As an independent video contributor, I am regularely approached by agencies to offer this or that file as a free download, or to opt into subscription models.
Usually these agencies are not among the biggest and offer rather low rates for their subscription models.
The justification for such requests is always to "attract more customers".

But hey, I�m a businessman - not a dummy. If one agency attracts more customers because their rates are lower or they want to have my free file of the week, they usually come from other agencies. And if the customers change because of the cheap subscription rates, or free files I always lose money. Why on earth should I support that?

I have long ago deleted my portfolio on fotolia because of their rediculously cheap subscription model without having a chance to opt out. I am inviting others to do the same and to opt out of subscription sales on all other agencies that don�t value our work with subscription rates that honour the work we�ve put into creating those files. Shutterstock for example has a really good subscription model and it seems to work, they are doing really well attracting customers from other sites and we can still make money.

Regarding free files: they do give exposure to our work, but does that lead to more DLs? I doubt that.
I�ve been photographer of the week on Dreamstime, Bigstock and iStock - none of the sites had a significantly increased number od DLs during that week or the weeks to follow. And I�ve talked to other contributors that report the same. If being contributor of the week doesn�t push sales, I don�t think free files will do. It sure is an honour, but that�s just about it.

So as a call to all the agencies out there: try to find other ways for attracting more buyers than just reducing prices and giving away our work for free. That alone won�t make you or us or anybody else successful in the longrun. Try to think about a marketing plan that brings new buyers into the stockworld rather than shifting customers from one agency to another.

What about you, are you giving away files for free, or opt into subscription models?

Hi all!
If you ask me - istock is overplaying that copyright thing by far. If you look at it that way, every single t-shirt (printed or not) is copyright, every jeans,...

Rejection reason:
"On socks. This file includes content that may be subject to copyright or trademark protection. Certain use of this file creates risk of infringement and we regret that it cannot be accepted, unless this content is removed from the file."

The other side is even less problematic.

What do you think?



here is a closeup