We contributors are so lonely. We can't punch the table and say NO! So the agencies keep abusing this. Normally businesses buy or produces what they sell. Microstock agencies don't do this. They just do the PR, take our works and sell. And what they get for this is 85%.. what!?

I do both photos and vectors. I'm traveling, waiting for hours for the right scene, right light, dogging precious moments, buying the best equipments, 5 grant dollar camera, expensive lenses, filters, studio equipment, studio itself, drawing tablet, generating arts, drawing, sketching, re-drawing, following trends, trying to create what people need and guess what they might need in the future, improving myself and investing money on it.. typing titles, descriptions and loads of keywords which is the biggest pain in the a*s and i have to do it for each file i create, thousands.. i mean i do a whole lotta work and the agency tells me my work is just 1-dollar worth no matter what size and sometimes my work is cheap because it's simple (the stupidest thing ever but, let's say ok..) and give me god * fifteen per cent??!!! with no expenses from their sides..

I don't know if you guys have special agreements or something but I feel abused and there is nobody to say "what the fck are you doing" to the agencies taking the prices and our percentages down and down each day.

I'm sure some you will proudly throw their sarcasm on me now. And I'm really sick of reading "like it or leave it" attitude here.

Quote from: Ploink on August 28, 2014, 18:04

Quote from: HypnoCreative on August 28, 2014, 17:18
SS is a good seller but somehow, with many big or small reasons, I do not completely trust the company.

Have you met the other players yet?

Yeah, 5 years ago.

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on August 16, 2014, 15:30

Quote from: panicAttack on August 16, 2014, 13:54
Yes, it can happen.

I take photos for about 5 years, not very long time but I do believe I'm getting better. On stock sites I am about 2-3 years.

I had about 70-80% acceptance rate for a long time, but last few months according to Shutterstock reviewers I totally forgot how to shoot and edit my photos. My last few batches, acceptance rate is about 10 -15 %. Mostly focus, lighting issues and composition.

But according to most other sites like Fotolia, 123rf, Dreamstime (ok, and IStock too, but it isn't very relevant because of their too high acceptance rate) I am still getting better.

Strange.

I don't remember when I began to take photos, maybe I was 10 or 12 y.o.
But I remember that I work as a professional for more than 35 years now.
And yes, despite my few experience, it happens that I get some "crazy" rejections from Shutterstock.
When I don't agree with that I just upload the images again or, if I have some real doubt, I ask to their contributor service what is the real problem.
Most of the time the images get accepted if they are good (or not so bad).

*By the way I don't think that there is any matter to open the 127th thread about "the bad Shutterstock inspectors"...


*Whistling...

Beppe, ach sheli, is there an emotional relationship between you and SS? You oppose all critics towards SS in an almost aggressive way.. Strange. Makes me think SS favors -some- contributors.

SS is a good seller but somehow, with many big or small reasons, I do not completely trust the company.

Quote from: FD on November 30, 2011, 05:11
The doll is of course copyrighted since you didn't design/make it and it's the main focus of the image. No experienced stocker would dare to shoot/upload commercial objects unless editorially.
The smiley is an exact copy of the Yahoo smiley and available on many emoticon sites, even as vectors. You can't piggyback on their success unless it would be blurred somewhere in the background.
Just try to upload original work, like models with a proper release. If you upload other's people creative efforts you'll get a reputation as a bottom-feeder.

Hugo, so you designed/made the main focus of these images and the objects are not commercial or they are submitted editorially?

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-hands-playing-cards-image14947480

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-image-laptop-beach-image347301

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-tall-modern-office-building-image240132

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photo-mountain-bike-beach-image372105

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photography-call-support-center-gear-image3604637

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-teen-emo-punk-global-power-image4172918

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-images-aircraft-landing-landing-lights-image218539

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-arabic-abstract-building-interior-image685422

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-asian-tricycle-image4672010

These are only from the first page of your portfolio. Are you sure you really mean what you are saying?

It's a useless feature.

Depositphotos has one of the worst contributor support among all!.. Contact them and pray for a response every night before you go to bed.. That's how it works.

Quote from: ShadySue on January 21, 2013, 01:10

Quote from: HypnoCreative on January 21, 2013, 01:07

Quote from: ShadySue on January 21, 2013, 00:26
Why put logo into keywords of that sort of image, if it can't actually be used as a logo?

Because a logo isn't only used as a corporate graphic mark, there are other meanings too.. and a stock image can partly be used in a corporate logo with minor or major revisions, additions and so on, just as long as it is purchased with the right license. a regular credit or subscription download does not cover this kind of use.

besides, some of my designs i found on google being used as a corporate logo do not have the keyword "logo" on the stock sites.

It can only be partly used in a corporate logo if that is allowed by the t&c of a particular site, if any allow it.

You would have to find out which site the corportation got the logo from, check that site's t&c, and take it from there.

I actually do so. I contact the company, kindly ask for a proof that they "purchased" the image first explaining that I am the creator of it. Some of them get back with a screenshot of their downloaded items including my work. The result is usually that they downloaded it on a subscription plan which cost them less than a dollar bill. It's kinda weird. Even for the company because they use it as it was created along with hundreds of others.

Let's say they download it from depositphotos which allows us to sell vectors with these keywords. But a regular download has limits in using areas and I do not think it covers using a vector as the unique logo of a company while you have to buy higher licenses even for print-only or multiple use.

I am making a research including the agencies and I wanted to hear your thoughts and experiences too, if any. I am not really desperately seeking help Not to be confused!

Quote from: ShadySue on January 21, 2013, 00:26
Why put logo into keywords of that sort of image, if it can't actually be used as a logo?

Because a logo isn't only used as a corporate graphic mark, there are other meanings too.. and a stock image can partly be used in a corporate logo with minor or major revisions, additions and so on, just as long as it is purchased with the right license. a regular credit or subscription download does not cover this kind of use.

besides, some of my designs i found on google being used as a corporate logo do not have the keyword "logo" on the stock sites. 

Quote from: Pauws99 on January 20, 2013, 23:17
I guess it would be risky - presumably if some other organisation decided to use the logo too they couldn't do anything about it?

I think logos and icons will always have their places in microstock market. the problem starts when an individual or a corporate decides to use a microstock vector as a brand logo. Because as you said, any other individual or corporate might want to do the same, maybe thousands of them... It's not the vector or the designer to be blamed in such a case. The definitions of using fields are clearly indicated in both contributor and buyer agreements.

So.. can we say it is illegal to use a stock vector as a brand logo even if it was purchased with a distribution or a multi-seat (or any other) licenses since the nature of a brand logo must be unique to those who own the rights to it?

There are stock logo sites too. They sell the logos just once and once it's sold, they remove the logo from their libraries which sounds logical since it's clearly defined that the sites sell logos for business and the businesses buy it for the same purpose. The regular microstock agencies do not work like this. Some offer the full rights to the images but still, the image might be sold several times before.

Any other thoughts?

Quote from: Hannafate on January 20, 2013, 19:32
No.

That doesn't keep people from doing it, of course.

No to?

Quote from: sjlocke on January 20, 2013, 17:13
It sounds like you are complaining you don't get paid enough for your file?

I complain that the buyers do not want to buy proper licenses. Most of them download files by subscription and they use them knowing no boundaries. and in this case, as a logo especially. it's a huge question mark how to follow up who's buying what and whether they use the downloaded image in legal conditions.

I believe very few people buy images in correct licenses.

This question might sound a bit stupid but before I start digging in the agency policies, I wanted to ask you guys.

People download an icon set or single icon and sometimes we name and keyword them as a logo too. but the word "logo" doesn't only mean a business logo. personally, i design many business logo templates, even as a full brand identity set. and the agencies accept to sell them in this manner. but is it legal to download it with a subscription plan, for a few cents and use it as a brand logo? Because a brand logo must be unique to the owner. But this way, hundreds of people use one design as their logo. the same logo, different business names. on the other hand, don't they have to purchase these files with a proper license like distribution or something? they use it everywhere!!! web, print, products, packaging.. wherever a logo can be used..

i made a simple google image search with some of my best selling logo designs and i found many results with my designs used for different businesses but almost none of them have been sold in a proper license. most of them are sold by subscription. it just sounds weird. both for the designer and the buyer.

i'd like to hear your thoughts and what you know about this subject. thanks!!

crestock is such a waste of time. it's much of a better idea to spend that time creating new stuff. i stopped uploading there long ago

Quote from: jsnover on December 22, 2012, 18:03

Quote from: HypnoCreative on December 21, 2012, 10:39

Quote from: Morphart on November 29, 2012, 01:48
On my side, selling mostly (95%) Illustrations on Canstock, they are my second best seller after Shutterstock, which means (for Illustration, and for me) they are doing incredibly well.

I have heard also the same from other Illustrators.

I always wondered how illustrations like in your portfolio can be sold as stock. Do you hold the copyrights to these engravings?

Copyrights expire. If the work is demonstrably old enough and the copyright is expired, you can scan a print and own the copyright to the scan. You'll see old engravings from various contributors at all the agencies

But it's such a blurry situation. Who will decide who scanned them first? Being the first uploader to a site makes you the new copyright holder? What if someone else uploaded it to another site before you or what if someone else scanned them years before you and used them somewhere else?

I think I was lucky. When I first stepped in, I uploaded around 50 files and got a couple of downloads the very next day. But you never know what happens at first. Usually it takes time for a portfolio to gain recognition. Just be patient and you'll see some downloads soon. And of course, the famous returned sales too The worst thing about depositphotos...

Quote from: fotografer on December 21, 2012, 10:33

Quote from: HypnoCreative on December 21, 2012, 10:24

Quote from: fotografer on December 21, 2012, 10:11
I think that it is only reasonable to give a refund is if the image quality is bad which is highly unlikely except for the occasional very old image or that they have now bought a larger version.

I think it would be still unreasonable because if an agency accepts to sell an image, there must be a quality standard. Once they accept it, they confirm that the image is of required quality. Most of my returned sales are vectors, icon or logo sets especially. There is no size or another technical problem. I guess a few -smart- guys have discovered a way to obtain premium images for free and they are using it hard or DP simply steals money from contributors since they can't even show any document about the transactions.

Either way, poor us...

That's why I said the occasional old image.  Some sites still have images that were uploaded befor 2005 and some of them are probably quite bad quality.  DP hasn't been around long enough for that.

My oldest image is 3 years old. Besides, file age shouldn't be a problem once it was reviewed, accepted, found and purchased. Moreover, I have almost none returned sales on any other agencies. These returned files are usually my top selling images, yet they love appearing in my DP returned sales table a lot.

Quote from: Morphart on November 29, 2012, 01:48
On my side, selling mostly (95%) Illustrations on Canstock, they are my second best seller after Shutterstock, which means (for Illustration, and for me) they are doing incredibly well.

I have heard also the same from other Illustrators.

I always wondered how illustrations like in your portfolio can be sold as stock. Do you hold the copyrights to these engravings?

Quote from: fotografer on December 21, 2012, 10:11
I think that it is only reasonable to give a refund is if the image quality is bad which is highly unlikely except for the occasional very old image or that they have now bought a larger version.

I think it would be still unreasonable because if an agency accepts to sell an image, there must be a quality standard. Once they accept it, they confirm that the image is of required quality. Most of my returned sales are vectors, icon or logo sets especially. There is no size or another technical problem. I guess a few -smart- guys have discovered a way to obtain premium images for free and they are using it hard or DP simply steals money from contributors since they can't even show any document about the transactions.

Either way, poor us...

Quote from: luissantos84 on December 21, 2012, 02:52
sorry but I had a good laugh reading this not of you but the way you emailed them writing so well asking very good and well structured questions, anyway and again they can pull whatever they wish and we can't do anything, I have a few returned sales with them too and that goes around all agencies beside SS...

so far 34 from 1285 sales

That day, I got 6 returned sales (around 30 dollars).. and a few more on the following days.

I really didn't believe the story that the operator told me and in their last message, she told me there was no documents existing. what would you think?

It's also strange that the live chat operators have almost no idea about specific issues and they just direct you to someone else but the first operator had a very interesting story to tell me. Besides, she ended the conversation before I was finished. She must have been a bit worried.

I have 52 returned sales so far. Many of them are credit sales.

Hey guys,

If you submit to DP, I'm sure you are experiencing the same problem. Huge volume of returned sales!

First I connected to live chat and the operators were quite unhelpful and sometimes blatant! They said I should contact my personal manager about this issue and I didn't know there was such a person until then. After some unnecessary robot talk, they finally told me my personal manager will contact me soon yet it took about 10 days and a couple of emails that I was still waiting for her to contact me.

Then the miracle happened and she contacted me.

That's exactly what I wrote to her:

Hello .....,
I'm indicating my questions in numbers and would like have answers for each.

1-What is a returned sale?

2-In what circumstances can a buyer return their purchases?

3-How do you make sure the buyer doesn't copy the image on his computer and return it in order to get his money back? Is it really possible to return a photograph or vector image after download? Because if so, I can download everything and return it later like everyone else. This is weird.

4-Please see attached to view my returned sales in 5 days. How come does this occur so often and intense while the other agencies sell a lot more than depositphotos with no returned sales at all? What difference does depositphotos have?

5-When the returned sales on 5th occurred, I connected to live chat and  the operator told me that the buyer used a stolen credit card. When it was discovered, the sales were canceled and the money was returned to the real owner of the credit card. Well.. I want to see the official documents of this incident, along with the other returned sales because honestly, I do not believe it. All I can see is that my money was (and still is) taken back from me by depositphotos with NO EXPLANATIONS at all. This is important. I want to see the sheets that proves this story wasn't made up to justify the money taken back from my account. I want reasonable explanations with proofs, not robotic sentences.

Thank you

--

reply:

Dear .....,

thank you for the prompt response.

I will gather all the information, and will email you tomorrow.

Thank you for your patience in this frustrating situation.

----

4 days later:

Dear .....,

I apologize for taking so long.
We have received the Technical Dept. response confirming that there are no system issues with your account.

Here are the promised answers:
3. It is obvious that nobody can keep it under control. I hope you understand that a buyer who did not even get a refund can share an image with his friend, for example; but there is no way for them to use suck images legally. Therefore, if a buyer returned his/her money, they have no rights for commercial or any other use, and you can even file a lawsuit. In this case, you may also ask us for the confirmation.
4. All the files for that period were returned by the same buyer. As for the second part of your question, unfortunately I do not have this kind of information about the other stock agencies. Therefore, I am unable to give you an answer.
5. There is no way to get the real proof of the returned transactions. We have contacted the bank to ask for the document that proves it, but they have rejected our request due to the confidentiality of their clients' information. 

----

what do you guys think?