pancakes

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 - wakeupcall

Pages: [1]
1
Dreamstime.com / Re: Dreamstime - Is it time to leave
« on: March 05, 2009, 04:50 »
Wow it looks like I've stirred up a hornets nest here, Dreamstime is a popular site amongst contributors no doubt, however my view on sites are not how nicey touchy they are, I do this for a living and I'm very successful at it, I appreciate that many replies here are from those who are looking to make a few bucks each month and as such the friendly side of a site is important, however in business the base line is the only thing that counts I couldn't care less how friendly the management are it's nett profit that is the only important thing for me.

Re FTP - search their forum, just because something isn't happening to you doesn't mean you should dismiss others opinions, there is a problem with FTP there - for some, unfortunately the management at DT take the same dismissive approach as many here.

Re Ellen - Whatever your opinion of her, the fact remains she was brought in because of her reputation in the industry, Dreamstime are a tiny drop in the stock industry ocean, without a 'name' behind them I'm wondering whether they will suffer.

Re the breach - iStock were the only agency professional enough to admit it happened and publicly announced it, full credit to them it's what sets them apart. They weren't the only agency who were targeted and this has been going on for a couple of weeks.

Re the editor - As a professional I want my work reviewed to a high standard, obviously a site like Dreamstime is going to struggle to get a decent reviewer to work for them, if someone knows what they're doing they'll be out there doing it, so I accept reviewers might not be great photographers but what I don't want to see is lack of knowledge of the industry, Dreamstime have employed this guy and I ask what that says about their standards.

As for sales figures, I'm basing my views on a strong growth margin at nearly every site except Dreamstime, for some of you making 10,20 or 50 dollars a month a low percentage drop is not significant, when it gets into hundreds at a time every other site is steadily growing at a time of worldwide recession you'll understand why I said what I did.

As for being anonymous, if you don't understand why then you need a bit more experience in the industry.

For the record I think the folk at DT are nice too, I think the folk at iS are complete a**holes but they are the market leaders, guess which site I prefer  ;)

 

2
Dreamstime.com / Dreamstime - Is it time to leave
« on: March 04, 2009, 07:59 »
I don't know about anyone else but things happening at Dreamtime lately have seriously made me consider pulling my portfolio from there.

-Their only credible resource has announced she's leaving.

-It's impossible to upload there using any FTP software.

-Yesterday they had a major security breach and are recommending everyone change their password (although they're doing their best to play this down in the forum)

-Sales lately have just plummeted.

-But the final insult for me was reading in the forum about their latest editor, not only has this guy got a mediocre portfolio with low sales, but one of his latest uploads is a photo of a duck, and not just a photo of a duck but one he took standing up and looking down and he even managed to cut the tail out of the frame, I mean for crying out loud this guy is going to be reviewing our work!!!



3
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia changes to Exclusivity and other News
« on: February 18, 2009, 16:24 »
I now know who you are.

That sounds like a threat

I didn't put two and two together. 

Clearly not because if you had you could have just clicked on his portfolio link which is under his comments here.

I never visit the Fotolia forum because of the way you moderate, you are a moderator and you are there to make sure people behave in a proper and respectful way, that does not mean you should lock threads because you don't like peoples opinions.

I also feel that as you've taken the role of being a moderator on Fotolia albeit for little or no pay that you should not take part in any topics there concerning contributor relations, your view of the matter is clearly biased.

There's a huge difference between being a moderator and acting like a corporate whipping boy, and no you don't know who I am but rest assured I'm no newbie.

4
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock changes model release policy???
« on: February 13, 2009, 09:50 »
Not sure why you are lecturing here.  Most of us know all this already - it has nothing to do with "thinking outside the box" or "thinking laterally" although those are really cool catch phrases!  I am sure if you try you can work "synergy" in there somewhere too.  ;)

However it is totally irrelevant that the agencies doesn't really, legally, need a copy of the model release or particular information they are demanding be on it.  The fact is they won't accept images of people without them, so if we want to do business with the micros we have to provide them. 

Sorry you see what I wrote as a lecture it wasn't intended to be, I was trying to help some others out who appear confused by all this.

I'll try and explain it more clearly.

When you photograph a model with the intention of selling the shots for commercial stock you need a model release (contract) between you and the model and it needs to be worded in a way that is legal in your country or more precisley the country in which the shoot took place.

When you upload these shots to agencies they require a copy of a release with all the information as previously mentioned.

However the agencies are not legally entitled to that information and in many countries they break data protection laws for:
a. asking for it
b. using the information

So the point I am making is:

You MUST have a legal model release signed by the model with their genuine details on to keep for your records should it ever be needed.

The agencies must have a model release with information they require on it in order to accept your shots.

BUT if you want to safeguard your models information and in most cases comply with data laws just upload a release with psuedo information on it and keep the original to yourself, the whole thing is just a 'box ticking' excercise.

Strange as it may seem in my country I am actually complying with the law by doing this.






5
Whether you like or dislike Ken Rockwell doesn't get away from the fact that this Laurin Rinder guy has tried to use him to bump up his books profile, which then backfired.

The result is that this Ken Rockwell has based his opinions of everybody concerned in microstock and the stock industry in general on what some amatuer snapper has fed him.

At least his book review was honest!





6
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock changes model release policy???
« on: February 13, 2009, 04:37 »
People need to start 'thinking outside the box', a model release is a contract between YOU (the photographer) and the MODEL, the agencies are not part of that contract, the model release needs certain information for it to be legally binding in the country where the photo was taken (names,addresses,signatures etc)

Nearly every agency requires a model release uploaded with the photo, and they require certain information on them, however NO agency is legally entitled to use any of this information and they will break data protection laws in most countries if they do.

Some people have mentioned their models are concerned about their personal information being shared with other parties.

If there ever was a legal case regarding a photo bought via a stock agency and the release needed to be presented it would have to be the original that you hold, not the one that you've uploaded to the stock agency.

Think laterally people it's not rocket science!

7
General Stock Discussion / Re: Get Paid Shooting Nothing
« on: January 30, 2009, 05:17 »
I don't think the OP's blog is going to be a threat to anybody for a couple of reasons:

Firstly he's encouraging people to shoot dirt, if anybody is stupid enough to believe they are going to make any real money with the advice he's giving then let them try.

Secondly as he keeps telling everyone he is a administrator/reviewer, there's only one reason that anybody would want to sit in front of their computer for hours on end looking at other peoples photos for the lowest wage on the planet !!

People that have the talent to make money in this industry are out there doing it, not making blogs, trying to get referrals and certainly not by being a reviewer.




Pages: [1]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors