Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime (Read 72865 times)

gbalex · « **Reply #300 on:** May 31, 2014, 11:42 »

It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.

We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.

Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.

heywoody · « **Reply #301 on:** May 31, 2014, 12:00 »

Quote from: bunhill on May 31, 2014, 11:39

Quote from: ethan on May 31, 2014, 10:51
please respect the views of full time photographers that depend on selling their images to live and support their families.

Two things:

1. Nobody in microstock can seriously make this argument with a straight face.

2. If your markets are genuinely sustainable and economically viable then they will not depend upon you persuading people to do this or that.

There are more and more microstock pictures every day. The more of something there is, the less you can realistically expect to get paid. Microstock is the basic (no added value) stock product and is clearly moving ever closer towards being free at the point of delivery IMO.

This is well said - just because the reality is not very palatable doesn't make it less real ...

Axel Lauer · « **Reply #302 on:** May 31, 2014, 12:11 »

@ethan,
your right

@gbalex
well said

Just made an decision
I will pull 70% of my port from SS
SS is the "last man standing" - all others i already gave the axe (means i already canceled although some of them like DT still sell my images)

What i will do:
I leave the typical stock-crap which can be done by any of our interns and the good stuff like travel or fashion i will pull and give symbiostock a try.

I will leave the videos online until the trend "sell for pennys" will arise there too.
Then it would be time to pull the videos as well.

Enough is enough

ethan · « **Reply #303 on:** May 31, 2014, 12:19 »

Quote from: Axel Lauer on May 31, 2014, 12:11

@ethan,
your right

@gbalex
well said

Just made an decision
I will pull 70% of my port from SS
SS is the "last man standing" - all others i already gave the axe (means i already canceled although some of them like DT still sell my images)

What i will do:
I leave the typical stock-crap which can be done by any of our interns and the good stuff like travel or fashion i will pull and give symbiostock a try.

I will leave the videos online until the trend "sell for pennys" will arise there too.
Then it would be time to pull the videos as well.

Enough is enough

It's not my place to interfere with your plan, it's good that you have a plan.

Why don't you consider doing exactly what you plan with Symbiostock but keep your port at SS (just for the income) and then cull it by 70% when you are ready?

That way you don't punish yourself financially and it might help in the interim period establishing your symbiostock site.

Might be worth consideration.

Oh. And good luck

emjaysmith · « **Reply #304 on:** May 31, 2014, 12:26 »

Unfortunately in this day and age the majority of people in all walks of life are all too willing to sell out tomorrow for the chance of making a quick buck today.
The saddest thing of all, in my opinion is that those who choose not to follow that path merely make it even more profitable for those that do.
I suspect that the real reason that some people are so quick to take these type of deals see it as an opportunity to enhance their incomes by taking advantage of reduced competition.
I am certain that those who participate in these schemes will see some short term benefits, BUT only if the majority of people opt out.
I am not referring to any contributor/s in particular here but I would ask those who are thinking of participating in any of these recent schemes to remember that they are gambling with everyone's future incomes, not just their own and that is why some people may appear somewhat aggressive in response to their actions.
I sincerely hope that everything pans out in the end and we can all enjoy a more prosperous future

ferdinand · « **Reply #305 on:** May 31, 2014, 13:30 »

Quote from: emjaysmith on May 31, 2014, 12:26

I suspect that the real reason that some people are so quick to take these type of deals see it as an opportunity to enhance their incomes by taking advantage of reduced competition.

this is essential - great post - dpc problem

PureArt · « **Reply #306 on:** May 31, 2014, 16:00 »

Guys,

DreamsTime is not a bad agency. And, as one guy said here, "DT is relatively honest".

(I like this definition ("relatively honest") very much. We are now at the point of time when all the microstocks go to 3 groups: "relatively honest", "dishonest" and "too small to be considered as a serious agency". And there is no "honest" group at all. So, let's be more respectful to DT.)

Now to the point. I do not like this shady deal offered by DreamsTime and I opted out - turned off all the partner sales, because DT does not offer any other way to opt out.

But I can change my decision if DreamsTime will fix the errors they just made. All the errors were mentioned and discussed here at MSG.

First of all, I must say that I contacted DT support and they answered my questions politely. But why do not they send a new corrected newsletter to all the DT contributors?! They answer to personal support emails, trying to fix their mistakes in person-to-person conversation, but why not send a new email to all the photographers?!

Now, after the 1-May boycott, Fotolia sends emails to the contributors several times a week! (Trying to entice the contributors) But DreamsTime sent the only message to us and they understand that they sent a bad invitation. Anyway, they did not send a more polite, correct, informative new message to us. Even the broken links were not fixed. They do not need chisel+stone to make the message, but ...

So, dear DreamsTime, please show us your respect and confirm your reputation: Write a new text and send it to us. You see all the questions here at MSG. Just write some good answers to us - your partners.

P.S.
What especially I do not like in DT offer is: "You have 5 days to decide."
Emm... Excuse me?! Why not 5 hours or 5 minutes? Where did you take this number? We are photographers and designers, our job does not require to be online 24/7/365. And I also do not think that DT makes any business decisions in such a hurry. Why should we?

P.P.S.
Sorry for my bad English.

Mantis · « **Reply #307 on:** May 31, 2014, 16:22 »

Quote from: robhainer on May 31, 2014, 10:22

I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.

I am not trying to make it personal in any way. I hope you don't feel that's what I am doing. We are having a great discussion as far as I'm concerned.

Alex5248 · « **Reply #308 on:** May 31, 2014, 17:25 »

My answer to DreamsTime Please exclude me from this “Beta” or “Pilot” project. Customers are stealing pictures from everywhere for their blogs and it is not fear to the contributors to give them access for free to your database. I know that Getty Images made reshaping of the market with close to 39 millions free images. If someone has to have blog and couldn’t make money from it has to close this blog or to support it by them. I’m not supporter of the idea for free images at all. I show you before year or two how one picture which wasn’t downloaded as a stock photo for sell but when was shown as free stock photo for a week has more than 100 downloads which means the Stock Photo wasn’t good when have to pay $0.36 but was enough good to be used when was free $0.00. No action of Getty Images (they are not connected with photography Getty Image is own by investment fond) no any other steps back in front of the customers will make any prosperity of the micro stock photography.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #309 on:** May 31, 2014, 17:44 »

In the absence of information nobody knows whether DT is offering a good deal or a bad deal. When we hear how the beta test went and what comes out of it we should be able to make informed decisions on what to do. Compared with all the other stuff going on this topic is small beer and, really, acting like a trade union picket line attacking people for not having the same point of view as you is totally over the top.

I would argue that it is completely misguided to think that personal attacks will forge unity. The only way to get people to join you in a campaign is through reasoned argument. Abuse will not only create divisions, it will drive away reasonable people who do not want to get involved in viciousness and thus, ultimately, guarantee the failure of those who resort to abuse.

The main issue at the moment is Fotolia's DPC, not DT's attempt to set up some new deal, and I suspect this squabble is distracting attention from that far more important cause.

heywoody · « **Reply #310 on:** May 31, 2014, 17:49 »

Quote from: PureArt on May 31, 2014, 16:00

… (I like this definition ("relatively honest") very much. We are now at the point of time when all the microstocks go to 3 groups: "relatively honest", "dishonest" and "too small to be considered as a serious agency". And there is no "honest" group at all. So, let's be more respectful to DT.)…

Excellent summary. DT, in general, suffers from a lack of transparency but is (relatively) fair compared to the others that are actually worth a * (other than SS who appear to make very few mistakes, business or PR).
This initiative seems harmless enough with the limited files etc, will certainly have no impact on me personally because it’s limited and doesn’t include my best selling files so prepared to let it run & see how it goes. Equally, folks who will be or think they will be compromised or who have a principled position can opt out. IS unilaterally hugely reduced prices not long ago with no opt out and no corresponding sales increase. No long before, FT and 123 did something similar. Even the conscientious objectors have to admit this exercise DT are running is not in the same league.

leaf · « **Reply #311 on:** June 01, 2014, 00:44 »

I've just finished a lot of editing of this thread. I have tried to remove all the posts that are simply personal insults, crude language and mud slinging and kept things related to the topic. Let's try keep this a little more professional and cut the insults. If I missed any posts please let me know. The 'report post' works well.

One member was also banned for continually using crude language and insulting members.

pictureman75 · « **Reply #312 on:** June 01, 2014, 02:40 »

Well done, Leaf ... these discussions (DT, FT, DPC ...) are too important for us all to be disturbed and flogged to death by trivialities!

luissantos84 · « **Reply #313 on:** June 01, 2014, 05:22 »

sorry Tyler but was I the one offending other members? all my posts were removed

leaf · « **Reply #314 on:** June 01, 2014, 05:28 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on June 01, 2014, 05:22

sorry Tyler but was I the one offending other members? all my posts were removed

I removed a lot of posts that were off topic and quotes of those posts

luissantos84 · « **Reply #315 on:** June 01, 2014, 05:29 »

ok that is fine!

robhainer · « **Reply #316 on:** June 01, 2014, 08:44 »

Quote from: Mantis on May 31, 2014, 16:22

Quote from: robhainer on May 31, 2014, 10:22
I'm OK if you guys want to make it personal if it makes you feel better. But really, it's not personal and I'm entitled to my opinion.

I am not trying to make it personal in any way. I hope you don't feel that's what I am doing. We are having a great discussion as far as I'm concerned.

No. It wasn't you. You were debating the topic, and you made some good points. It's the people who were trying to make it about me and my decision to opt back in to DPC who were making it personal when that has nothing to do with this discussion.

ethan · « **Reply #317 on:** June 01, 2014, 08:52 »

Quote from: gbalex on May 31, 2014, 11:42

It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.

We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.

Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.

Could not agree more.

The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.

robhainer · « **Reply #318 on:** June 01, 2014, 12:13 »

Quote from: ethan on June 01, 2014, 08:52

Quote from: gbalex on May 31, 2014, 11:42
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.

We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.

Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.

Could not agree more.

The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.

I'm not sure where you're coming from. I think it's the opposite. I'm on track to make more than $20,000 this year from stock. While that's not a full-time salary, it's not pocket change either. It's enough for me to care about what happens to it, which is why I've made the decisions I have. "Boycotting" Fotolia would have cost me a decent chunk of that money, while hobbyists who do make pocket change can afford to delete whatever they want.

farbled · « **Reply #319 on:** June 01, 2014, 12:28 »

I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #320 on:** June 01, 2014, 12:30 »

Quote from: robhainer on June 01, 2014, 12:13

Quote from: ethan on June 01, 2014, 08:52
Quote from: gbalex on May 31, 2014, 11:42
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.

We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.

Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.

Could not agree more.

The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.

I'm not sure where you're coming from. I think it's the opposite. I'm on track to make more than $20,000 this year from stock. While that's not a full-time salary, it's not pocket change either. It's enough for me to care about what happens to it, which is why I've made the decisions I have. "Boycotting" Fotolia would have cost me a decent chunk of that money, while hobbyists who do make pocket change can afford to delete whatever they want.

On the other hand I'll probably make more than twice that much from microstock this year, and I not only opted out, I just deleted my files from Fotolia. I'd like to earn even more next year, and I think DPC will make that more difficult. I'm not interested in being associated with a coompany that undercuts my sales elsewhere.

ethan · « **Reply #321 on:** June 01, 2014, 12:47 »

The 'hobbyists' (their term not mine) are missing the point.

Collectively we must resist at all times giving away our products for free - I really am struggling with the mentality sometimes - of people that believe their 'product' is so worthless they can willingly give it to complete strangers (that never, ever come back to buy from you) their images.

Complete madness.

No business worth it's salt has ever devalued their product to such an extent they give it away for free.

And when the day comes, and we're collectively heading that way, when there are literally millions of RF images on the web for free, the very same people that (today) are willing to give away their stuff for free, will realise, far too late "Oh ****, look what's happened"

"Oh well, back to the day job, it was nice while it lasted. My, I really feel (not) for all those professional full timers that warned us this might happen......"

robhainer · « **Reply #322 on:** June 01, 2014, 12:56 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on June 01, 2014, 12:30

Quote from: robhainer on June 01, 2014, 12:13
Quote from: ethan on June 01, 2014, 08:52
Quote from: gbalex on May 31, 2014, 11:42
It is nice to see that the sedate boiled frogs are starting to wake up enough to jump out of the pot.

We can now engage in conversations that will benefit our collective good. The me mentality will be the death of us, if we fail to address it.

Instead of fighting it is time to come together to discuss our long term welfare in this greed driven business model.

Could not agree more.

The inevitable split between the collective of Stock/Commission photographers (Full time making a living) versus hobbyists that do it for pocket money is becoming more apparent. The latter group essentially have nothing to loose, they just go back to their day jobs when all RF images are free on the internet.

I'm not sure where you're coming from. I think it's the opposite. I'm on track to make more than $20,000 this year from stock. While that's not a full-time salary, it's not pocket change either. It's enough for me to care about what happens to it, which is why I've made the decisions I have. "Boycotting" Fotolia would have cost me a decent chunk of that money, while hobbyists who do make pocket change can afford to delete whatever they want.

On the other hand I'll probably make more than twice that much from microstock this year, and I not only opted out, I just deleted my files from Fotolia. I'd like to earn even more next year, and I think DPC will make that more difficult. I'm not interested in being associated with a coompany that undercuts my sales elsewhere.

They're your files, so I don't have a problem with it. I just get annoyed when people tell me what to do with my files especially when all they have to back up their assertions are assumptions, speculations and guesses. Fact is, we don't know what impact any of this will have. Every other site sells images cheaper than Shutterstock, which makes me most of my stock income. I still use them. I don't see the difference. This effort by Dreamstime could mean more money. I don't see the harm in letting them use a few of my low income images to find out. I think it's worth the very small risk.

That said, I understand the point people like Mantis have made. The email by Dreamstime wasn't a very good effort. It's not very clear what they're trying to do, and you should be able to opt out without losing other Alliance sales.

robhainer · « **Reply #323 on:** June 01, 2014, 13:00 »

Quote from: farbled on June 01, 2014, 12:28

I'm a hobbyist/part time stock shooter. The inference that I'm just in it for a few dollars is insulting. I have plenty to lose besides money. Lumping everyone together as one "type" is inherently a stupid thing to do. Its like saying there is only one type of buyer, one type of agency and one type of stock photo.

Sorry, Farbled. I was just responding to Ethan. Even for people who don't rely on the income still pour a lot of heart and soul into their images. And let's face it, uploading and keywording isn't a very pleasurable experience; it can only be called "work."

E

disorderly · « **Reply #324 on:** June 01, 2014, 13:13 »

Well said, robhainer. I agree with both your points: that making a few images available for Dreamstime's pilot represents a small risk financially, one that I'm willing to take; and that DT could have and should have handled it better. The lack of a more limited opt out is a pain; your choices are either to opt out of everything or to disable the specific set of images DT identified in your email, at least for the duration of the pilot. In my case that's 21 images. Given the goal, the duration of the pilot and at least the possibility of being paid at the end of the trial, that seems a fair investment to me. Your mileage may vary.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime (Read 72865 times)

gbalex

heywoody

Axel Lauer

ethan

emjaysmith

ferdinand

PureArt

Mantis

Alex5248

BaldricksTrousers

heywoody

leaf

pictureman75

luissantos84

leaf

luissantos84

robhainer

ethan

robhainer

farbled

Shelma1

ethan

robhainer

robhainer

disorderly

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors