 01, 2016, 00:59
Angela

For goodness sake - forget this. Forget their email address and its IP, forget the claim, forget this thread. No-one is going to sue you - it costs a fortune and what damages would they expect to get if they even attempted it and were successful - nothing!

Get back to normal life.

Steve

Yes. This is nothing, and you are getting worked up over something you should totally ignore and never think about again.

I believe it's fine to advertise the image for sale, then buy extended licenses as needed and print and deliver the product. This could be totally legit. Right?

They must be caught up in this: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-idUSKCN12L1ME

Quote from: CJH on October 20, 2016, 15:35
Agree, it's in the packaging.   Hung, I suggest you focus more on estimating earnings and less on what has already been spent on the business.   Over-spending (by a lot!) on a domain name that you don't use is not a great advertisement for your business skills.   The estimated value of the salary you didn't take doesn't matter much to investors.  Yes, it demonstrates your committment, but top of everyone's mind will be "What will I get for my $1Mill investment?"  Where are the numbers showing that?  And how solid are the forecasted earnings? Personally, I suspect this market is well-saturated, lacking meaningful barriers to entry, and well into milking the cash cow stage of industry develoment.  But that's just based on casual observation and I could be mistaken.   Good luck.

I don't really know what he was asking for - I think he's saying he's spent $1 million so far and is looking for a co-founder. The co-founder can have experience, connections and expertise that will help the business succeed, which in the end is more valuable than the initial investment. The site is pretty complete and having a co-founder who is good at navigating the VC world would be the most valuable. Canva has $45 million in VC funding, which is a major reason why it's working.

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on October 20, 2016, 15:43

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on October 20, 2016, 15:22
I don't think I have said that once. But I am saying the average user here does not have a million dollars to spare. Still confused?

That's why I asked what you were saying. How much must the AVERAGE user have to spare to warrant looking for investors? Why must the average user have so much money when clearly representatives from Fotolia/Adobe/Videoblocks etc. hang around here checking the forum every week?

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on October 20, 2016, 15:22just being argumentative for the sake of doing so.

Partly true, but the main reason was to point out the belittling and comments like "it's been done" and "the logo has letters and colors, it's too similar".

I'm not defending the pitch, I'm just pointing out the bully attitude against "newbies".

The criticism was getting pointless, yes. Also, the facebook link works just fine for me, and did from the moment it was posted - I have no idea why people can't see it.

I think the introduction was a little strange, but this isn't a terrible place to ask for input or even look for a partner. There are people around with startup experience in the industry and some people with fairly deep connections who can offer input.

Quote from: Kenny on October 19, 2016, 18:48

Quote from: DesignBold on October 19, 2016, 05:09
I don't deny that we are very much inspired by Canva. But there is one important thing: we have a difference business model. We are trying to create more beautiful templates and try to become a marketplace for designers & marketers.

Canva's already in the marketplace for designers, marketers, and more.

Canva already offers beautiful templates:  https://www.canva.com/templates/invitations/halloween-party/

It also appears you're inspired by Google:

You guys are getting ridiculous. Yes, geometric sans serif and colors, like many, many logos. You should know better.

There is space for several vendors in the marketplace, I'm sure.