|
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 - ann
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15
1
« on: June 15, 2015, 11:00 »
I don't know about demotix, but when an image is usually licensed for editorial use by a news agency, syndication is (sadly) included. ie, they can feed their story to anyone who wants to pick it up, and that includes the images.
We used to make residuals of that usage, I started off by shooting for the newspapers and we got a commission evertime that image was used in another paper or magazine that the paper owned, sadly, these days it's open season on photographer/videographer rights.
As budgets get smaller these companies just openly flout the laws with a "sue us" attitude, they know how little they pay us and know we can't sue.
This spring I caught our national broadcaster downloading my videos and using them on the news, how I caught them?, an intern tracked me down, emailed me, and then asked I call her, I called and she wanted to know "details" on the videos I had on some social media after I spent many hours on a couple of stakeouts to get some action shots in the winter.
They even offered me a special chance to be interviewed and "be on TV", I told her no I have a face for radio and that is why I am on this side of the camera.
So what they did was they used the video and credited me, as if it was ok steal it as long as they credit me except I still to this day can't figure out how to cash in those credits for cash 
It was content from what is now in these collections that they used for the news.
https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A988461.html
https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A1013880.html
I didn't bother going after them, lawyers are too expensive, but what got me was how openly they did it, when I found out a couple months later and called them they said, "You point is"?, "we have the right to aggregate anything on the internet" and that was that and hung up on me..
This is our national broadcaster and like everyone else they have been hit by terrible cutbacks and layoffs so now they get spot news video by stealing it where they can, usually from social media/YouTube and they will use it if it can be used unless someone has splashed a copyright right in the middle of the screen.
Times sure have changed.....
M
http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG
That's disgusting - and, of course, illegal, what the broadcaster did and said to you. Just because it's becoming the new 'norm' doesn't make it any less disgusting. Has it motivated you to replace unwatermarked video with watermarked ones on social sites, or stop putting up unwatermarked videos? I don't do video, but I do have my copyright smack in middle of images on my site. The next time someone mentions how it detracts from image, I'll share your story, along with my usual comment that I post images with aim of licensing them, period. - Ann
2
« on: June 12, 2015, 09:30 »
I received it and was interested enough to read the contract carefully, certain key parts several times.
General reminder about contracts, especially when one's considering becoming shareholder in company:
Each section, each word of a contract can have major implications on immediate and future obligations. Unless one has relevant legal training, having contract reviewed by lawyer is a MUST.
Taking a risk isn't necessarily a bad idea, just as long as you clearly understand the risk.
3
« on: May 14, 2015, 08:18 »
Distribution: yes
Novel use: no
UK newspaper scheme: yes
Archival/reportage: in
Video: n/a
- Ann
4
« on: March 17, 2015, 06:53 »
In a year they'll be old enough to drink in U.S.
5
« on: January 27, 2015, 00:58 »
Fun photo! It's a bit puzzling that you yourself posted the photo without a watermark after what happened when bride posted it without watermark (and, admittedly, without instructions about credit line). Based on how often I've had to explain to people (who have directly licensed my photos) how to include a byline, I'd guess that lots of people will now repost it without knowing how to fulfill your requirements, let alone those who won't notice or care what you wrote: "just please make sure there is a proper photographer credit with a link to my website, FB page ( www.facebook.com/joshuaraineyphotography), or IG account (@joshuaraineyphotography)." I'd 100% include a watermark, at least in lower corner. All the best - Ann I had quite the crazy circumstance this weekend. I shared an engagement photo with one of my brides, via text, no watermark; and she ended up sharing the image with a big organization that then re-posted it to their Facebook page. The image went viral, with over 150,000 likes and 20,000 shares in the first 24 hours. I was getting calls and messages from friends and clients that saw the photo on the news. Wild! Anyway, here's the link if ya'll want to check it out here: http://joshuaraineyphotography.com/wedding_engagement/hunt-is-over-going-viral/
I would also love to get your thoughts on watermark vs no watermark and any advice if you've had an image go viral like this! Cheers!
Joshua Rainey
6
« on: January 23, 2015, 21:28 »
Uncle Pete - fun list, and I'm happy to see I don't have to worry at all about Signs 1-3
(Mr. Know-It-Alll, Negative Guy, Gear-Centric Guy)
- Ms. Ann 
7
« on: January 23, 2015, 00:10 »
[deleted - duplicate post]
8
« on: January 23, 2015, 00:05 »
[deleted - duplicate post]
9
« on: December 23, 2014, 19:35 »
okay, I'll play:
When it's light out; otherwise, you're having a bad night.
10
« on: November 14, 2014, 13:07 »
The White House
11
« on: November 13, 2014, 09:15 »
Train platforms are the "cliffs" I capture photos on - it's so crucial to consciously and constantly listen for trains approaching - best to stay only briefly.
12
« on: November 09, 2014, 14:42 »
@wordplanet - Your answer is so comprehensive & helpful, that there's no way I can thank you enough or address all, but here's a bit: 1) '...with PS6 and CC's content aware fill I'm considering whether it's even worth keeping the watermark on my large photos...."Though, like you, I do magazine work, I feel most visitors (not counting media organizations) to my site don't use PS6/CC's content aware cloning, so my awful center watermark is still likely helping deter a decent percent from taking screenshots to then print, post online... (Yes, they're likely taking screenshots for offline viewing, emailing to pals.) On related note - Shortly after I was notified some images were selected for Lattice (before it went live) I opted out, due to its lack of watermarks, and then posted requests on PS's forum to add option to watermark. 2) A homepage with photos that are totally randomly populated won't fit my particular needs, so I'll have to pass on using template similar to yours, alas. ( If I could pick certain ones to appear at start, that would work, but I don't have coding skills, nor motivation to learn them, necessary to alter template default, if that's possible.) 3) concerning later posts on PS commission for downloads: Yes, it's easy to have customers download in way that avoids PS commission. For ex., my established clients have passwords that allow them to download files, and then I send invoice. No delay in their getting files, no PS commission. Thank you again for all your info! - Ann
@Wordplanet
Your homepage is quite effective.
Thanks Ann [.....]
13
« on: November 07, 2014, 23:55 »
@Wordplanet Your homepage is quite effective.It looks like you use a Beam template. If yes, it would be great if you'd answer any of these:--Do you have option of watermarking your homepage photos?--How do you populate homepage with photos - random? handpick all/some of them?--Are you, clients happy with your site's navigation, especially when viewed in iPad and similar?(I use one of their traditional templates.)Thanks! - AnnI have my site on Photoshelter too. Great for storage and for sharing assignment work with clients and impressing potential clients when they take a look.
My first two sales to publications this year covered the cost of my website for the year (I have the full pro account) and have had many buyers approach me to license my work who were specifically searching on Photoshelter's site since their search engine lets you search through just one portfolio or through everyone's. They have a great client base - lots of amazing photographers and lots of top-notch publications who search there and license directly from the photographer. I shoot a lot of local news/features type work and travel, so it's a great fit for me.
They ran a stock site themselves for a short time around 2008, but then switched to this model. They have lots of templates to choose from, and a back end archive you can use to organize and backup your work. Someone searching the site can find stuff in your "unlisted" galleries as long as you make it searchable, as well as the work you have visible in your front page galleries.
The staff is really helpful, they run a lot of webinars, and they actually answer their phones!
Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.
14
« on: October 06, 2014, 20:29 »
Was it a news upload - live news minimum is 6mb, as I remember it.
- Ann
15
« on: September 13, 2014, 11:09 »
As a contributor, I get what you mean by "the party who does the least gets the most" - especially IF you're talking about the amount of work - But the Amount of work often is not what determines someone's fee in a business that Sells a service, product - Sales tend to be king. The commission to partner agencies has to be large enough for them to bother taking it. Some options: opt out of partner/distributor deals --- avoid agencies that don't have opt out for partner deals (which will mean avoiding a lot of agencies) ---- work smart to develop/find ways to sell your work directly - freelance, be employee, be owner...As an aside - When I was looking into listing house with real estate broker using Multiple Listing, I didn't aim for lowest possible commission fee, since my property, though nice, was not special enough to motivate a broker to work as hard to promote & sell it for less commission than other nice houses. Now, if I didn't care how long it took to sell home, could be a different matter. - Ann ...30% of something is better than no sale at all.
And that is exactly how we got to the point that we're at today.
Point taken. But that is where we're at. They've given us the choice to opt out of the distribution program, so we are each free to decide if 30% is worth it.
That is not the point, the point is why does a distributor who literally has to do nothing, get 40%? More than the issuing agency and more than the image creator. The party who does the least, gets the most.
16
« on: August 16, 2014, 09:49 »
Lionheart - as a technical aside - clearly one graph's generally up and other's generally down, but the positioning of the straight lines exaggerates the incline of each.
17
« on: August 12, 2014, 11:08 »
I think one's average gross depends on a combination of image quality & scarcity, price negotiation, and luck. For any one sale, one of those factors can strongly determine price, but over time all factors matter.
I checked out my sales for past year, and average gross is within a few dollars of Ed's, so close to A's $100 gross average comment. I don't have any images on micros. Licenses were almost all editorial, and involved varied city sights, politicians, cars, animals, public celebrations and civic engagement...
- Ann
18
« on: July 31, 2014, 12:27 »
I'm surprised editorial is worth submitting to SS, with or without hoop-jumping.
Or is it they tend to attract POD?
19
« on: July 11, 2014, 08:28 »
Hi Shady Sue - If an Alamy contributor posted in their forum about getting a "top hundred sellers" letter due to earning less than $400 gross in June, there was a typo or other error - it's not accurate. I grossed well over $500 last month, and no "top 500" email arrived, let alone "top 100." So either the person has some details wrong, or Alamy sent email in error, didn't send an email in error.... I'm guessing the error is not with Alamy's emails in this case. (And, FWIW, during another recent month I grossed over $500, and no "Top Anything" letter then either.) All the best - Ann [ edited to modify my gross, plus add (after seeing Ed's post below): My portfolio's not quite 2,000 images ] Well I give up with them. Still only 1 sale in 2014 with nearly 600 images. I don't even bother checking my account anymore as I know there will be a big fat nothing (of course I just checked it now before I wrote this message ;-)
Is your Alamy content only there, or also on other sites?
Still, as I said before, I was about eight months and >800 files before I had my first sale, and they are all 'only on Alamy', except nowadays for some which are also on FAA.
Still, if you read last month's sales thread, they seem to have sent out emails to their 'top hundred sellers' in June, and some who made that happy band earned less than $400 gross in June, so ...
I just had my first sale of the month
Country: Worldwide
Usage: Non-Editorial Electronic and web uses
Media: Corporate website, single design
Industry sector: General business services
Image Size: Any size
Start: 01 June 2014
End: 01 June 2019
5 years multiple web use incl. personal screensaver use
$17.12 to me.
So certainly no get-rich-quick scheme.
Still, every month, some people report big-value sales, but obviously they're not sharing what files got the big money. But in fact, that's irrelevant, as 'big discount' trumps 'unique content'.
20
« on: June 17, 2014, 11:20 »
I don't understand why someone will go to Alamy to search for RF files and than will search for the same images on microstock? I guess if someone want cheap images, it will go from the first time on microstock agencies.
Perhaps because those particular customers want to see a really wide range at Alamy and really are open to licensing through Alamy, but first want to make sure their fav image isn't available for less at micro? - Ann
21
« on: May 30, 2014, 09:33 »
They rip us off because they can. What ( seriously) can we do about it? I rely on my stock income to pay my bills.
Prevention through education. Campaigns that effectively warn against joining agencies with unsatisfactory commission percentages and contributor relations would likely have higher success rate than campaigns to get contributors to leave. Yes, there will be many potential contributors who can't or won't be reached, influenced that way - but I believe a TIPPING POINT can be reached, where agencies stop assuming desirable contributors will accept downward spiraling, wildly unreasonable compensation and terms <A bit similar to how efforts to prevent others from starting to use heroin are likely more successful than efforts to get users to quit.> - Ann
22
« on: May 27, 2014, 10:10 »
[deleted, since my post may have included inaccuracies]
23
« on: April 18, 2014, 22:18 »
Haunting, otherworldly - thanks for sharing, ethan
24
« on: April 04, 2014, 08:06 »
Thank you all ! Now, for a conclusion I think is possible but with a lot of work, ambition and imagination
You appear to be choosing to focus on the more optimistic comments, rather than the more realistic (and, I feel, useful) ones. If you can earn money through photography in ways other than stock, I advise you to diversify and build on that. All the best - Ann
25
« on: April 01, 2014, 07:35 »
Fiverr did mention to me that they are interested getting more stock image gigs direct from artists, maybe even set up a separate category/section. If anyone wants to sell at Fiverr, definitely reach out to them with any questions. They do seem receptive to getting some legit photo gigs going.
I've been toying with the idea of offering packages of blog sized images there (and probably on my own site). Picking things I think would make sense for bloggers and others looking to do things on the cheap and packaging them so they're an attractive deal but not a giveaway. I don't think I need any help from them to set it up though - I was looking through my pile of stuff to see what might make sense and think how to bundle.
All communications and deliveries take place through their system, so I guess I'd have to make a zip file with the license and the JPEGs, but I don't know how that part works. Given their attitudes towards IP, I'm a bit gun shy about working with them. Has the taste of Deposit Photos a bit...
Really? Perhaps I'm missing some implied message, but if not: No site is perfect, but fiverr hardly seems a company anyone who respects copyrights would want to be associated with.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
