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.

Topics - rene

Pages: [1] 2 3
General Stock Discussion / Microstock vs. Unsplash
« on: June 02, 2019, 09:55 »
I have read here (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/december-earnings) a thread about earnings and bad influance of free photos stock sites.
As a phrase
"Those people who gave free photos in unsplash are probably the dumbest person ever appeared on the www. I cannot think of somebody more stupid"
 I took a look to Unsplash for the first time.
I found a lot of good images, relevent reserch results and curiously often better descriptions than at SS. For sure this kind of sites is serious competition for regular stock. My first thought was to agree with quotation above but after long reflexion, am I really smarter than they? I am selling for $0,38, it is not so far from free...
 With half day commissioned shooting I earn equivalent of 6 months of SS earnings. It seems easy for potential clients to contacts artists at unsplash so maybe with carefully selecting images it is not so bad idea to be there. I have seen a lot of profesionals there.
If microstock leaders continue to treat us as sh*t there is a risk that lot of contributors,earning close to nothing, turn to free sites to have pleasure to hurt microstock business , just for revenge.

Shutterstock.com / Making money with stolen content
« on: April 28, 2019, 06:19 »
After read  the  wackamoles thread I realized how weak we are. Personally I think it is a huge issue, It can kill legitimate artists.
Shutterstock, probably others too, have contributors interest at the bottom of their to do list. Actually I dont think trying to help them, signing NDA and discreetly working for free is a good idea. They try to push problems under the carpet and as long as intellectual propriety problem is not public they will not seriously act.
If it get public and shareholders and clients are informed it will be a serious motivation.
But how to do it? I dont think a discussion on MSG is the solution.
If we, individually, contact people and groups concerned by digital business, copyrights, design, art etc.  the word could be spread. I am especially thinking about journalists specialized in digital, designers magazines. If important number of people point similar problem, with factual content, real experience and link it could work.

Some ideas to work on.
- Clients can purchase unsafe content. They are paying money without guaranty that the product is legitimate. If the content was stolen inside SS the contract protect them but what if not? The copyright holder can sue the final client, he doesnt need to handle with SS as he hasnt any relation with them.
- Today it is very easy to detect identical content. That means they can track potentially stolen work. Why not to do it?
- Lack of reactivity on DCMA. Apparently sometimes only files are taken down, not contributors accounts.
- At least a part of money which was not transferred to dishonest contributor (SS pays once a month) could be easily paid to original artist but they keep this dirty money.
- The way how they want to make it opaque, lack of transparency is not appreciated by potential investors.

Maybe we can share here contacts, web sites and others idea to touch an audience that could be interested?

Pond5 / Exclusive contributors - price strategy
« on: April 04, 2019, 17:04 »
I'm hesitating how to fix prices on my exclusive files. On one side I want to get as much as possible, on the other hand I would like to make P5 competitive and bring traffic from others sites.
Any suggestions?

Adobe Stock / Rejection for 'technical reason' nonsense
« on: March 21, 2019, 11:38 »
I had few rejections at Fotolia. I have no problem with, they decide. But in my opinion giving for rejection an enigmatic "technical error" reason  is not productive.
The file is corrupted? Should I reupload?
Technical problem on their side?
Wrong metadata?

Is it so difficult to set an unambiguous check list in 2019 for Adobe?

iStockPhoto.com / I don't like iStock but...
« on: January 11, 2019, 12:32 »
Like majority of contributors I hate what happened in 2013(?) and what became iStock.
But to be honest there is one think I like , the kind of photos that sell here. IStock/Getty is the only place where photos (my) I like sell all the time. Photos which are ... just photos and not 'digital art'.
SS and AdobeStock selling, from my experience, only heavy altered artificial stuff.

iStockPhoto.com / November download stats missing
« on: January 03, 2019, 11:04 »
November 2018 royalty numbers are there but I still cannot see downloads stats for this period. Last stats avialable are for october 2018.
Can you see yours?

Adobe Stock / Cannot find payment status
« on: September 14, 2018, 07:26 »
I am trying to find my Fotolia payments list. Impossible, not only the last pending but even old "credit conversion" disappeared. 
Anyone has an idea where can I find it? BTW I am only on Fotolia and not on AS.

iStockPhoto.com / Corrupted images at iStockphoto and Thinkstock
« on: February 03, 2018, 08:13 »
Anybody noticed corrupted images at Getty's sites?

When I checked my portfolios a large number of photos is broken, especially at Thinkstock.
Thumbnails are pixelated, partially visible or invisible at all. Titles and keywords are not related, 'borrowed' from others images.
Both search page and individual image detail page are concerned.

iStockPhoto.com / IStock Getty password security issue
« on: July 12, 2015, 23:45 »
Apparently,  according posts on iStock forum  our passwords are stored as clear text. It results in massive security breach. In addition,  they sending these passwords in email. One more time iStock shows how unprofessional they are. Related topic:

iStockPhoto.com / Istock/Getty communication on Adobe Stock
« on: June 25, 2015, 20:36 »
How they can dare write something like this when they paying even less.
Shame on you iStock/Getty.
original communication quote:

"A Few Thoughts on the Launch of
Adobe Stock
Following the launch of Adobe Stock, we felt it was a good time to reach out and communicate to you our exclusive artists with some thoughts on what this means for Getty Images, iStock by Getty Images, and our valued relationship with you.

We start with the point that competition is not necessarily a bad thing.  Competition can drive us forward in better serving current and potential customers.  It can also help grow our customer base as new marketing builds awareness of the need for and availability of licensed content.  The negatives of competition come when you do not have a clearly differentiated product.

Thanks to your content and ongoing submissions, we enjoy and will continue to enjoy a clear point of differentiation superior content.  This is the very core of our customers needs.  Without great content, customers cannot produce great projects.  iStock by Getty Images is the only service in the value space that provides a meaningfully different and superior content offering.  Adobe Stock is the same content offered historically via Fotolia and many other providers.  Adding a statement that it is curated by Adobe, does not make it true.

We also enjoy the full reach and assets of Getty Images.  Only Getty Images offers a comprehensive offering to service all customers, across all projects, in all geographies €“ creative and editorial, new and archival, global and local, premium and value.  Only Getty Images has a 700-person dedicated sales force that are experts in content licensing.  Only Getty Images has 20 years of building strong customer relationships.

Moving beyond what we believe Adobe€™s entry means to Getty Images and iStock by Getty Images, we wanted to share some thoughts on broader implications for photographers as a whole.

With the launch of Adobe Stock, it is clear that Adobe believes all imagery is worth a maximum of $10.  We simply do not agree with this view.  Commercial and photographic experience and investments in pre and post-production do matter to quality and are only commercially viable through higher price points and, ultimately, returns to the photographers.  This is a core reason why Getty Images contributors can sell across our offerings versus a one-size fits all, every image is a commodity approach.

The launch of Adobe Stock also under-scores Adobe'€™s true focus.  Adobe is under-pricing the work of photographers to increase the overall attractiveness of Creative Cloud.  In fact, Creative Cloud customers receive an additional 40 percent discount with this discount subsidized by photographers via lowered royalties.

We struggle to understand how Adobe Stock helps to sustainably support the creation of imagery and photographers, many of which are paying Creative Cloud customers.  Instead, in current form, we only see how Adobe Stock helps support Adobe€™s broader software ambitions at the expense of the creation of imagery and photographers.

Getty Images remains focused on licensing content with an emphasis on superior material.  We will continue to price this superior content to an appropriate premium and provide a higher royalty.  We thank you for your contributions and loyalty.  We are more committed than ever to maintain your loyalty and will intensify our efforts to compete on the basis of quality and a comprehensive offering.  In the coming months, you will see marketing, site merchandising, partnerships and other improvements that only reinforce this strategy and our intensity.

Thank you for being our partners.

Brad and Team

iStockPhoto.com / Fotomore & Thinkstock hosted in China?
« on: July 10, 2014, 23:16 »
Yesterday I discovered many corrupted file at Thinkstock. I knew the problem with Fotomore but not at Thinkstock.
Strange think few randomly compared files between both sites had exactly the same corrupted "look". Are they using same servers for both?

It is almost 7 years I am a part microstock world. In the beginning I was enthusiastic but with years it changed.
Today my relation with sites is closer to hate than love. The problem is that with time I forgot why I don't like agencies... Sometimes when I discuss with people and want to be very factual I lack of arguments.
For example I deleted my portfolio from Fotolia and I think it was related to the event when Bobby Deal was banned. What it was?
The only date I remember is September 2010 and iStock beginning of the end.
Is there any place where we can find this kind information? Different events related to sock agencies?
BTW, In the title I put "negative" events as I don't think there were positives ones...

iStockPhoto.com / Istocklypse 2014 RIP
« on: May 27, 2014, 06:48 »
It is incredible how the enthusiasm is gone in IS forums.
The last istocklypse in Hong Kong ended 3 weeks ago. There are only 2 post comments related to this event in IS forum. Compared to previous years it is a very pitiful score...

iStockPhoto.com / Balance changed (down)
« on: March 11, 2014, 04:57 »
I am not 100% sure but I have impression that my balance diminished this night and the difference is equal to the recoupment amount (1/6).
Strange thing, someone at IS forum stared a new topic about the same issue but it has disappeared.
Am I crazy?

I checked Microstock poll results and was very surprised to see the new classification, especially 'Self-hosted' (Symbiostock) on third position. If it is true, it is a revolution and very good news but I am rather skeptical.
Any thoughts?

Stocksy / Stocksy - where are they?
« on: August 26, 2013, 02:17 »
Stocksy is a newcomer but after almost half year probably most active contributors should have sales.
I like the idea of co-op and all artistic and human approach of this site. But what about a business side?
I'm seriously considering to invest my time and money to participate but is it worth? Do they have any chance to be successful?
Any thoughts after 5 months?

iStockPhoto.com / Rates again
« on: August 22, 2013, 09:48 »
I almost forgot an old typo: rates at the official iStock page (http://www.istockphoto.com/help/sell-stock/rate-schedule) are wrong.  To fix it probably 1 min will be enough as we are talking about not more than 100 characters. This problem is known for at least 2 months. Not very professional.
But what is really incredible for me is this statement, from iStock admin Kevinjay:
"As noted, the info on the Royalty Rate page is incorrect in places. It's a known issue and will be remedied at some point but thus far has not been a priority. If you have any queries about the royalty rates, please contact Contributor Relations." (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=355808&page=1)
Is my understanding of English wrong or is this guy saying that official website is full of crap but they don't care?

General Stock Discussion / D-DayS (plurial)
« on: July 24, 2013, 20:54 »
I read topics about impacts of deleting files and especially D-Day. Many good points for both, pro and cons. I understand perfectly people who hesitating.
I propose to create D-Days, on monthly or bi-monthly basis. For example every 13th of each month. Instead of deleting files we have decided to deactivate anyway (for different reasons like protest, quality, better performance on other site etc), we wait and delete them only on one day of the month.
I cannot see any cons. And advantages are there:
- it is not more individual but collective action.
- we can use 'D-Days' term for "our" communication
- sites should monitor different operation. Huge increase of deactivation will remain sites not to go too far
- good for my spiritual health
- costless
 We can start with Fotolia... Are you available on 28th?

General Stock Discussion / Thinkstock by Getty on home page
« on: June 15, 2013, 00:40 »
Maybe it was there before but today I saw on Getty's home page a promo with direct link to Thinkstock. For those who think iStock has a future...

I'm 100% for 2nd Feb idea. The problem is that the impact could be low. How many people, buyers are aware of what happens? Many stunning images will be removed from iStock but how to see what's gone? iStock has advantage because you can see what is exclusive there but no way to see what is missing. It is not completely true because DT and FT have few exclusive images but nothing serious.
My idea would be to create site/page where we could upload watermarked images with link to sites where to buy them (in my case SS). These images should be NOT available at IS/Getty and be rather unique. A kind of high quality library: "Vendetta images library - masterpieces not present at iStock".
The problem is that probably the majority of sites, like Flickr, forbids watermarked images and links...
BTW, my crown is gone. Viva liberta!

iStockPhoto.com / Erin Brockovich vs iStock/Getty
« on: January 11, 2013, 01:02 »
I start separate thread, concentrated on concrete actions we can take.
What happens with iStock/Getty/Microsoft/Google and probably others, for instant submerged deals, is unacceptable. I dont think iStock and friends will stop because it is the right thing to do. We should stop them. If not swindlers will continue.
We need 2 organized actions. One legal, another social/communication.

I propose for social/communication action:
Try to collect here addresses of people, sites, magazines, associations, journalists etc. Then prepare a kind of an open collective letter (only one to avoid spams)which will be sent to concerned people.
Spread a word on social networks and blogs.

Legal action:
1) Create paypal account to collect money. We should keep it simple, at least in the beginning IMO, so no need to create legal entity. On this site there are many persons I trust and respect (LisaFx, Leaf, Sjlocke, Jsnover and many others). If one of these people agrees to open an account Im ready to send few hundreds of $.
2) Contact a specialized lawyer. Present well prepared file with all iStock/Getty story, not only Google/Microsofts. At least we will have a precise idea what is legal
3) Based on lawyers opinion we decide next steps.

I think it is urgent to act. Not only iStock contributors are concerned. All copyright holders, if this still means something, are concerned. If Getty with impunity can do this others will follow. Floated marked with high quality free images from Getty will devaluate paid ones. Who will buy Shutterstocks subscription if there is a free option?

The reasons why IMO we should charge them:
1)   It is simple immoral, not right. I know it not an argument in a court but this is what it is.
2)   Probably illegal: nothing to do with promotion
3)   Probably illegal: copyright holder cannot stop it
4)   Probably illegal: the way they change ASA
5)   Probably illegal: be paid for without paying suppliers
6)   Probably illegal: not inform about these kind of deal which are nothing to do with regular business
7)   Probably illegal: prevent us to become exclusive on competitors sites (impossible to remove our images)
8)   Financial. It could be a possibility to earn much more money than from selling our photos.. Compensations could be huge for images download thousand times.

I just cannot stand that they think that they can do anything. There should be a punishment.

Now I have thousands of jpg files, all with embedded IPTC keywords, stored on a network drive. . I use freeware like Xnview or Infranview to manage jpgs. It works great but searching files by keywords is extremely long. Is there any method to accelerate researches? Do you know any software which are efficient, maybe with indexing system?

General Stock Discussion / PNG, istock's and Yuri's abandon
« on: June 25, 2012, 19:08 »
iStock and Yuri announced over one year ago that PNG files would be available on their sites. iStock officially stopped this project. Yuri after proudly talked this revolutionary feature on his website simply didn't make it.
Anyone has idea why these projects were abandoned? It doesn't seem to be very complicated to add another files' format in downloads.

iStockPhoto.com / Ex-exclusive mutual aid club
« on: December 14, 2011, 22:36 »
Many exclusives drop crowns. Financially first months of independence will be difficult.
Actually I'm still exclusive at IS but I'm not buying anymore there. I have subscription at Shutterstock now and I'm not using all my quota. I propose to download images from freshly independents. It's not a big help but I think it's better then nothing.
If you are interested pls put link to your SS portfolio here- ONLY EX-EXCLUSIVES.

iStockPhoto.com / Do you send buyers to Istock?
« on: November 12, 2011, 23:11 »
Personally I think that the new referral system is a disaster. Complicated, probably voluntary to avoid paying people. Not reliable and financially not interesting. Doing all this work for 20$ doesn't interest me (especially knowing that there is no guarantee that system works).
Before September 2010 I sent many buyers, without using the ridiculous 10$ referral system, simply because I liked IS. Now our relationship is strictly financial so if I can earn one more dollar by sending buyers to another site I'll do it. I'm still exclusive but I don't think there is no future for IS and throwing the crown is only question of time.
I'm curious if you continue to put IS links on yours websites. Do you use IS referral system?
I voted last option.

Pages: [1] 2 3


Microstock Poll Results