Para colocar as suas mensagens tem de efectuar primeiro o login.
Clique aqui para efectuar o seu login ou registar-se se for um novo utilizador.
| New Prices for 2007 and Free Section Upgrade |
| Autor |
Mensagem |
Sophieso
1289 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 01:53:28 AM pela Sophieso |
 |
 |
I really don't like the idea that my 12 MP images can be bought on this site in a subscription package. When those files were uploaded, they were uploaded under the terms of a very specific agreement of how they would be sold. At that time, those terms did not include selling those images for 25 cents, or 35, or anything below the 50 cent price that was in effect at that time.
If your highest price possible starts at 8 MP, I'd like the ability to replace the 12 MP photos I have on the site with 8 MP versions, which I still don't want to sell for a quarter, but at least it's better and protects my larger versions on other sites.
Since this is a major change in the agreement between contributors and DT, how does it change the former contract we had, specifically the 6 month commitment of images?
Whenever there have been changes in contracts on other sites, contributors have the option to accept the new terms, opt out of certain parts of it, or leave the site. Will we be given the same options? |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 257 | Total de vendas: 597
|
|
Nikitu
1310 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 03:13:13 AM pela Nikitu - o membro é um administrador |
|
|
The terms and condition do not specify prices paid by the designer or royalties received by the photographer, but specify the royalties percentages awarded. |
|
Canon 20d, Canon 24-70mm with 2.8 18-55mm, 50mm with 1.8, Ma...
|
Arquivos enviados: 3397 | Total de vendas: 5024
|
|
Stuartkey
895 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 03:15:13 AM pela Stuartkey |
|
|
I think Sophieso has a good point.
Obviously everyone will be happy about an increase in commission, but a reduction in any given area is a completely different matter. I don't see how you can change the goalposts like this and not give people who don't agree with it an option to opt out... whether that be opting out of just the new terms or opting out of the site completely.
|
|
Canon 350D - 17-40 f4 L - 70-200 f4 L - 50mm f1.8 II
|
Arquivos enviados: 424 | Total de vendas: 2268
|
|
Achilles
3382 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 03:31:35 AM pela Achilles - o membro é um administrador |
|
|
A opt-in or opt-out situation is sometimes not viable technically nor from the business point of view. Even if it would be possible, that would have to be applied to all prices. It means one would have to decide whether he sells the files for the new pricing system (making the compromise on subscription considering the high increase in royalties) or the old one.
Why? Because the agency has to protect buyers just as it protects contributors. If we don't do that, there will be no sales.
The buyers will support the burden of this price increase. You will say that the prices are still small compared to the quality. That is correct, but still this is a significant price increase and many of them might not be able to accomodate it, or simply don't like it.
In order to ease the transition for these buyers, the subscription prices were updated. In fact we have just removed part of the bonus, because contributors receive more than 80% in royalties from this model. It used to be 100%, nobody complained at that time.
Regarding the resolution, as ever before, yes, you may replace images by uploading new ones and disabling old ones if the new ones get accepted.
Whether you increase the resolution you have on the site or decrease it, it is your own decision. Our strong advice is to upload the highest resolution your camera provides.
The users that uploaded downsampled images so far will suffer from their own mistake. That was not honest towards the buyers nor the agency. You will not only lose sales from now on by having a portfolio that is smaller in MP than it could be, but you have already lost a lot of sales.
Most buyers focus on quality and on the image itself vs the resolution. But some of them, a part that shouldn't be neglected, is looking for high resolution. So if they compare two images approved by their client, they will download the one with the highest resolution.
|
|
Nikon D300 / Nikon N80 | Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fishey...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1964 | Total de vendas: 10188
|
|
Stuartkey
895 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 04:27:08 AM pela Stuartkey |
|
|
| Originalmente enviada por Achilles: |
 |
Mensagem Citada: ...contributors receive more than 80% in royalties from this model. It used to be 100%, nobody complained at that time.
|
I think you'll find that there were complaints, due to print resolution images being purchased for 50c or 60c regardless of the image level. The difference with the new pricing is that instead of the commission being equivalent to a regular web resolution sale, it is now less than half that amount.
To use the worst case scenario, the maximum commission offered is $4.80 for an exclusive Max Res Level 5 image, so if bought on subscription this image goes from $4.80 to $0.25.
Ouch.
|
|
Canon 350D - 17-40 f4 L - 70-200 f4 L - 50mm f1.8 II
|
Arquivos enviados: 424 | Total de vendas: 2268
|
|
Pinfoldphotos
231 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 04:48:56 AM pela Pinfoldphotos |
|
|
I too am concerned about the number of free images which will become available. When this number is significant, there are certain to be similar images for sale to those available freely....it doesn't take a genius to work out which one a "buyer" would opt for!
Ian. |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 168 | Total de vendas: 480
|
|
Nikitu
1310 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem editada em 12/21/2006, 05:01:05 AM pela - o membro é um administrador |
|
|
Here is some simple math.
I looked in my last 100 images sold and found this.
(the amounts reflect my earnings not what the user has payed for the images)
I have 93 images bought on credits * 1$ = 93 $
I also have 7 images sold on subscription * 0.6$ = 4.2$
Total on the current plan = 97.2$
Now, let's see how it would look with the new plan
93 * 3 $ (average payment) = 279 $
7 * 0.25$ subscription payment = 1.75$
Total on the new plan 280.75$
Difference between the first plan and the second is pretty obvious and the difference for the subscription image only is of 4.2$ - 1.75$ = 2.45$ while the extra earnings are 279$ - 93$ = 186$ .
So, if we would leave the subscription at 0.50/0.60$ theoretically you'd earn 2.45$ more, but in reality without the smaller price proposed for the subscription the users would be less interested therefor earnings would actually fall and you would earn less.
|
|
Canon 20d, Canon 24-70mm with 2.8 18-55mm, 50mm with 1.8, Ma...
|
Arquivos enviados: 3397 | Total de vendas: 5024
|
|
Nlizer
248 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 05:09:04 AM pela Nlizer |
|
|
I'm curious where the $3 average per image amount comes from in your pricing scenario. |
|
Minolta Dimage 7
Casio EX-Z850
|
Arquivos enviados: 394 | Total de vendas: 1757
|
|
Nikitu
1310 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 05:11:23 AM pela Nikitu - o membro é um administrador |
|
|
It's the average a photographer with a fairly good portfolio would earn with the new plan. |
|
Canon 20d, Canon 24-70mm with 2.8 18-55mm, 50mm with 1.8, Ma...
|
Arquivos enviados: 3397 | Total de vendas: 5024
|
|
Achilles
3382 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem editada em 12/21/2006, 05:29:47 AM pela Administração |
|
|
Ian your concerns are shared by the agency. As soon as this section starts to compete with the commercial stock, it will be put to an end. There are several algorithms we already considered and analyzed regarding customer behaviour in order to know how to avoid that. This is meant to boost sales, not to lower them.
For the sake of numbers, based on Ioana's math:
Total new plan as proposed by us $280.75 vs $283.2 if we leave the subscription royalties at $0.5. Frances, can repeat the same thing with a different average in royalties than $3. The percentage will stay the same, the difference in royalties if the subscription royalties stay at $0.5 is insignificant and doesn't deserve the risks of losing buyers.
Because this will happen, some buyers will be lost.. So if they leave, the $279 amount will be less. Let's assume we lose up to 20% customers (that's huge but is possible if we don't give them the alternative). So that $279 royalties from credits will lose 20%. Without subscription one will earn about $210 (credit r.)+$4.2(subscription r.)=$214.2
PS: later edit - there is a small mistake here. it is assumed the subscription percentage will stay the same. That is not true, it will increase. But even if it doubles itself (which is highly unlikely according to our studies) the royalties lost this way from credits are still insignificant. |
|
Nikon D300 / Nikon N80 | Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fishey...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1964 | Total de vendas: 10188
|
|
Stuartkey
895 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 05:26:36 AM pela Stuartkey |
|
|
I have to be honest, I have concerns about the logic of some of this.
If you are worried about the price increase affecting the number of buyers then why introduce it? I don't see how introducing a reduced cost subscription scheme in an attempt to placate the buyers helps the situation.
Say that a number of buyers look at the new pricing schedule and decide its too expensive. They either decide to go elsewhere or maybe they take out the subscription. Now they are stil buying images but the photographers are getting peanuts for them. And they will have to buy an awful lot of images at 25c each to make up for the increased prices they would otherwise be paying.
Ultimately, these changes are going to happen, so I guess we have to just wait and see what happens. I just know how frustrating it is to logon and see a current level 2 image being sold in print size for 60c... I'm not looking forward to finding it happening for 25c....
|
|
Canon 350D - 17-40 f4 L - 70-200 f4 L - 50mm f1.8 II
|
Arquivos enviados: 424 | Total de vendas: 2268
|
|
Achilles
3382 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem editada em 12/21/2006, 05:34:53 AM pela Administração |
|
|
Stuart, yes, if you want to be safe, nothing has to change. But that's an artificial and temporary safety, we will just erode ourselves. Assuming that you don't like improved royalties, things can stay this way. But in order to improve the images quality, the agency thinks about motivating contributors. If you think way back at the last price increase, you will see that the royalties doubled. Would you like to earn half than what you earn right now?
That's the engine, contributors earn more so they afford better equipment, studio costs, props, models... That means they provide better imagery that will boost the success of the buyers designs even more. if their clients make more money within their own markets, they will need to improve their image as well. So they will come after better imagery. Downloaded from, guess what, your portfolio at Dreamstime :)
|
|
Nikon D300 / Nikon N80 | Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fishey...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1964 | Total de vendas: 10188
|
|
Stuartkey
895 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 05:48:05 AM pela Stuartkey |
|
|
The point I was making had nothing to do with avoiding change, I was merely questioning the policy of subscription based sales as a method of appeasing buyers disgruntled with the price increase of normal purchases.
|
|
Canon 350D - 17-40 f4 L - 70-200 f4 L - 50mm f1.8 II
|
Arquivos enviados: 424 | Total de vendas: 2268
|
|
Milanlj
180 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 06:05:38 AM pela Milanlj |
|
|
But as far as I know, the subscription was there before, so I dont understand what the problem is? How can there be any change in earnings then? You could always buy any image via subscripton for 0.5/0.6 |
|
Canon EOS 400D
Pentax K10D
|
Arquivos enviados: 318 | Total de vendas: 503
|
|
Sophieso
1289 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 06:17:44 AM pela Sophieso |
|
|
| Originalmente enviada por Nikitu: |
|
| Mensagem Citada: The terms and condition do not specify prices paid by the designer or royalties received by the photographer. |
So we are locked in at whatever price you choose, whenever you choose, even if that price is free, and that's the end of the story. It seems that your contract protects and benefits DT with absolutely no thought or consideration for the contributor. Because of the six month lock in, that is not a good display of ethics or genuine concern for your members.
It's hard to understand how locking in contributors for 6 months, regardless of whatever plan you come up with, is hardly going to increase the content of this site. With major changes such as this, especially when they're in direct competition with a site with much more traffic and a much longer history of subscription sales, your members should have the right to opt out.
Your example was very nice, Ioana, and I'm sure it will put dollar signs in the eyes of many, but it sure the heck doesn't hold up to the sales I've experienced. You're working on hypotheticals. The reality I'm working on is that you're offering my 12 MP images for sale at 25 cents when I can get a lot more for those same images elsewhere.
The entire change is far too complex, with too many changes and options presented to buyers. As a buyer, I'd definitely go for the subscription and just not waste my time, or my money on the new, higher prices, especially if I'm in the market for large size images and know I'll need more images in the future. Buyers on other public forums have already stated that they shop for images on one site, then go hunting for them at a cheaper price elsewhere, or a cheaper plan. This will only add to this type of activity by buyers, at the same time knocking out the occassional buyer who needs an image once in a while.
I'm also going to assume that if existing images are replaced with lower resolution versions to protect those images, the six month commitment to the site starts from the date of the replacement. Don't even bother answering that question. I already know the answer. |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 257 | Total de vendas: 597
|
|
Dbajurin
22 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 06:25:12 AM pela Dbajurin |
|
|
Ok, Achilles and Nikitu please do the math once again and take MP in consideration. If you use subscription 0,25 for pictures lower than 8PB (I prefered 5MP) and double it if they are larger. If you do the math you will see (I am sure) that subscribers will get all images with 0,25$ and Photographers will we happy because they think this is fair for news poratal and small magazines or other subcribers but larger (also expensive to produce) pictures will be RESERVED for those who need it for covers, posters, jumbos and others.
What is the problem in doing price list like this? |
|
Olympus E3 and Olympus E510 various lenses, Olympus E300, an...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1920 | Total de vendas: 1375
|
|
Nikitu
1310 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 12/21/2006, 06:30:27 AM pela Nikitu - o membro é um administrador |
|
|
The terms and conditions say that you receive 50% of sale if you are not exclusive here, 0.25$ is more then 50% when it comes to subscription and the rest of the cost are supported by the agency.
My example was no hypothetical, I work on my images and I am building a portfolio to earn money from, I am already earning from my images and will earn even more with the new prices. And if I have to have a sale of 0.25$ every once in a while then so be it because I will be earning on the other side from the substantial increase in prices for credit buyers.
If you don't want to take my example you can do this on your images and see the results. I'd like to see them posted here.
Buying a subscription means to download 10 images per day, each day, not many designers do that or need so many images. No one will pay for the subscription just to download a few images they need, they will still go for the credits.
As you can see we didn't just change the prices, we never did that in the past either, we posted first on the boards to have the contributors opinion.
|
|
Canon 20d, Canon 24-70mm with 2.8 18-55mm, 50mm with 1.8, Ma...
|
Arquivos enviados: 3397 | Total de vendas: 5024
|
|
Nlizer
248 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem editada em 12/21/2006, 08:33:14 AM pela Nlizer |
|
|
The only issue I have at this time is allowing my vectors to go for $.25 or will they? What is the pricing plan for vectors and raw files? |
|
Minolta Dimage 7
Casio EX-Z850
|
Arquivos enviados: 394 | Total de vendas: 1757
|
|
Nlizer
248 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem editada em 12/21/2006, 09:05:47 AM pela Nlizer |
|
|
I wasn't attacking anyone by asking where the $3 came from in the scenario. I'm a numbers person and just wanted to understand where it came from. If the average person here has only level 1 images that span different sizes then the average would be $1.33 ($2.40 for over 8 mp and $.25 for subscription downloads being the upper and lower end of the spectrum). Still being higher than the $1.00 we get now. But I just wanted to know where the amount of $3.00 came from, no hidden agenda.
I did my own numbers and while now I average about $.90 per image I would under the new model average $1.65 if my purchases stay the same and none of my original individual sales converted to subscription sales. |
|
Minolta Dimage 7
Casio EX-Z850
|
Arquivos enviados: 394 | Total de vendas: 1757
|
|
Dbajurin
22 mensagens
|
|
Mensagem editada em 12/21/2006, 09:37:01 AM pela Dbajurin |
|
|
I have solution for all of you who are worried about free section like me. You can subscribe yourself as subscriber and download each of your images with 0 download just ones and your portfolio will be the same with a bargain price less than 0,25$ (I think it will be 0,05$) per image. And your images will be safe from free section.
Cool!
Dario |
|
Olympus E3 and Olympus E510 various lenses, Olympus E300, an...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1920 | Total de vendas: 1375
|
|
| Página: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | | |
