|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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 - blamb
26
« on: August 15, 2014, 08:14 »
Ok, trolls, here is what I wrote:
"I put the word 'scabs' in quotation marks because I can't do comical air quotes with my fingers over the internet. I'm a contributor and I understand the various points of view on this issue. The company is the bad guy, not fellow contributors. I would only define a 'scab' as someone who vigorously defends the company and the 3% even after being presented with the facts."
27
« on: August 14, 2014, 21:52 »
Bullying fellow contribs on social media is messed up. Are you a teenager or adult?
I dunno, did you feel like you were betraying your fellow contributors when the royalty was 3%? Is that why you're acting so defensive? I guess you can relax now that they're adjusting the rate. Does the fact that they're adjusting the rate make you feel a little guilty about accepting that 3% without protest? Is that why you're taking the least charitable interpretation of what I posted?
28
« on: August 14, 2014, 00:04 »
3. Get on social media and warn others about DP's behaviour. An angry tweet or two a day at @Depositphotos from a core group of determined contributors will add up over a sustained period of time (I'm willing to do this as part of a group).
29
« on: August 13, 2014, 22:18 »
You have clearly not read what I have posted.
30
« on: August 12, 2014, 19:03 »
...Gently but firmly let "scabs" know that they are betraying their fellow contributors. Do it on this forum and take it to social media too, if you have to...
And do you really want to take it to public naming and shaming of contributors?
I meant exactly what I wrote. Gently but firmly inform. Do it privately or publicly. There are lots of examples of people doing just that on this forum and the exchanges I've seen have been pretty civil. I put the word 'scabs' in quotation marks because I can't do comical air quotes with my fingers over the internet. I'm a contributor and I understand the various points of view on this issue. The company is the bad guy, not fellow contributors. I would only define a 'scab' as someone who vigorously defends the company and the 3% even after being presented with the facts. But the social media is the core tactic. All you need is a core group of 6-7 committed people engaging on social media a couple of times everyday. That's enough to pollute their social streams and would do far more than a download day. I'm up for that if anyone else is but a single person can't do it alone or they look like a kook with a grudge. You need a group.
31
« on: August 11, 2014, 10:18 »
This situation is a great opportunity for contributors to get together and exercise their power. As a minor site, DP is likely far more vulnerable to focused, sustained contributor action than a larger site. The key is SUSTAINED action. Nobody cares about deactivation days, as we've seen.
DP isn't just cheating contributors, it's cheating against their competitors by not sticking within the fuzziest lines of ethical behaviour. Competitors can't really respond in a meaningful way so it's really up to contributors to slap down this form of abuse.
Sustained action would involve things like:
1. Deleting your entire port (I did).
2. Tell your buyer contacts that DP cheats contributors (I do this).
3. Get on social media and warn others about DP's behaviour. An angry tweet or two a day at @Depositphotos from a core group of determined contributors will add up over a sustained period of time (I'm willing to do this as part of a group).
4. Gently but firmly let "scabs" know that they are betraying their fellow contributors. Do it on this forum and take it to social media too, if you have to.
I'm sure there are lots of other things that can be done.
Putting a big dent in DP would give contributors a sense of their real power as a group and would encourage additional campaigns against bad behaviour. It would take the pressure off the other companies to compete against bald-faced bad behaviour. It would provide a small but meaningful rebalancing of power that would benefit everybody (possibly even DP if they change and survive).
This is an opportunity. If we waste it, then we're stupid and we deserve 3%.
32
« on: July 01, 2014, 15:39 »
It's been two months since I dropped the crown. Here's my experience so far:
I was an exclusive (diamond) vector illustrator since 2006 with a port of about 2300 images. After the 2010 changes, I took advantage of the 'partial exclusivity' loophole that allowed us to upload raster illustrations to the other agencies while maintaining vector exclusivity, so I wasn't starting from scratch. I'm really glad I did that, considering how things turned out.
The preparation was a nightmare, especially rekeywording the metadata for the JPEGs. Uploading was slow and I haven't finished uploading to the smaller sites.
I am never uploading to Fotolia because of that site's reputation and I deleted my small port at DP because of the subs nonsense. Veer doesn't seem to be working or earning anymore, so I probably won't bother with them. That's too bad, I remember when Veer was cool.
May was my first month as an independent and there was an expected earnings drop, but it wasn't much more than the month to month drops on istock. If you doubt that exclusivity still has any value, understand that your istock earnings will really plummet once you give up the crown. If you're doing well, you should probably keep doing when you're doing.
June was the first month of having most of my files up on a few sites. I nearly had a best month of the year but missed it by about $50. I'm hoping the smaller sites will provide more flow but there's little activity, even with a larger portfolio so I don't anticipate much change going forward.
The best and worst part of the experience was having the time to look over my entire portfolio again as a collection and seeing how much lousy, lazy and inconsistent crap I have. I really appreciated the chance to have a painful reevaluation. The 2010 changes at istock, esp the RC system, knocked the enthusiasm out of me and I never got it back so I'm really looking forward to this fresh start.
TLDR; A lot of work but almost had a BMOTY in 2nd month.
33
« on: May 26, 2014, 12:52 »
The OP made it sound like support hadn't been contacted yet. I agree that the glitch is iStock's responsibility ... but when I was in the same situation I wanted to make sure I had my bases covered. Dropping exclusivity was a big enough risk on its own.
34
« on: May 25, 2014, 14:25 »
Do not play games or make assumptions. Contact support.
35
« on: May 24, 2014, 11:41 »
That happened to me, too. Must be some sort of bug. Contact support and they will help you out.
36
« on: April 26, 2014, 22:28 »
two weeks ago I clicked on the istock link to cancel exclusivity. For 10 days it was counting down. I checked it every day or two. Suddenly at the beginning of this week it is gone and there is no indication that I put in for exclusivity at all.
I had a similar experience. With 7 days to go I received an email saying 'congrats on becoming an istock exclusive!' I sent out some messages and received confirmation that I was still scheduled but then my exclusivity disappeared, a week early. Maybe there's a bug.
37
« on: April 16, 2014, 15:22 »
I've dropped exclusivity too, and have two weeks to go on the ticker. I'm hoping it'll at least help me get some motivation back. The RC system was just a huge wet blanket on my ambition. I've been partially non-exclusive (raster illustrations only) for a couple of years, so I'm not making a huge, sudden transition.
38
« on: January 23, 2014, 16:27 »
Great. It's not working for me. I can apply for video and photo exclusivity but NOT cancel. Tomorrow was going to be the day I was going to drop (my birthday, fresh start, etc. etc. etc.). Hope it gets back up by then.
39
« on: January 21, 2014, 02:06 »
Thanks. The three years of slow decline have taken their toll and I've rode this thing to the bitter end. Time to move on.
40
« on: January 20, 2014, 23:34 »
Yeah, I'm getting killed. Finally gonna drop the crown because there's no way I'll make LESS going indie.
41
« on: December 19, 2013, 14:12 »
I'm doing a lot more freelance these days as stock withers and fades ... 
42
« on: October 30, 2013, 16:38 »
After dragging out exclusivity to the bitter end, I'll be dropping another level from 35% to 30%. Pretty dismal trend. And I worked so hard to get that 40% only to see it snatched away by that miserable RC scheme.
43
« on: April 30, 2013, 10:36 »
People DO say that! But when you do microstock, you're doing work for yourself, not a client. You license the use of your work but you still own that work. If you're licensing RF, you can still put the same images to work doing other, non-RF things (zazzle stuff, for example). If you design a logo as part of a contest and aren't selected, you've worked for nothing and because the work is so specific, you can't benefit from it later.
But the real concern is the rip-off artists. Google "99 designs ripoff" and read story after story after story ...
44
« on: April 29, 2013, 23:09 »
I'm also opposed to contest sites. If you're doing work it's work and you should get paid for it.
But you get what you pay for ... that site is crawling with scammers and rip-off artists and you'll never be 100% certain of the integrity of the work.
45
« on: February 07, 2013, 15:22 »
Rather than a list of "good" and "bad" agencies, we need a list of agency profiles listing the good & the bad for each so we can make up our minds about how we feel about them.
46
« on: February 07, 2013, 13:44 »
and money is left on the table.
That should be typed in giant letters.
47
« on: February 02, 2013, 14:13 »
20-30 seems like the "symbolic gesture of support" level, so I've dumped 30 files.
48
« on: December 10, 2012, 19:48 »
I'm tired of all the discussion about istock, I think the general consensus is that they're never going to be able to admit to and fix all their problems. Agreed. Stirring all of this up again is pointless, annoying and cruel to those newly-minted bronze exclusives who think they've got a future.
49
« on: December 10, 2012, 13:32 »
There was a massive new ingestion of Getty Agency images over the last few days and the first page (200) of searches supposedly by Best Match are larded with those. Clearly new images and Getty transfers - or both - are currently considered "best" to the exclusion of just about anything else but a pink flame
So when they say the best match is right where it should be, they're not kidding. If, as an individual, if someone asked you to 'reset the conversation' while simultaneously taking actions to hurt you ... isn't that a bit psychotic?
50
« on: December 09, 2012, 14:47 »
Yeah, pretty much everything they SHOULD do they can't/won't do. They've boxed themselves in to the current program and the short-term change would be too painful with no guarantee of success. Ouch.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
