|
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 - stockastic
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 160
126
« on: October 28, 2018, 15:04 »
Any news on this?
I guess it's time to bail out - I'd rather not leave my images laying around on old hard drives. Has anyone been able to get closure?
127
« on: October 15, 2018, 09:03 »
Just like all the other so-called 'agencies': they can make the real money via up-front fees or 'plans' without paying the contributor anything - except a token amount on a discounted 'sale' when and if an image is used in a publicly discoverable way and a license is granted.
128
« on: October 14, 2018, 10:58 »
What a pathetic con job. Standing back and letting their archive get flooded with junk is a "buildout"?
129
« on: October 13, 2018, 16:58 »
The forum admin is likely to tell you they already replied and you must have missed the email. Then she'll try to take the discussion out of the open forum. But she may get it straightened out.
130
« on: October 13, 2018, 14:54 »
Only a matter of time before it's completely replaced with renderings. Want 2 happy seniors cycling in a park? Meet Mr. and Mrs. CGI, no model releases required.
131
« on: October 11, 2018, 14:27 »
Not getting a reply from Support is no surprise - it comes up on their forum frequently.
Create a new account and use it to post your question on their forum - that tends to get a response.
132
« on: September 18, 2018, 10:00 »
But isn't it obvious? They have so much content that new stuff isn't worth the cost of reviewing. This is no doubt true at other agencies too; some, like SS, seem to have basically stopped reviewing instead of shutting off uploads. Maybe they rank new uploads lower in search on the assumption that average quality is lower without review.
133
« on: July 27, 2018, 09:47 »
Join us in the RACE TO THE BOTTOM! There will be a t-shirt.
134
« on: July 17, 2018, 11:02 »
sgoodwin4813 - a golden shower
stockastic - FOX is blasting trump on this one
You mean FOX actually hit a limit? But surely Hannity is still loyal.
135
« on: July 16, 2018, 22:00 »
This latest debacle may actually cost him a measurable amount of support. Don't count on it though. Remember, Trump people only know what Trump, and Fox, tell them. They're not even aware of what's going on. And anyway, what about Hilary Clinton's emails?
136
« on: July 16, 2018, 13:22 »
People who get their reality from Fox are being led down a very strange path indeed.
137
« on: July 13, 2018, 10:10 »
I wish I could close my account again.
138
« on: July 12, 2018, 10:19 »
I gave up on stock and closed all my accounts except Alamy. They're far from perfect, but they haven't been a part of the methodical trashing of the business carried out by 'agencies' like SS. I still have a sale at Alamy once in a while, and I get a few dollars for it, which is fine.
139
« on: July 11, 2018, 16:57 »
[bump]
No news now in several months. I assume whatever the plan was, it didn't happen, and I should probably close my account - if there's still anyone around to do it.
Anyone heard anything different?
140
« on: July 04, 2018, 14:41 »
The DMCA was written by lobbyists for the big internet providers, with the intention of shielding them from responsibility and, naturally, liability for copyright infringement. It works well.
141
« on: June 30, 2018, 09:01 »
The paper prints seem to be consistently ok. I see lots of complaints about metal prints in their forum.
142
« on: June 18, 2018, 16:21 »
As many may know SS is working with IBM about using AI, so those crazy portfolios can be an AI test data, or AI produced "artwork"
I'm sure companies like SS think they see big money in renderings generated by so-called "AI". What would a fine microstock company like SS enjoy more than putting photographers and vector artists completely out of business? Yes, these images could be something like that.
143
« on: June 18, 2018, 10:18 »
I got out of SS long ago and couldn't care less what happens to that company. But these crazy "portfolios" really have me curious - what's actually going on? Obviously no one is sitting at a computer uploading thousands of nearly identical renderings, and SS isn't paying anyone to inspect them. They're either produced internally, or by someone with an insider connection, and loaded directly into the system.
Are there buyers who actually need something like this, to assemble a composite image for an ad? Maybe they need a black shelf at a specific angle?
144
« on: June 09, 2018, 13:08 »
As if I needed another reason to never have anything to do with these companies again.
145
« on: June 04, 2018, 12:37 »
Pretty sure the best "exciting news" is yet to come! 
146
« on: May 31, 2018, 16:40 »
Get your tinfoil hats ready for more announcements about "sophisticated AI-powered keywording".
147
« on: May 31, 2018, 13:11 »
Nothing to see here, folks. Just keep walking and let the emergency crews do their work.
148
« on: May 08, 2018, 09:50 »
A more credible theory about why you seem to be troubled more than others with numerous returns might be that your work has technical faults
A good theory, except I didn't say anything about "numerous returns". I think I've had maybe 2 over the years. I don't seem to be doing a good job of writing the posts you actually want to reply to. But I'm sure you're right about my lousy photography.
149
« on: May 07, 2018, 13:06 »
No doubt the TOS would allow this, because it's not a 'sale'. I don't necessarily think Alamy set out to cheat us by turning 'sales' into 'rentals' - maybe it's something they just sort of slid into by going overboard to please customers. And over time, they found out it was a source of revenue, so they loosened things up even more.
I don't know the details, I'm just guessing that the customer pays Alamy something for these 'returned' images, and if so, we obviously don't get a cut.
So you don't actually have a single shred of evidence that any such thing is happening, outside of what goes on in your vivid imagination?
I notice that you ignored my point about the risk that news of such a scheme would be bound to leak out eventually.
Which part of "I'm just guessing" wasn't sufficiently clear?
150
« on: May 04, 2018, 14:42 »
I think what they're doing is basically "renting" images without paying royalties. The client uses the photo for internal purposes - design mockups, presentations, sales pitches for ad campaigns, or just to develop ideas - in exchange for a sort of "restocking fee" from which we get nothing.
Wouldn't that be blatantly illegal - which would be very stupid of them because somewhere along the way a "renter" would also be a contributor. And remember, Alamy's profits fund cancer research, it's not run by some Wall Street shyster who's trying to rip everyone off for personal gain.
No doubt the TOS would allow this, because it's not a 'sale'. I don't necessarily think Alamy set out to cheat us by turning 'sales' into 'rentals' - maybe it's something they just sort of slid into by going overboard to please customers. And over time, they found out it was a source of revenue, so they loosened things up even more. I don't know the details, I'm just guessing that the customer pays Alamy something for these 'returned' images, and if so, we obviously don't get a cut.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 160
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
