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 - stockastic

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 157
1
Adobe Stock / Re: Good bye Adobe Stock from Venezuela.
« on: October 19, 2019, 19:15 »
There's only 1 way impeachment can succeed:  around 20 Republican Senators in 'swing' states get together and decide they'd rather have someone other than Trump on the Republican ticket in 2020.  They could 'reluctantly' vote to convict him and have a fig leaf of cover.


2
General Stock Discussion / WikiMedia contest
« on: September 16, 2019, 12:54 »
Wikimedia has a photo contest for 'monuments' in the U.S..

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2019_in_the_United_States

I have a couple I might enter.  But I know nothing about WikMedia or the " CC BY-SA license" required for a submission.   I followed the link to the pages of legalese and my eyes instantly glazed over.

Is the bottom line simply that I'd be putting my full-size image file in the public domain?



3
General Stock Discussion / Re: Alamy - is it worth it?
« on: August 30, 2019, 11:55 »
If you're not on any other stock sites, can you list images as "exclusive" with Alamy and still sell them as art prints on PODs? 

4
Does anyone know if other agencies follow this same practices ? This de-values our work by a lot I would assume.

My assumption is that they all do things like this - or if an agency isn't doing it now, it might start next week.

5
Newbie Discussion / Re: Is 500px worth the time?
« on: August 15, 2019, 14:12 »
"they are now owned by Getty."

You already know everything you need to know.

6
General Stock Discussion / Re: Trademarks at FAA
« on: August 14, 2019, 13:09 »
FAA checks nothing. If they get a complaint, they delete your images with no notice, and no discussion. It doesn't matter if you think the complaint is unjustified; FAA won't do a thing for you.

You can sell a lot of things as 'art', meaning individual prints; but put it on a handbag or a coffee cup and it's a 'product'.

7
I've had photos on FAA for years and sell a couple of prints there every month, occasionally more. At least when I sell one I make some money, as we can set our own markups there. 

I found out long ago that the big stock 'agencies' were selling images through POD and that was a big reason I closed all my microstock accounts.

FAA is basically run by one guy, with one interest: increasing his bottom line.  He couldn't care less about photographers or artists, and he's not one himself.  He never communicates with contributors or responds to complaints.  If you're unhappy with the deals he's cut with big 'content' companies, there is absolutely no point in attempting to contact him or his handful of FAA employees; your only choice is to close the microstock accounts.


8
Print on Demand Forum / Re: Red Bubble Technical Support
« on: August 03, 2019, 09:44 »
That bubble burst long ago. Unless you're selling t shirts to kids, there isn't a nickel to be made there.

9
Alamy.com / Re: Have sales plummeted for all or just me?
« on: May 14, 2019, 17:51 »
 No sales this year, and I'd  like to close the account. Cleared balance is $48 and I'll be dead before it reaches $50.  If I close, will they pay me that balance?

10
Will this be a great way to GET MY NAME OUT THERE?
Will these be SALES I WOULD OTHERWISE NOT HAVE GOTTEN?

11
Image Sleuth / Re: Etsy is the absolute worst
« on: May 11, 2019, 17:11 »
At one time I looked into selling prints on Etsy;  but I've decided to have nothing to do with them.  The fact that people can buy stock to resell as prints was one reason I got out of stock.

All these 'agencies' are scum IMHO.

12
A few years ago SS was talking grandly about how they were a "technology" company with a big R&D group. 

I think they built a system so automated and so complicated that they can't manage it anymore; and some employees, partners and other 'insiders' have figured out how to play it.  People with access are bringing in other people's stolen portfolios for a price, direct, no 'upload' and no inspection, thousands of images at a time.   They've probably lost enough key development people by now that they're afraid to touch the code, can't take the risk of breaking things, and don't have enough monitoring hooks in place.

Its too late, the ship has sailed... they can't afford to pay new people to look back at 100 million images and decide what's real anymore.  Even if they did, how many of those poorly paid 'inspectors' could they trust?

13
Off Topic / Re: Global Warming is causing the Polar Vortex ???
« on: January 25, 2019, 17:00 »
"Global warming" is just a shorthand term used by the media.  What's really happening is much more complicated.  As more solar energy gets trapped in the atmosphere, the overall average temperature increases but locally, all sorts of things happen as that energy circulates.   In the short term some regions may get colder as major air currents (driven in part by the Earth's tilt and rotation) shift and move.  That makes the political situation even tougher as people, and nations, start trying to figure out who wins and who loses.

In the long run we'll all lose if temperatures get high enough.  Right now that's the track we're on.

Climate scientists don't all agree on the details or the short term forecast - we don't yet have the instrumentation or the computing power to answer every question.  It's like oncologists - 9 out of 10 may agree you have cancer, but differ on their guesses about progression.  If you want to pin your hopes on that 1  out of 10 who says he's not sure yet, be my guest - I'll have the surgery.

Steven Hawking says by 2600 we'll have about 100 years to colonize in space and get off the planet or we'll all die. Pretty gloomy prediction. But just like your cancer scenario, the truth is, maybe we don't know, but there's a good chance that Hawkins is in the right area of predicting the future.

Most of my argument with global warming fear and doom, isn't that it's happening, it is. I want to know how we're going to stop it, and feeling good, politics or signing an accord is nothing functional or useful. How do we stop what's happening? Is that possible?

I reccommend the excellent, brief, readable and non-political book by Carl Pope and Michael Bloomberg. 

14
Off Topic / Re: Global Warming is causing the Polar Vortex ???
« on: January 25, 2019, 11:09 »
"Global warming" is just a shorthand term used by the media.  What's really happening is much more complicated.  As more solar energy gets trapped in the atmosphere, the overall average temperature increases but locally, all sorts of things happen as that energy circulates.   In the short term some regions may get colder as major air currents (driven in part by the Earth's tilt and rotation) shift and move.  That makes the political situation even tougher as people, and nations, start trying to figure out who wins and who loses.

In the long run we'll all lose if temperatures get high enough.  Right now that's the track we're on.

Climate scientists don't all agree on the details or the short term forecast - we don't yet have the instrumentation or the computing power to answer every question.  It's like oncologists - 9 out of 10 may agree you have cancer, but differ on their guesses about progression.  If you want to pin your hopes on that 1  out of 10 who says he's not sure yet, be my guest - I'll have the surgery.




15
But note that Kim Dotcom was charged with things like money laundering - not copyright violations. Whatever he was doing, he p!ssed off the wrong people, who were able to get big time law enforcement on his trail.

16
They'll just claim they're only a "platform". Napster tried that, but the music recording industry had the muscle to shut them down.

17
You already know all this, but... the purpose of the DMCA was to protect the big ISPs of the day from copyright lawsuits from insignificant gnats like us - not to protect our intellectual property. It was written by industry lobbyists with intent of putting all the burden on the copyright holder, resulting in an endless and futile game of chasing our work and IP across ever-changing servers and domains, firing off emails and 'takedown notices' to crooks who can safely ignore them, or hosting companies that don't need to care.

IMHO there is no way to protect our content unless and until the DMCA is replaced by something that makes it possible.

It may be that a future image file format uses some sort of blockchain technology to verify rights, but right now that seems impossibly complicated and unlikely to ever be adopted.  And even that, in itself, wouldn't be enough to compel action by infringers or their supporting infrastructure providers.

18
Shutterstock.com / Re: .38 SODs
« on: January 15, 2019, 16:57 »
IMHO, pricing by pixel size was another major factor in the collapse. Image size has no relation to the costs of production, and "thumbnail" can be anyrhing.  It's like selling low resolution versions of hit tunes at a huge discount.  FB is a new form of advertising, some of the old licensing concepts don't really apply.

Anyway, I'm out of it. I no longer need to rationalize the pricing.
Though that is what happens with music...you can stream virtually free. Downloading in MP3 costs more and then more again for the (allegedly) better quality vinyl or CD. Pricing generally has nothing to do with input costs its a function of supply and demand.


Yes, price is set by supply and  demand.  But if that process ends up at a point where suppliers can't even recover their costs, production will cease.  Of course, in the case of microstock, buyers and producers don't negotiate directly, so it's far from an ideal market.


Music streaming is comparable to microstock in some ways.  I guess we'd have to ask some musicians if they thought streaming was a good thing.  I think they'd say 'no'.


soon micro sock won't have any professional ready to invest more than 50 bucks in any kind of shooting...even bog company are hit, lower their earning. only desperate from eastern europe and thailand still upload . out of their camera, but it's just the impossibility to accept that micro stock is ending.

It's hard to imagine anyone, anywhere, making "substantial" money at this game - by which I mean at least a good portion of their income.   But what do I know, I'm just an old guy in a wealthy country.

19
Dreamstime.com / Re: CLOSING DREAMSTIME NIGHTMARE
« on: January 14, 2019, 19:52 »
I got out of DT years ago, so none of this matters to me, but I'm wondering:  are you really prevented in some way (i.e., in the site code) from just deleting all your files one-by-one, disregarding the agreement?   And if you did, what could DT to you in retaliation?    Sounds like a bluff to me.


I dont know about today, but back when I deleted images, no, I could not just disregard the agreement and delete them all. It stopped me when I got to the percentage, and I had to keep going back as photos aged and delete them. Maybe they are lax about it now, guess its worth a shot.

Or just email them, tell them your entire portfolio is stolen, you don't have any rights to it, you faked the model releases, you've recently found Jesus and want to go straight. They'll close your account and delete everything.

20
Dreamstime.com / Re: CLOSING DREAMSTIME NIGHTMARE
« on: January 14, 2019, 17:37 »
I got out of DT years ago, so none of this matters to me, but I'm wondering:  are you really prevented in some way (i.e., in the site code) from just deleting all your files one-by-one, disregarding the agreement?   And if you did, what could DT to you in retaliation?    Sounds like a bluff to me.



21
Shutterstock.com / Re: .38 SODs
« on: January 09, 2019, 16:30 »
IMHO, pricing by pixel size was another major factor in the collapse. Image size has no relation to the costs of production, and "thumbnail" can be anyrhing.  It's like selling low resolution versions of hit tunes at a huge discount.  FB is a new form of advertising, some of the old licensing concepts don't really apply.

Anyway, I'm out of it. I no longer need to rationalize the pricing.
Though that is what happens with music...you can stream virtually free. Downloading in MP3 costs more and then more again for the (allegedly) better quality vinyl or CD. Pricing generally has nothing to do with input costs its a function of supply and demand.


Yes, price is set by supply and  demand.  But if that process ends up at a point where suppliers can't even recover their costs, production will cease.  Of course, in the case of microstock, buyers and producers don't negotiate directly, so it's far from an ideal market.


Music streaming is comparable to microstock in some ways.  I guess we'd have to ask some musicians if they thought streaming was a good thing.  I think they'd say 'no'.

22
Shutterstock.com / Re: .38 SODs
« on: January 08, 2019, 17:04 »
IMHO, pricing by pixel size was another major factor in the collapse. Image size has no relation to the costs of production, and "thumbnail" can be anyrhing.  It's like selling low resolution versions of hit tunes at a huge discount.  FB is a new form of advertising, some of the old licensing concepts don't really apply.

Anyway, I'm out of it. I no longer need to rationalize the pricing.

23
Shutterstock.com / Re: .38 SODs
« on: January 08, 2019, 11:34 »
In all seriousness - the SS/FB deal was one of the deciding factors when I quit doing microstock.    It was pretty discouraging to see comments - from people who should have known better - about this being a "great deal" for "sales you otherwise wouldn't get".   In my mind, it was all over at that point.  FB was a huge new advertising market, and microstock had entered it at giveaway prices; there was no upside left.

I can't quite accept the idea that Facebook, with a market cap of $400 billion, can only pay 38 cents for a image, for an ad that might be seen by millions.  Call me nave.

24
I've been contacted by an art consultant who wants to license some photos for prints.  I'd like to find a standard license agreement that I could use, granting them a one-time right to make a print, but stating that I retain ownership of the images.   And that's all it really needs to say; I've dealt with these people before and they're totally on the up-and-up.

Can  anyone point me to a generic license agreement that I could download and use?

25
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS worst Spammed Portfolios
« on: December 31, 2018, 20:00 »
It would be so interesting to know what's really happening inside that company.   

I get the impression that there's been so much turnover and organizational 'churn' that things are chaotic and some 'games' are being run by insiders.   These thousands of repetitious junk images didn't get in by being submitted and inspected through normal channels; something else is going on.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 157

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results