|
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 - drd
1
« on: February 27, 2021, 08:18 »
They are sales on which we receive royalties, but are cheekely classified only as views. See answer on a contributor ticket questioning connect sales: Thank you for your message and I sincerely apologize for the delay in my response. Regarding Promo.com, Getty Images makes a subset of iStock content available within their video editing tool. Any licenses of your content will appear on the Connect statement under the Price Per Image Product Type (https://contributors.gettyimages.com/HelpArticle.aspx?article_id=5176)
It's important to note that you are receiving royalties for this use - your content is not being given away for free. Also note that the usage is restricted, it is not the same usage permitted on a standard RF license.
We work with these Partners to ensure that your content is right inside their End Users workflow, exactly where and when they need it. In this way we can reach new, non-traditional customers at scale. For more information, visit: https://contributors.get...cle.aspx?article_id=6252
I'll just hope that most others who might care are making more than that.
My regular sales usually make up for that ridicolous connected stuff....
Although January 2021 was quite low in regular sales compared to previous months.
Connect is views not sales.
2
« on: December 15, 2020, 07:59 »
Several sites have restrictions on deletions in their contract. They don't want to see the kind of hemorrhage iStock had a few years back, when they had a really stupid security breach, and hundreds of photographers deleted their portfolios.
I understand why they do it, but it takes away the right for contributors to manage their own business. It pays to read the contract. If a contributor isnt ok with them taking control of your assets, dont sell there. I doubt I would have even signed up if those were the terms way back when.
If you upload images on istock/getty it is not your business anymore. At least they think so!
3
« on: October 24, 2020, 10:43 »
Much more useful if they would add a "No license found" tag.
4
« on: March 18, 2020, 11:11 »
Sales were made in Israel by Wibbitz COO. Anyone heard of this distributor ?
I have heard they are licensing the free Unsplash content for a monthly fee.
5
« on: December 20, 2019, 09:52 »
Getty Images CEO Dawn Airey should resign after this serious data breach!
6
« on: December 19, 2019, 17:17 »
I have received someone else's statement. What a bunch of loooosers!
7
« on: December 18, 2019, 14:37 »
Intellectual Property is the oil of the 21st Century (Mark Getty)
8
« on: December 18, 2019, 14:27 »
Least favorite is Getty
9
« on: April 04, 2019, 16:43 »
This is some sort of big theft scheme. I'd love to know how much the client paid for the last sale of which you have received $0,01 royalty.
My guess is that hey have paid $174.95 Premium Access and you got 20% of the rest.
10
« on: March 30, 2019, 05:05 »
Why don't you take your vintage collection and go with it to another thread? It is free to create a new thread!
The original post is about UNITY between contributors and not self-interest of particular individuals.
11
« on: March 29, 2019, 11:10 »
Beautiful fluctuation...
That is an irregular rising and falling in number of downloads. I cannot see any positiveness on that! There are more downloads, but the numbers are not adding up to generate the same amount of $ as previous years.
12
« on: March 24, 2019, 10:55 »
They would go into Chapter 11 and re-organize their debt - likely trade it for equity again. They still are the dominant market player and have a viable business without the debt load. Lenders don't want to kill the cow: They will find a creative way to keep it supplying them with milk. I worked for a company in a similar situation. Vulture funds usually find a way to keep the tap flowing -- albeit often at the cost of employees and suppliers.
If they sell milk for 6 cents, less photographers will decide to feed the cow. If photographers don't feed the cow it won't give any milk to produce the cheese. Lenders will not get the cheese and Getty will end up with a dead cow in the barns. https://twitter.com/jonathandklein/status/690559911252471808?lang=en
13
« on: March 23, 2019, 02:55 »
i hope they go bankrupt...lot of possibility of sales out there without those bigh sucker company...the problem is that if they go bankrupt imagine 00 millions file and more coming toward ss and fotolia...o better they stay there selling for penny to contributor...the problem is already there lot of exclusive seeing there rperd falling down and thinking to leave their exclusive status.
They wont go bankrupt but they might sellout to someone like Visual China Group... like Corbis did.
iStock has already been sold as part of a deal with Visual China Group. All istock uploads and older files are mirrored to veer and vcg.
Have you got a link for that?
The official word was that "VCG is a trusted business partner for Getty Images in China" meaning to get Getty images into the Chinese market.
Which of course led to low prices, mass copying and even them giving images away for free, though after many complaints that was said to have been stopped.
Whatever, it's not the same as being "sold".
It s kept very quiet, it is not in the news as the corbis sale, but every sign shows that the same has happened. http://aspp.com/10253-2/ iStock uploads are making it quicker onto Veer than own page. Veer was part of the Corbis sale.
14
« on: March 22, 2019, 09:38 »
i hope they go bankrupt...lot of possibility of sales out there without those bigh sucker company...the problem is that if they go bankrupt imagine 00 millions file and more coming toward ss and fotolia...o better they stay there selling for penny to contributor...the problem is already there lot of exclusive seeing there rperd falling down and thinking to leave their exclusive status.
They wont go bankrupt but they might sellout to someone like Visual China Group... like Corbis did.
iStock has already been sold as part of a deal with Visual China Group. All istock uploads and older files are mirrored to veer and vcg.
15
« on: March 20, 2019, 11:23 »
Getty images is giving you 6 cents for every sale. After knowing this it is simple math to find out how to make $150k/year
18
« on: February 01, 2019, 14:29 »
Nothing seems to sell these days/years on Alamy.
19
« on: February 01, 2019, 14:28 »
January was cold here.
20
« on: January 29, 2019, 15:45 »
21
« on: January 29, 2019, 14:53 »
The 85% royalty for photographers looks really promising and can't wait to see getty, ss and the other microstock sites go bust.
22
« on: December 06, 2018, 03:36 »
Can you share how was this person selling your images? (postcard or electronic download?)
23
« on: December 06, 2018, 03:31 »
They seem to be a legitimate secondary market. Check with your particular sites to be sure.
It might look legitimate, but claiming anothers work as your own is Copyright infringement. This is what they do.
24
« on: December 05, 2018, 03:47 »
Not sure how many of you have seen that the Getty Images, 500px, Corbis, Arcaid and many other collections https://www.vcg.com/creative/brands are now up for sale on the vcg.com site. On every image: 1. the contributors name is missing (replaced with an ID) 2. the EXIF information is wiped (from date to camera name to copyright information) 3. the copyright is attributed to '1995- 2018 vision China ' Since when is legal to do this? As far as I know the contributor is the author and the copyright holder, not the distributing company.
25
« on: May 18, 2018, 10:24 »
How contact istock I have to delete image from there and they dont respond to my email. Thank you
They won't delete it, only because you want to get it deleted.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
