MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - aetb

Pages: [1] 2 3
VideoBlocks / Re: Storyblocks - any signs of life?
« on: August 19, 2019, 21:14 »
If you were the company and want people to migrate to the market place - would you not reduce the commission to motivate contributors to make the switch ?
I would.
That piss me off however !

I said.... are you serious ?!

They are - I hate people like that.....
I could probably sue them because of the stress and time they cost me.

Thank you all for you help.
I don't khow how illegal it could be to take pictures through the porthole of the wings+logo when there was at the same time a photo competition on Instagram organized by the same company... asking people to take in photo of what they see through that dirty plastic & scratched window.
They accuse me of selling the image and to used their brand like if they were one of my clients... which when you understand and read what editorial mean... you can't accuse a photographer the above. They don't accuse me for the picture I took, but for the usage I did with.

They asked me to remove the images - what I did... And they ask me to contact the clients to stop using the images... what I can't !
Also (and the most impossible): they want me to agree that what I did was illegal - which is not. I understand they don't feel good knowing people to make money with their brand, BUT... illegal... nope.

I just want this to close, images removed... I hope I won't have to deal with the court since this is a big waste of time and money. Oh and they ask 20 000$ per image used (25 images) which is again ridiculous.


What I understand is that an employee got recognized a the Reader's Digest post explaining 15 thing that you must not do on a plane. Curiously enough, there is no mention of taking pictures ;)
"Dont argue" it saids.

However... The poster referred to images inside the plane of the staff and images through the window. Unless you were give permission to take and sell images on the private property of the airline, then you have no legal right to place the images for sale under any sort of license. You can't sell an editorial license for an image that you didn't have permission to take in the first place. Taking a plane from a private airport (and some are privately owned and operated I believe) may fall into the same category although less risky.


So waht you are saying is that there is a risk to actually do what site allow you to do ?
... and sell it...
What I did was to take some picture from inside the plane during the traveling. Pictures are allowed... selling them... who ask ?!
Fact is that I think someone did not use those images as editorial like it should and Air Canada (the copany) are upset about it.
The fact is that the bad usage of those image is not my problem as I undersand.

Hello !
I don't get it. A big Airline company is sending me an e-mail about images sold and used by whoever with their staff and logos. I DID and have those images in my folio marked as editorial and accepted by Shutterstock. I did 35$ out of it so I'm not planning on keeping thoses images Online BUT I was wondering... Does all companies can simply working with the fear and thretning contributors with big amount of money to be paid if they don't remove the images from all agencies, etc ?

Seriously ?
I feel bad removing them cuz that mean all the editorial content is just a matter of the company asking the images to be removed or not.

Images a a mix of airplanes. Inside, outside, the wing with the logo and the Sun... porthole, etc. >:(

General Stock Discussion / Re: Selling Exclusive Right?
« on: November 02, 2018, 21:17 »
Same here... yesterday for 1500$
I don't like that...

I'm I alone... are they really buying images and so they can rule the stock world without us ?
Story block asked me the same last year.
I never said yes, but they are talking about a decent amount of money now... 1500$ is a lot seriously !

Here is the message:

Dear (my name)

I am happy to notify you that we are interested in buying all rights to image "123456whatever" in your portfolio on behalf of our client.

For this offer to proceed, I would like to know the following from you:

1. Are you interested in a full copyright transfer of this image to Shutterstock for (a minimum) of $1500.00 commission? (Client is looking at 1yr, 2yr, and indefinite exclusivity.  $1500 would be the least amount of the payout for 1 year)

2. Where else is the image available and for how long has it been available at those agencies? (If terms are finalized, the image and similars will need to be removed from all other agencies, including Shutterstock)

3. Are there similar images in addition to and that we need to be aware of? If yes, please explain where the similars are and how many exist total. This offer is time sensitive so please confirm whether or not you are interested in this offer as soon as possible. I look forward to hearing from you.

Did they regain my trust completely? No. After all, they deliberately cut our commissions, broke their initial promise and tried to pass it off as a good thing. That means they are either incompetent (i.e. their business plan wasn't sound to begin with) or greedy, or both. The damage is already done and I'll never look the same at them again.

Think about it, they must have discussed different scenarios before implementing the commission cut. Did the backlash really surprise them? I find that hard to believe. Maybe this was part of their cunning masterplan; cut commissions, wait for a backlash and then proceed with new pricing to make us feel heard.

And apparently it works. Contributors are slowly accepting the new situation: SB profits, we lose money but still continue to upload. Well played SB, well played.

Yup !
That's why I took the time to explain my opinion in details.
I had to stop uploading since the last 6 months and I got that e-mail... then got here and saw that post of happy people !
I was kinda shocked and went to read the whole story and yes - that looks like a master plan well organized to me.
Whatever what's the result. I have to said that asking 25% at first would have been more acceptable than 50% in one shot.
Anyways... we all loose money and they will start making millions.

Hey guys... I'm not saying they are lying about the fact that it's unsustainable at 100% comission.
What I mean is more than that... it's that their plan was maybe already taught.

Let me explain it properly and if you don't understand it's because I'm not clear.
You can believe me or not - I'm not always right in life.

So... imagine you want to start a new stock company. - and that you have the budget to make low profit for more than a year. Would it be a good idea to give 100% commission to contributors and then make sure to have all the footage quick and from all around the world. Contributors would also refer their clients since they get 100% commission ! Would that be nice !? What IF that was the plan and it was also the plan that AFTER beeing the fastest growing stock video company - they start making money like others !!. Imagine if their plan was to sell videos at 79$ and get 50% commission from day one. It's politics then... you remove something to the mobs, your sad... you said you make sacrifices - then they are not happy, so you give a little more then they are happy.

What I think it that since day one, they wanted to get 50% commission of 79$ video stock clips. They did some politics... some kind of emotional negotiation with you. If you would not said anything, they would probably keep their clips at 49$... maybe not even since NOW they have the clients... NOW they have all the contributors ! So why having low prices... ? They can do like big players now !

I just hope I'm wrong - but let assume... if you start a new stock video company today - you could do exactly the same thing and it would work - or at least, you would get some contributors uploading at start.

The original Storyblocks 100% commission rate was great while it lasted but ultimately unsustainable. Cutting commission by 50% but not raising prices was unfair to contributors and damaging to the market. By keeping commissions at 50% but raising prices to market standards, a balance has been struck and commission dollars are good.

So they got that huge amount of footage and contributors to become just like others right after.
That was for sure par of the plan since the start... anyways - 50% of 49$ is not cool... I get it now.
I just did not see that they were going to do that move.

... I don't want to make people angry... but I still feel that Storyblock has sucessfully stop giving 100% comission and contributors are happpy with that.
If they would decided in one day to raise the prices and then take 50% everyone would be pissed - but because they "negociated" you seems all proud of what you got. Foor me Storyblock just became like other companies.


1. We make more per sale than under their first plan, and that change is wholly due to contributor feedback.
... sure... just not that first point.
Like I said it's about 7$ drop per sale.

So we earn 50% of 79$ istead of 100% of 49$
With the fees and everything.. that mean 35.55$ instead of 42.44$
and you guys find it's a good idea ?
Probably I don't get it at some point.

I get all of this... but honestly - since I'm uploading stock, I've only had increase in sales. Maybe for some months it has been a little slow (like july and december for me)... but then this July is equivalent of the july of 2013 when I had 1/3 of the images & footage of today.
... but hey that's not all... March was my best month ever... of this year.
So there is really something that happened.
60% drop in 4 months.

Imagine if you loose 60% of anything ... you would ask questions !

Other agencies are going stable........ reason why I'm not uploading is that I'm starting a kombucha company... and that takes lot of time - and I'm counting on my stock revenu to have decent amount of money for that company start-up.
So you can imagine.

Shutterstock is 30% of my total income... remove 60% of it... that's a 20% budget cut.

As the title said... I am doing 40% of what I was doing 4 months ago. That also mean that I'm now doing the same revenu as what I was doing in 2014 ! with half of the footage and images uploaded. Is it really possible that just by not uploading Shutterstock algorithm drom the value of the entire folio ?
I don't understand...
I have about 7000 files which include 2000 videos.
Major major drop. and it's droping every months.
I've just uploaded 100 new images since I'm worried and will find the time to upload videos soon but hey - if I'm not uploading it's because I'm on an other project that needs that cash flow !
What . !
By chance other agencies are crushing well during this rough moment.
So - anyone experiencing a major drop like that ?

My revenue drop of 50% in 3 months on shutterstock...
What is happening ?!

What I mean is... since I withdraw from Paypal to my Canadian money bank, I have to paid for a conversion fee. If I was able to withdraw in the same canadian bank, but in US money I would paid the BANK fee that are smaller than Paypal fees for converting US to Canadian currency.

Or any better idea for any Canadian people to avoid fees !
At the end of the year, I find I'm giving away LOTS of freaking cash to Paypal... seriously... that's a professional lens every year :(
any suggestion ?

editing: I've tried to create a US currency account at my bank, but Paypal was not able to make the link to that account... somehow, they love making money.

ShadySue is right, the search function doesn't behave as expected. I often get a 'No result found...' page, and annoying loading bars. If I do get results, there is very little content.

And once you search for something, sports for example, and go to the home page, it loads sports, not the home page. https://www.stockiste.com and yes it always says, content not found, then starts the spinning circle, every time you go to any page. Very weak collection. It looks more like a personal site.

That's why they gives hard drive if you upload...
I mean... htey need stock to make money and they certainly know it :P
I got my drive and just wanted to share it with you. - if some have an account already - just upload 500+ images and wait the drive to come by mail. :D

Hmmm, nothing here about that site for 18 months since this:

I went to stockiste for a look. Seems rather strange. You get presented with a random page of images with a big K at the top (that would be K for Stockiste) the slogan at the top "Creative stock + Exclusivity on the GO!" (what exclusivity?) than some categories at the bottom. Then I had to click to see all the categories. I couldn't find any search facility on the home page or when I chose a category.
Then I clicked on an image at random. It's not available as RF, so presumably the prices relate to RM, though that's not obvious or explained on the image page. But above the prices, it says Social Media, priced by size from 67x100px to 3333x5000px. Is there a huge need for 3333x5000px pics on social media?
Clicking on the word Social Media, so see if any other usages were listed, there was a dropdown with different social media platforms listed, with no other possibilities offered for sale on that image. Weird.
Also, annoyingly, every time from going from one page to another, I get a 'loading content' page, sometimes telling me what I'm looking for isn't available, sometimes with code - even when just using the back button.

Tried six other images at random, and they also only offered Social Media.

Seems like a very strange site.
Wonder what the 1Tb drive offer is all about? I can't imagine many buyers would stick around a site with no keyword search facility for very long. And the sales options make no sense. This was on each of the six random files I clicked on with no other options:

I presume that there are files available for other uses, but without an obvious way to filter these, I can't see many buyers being interested in this site.

In addition, after I had chosen one category and clicked on a few images there (no way of subfiltering that I could easily see), I then clicked Home at the top of the page, and got to the category home page, not to the home page of the site. There was no way to get back to the home page of the site, other than by starting over in another browser. Once in the other browser, I clicked a couple of images again and tried to find better navigation that might lead me more easily to particular files (in case there was some FF problem), but no, all I can see is categories, then you're stuck within the categories unable to easily discover how to filter them down.

And what is that 'K' top centre for? You try to click on it and it disappears upwards.

Hey, they own me a Lacie Drive for the critique.

You should contact them. They are aware of few problems and really open with comments.
_I've contacted them for a metadata keywording problem and they fixed it.

How are your sales...?? (if you are not the ceo... ???)

For me is very expensive produce 500 photos and dont send to offset, wentend61...

I'm not exclusive... they now accept non-exclusive.
not CEO - I saw the add on the forum a while ago and submited my images.
Got acepted and then - uploaded 1500ish photos.

Hey guys - don't know what is the link of the add or if this is still going on, but I've uploaded 500+ images on Stockiste.com and they sent me a hard drive by mail with a super duper letter thanking me.
They rocks !

If someone could find the link of the "promo"... you could all upload there and get the drive too. Probably limited offer, but many of you have way more than 500 mages so why not !?

Found it: https://www.stockiste.com/featured-product/lacie-porsche-design-mobile-drive/1

The question is the title.
Thanks !

General Stock Discussion / Re: PRORES vs H.264 Tested
« on: June 20, 2016, 11:47 »
Did not read... but here
A professional told me one day that they tested all kind of compresseion at the time (ALL) and PhotoJpeg was the best of all.
ProRes will be better in quality, but the data will be long to transfer.

They did not test H 264... BUT my opinion is that it's the worst. It perfect for a final project, but if you are buying a H264 clip then want to color grade it, you will result with soooooooo much artifacts and compression problem.

PhotoJpeg for the win.

I've created my own template for model release using the same text.
iStock is probably the more demanding so the best to copy and transform into yours.
My company logo replace iStock and I've make it faster to fill.

Hello guys !
As contributor and buyer I'm questioning "unlimited download" plateform.
I think Photospin works that way, but they paid contributors a % of the subscription plan which is allright in one sens.
Videoblock just buy clips to contributors and never give anymore money after.
I've just subscribes to "Art-List" for music and I can download music... no limit. - I've asked how the contributors are paid and got no precise answer.

I'm thinking that imagine if Videoblock have a huge list of videos of all kinds and are just selling it with subscription plan... then contributors won't have anything for the future. That beeing said, I have to said that I've refused to sell clips to them the price they wanted to buy it which was 1/10 the price it would have to be because I was thinking about WHAT IF !??

What if everyone said yes... what is they really have all the necessary videos on the unlimited download subscription.

That would mean that they could just lower their subscription after few years... take the control of stock footage and no giving any more royalties to contributors !!!

I was also thinking about price. Dreamstime have a 250$ price (I think) if someone is buying an image to use for sale. some extended rights, etc. I would not let a video for less than this amount to an agency. Selling a video 5 times on videoblocks give me almost this amount... why would I be selling my clip for not anymore money for 1/10 (not even) that price ?

If they ask, it's because some people said yes... we are in trouble.

Finally, contributors should ALWAYS have a % of ANY sales. if it's subscription, well like shutterstock, they have a download limit. If it't unlimited, well make maths at the end of the month and divide subscription plan per download with contributors like Photospin.
out of that, my clips are under my control. If an agency is getting weird and does stupid moves, I can always remove my clips there and save stock footage world (at least, what I can save).

My two cents, but I would be curious of reading your opinions too !

Pages: [1] 2 3


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle