<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Microstock price war ?</title>
	<link>http://blog.melchersystem.com/2010/01/18/a-microstock-price-war/</link>
	<description>Another Photo Industry blog</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 19:22:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Flemishdreams</title>
		<link>http://blog.melchersystem.com/2010/01/18/a-microstock-price-war/#comment-4461</link>
		<author>Flemishdreams</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.melchersystem.com/2010/01/18/a-microstock-price-war/#comment-4461</guid>
		<description>Of course the access of these spidebots can be blocked easily. Shutterstock did it quickly enough for Lookstat, and that was just a help for contributors, not even buyers. This one of the many scavengers that try to make money on the artists' sweat since they add their referral code - of course - to the image purchased. Most sites, and certainly Dreamstime have a clause in their TOS that prohibits automated access.

It won't happen for a "harvester" that still is in beta and requires a stringent registration, including birth date. The moment a site like this takes off and uses a significant amount of bandwidth of the microstock agents to feed their competition (adding insult to injury), be sure it will be blocked. If not technically, then legally by amending the TOS.

Contributors nevertheless should anticipate on this evolution by _not_ uploading to agents that play the price competition game. The bottom line for stock photo prices has long been reached, considering the production costs that keep going up with the heftier quality requirements. It's the responsibility of the contributors primarily. It doesn't make sense to offer your work on "midstock" sites for premium prices, and at the same time undercut those agents by trowing the same images at cents-sites.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course the access of these spidebots can be blocked easily. Shutterstock did it quickly enough for Lookstat, and that was just a help for contributors, not even buyers. This one of the many scavengers that try to make money on the artists&#8217; sweat since they add their referral code - of course - to the image purchased. Most sites, and certainly Dreamstime have a clause in their TOS that prohibits automated access.</p>
<p>It won&#8217;t happen for a &#8220;harvester&#8221; that still is in beta and requires a stringent registration, including birth date. The moment a site like this takes off and uses a significant amount of bandwidth of the microstock agents to feed their competition (adding insult to injury), be sure it will be blocked. If not technically, then legally by amending the TOS.</p>
<p>Contributors nevertheless should anticipate on this evolution by _not_ uploading to agents that play the price competition game. The bottom line for stock photo prices has long been reached, considering the production costs that keep going up with the heftier quality requirements. It&#8217;s the responsibility of the contributors primarily. It doesn&#8217;t make sense to offer your work on &#8220;midstock&#8221; sites for premium prices, and at the same time undercut those agents by trowing the same images at cents-sites.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zager</title>
		<link>http://blog.melchersystem.com/2010/01/18/a-microstock-price-war/#comment-4460</link>
		<author>zager</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:42:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.melchersystem.com/2010/01/18/a-microstock-price-war/#comment-4460</guid>
		<description>Hello Pmelcher. Well, we're licensing FT and DT images and some other traditional agencies. We're trying to explain everything we do in our blog that is open to anyone interested in more information or interested in discussion. Is that since 2008 when we started.

Check this Fotolia related post:
http://blog.pixmac.com/2008/11/24/why-do-i-have-my-photos-at-pixmac/

And this post about photographers:
http://blog.pixmac.com/2009/08/05/the-way-to-satisfy-photographers-at-pixmac-we-think-we-can/

We're trying to be open as much as possible and if anyone is asking we're replying. As you propably know from discussions on Microstock Group Forum. We also have Facebook and Twitter so whenever anybody has a direct question, we're ready to discuss that.

Please, send any comments to my email or to support. Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Pmelcher. Well, we&#8217;re licensing FT and DT images and some other traditional agencies. We&#8217;re trying to explain everything we do in our blog that is open to anyone interested in more information or interested in discussion. Is that since 2008 when we started.</p>
<p>Check this Fotolia related post:<br />
<a href="http://blog.pixmac.com/2008/11/24/why-do-i-have-my-photos-at-pixmac/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.pixmac.com/2008/11/24/why-do-i-have-my-photos-at-pixmac/</a></p>
<p>And this post about photographers:<br />
<a href="http://blog.pixmac.com/2009/08/05/the-way-to-satisfy-photographers-at-pixmac-we-think-we-can/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.pixmac.com/2009/08/05/the-way-to-satisfy-photographers-at-pixmac-we-think-we-can/</a></p>
<p>We&#8217;re trying to be open as much as possible and if anyone is asking we&#8217;re replying. As you propably know from discussions on Microstock Group Forum. We also have Facebook and Twitter so whenever anybody has a direct question, we&#8217;re ready to discuss that.</p>
<p>Please, send any comments to my email or to support. Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

