Author Topic: Not very understandable rejection message - Dreamstime (Read 14846 times)

Achilles · « **Reply #25 on:** May 24, 2013, 08:17 »

@Alistair: No, I don't read these forums, sorry. Got your link though.
@OP: without any examples this is just venting, no offense.

Alistair, we find these to be a usual case of replicating content. Good content but identical nevertheless. Many good photographers do this unfortunately, in order to compensate volume. They switch roles with the designer when they shouldn't.

...
admin edit: images removed per the owner's request
...

Same is happening for almost every recent file in your portfolio. The files are good, but we're a stock photography website not a template provider for designers. How many are too many? Why 4 and not 10? You might disagree with our policies, very well, nobody forces you to like them. We explained the reasons behind these rules countless times, can we move on?

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #26 on:** May 24, 2013, 08:39 »

Wow, bad practice publishing someone's rejected images. Can you do that? Nevertheless, bad practice and quite an arrogant response. I am not expecting anything else from DT though. SMH

JPSDK · « **Reply #27 on:** May 24, 2013, 08:44 »

Right ponke.
Archilles... Did alistair not even make you think about your policy?

leaf · « **Reply #28 on:** May 24, 2013, 08:45 »

Quote from: Achilles on May 24, 2013, 08:17

... but we're a stock photography website not a template provider for designers.

I agree that you are a stock agency not a template site but would argue the opposite way. Accepting just the one image is simply providing a template for designers to use.. accepting them all is providing a finished product, ready to be used... stock photography. Lots of designers know how to use Photoshop but many image buyers (especially microstock buyers) just want something simple that they can use right away. They don't want to have to edit it themselves.

You also chose an image which was easy to modify, the guy in the forest example is quite a bit harder to create variations.

noodle · « **Reply #29 on:** May 24, 2013, 08:54 »

wow - sounds like someone needs a course in PR...

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #30 on:** May 24, 2013, 09:17 »

Quote from: Achilles on May 24, 2013, 08:17

Many good photographers do this unfortunately, in order to compensate volume.

Many good designers need this, in order to have more possibilities to find the image that will fit better to their layout.
(Is it so difficult to understand this?)

JPSDK · « **Reply #31 on:** May 24, 2013, 09:26 »

PLUS to modernize their port so that the poor customer does not have to choose the same old photo again and again.

CommuniCat · « **Reply #32 on:** May 24, 2013, 10:45 »

Edited message: MSG - please take my image down in the post above. I think I asked nicely, but the request has been ignored by the poster above.

I've sent a message to admin - but I don't think anyone is "in". If there is a forum admin who can make a call to action - please do.

JPSDK · « **Reply #33 on:** May 24, 2013, 10:58 »

So an official from Dreamstime published files that he did not hold the copyright for.

How bad can it be?
Dont they have any limits? Do they think they are kings?

Shame on you Archilles and Dreamstime.

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #34 on:** May 24, 2013, 17:53 »

DMCA

Gel-O Shooter · « **Reply #35 on:** May 24, 2013, 19:25 »

Quote from: Achilles on May 24, 2013, 08:17

Alistair, we find these to be a usual case of replicating content. .............

Wow. This makes me exceedingly glad that I have had the good sense to never grace any forum with my real name/portfolio links! Apparently it makes the target practice for rude, arrogant agency reps way too easy.

JPSDK · « **Reply #36 on:** May 24, 2013, 21:49 »

I have sent a message to Dreamstime:

Attn.: Dreamstime HR.
Please note that a Dreamstime representative, Achilles, acts very improfessionally at the MSG forum.

+ a link to this thread.

fotografer · « **Reply #37 on:** May 25, 2013, 04:42 »

Quote from: JPSDK on May 24, 2013, 21:49

I have sent a message to Dreamstime:

Attn.: Dreamstime HR.
Please note that a Dreamstime representative, Achilles, acts very improfessionally at the MSG forum.

+ a link to this thread.

Achilles is Serban and he owns DT.

Mactrunk · « **Reply #38 on:** May 25, 2013, 07:41 »

I hope I'm not offending anyone now but I understand Dreamstime in this case. Im am also a buyer since 2005 and buy only at Dreamstime and never had a case were I needed more options. I would have bought the black version with no text on it. In the 8 years I am buying from them I never bought an image with added content. And if most designers work like I do they create an idea in their head and will look for the isolated image on black or white to use for that concept. And if I would search an image and for every image I get 5 versions the search results would be overwelming! The diversaty would not be great and I would see less images. So no offence... But I would do the same if I had a stock company.

And as a contributor I also had some of these rekections. But also some cases I don't agree with. But I see it like this. Dreamstime is helping me make money. So if it's on there termes so be it.

Please don't shoot me for my opinion.

rubyroo · « **Reply #39 on:** May 25, 2013, 07:45 »

<Bang!>

Only joking - it doesn't serve any of us to shoot the buyers.

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #40 on:** May 25, 2013, 08:05 »

Quote from: Mactrunk on May 25, 2013, 07:41

I hope I'm not offending anyone now but I understand Dreamstime in this case. Im am also a buyer since 2005 and buy only at Dreamstime and never had a case were I needed more options. I would have bought the black version with no text on it. In the 8 years I am buying from them I never bought an image with added content. And if most designers work like I do they create an idea in their head and will look for the isolated image on black or white to use for that concept. And if I would search an image and for every image I get 5 versions the search results would be overwelming! The diversaty would not be great and I would see less images. So no offence... But I would do the same if I had a stock company.

And as a contributor I also had some of these rekections. But also some cases I don't agree with. But I see it like this. Dreamstime is helping me make money. So if it's on there termes so be it.

Please don't shoot me for my opinion.

There are also a lot of photoshop noobs or non-designers looking for images and they will be delighted to find a ready product and even multiple choices to choose from.

Mantis · « **Reply #41 on:** May 25, 2013, 08:18 »

Quote from: Poncke v2 on May 25, 2013, 08:05

Quote from: Mactrunk on May 25, 2013, 07:41
I hope I'm not offending anyone now but I understand Dreamstime in this case. Im am also a buyer since 2005 and buy only at Dreamstime and never had a case were I needed more options. I would have bought the black version with no text on it. In the 8 years I am buying from them I never bought an image with added content. And if most designers work like I do they create an idea in their head and will look for the isolated image on black or white to use for that concept. And if I would search an image and for every image I get 5 versions the search results would be overwelming! The diversaty would not be great and I would see less images. So no offence... But I would do the same if I had a stock company.

And as a contributor I also had some of these rekections. But also some cases I don't agree with. But I see it like this. Dreamstime is helping me make money. So if it's on there termes so be it.

Please don't shoot me for my opinion.
There are also a lot of photoshop noobs or non-designers looking for images and they will be delighted to find a ready product and even multiple choices to choose from.

But where do you draw the line? This is but one example. I am sure that this could get some perpetual motion behind it and the site would be chock full of these kind of images. I have a s_hit load of images like this where I could do the same thing by adding PS elements. In fact I could double my portfolio conducting this kind of tactic. So, for me, Serban is probably doing the right thing because this kind of "templating" would be hard to define and we'd thus see a ton of the same exact images with added elements, some probably useful and some not. I think he is stopping this at the root cause for fear this kind of thing could perpetuate into something for which it wasn't intended (if he allowed it, of course).

Now if the OP repositioned the child for the added elements images and it was a "different" aesthetic shot, he could send that in. I don't think Serban is saying you can't do this, he is saying don't do it with the same exact image....at least that's my interpretation.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #42 on:** May 25, 2013, 08:45 »

Quote from: Mactrunk on May 25, 2013, 07:41

I hope I'm not offending anyone now but I understand Dreamstime in this case. Im am also a buyer since 2005 and buy only at Dreamstime and never had a case were I needed more options. I would have bought the black version with no text on it. In the 8 years I am buying from them I never bought an image with added content. And if most designers work like I do they create an idea in their head and will look for the isolated image on black or white to use for that concept. And if I would search an image and for every image I get 5 versions the search results would be overwelming! The diversaty would not be great and I would see less images. So no offence... But I would do the same if I had a stock company.

And as a contributor I also had some of these rekections. But also some cases I don't agree with. But I see it like this. Dreamstime is helping me make money. So if it's on there termes so be it.

Please don't shoot me for my opinion.

Who can more… can less…
So better have more than less.
If you don't need more images you will just take the one you need.
If you need more images of a series it is good that you can find it. And this don't create any trouble or damage to whom needs only one image.
So, what is the problem?

And you cannot generalize your specific case.
As I cannot generalize mine.

These last 6 years I have worked as Art/Creative Director for an editorial group.
We have magazines for men, for women (weekly and monthly) about politics and business, about sport and about events (TV - show, etc.).
We are very great consumers of images, directly from the photographers and from the stocks too.
We often use series as they are very useful to create stories or use as thread.
And this are real needs, real facts, not only opinion.

rimglow · « **Reply #43 on:** May 25, 2013, 09:54 »

Well, Achilles has shown an example of what he says is typical. Let me show you an example of what I find is typical, for me, on the similar rejections.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #44 on:** May 25, 2013, 09:59 »

you have copied the flame Danny, bad bad bad boy, that is why you had rejection for similar

(just in case, I am being sarcastic)

rimglow · « **Reply #45 on:** May 25, 2013, 10:01 »

Guilty.

Koufax73 · « **Reply #46 on:** May 25, 2013, 10:11 »

Grande Beppe, chi l'avrebbe detto che con tutti gli impegni politici avresti avuto il tempo di occuparti di Dreamstime

(Sorry for non-italians: I've made a joke about the nickname of OP)

JPSDK · « **Reply #47 on:** May 25, 2013, 15:11 »

Quote from: fotografer on May 25, 2013, 04:42

Quote from: JPSDK on May 24, 2013, 21:49
I have sent a message to Dreamstime:

Attn.: Dreamstime HR.
Please note that a Dreamstime representative, Achilles, acts very improfessionally at the MSG forum.

+ a link to this thread.
Achilles is Serban and he owns DT.

That makes it worse.
They can have what ever policy they want, that does not bother me. But it bothers me that those pictures were published.

click_click · « **Reply #48 on:** May 25, 2013, 15:41 »

Quote from: Achilles on May 24, 2013, 08:17

... but we're a stock photography website not a template provider for designers. ...

With all due respect Achilles, but this is unsubstantiated.

Other agencies prove that buyers look for and buy similar images. We can tell because this is how we make our money!!!

If you are seriously only providing "stock images" and NOT "templates" - please do us a favor and remove all images of an apple except one!!! Or better:

Remove all images of a business man except ONE!
Remove all images of a business woman except ONE!
Remove all images of a business meeting except ONE!
Remove all images of a XXX except ONE!

Because apparently ALL of Dreamstime's buyers are designers. Really?

If I can provide newer, better versions of an existing best seller (of mine), what is the logical reason to reject it because it is competing with an image from my own portfolio.

AS IF I DON'T KNOW THAT!!! That's why I'm uploading a better version so I can get MORE downloads.

This is insane!!!! I can't believe what you posted...

gostwyck · « **Reply #49 on:** May 25, 2013, 16:09 »

Quote from: click_click on May 25, 2013, 15:41

Quote from: Achilles on May 24, 2013, 08:17
... but we're a stock photography website not a template provider for designers. ...

With all due respect Achilles, but this is unsubstantiated.

Other agencies prove that buyers look for and buy similar images. We can tell because this is how we make our money!!!

If you are seriously only providing "stock images" and NOT "templates" - please do us a favor and remove all images of an apple except one!!! Or better:

Remove all images of a business man except ONE!
Remove all images of a business woman except ONE!
Remove all images of a business meeting except ONE!
Remove all images of a XXX except ONE!

Because apparently ALL of Dreamstime's buyers are designers. Really?

If I can provide newer, better versions of an existing best seller (of mine), what is the logical reason to reject it because it is competing with an image from my own portfolio.

AS IF I DON'T KNOW THAT!!! That's why I'm uploading a better version so I can get MORE downloads.

This is insane!!!! I can't believe what you posted...

That's what I don't get. It seems that all contributors are allowed to compete against my own previously uploaded images .... except me. If I've uploaded that subject before, even if the new series are vastly superior, they frequently get rejected for being 'similars'.

That's why I haven't uploaded to DT for over 2 years.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Not very understandable rejection message - Dreamstime (Read 14846 times)

Achilles

Poncke v2

JPSDK

leaf

noodle

Beppe Grillo

JPSDK

CommuniCat

JPSDK

Poncke v2

Gel-O Shooter

JPSDK

fotografer

Mactrunk

rubyroo

Poncke v2

Mantis

Beppe Grillo

rimglow

luissantos84

rimglow

Koufax73

JPSDK

click_click

gostwyck

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors