Author Topic: StockXpert Images on Photos.com (Read 110145 times)

DanP68 · « **Reply #275 on:** August 05, 2008, 04:02 »

Contributors do remember, Epixx. I gather it will take a long time to build back trust. Fotolia eventually raised sub commissions, but from reading recent posts it is obvious contributors still view them with a wary eye.

epixx · « **Reply #276 on:** August 05, 2008, 04:48 »

Quote from: DanP68 on August 05, 2008, 04:02

Contributors do remember, Epixx. I gather it will take a long time to build back trust. Fotolia eventually raised sub commissions, but from reading recent posts it is obvious contributors still view them with a wary eye.

You are right of course, and the positive side of this is that a number of contributors actually did pull out their guns. The competition between the agencies is much to hard for them to lose the top contributors. Those are much more important than a price difference of a few dollars. I'm a buyer too, and if I can't find the photo I'm looking for one place, I go elsewhere, and it really doesn't matter much if the price is 1 or 20 dollars. I can't afford to lose a client over 19 dollars.

domencolja · « **Reply #277 on:** August 05, 2008, 05:35 »

As little as a singular opinion would matter, their first announcement never shocked me anyways. My EL sales across all the sites were and are non existent. Vector artists usually don't get them at all (unless their product is of a very particular sort). Said that, when StockXpert announced that they would expand their market potential to photos.com with regular subscriptions (at least to me: 0.30$ not getting ELs is still 0.30$, no matter the usage) and offering PPD options for EPS format vectors ranging from 50$-250$, I confess I was delighted. PPDs priced as mid-macrostock is good news and on top of that on a site that I would never get anyways. This fact to me sounded like contributing to an additional site with subscriptions plus PPDs for free (no uploading process, no anything).

I will stay opted in and the latest news don't concern me at all. But I deeply understand all those that confide in EL sales (with certain differences not to be ignored) and don't want to throw them away for free. I do not get EL sales anyways, so this is no matter what a win-win situation. I'm completely aware that a lot of my sales are used illegally for purposes not covered by standard RF license, but that's something I knew from the very beginning.

For vector artists like me, PPDs and semi-EL subscription (for raster versions) are good news. For photographers that value their work and found their income (and honor) in ELs, there's the opt-out option sorting things out. If you can't accept it, bail out. It's easy (at last).

p.s.: I'm not fond of this subscriptions trend, but if that's where the agencies are going, I'd rather stay in (with earnings on the rise) than "close shop" for pride reasons (btw, there's a LOT of low earners leading the pack for these EL sales and a couple of dozen Dollars a month - excuse the term - I'm really grateful for their free community work, but sometimes they could spend less time on forums and more in shooting/drawing pictures). At the end of the day, if you work (hard or not, relative to your expectations and plans), ELs mean nothing. Getting robbed while earning for bread (and a lot more)? Fine with me - that's how things work in the microstock industry. If you can't stand it, look elsewhere.

rene · « **Reply #278 on:** August 05, 2008, 05:58 »

Quote from: photoshow on August 05, 2008, 01:35

This industry is already undermined and accepting the subscription plan here as it now stands only deepens the undermining of the industry.

It is well past time that these greedy agencies came back to the realization that WE are the ones that THEY work for not the other way around. The Agency is the AGENT that means they make their livings off of our talent. They own nothing but servers, we own the content and as such if we stand UNITED on issues we remain in control.

It is time for the contributing content creators in this industry to grow sacks and stand up against this fiscal abuse.

It truly is sad that JI and StockXpert have gone down the same greed lined path as the rest of this industry. I actually liked it here but the truth is that under the current conditions I am done here. My legacy portfolio can remain as long as it does not contribute to the undermining of my sales elsewhere and everyone else here needs to stand up and take the same stance here and WE WILL WIN THIS ONE.

DO NOT OPT IN TO StockXpert / PHOTOS.com Subscriptions. To do so only weakens an already terminally weak industry. The health and strength of this industry lies firmly in the hands of the contributors. We own the content and as such we own the power! To win though WE have to ACT TOGETHER!

Agree with Bobby

rene · « **Reply #279 on:** August 05, 2008, 06:17 »

Quote from: domencolja on August 05, 2008, 05:35

and offering PPD options for EPS format vectors ranging from 50$-250$, I confess I was delighted. PPDs priced as mid-macrostock is good news and on top of that on a site that I would never get anyways.

So you think that 50-250$ sales are posible at Photos.com ?
For me it looks like "everything for 1$" shop with one display with 250$ prices. Not same kind of buyers.

domencolja · « **Reply #280 on:** August 05, 2008, 06:40 »

Quote from: rene on August 05, 2008, 06:17

Quote from: domencolja on August 05, 2008, 05:35

and offering PPD options for EPS format vectors ranging from 50$-250$, I confess I was delighted. PPDs priced as mid-macrostock is good news and on top of that on a site that I would never get anyways.
So you think that 50-250$ sales are posible at Photos.com ?
For me it looks like "everything for 1$" shop with one display with 250$ prices. Not same kind of buyers.

To say the truth we don't have any info on the amount (and type) of sales photos.com produces, but it's still better than nothing. I'm inclined to think that too much weight is being assumed from the EL vs. regular RF license differences. And as a vector "artist" that gets no ELs at all, another market opportunity is always a good deal to me.

Of course I refrain from writing final words, but right now every sale is a sale to me.

fintastique · « **Reply #281 on:** August 05, 2008, 06:44 »

I had noticed a steady decline in credit sales at StockXpert.

Back in September/October 2007 I had no subscription sales and a healthy number of credit sales, the ratio changed to 2 credit sales for every sub then 1.5 credit for every sub and now in August I have more sub sales than credit sales.

Yesterday at one point I checked my earnings I had 5 sub sales and no credit sales the subs sales were 1 XXL, 2 XL + 2 L

I was particularly annoyed at the XXL sale as it was an original illustration which should have earned $7.50.

At least at Fotolia subscription downloads are capped at L size.

This morning I received the e-mail from StockXpert regarding photos.com I decided to visit the forum and have skimmed through the 6 pages of this thread.

I am thankful of the opt out options I will certainly be using them.

kgtoh · « **Reply #282 on:** August 05, 2008, 06:47 »

Quote from: rene on August 05, 2008, 06:17

Quote from: domencolja on August 05, 2008, 05:35

and offering PPD options for EPS format vectors ranging from 50$-250$, I confess I was delighted. PPDs priced as mid-macrostock is good news and on top of that on a site that I would never get anyways.
So you think that 50-250$ sales are posible at Photos.com ?
For me it looks like "everything for 1$" shop with one display with 250$ prices. Not same kind of buyers.

I agree. They are definitely not targeting the $250 an image crowd. The promise of a $250 is, to me, a magician's distraction while they sell EL's at 30 cents. It is very obvious to me that StockXpert has moved from a "win-win" relationship with contributors towards one where they are looking at any means possible to exploit contributors. Perhaps it's desperation on JI's part. This what scares me, that I have to continually look over my shoulder to protect myself.

I think that's what drove previously loyal StockXpert contributors to bail out. It's not only matter of revenue from EL sales (although for larger contributors, EL sales from other sites can easily be more than total sales for StockXpert, so it's worth protecting), StockXpert also broke an unspoken trust that they, in their role of representing contributors, are looking out for their best interests. It became as much an emotional issue as a logical one. You will notice that the contributors that deleted their photos (and were the most vocal about it), were the ones who had been with StockXpert the longest and were the most emotionally connected to StockXpert. It's a shame because, from a business standpoint, you should cherish your most loyal stakeholders first.

(copying my post from the StockXpert forum:)
Speaking for myself personally.

I previously had subscriptions opted in. I have nothing against subscriptions per se; I realize it's a valid business model, although perhaps not palatable to everyone.

I have now opted out of subscriptions and opted out of Partner Licensing. I am keeping participation to a minimum because I realize that, no matter how sweetly it's phrased, any new developments and revenue models are to the benefit of StockXpert/JI and not me.

I will still continue selling at StockXpert because business is business. However, the trust is broken, and I will be out of here at the first sign of any hanky-panky.

stokfoto · « **Reply #283 on:** August 05, 2008, 07:17 »

I am glad we are given the option to opt out.
ironically in order to opt out we have to give up sub sales too which, clearly is there to encourage people to take part in this deal so if they want to keep their subs earnings,they will have stay opted in for sub thus for photos.com deal too
I know many people here (including me)weren't too happy with subs but many of us had them opted in as it has some impact on our overall sales.So ,here is the compromise,I'd rather loose sub sales rather than completely dropping StockXpert.

Thank you StockXpert anyway I think they handled the issue quite well.

louoates · « **Reply #284 on:** August 05, 2008, 08:25 »

I had two nice 2.50 credit sales this morning. I opted out months ago and have an increase in sales. I'm convinced that subs were taking away dollars from my portfolio there. I'm still getting the sales but at the higher rate. I'll stay opted out very happily.

astrocady · « **Reply #285 on:** August 05, 2008, 08:53 »

I still have two questions....

#1 is on the opt out deadline of August 15. Does this mean that after this date the opt out option will be completely gone? We only have 2 weeks to see how Photos.com works? If we opt out now, can we opt back in at a date later than August 15th?

#2 -- What about the copyright issue on photo.com? Is Jupiter still going to strip our ownership of our pictures sold on photo.com?

southmind · « **Reply #286 on:** August 05, 2008, 09:34 »

Quote from: dnavarrojr on August 04, 2008, 20:44

Well, they'll keep their low commissions but at least they will keep the opt-out in place.

For those that pre-maturely deleted your portfolios... any regrets for lack of patience?

Absolutely not. I am glad to have removed my portfolio from this mess.
It surely will not count for StockXpert and JI, but I can't accept their deal and the way they do business. I am sure now there is a lack of confidence in this company, like we can see in the stock exchange curves. The market is always right.
I can't understand how you can do business with the same photos at differents prices on different sites. Opt-out doesn't help at all, because they see the market with an "all at 0.30$" slogan.
So they certainly will advantage "the opt-in" sales in the next few months. As I work with other sites, I don't want to kill my business because of J.I.

So No regret to leave. Just a regret to see StockXpert , which was a good site, canibalized by J.I

steve-oh · « **Reply #287 on:** August 05, 2008, 09:53 »

Hi astrocady,

#1 If you want your images included or exclude by the august 20 launch date, then please make your decision by August 15. You can opt-in or out at any time after that. The database is sync'ed once a week, so your images will be include or excluded during the week that you make your decision.

#2 You retain all rights to your images. You will never give up ownership through any of our Jupiter or 3rd party programs.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

Thanks!
-Steve

Quote from: astrocady on August 05, 2008, 08:53

I still have two questions....

#1 is on the opt out deadline of August 15. Does this mean that after this date the opt out option will be completely gone? We only have 2 weeks to see how Photos.com works? If we opt out now, can we opt back in at a date later than August 15th?

#2 -- What about the copyright issue on photo.com? Is Jupiter still going to strip our ownership of our pictures sold on photo.com?

astrocady · « **Reply #288 on:** August 05, 2008, 10:45 »

Steve,

Thank for your fast reply

Your answers make me feel a lot better. My port is small, but once our Florida weather straightens out and I can stand to be outside for more than 15 minutes at a time, it will be expanding rapidly. And with the ability to opt back out if Photo.com doesn't work out, I'm looking forward to doing business with StockXpert

On the copyright issue, I guess I had it wrong -- I thought I had read somewhere that images downloaded from Photos.com were to be credited to Jupiter Images only. Not that I'm all that vain, but I do like to see my name in print now and then.

Thanks again,
Astrocady (another Steve, BTW)

steve-oh · « **Reply #289 on:** August 05, 2008, 10:59 »

Hi Steve,

I understand the confusion. Right now the EULA does say that buyers need to credit Jupiterimages (we will review, clarify and fix all this), but the clause about ownership states that "The Image(s) shall remain the sole and exclusive property of JUPITERIMAGES, or its licensors."

This means images owned by Jupiter are Jupiter's property and images owned by the licensor (you) are your property.

Thanks,
-Steve

lisafx · « **Reply #290 on:** August 05, 2008, 11:02 »

Well, I am disappointed that I now have to opt out to all subscriptions in order to avoid the Photos.com deal, but I am grateful to StockXpert for allowing the opt-out at all.

Would like to thank Steve and StockXpert for listening to contributor concerns and allowing the opt out.

It is very important to many of us contributors to control where our images are sold and under what licenses. This helps us to continue to do that and so to me it is an acceptable solution.

Perfect, no, but definitely an acceptable compromise IMHO.

photoshow · « **Reply #291 on:** August 05, 2008, 11:07 »

Those of you who think that this does not have any effect on you because you don't currently have a significant EL market are missing the point completely.

Every subscription download at Photos.com will in fact be an EL. That download will carry with it the rights to create printed items for sale. Art prints, T-Shirts, Greeting Cards, image branded consumer items at retail and on Ebay.

Images downloaded under the Photos.com subscription EULA will be able to be used for all these uses and for the right for manufacturers to use your images as PRODUCT you will receive 30 cents!

If any of you allow this to happen then you are only hurting those in the industry who do rely on ELs and or have deals with manufactures to provide content at reasonable market prices. To allow your images to be licensed under this plan only contributes to the continuing undermine of pricing in this industry and will eventually lead full circle back to images being given away for free.

I personally would have happily opted in to the Photos.com plan had they only been willing to correct this issue in the EULA but their unwillingness to do so proves that when they say they are customer centric and that they realized we are customers too only proves they are lying.

First off WE are not customers we are Clients. Why is it that no one seems to understand ALL THESE AGENCIES WORK FOR US? We PAY THEM to market our talent and Content. They don't pay us WE PAY THEM as such WE HAVE THE POWER to stand up an make a real difference here but WE have to recognize OUR TRUE POSITION HERE

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #292 on:** August 05, 2008, 11:23 »

I think I have somewhere read (I do not know where) resale of itemes with our photos on it through ebay or cafepress is prohibited under the EULA of Photos.com. Is this covered by the prohibition of selling Physical Goods (for resale through on-demand services)? Can you clarify Steve?

Microbius · « **Reply #293 on:** August 05, 2008, 11:44 »

Quote from: photoshow on August 05, 2008, 11:07

Those of you who think that this does not have any effect on you because you don't currently have a significant EL market are missing the point completely.

Every subscription download at Photos.com will in fact be an EL. That download will carry with it the rights to create printed items for sale. Art prints, T-Shirts, Greeting Cards, image branded consumer items at retail and on Ebay.

Images downloaded under the Photos.com subscription EULA will be able to be used for all these uses and for the right for manufacturers to use your images as PRODUCT you will receive 30 cents!

If any of you allow this to happen then you are only hurting those in the industry who do rely on ELs and or have deals with manufactures to provide content at reasonable market prices. To allow your images to be licensed under this plan only contributes to the continuing undermine of pricing in this industry and will eventually lead full circle back to images being given away for free.

I personally would have happily opted in to the Photos.com plan had they only been willing to correct this issue in the EULA but their unwillingness to do so proves that when they say they are customer centric and that they realized we are customers too only proves they are lying.

First off WE are not customers we are Clients. Why is it that no one seems to understand ALL THESE AGENCIES WORK FOR US? We PAY THEM to market our talent and Content. They don't pay us WE PAY THEM as such WE HAVE THE POWER to stand up an make a real difference here but WE have to recognize OUR TRUE POSITION HERE

Absolutely right. The problem is that with the subscription model the agencies no longer take their commission as a percentage of our earnings.
This disconnect between our success and their success has made it very easy for them to forget that they work for us. They no longer get directly paid from our earnings.
Again, sorry guys, but this all comes down to Shutterstock. It is their model that is the problem and its success that is making the other agencies copy it.
It's a fantastic model for the agencies and an appalling one for submitters.

epixx · « **Reply #294 on:** August 05, 2008, 11:48 »

Quote from: Microbius on August 05, 2008, 11:44

Absolutely right. The problem is that with the subscription model the agencies no longer take their commission as a percentage of our earnings.
This disconnect between our success and their success has made it very easy for them to forget that they work for us. They no longer get directly paid from our earnings.
Again, sorry guys, but this all comes down to Shutterstock. It is their model that is the problem and its success that is making the other agencies copy it.
It's a fantastic model for the agencies and an appalling one for submitters.

Well said

steve-oh · « **Reply #295 on:** August 05, 2008, 12:14 »

Correct, Jan. Cafepress and eBay type print-on-demad distribution is prohibited under the the Photos.com EULA.

Thanks,
Steve

Quote from: Freezingpictures on August 05, 2008, 11:23

I think I have somewhere read (I do not know where) resale of itemes with our photos on it through ebay or cafepress is prohibited under the EULA of Photos.com. Is this covered by the prohibition of selling Physical Goods (for resale through on-demand services)? Can you clarify Steve?

photoshow · « **Reply #296 on:** August 05, 2008, 12:37 »

Quote from: steve-oh on August 05, 2008, 12:14

Correct, Jan. Cafepress and eBay type print-on-demad distribution is prohibited under the the Photos.com EULA.

Thanks,
Steve

Quote from: Freezingpictures on August 05, 2008, 11:23
I think I have somewhere read (I do not know where) resale of itemes with our photos on it through ebay or cafepress is prohibited under the EULA of Photos.com. Is this covered by the prohibition of selling Physical Goods (for resale through on-demand services)? Can you clarify Steve?

Steve, see there you go blowing more smoke. You and I both know that Ebay stores that are offering PRINTS are not deemed as Print On Demand. Ebay has become an accepted RETAIL outlet and can not be compared to Cafe Press. This license is not good for your contributors or for the industry and your issuance of it leaves Jupiter Images in a bad light. As an AGENT it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to act in GOOD FAITH to those you represent. This license is not in good faith and should not be offered as a Jupiter Images product.

Simply bringing the Photos.com subscription EULA in line with currently acceptable subscription EULA's would end all this discussion and would see the majority of contributors opt back in to subscriptions across the board. Personally I don't understand why Jupiter Images is so unwilling to address an issue that in the end will be more detrimental to them then not. By conceding on this point you guys would be back to the originally stated goal of being able to provide a consistent product across all your brands. By not conceding you only deepen the gap and cause the removal of even more content from the subscription model.

Freedom · « **Reply #297 on:** August 05, 2008, 12:44 »

As some of you have pointed out above, the problem is the suscription model which was initiated by SS.

If we all opt out (I do!), the subscription model will not work. I like StockXpert but I also like to see some respect for the photographers. The trend of the industry has been that the agencies bestow our work as their charitable gift to the buyers.

cphoto · « **Reply #298 on:** August 05, 2008, 13:02 »

Quote from: photoshow on August 05, 2008, 12:37

Quote from: steve-oh on August 05, 2008, 12:14
Correct, Jan. Cafepress and eBay type print-on-demad distribution is prohibited under the the Photos.com EULA.

Thanks,
Steve

Quote from: Freezingpictures on August 05, 2008, 11:23
I think I have somewhere read (I do not know where) resale of itemes with our photos on it through ebay or cafepress is prohibited under the EULA of Photos.com. Is this covered by the prohibition of selling Physical Goods (for resale through on-demand services)? Can you clarify Steve?

Steve, see there you go blowing more smoke. You and I both know that Ebay stores that are offering PRINTS are not deemed as Print On Demand. Ebay has become an accepted RETAIL outlet and can not be compared to Cafe Press. This license is not good for your contributors or for the industry and your issuance of it leaves Jupiter Images in a bad light. As an AGENT it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to act in GOOD FAITH to those you represent. This license is not in good faith and should not be offered as a Jupiter Images product.

Simply bringing the Photos.com subscription EULA in line with currently acceptable subscription EULA's would end all this discussion and would see the majority of contributors opt back in to subscriptions across the board. Personally I don't understand why Jupiter Images is so unwilling to address an issue that in the end will be more detrimental to them then not. By conceding on this point you guys would be back to the originally stated goal of being able to provide a consistent product across all your brands. By not conceding you only deepen the gap and cause the removal of even more content from the subscription model.

Excellent point Bobby.

I too can't understand why it seems so difficult to change the photo + EULA.
JI/StockXpert have everything to win by making a few changes in the EULA.

By not making those changes they acknowledge that a significant number of buyer do not want the EULA to be changed because they do use indeed a significant number of images to retail on products....

If their customers did not care there would be absolutely no reason to not bring the EULA up to today's standards.

NYTumbleweeds · « **Reply #299 on:** August 05, 2008, 13:08 »

Steve can you or another rep of StockXpert address Bobby Deal's questions? His points are valid & well put but, unless I have missed one, I've yet to see you publicly address his issues. While other contributors simple questions have been answered quickly.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: StockXpert Images on Photos.com (Read 110145 times)

DanP68

epixx

domencolja

rene

rene

domencolja

fintastique

kgtoh

stokfoto

louoates

astrocady

southmind

steve-oh

astrocady

steve-oh

lisafx

photoshow

Freezingpictures

Microbius

epixx

steve-oh

photoshow

Freedom

cphoto

NYTumbleweeds

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors