Contributor Newsletter: February 4, 2013

First pagePrevious pageof 4
Displaying 61 to 72 of 72 matches.
whitemay
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Feb 5 8:22AM
I had hoped that the newsletter might give some incentive to Exclusives to stay exclusive.
amygdala_imagery
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Feb 5 8:24AM
despite what the eventual income will be, or not... i am under the impression that we will be getting money from a source that had no income potential for us before, but was happening on a regular basis.  that is, images showing up in searches, being clicked on, but never purchased.  to me it sounds like a nice idea to be getting something, where before we were getting nothing.  thank you everyone for your posts and insight and information.  appreciated.
hambagahle
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Tue Feb 5 9:16AM

I'm not exclusive (obviously) - do I have a "royalty schedule", and if so, where would I find it?


Regards
Silberkorn
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Tue Feb 5 9:51AM
Posted By amygdala_imagery:
despite what the eventual income will be, or not... i am under the impression that we will be getting money from a source that had no income potential for us before, but was happening on a regular basis.  that is, images showing up in searches, being clicked on, but never purchased.  to me it sounds like a nice idea to be getting something, where before we were getting nothing.  thank you everyone for your posts and insight and information.  appreciated.


Well, that's not the whole truth. We will loose traffic because the google viewer makes it easy to get the image without going to the source. Traffic = money. Getty has provided API which gives Google access to Hires images. If you want to get youself a brighter picture of all this, go read in the independent forums. Other Stock Agencies have voiced great concerns with this. There is a call to sign a petition against this.
amygdala_imagery
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Feb 5 10:28AM
Posted By Silberkorn:

Posted By amygdala_imagery:
despite what the eventual income will be, or not... i am under the impression that we will be getting money from a source that had no income potential for us before, but was happening on a regular basis.  that is, images showing up in searches, being clicked on, but never purchased.  to me it sounds like a nice idea to be getting something, where before we were getting nothing.  thank you everyone for your posts and insight and information.  appreciated.



Well, that's not the whole truth. We will loose traffic because the google viewer makes it easy to get the image without going to the source. Traffic = money. Getty has provided API which gives Google access to Hires images. If you want to get youself a brighter picture of all this, go read in the independent forums. Other Stock Agencies have voiced great concerns with this. There is a call to sign a petition against this.

thanks silberkorn.  
asiseeit
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveAwarded to fabulous photographers with more than 100,000 downloads
Posted Tue Feb 5 2:10PM
Without details it's hard to speculate how this will turn out. But the concept I think has some positive points. Right now yahoo licenses an image for $10 and posts it for thousands of people to view. This new concept could end up bringing in revenue every time each of those thousands of people view the image, with no license purchased for posting them anywhere. Perhaps this kind of revenue-generation is where things like google docs and others will be heading. But maybe that's just wishful thinking
bmcent1
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloads
Posted Tue Feb 5 2:40PM

Posted By asiseeit:

But maybe that's just wishful thinking :)


Possibly. I just can't imagine Yahoo being happier paying out $100 in micropayments vs $10 for a royalty free license. We need more details, but in order for copyright owners to gain revenue from "views" and "clicks" the money has to come from somewhere. It doesn't come from end users in these schemes, so it has to come from companies, which are usually trying to reduce costs.
Lobo
Member is an adminThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.Forum Moderator
Posted Tue Feb 5 4:21PM

Posted By asiseeit:
Without details it's hard to speculate how this will turn out. But the concept I think has some positive points. Right now yahoo licenses an image for $10 and posts it for thousands of people to view. This new concept could end up bringing in revenue every time each of those thousands of people view the image, with no license purchased for posting them anywhere. Perhaps this kind of revenue-generation is where things like google docs and others will be heading. But maybe that's just wishful thinking :)

I'll get some details later this afternoon. I think most of the concerns can be addressed, but if people are dead set against the idea of Getty leveraging alternative business models to provide additional revenue streams the detail won't go far to quell peoples concerns.

Anyhoo, let me see what we can get together.
CraigRJD
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5 4:37PM
Posted By bmcent1:


Posted By asiseeit:

But maybe that's just wishful thinking :)



 in order for copyright owners to gain revenue from "views" and "clicks" the money has to come from somewhere. It doesn't come from end users in these schemes, so it has to come from companies, which are usually trying to reduce costs.


I always had in mind that their advertising revenue would be linked to the number of views of that page .... so assumed the money ultimately comes from advertisers?
CraigRJD
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5 4:38PM
/
/
Posted By Lobo:
I'll get some details later this afternoon. I think most of the concerns can be addressed, but if people are dead set against the idea of Getty leveraging alternative business models to provide additional revenue streams the detail won't go far to quell peoples concerns.

Anyhoo, let me see what we can get together.


Thanks Lobo
Lobo
Member is an adminThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.Forum Moderator
Posted Tue Feb 5 7:50PM
Here we go:

Connect Discussion

We are going to keep the discussion on the Connect API to the thread above.

(Edited on 2013-02-05 23:39:01 by Lobo)
Lobo
Member is an adminThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.Forum Moderator
Posted Mon Mar 11 8:50PM
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 4
Displaying 61 to 72 of 72 matches.
Forum Home >> iStockphoto Announcements >> Contributor Newsletter: February 4, 2013
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)