Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item The Online Resource for Sports Photography

 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Classified Ads
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions

Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.



|| Member Message Board
Ryan Gebely, Student/Intern, Photographer
California | PA | USA | Posted: 11:46 PM on 06.20.06
->> Has anyone else got a call from yet? Is anyone using Just curious I got a phone call the other day from a lady saying she saw my pictures on and wanted to follow up on some discussion about getting hooked up with them? Just curious if anyone has anything to say about them? Thanks!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

John Mecionis, Photographer
Port Jefferson Station | NY | USA | Posted: 7:56 AM on 06.21.06
->> Ryan, I use Photostockplus and also Printroom. I like the look of photostockplus better than printroom. The photos look larger to the buyer and the site looks more like my own. They both have a similar way of uploading and fulfiling orders.
I find the customer service to be better at Photostock. They have always responded within an hour to any questions or technical advice. They have even changed a few things just to suit my needs. I can't say the same for printroom, It has taken them days to respond when I needed a fast answer, not always but the last few times. Printroom has made good on customer complaints, while I haven't had any complaints (as of today) with Photostock.
All in all it's a coin toss between the two. I don't pay for either one of them.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Aaron Nagata, Photographer
KEALAKEKUA | HI | USA | Posted: 12:52 AM on 06.22.06
->> Ryan and John

I received a call from Joe Allen today. very nice person, wasn't pushy or anything. I had a nice conversation and mentioned that I will explore their site in more detail at a later time. He asked me if he could do a follow up call in a week.

My first impression is good. There may be some compassion and I'm quite impress with their service and support. The main phrase sticks in my mind---"you do good, we'll do good"

 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ron Hawkes, Photographer
Camden | ME | USA | Posted: 7:06 AM on 06.22.06
->> I too received a call from Joe Allen, seemed very nice. When I went to the Photostockplus site I found it very easy for anyone, including kids, to find nudes and seeing as how I shoot mostly youth sports I saw that as a problem. Not sure how hard it is to get to their site from one's own hosted by them, but would rather not take that chance.
Mr. Allen's first response was that they thought that the nudes were tastefully done, which I agreed with, but didn't think mom and dad would care how tastefully they were when the little guy was looking at them. Mr. Allen agreed and said thank you for my time and wished me luck with my business.
If I was not shooting youth sports I would probably look into them further just based on my conversation with Joe Allen.
I will say price wise it looked very much like Photoreflect.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael Moriatis, Photographer
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 8:58 AM on 06.22.06
->> I got an email from Seemed like one of those scam emails. Anyone have any experience with them?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Wes Hope, Photographer
Maryville | TN | USA | Posted: 12:02 PM on 06.22.06
->> I too received a voice mail yesterday from Upon skimming the website, it seems to me that our own would serve the same purpose. And be cheaper to boot. Plus, stock sales through are royalty-free... in other words, MegaGlobalCorp buys one of your photos and then distributes it for eternity on mugs, motivational poster, t-shirts, liquor ads, condom wrappers, etc. and you don't see an extra penny from what you charged them.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but it just doesn't seem like a good deal. Photoshelter offers more and for a lower price (and you can tie it into your SportsShooter page). I don't think I'll be calling them back (no offense meant photostockplus folks... and I know you read the boards).

For the record, I'm not a member of either group.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Loy, Photographer
Hurst | TX | USA | Posted: 12:20 PM on 06.23.06
->> Michael,

I got an e-mail and phone call from this week.

The general opinion about them on the Editorial Photographers message board is that they're better at promoting their website than promoting the photographers on it.

Personally, I went with Photo Shelter a few months ago, mainly so I would have complete control over the whole process.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Will Duncan, Student/Intern, Photographer
Johnson City | TN | USA | Posted: 10:30 PM on 06.25.06
->> I got a call and an email...the call just made me laugh though, total ego booster pre-written response. I know the pictures on my profile arnt what they were beefin' them up to be in the voicemail
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ron Erdrich, Photographer
Abilene | TX | USA | Posted: 12:57 PM on 06.26.06
->> I just had a nice conversation with one of their reps and thought what the offered was interesting. I'm not too keen on the royalty-free idea, however. She told me that it allows them to charge a higher fee but I think I'd rather have sustained income over the long haul than a windfall.

But I don't know, this might just be the industry standard. I admit that I know next to nothing about this and about shooting/marketing stock photography. Anyone with any experience want to chime in with a pros vs. cons overview of what's out there?

 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Paul W Gillespie, Photographer
Annapolis | MD | USA | Posted: 1:33 PM on 06.26.06
->> IMO Royalty Free is bad. Lets say that you sell image of a guy drinking a cup of coffee through the site to Starbucks. Now Starbucks owns that image and has to pay you nothing to use it anywhere they want. Not only that but do you think that they will be calling in the future to shoot something else, most likely not. They will just go back to the royalty free site and buy another.

This kind of Royalty Free usage will kill the assignment photo business because companies will just search for an image that may suit their needs on the RF site and buy it restriction free. Sure some companies will still hire photogs to shoot custom stuff of their products, but the general images will be bought on the cheap at the RF site and reused by many companies.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Randy Janoski, Photographer
Washington DC & Nashville | TN | USA | Posted: 1:47 PM on 06.26.06
->> Ron,
Fifteen years ago I was represented by three stock agencies. Back then the workings were in my favor. With the internet I saw profits slipping away and as my contracts expired I pulled my images back and started marketing them myself.

When the bright idea of Royalty Free came along that hurt the photographer again...immensely.

Paul is absolutely correct Royalty Free is bad, very bad unless of course you’re the buyer!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Christopher Gannon, Photographer
Des Moines | IA | USA | Posted: 12:49 PM on 07.12.06
->> I too received a call from Joe Allen. Good promoter over the phone, but if they maintain royalty free sales, I don't see how they could maintain (or attract for that matter) quality photojournalists. I'll pass.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Rabian, Photographer
Wilmington | DE | USA | Posted: 2:17 AM on 07.13.06
->> Paul, I comepletely agree and your example is spot on.

Chris, Photostockplus isn't worried about attracting "quality photojournalists", they're trying to attract the saps (and a lot of them) who think this will be a great way to make a few bucks they likely wouldn't have made on their own. They're not in this to "help photographers showcase their images", they're in it to "use" them. It's not about quality and helping photographers showcase their stuff, it's about pure meatball volume. Individual photographers are NOT going make money with these guys (unless they have no clue how to calculate a true Cost of Doing Business, and even less clue about usage values), but Photostock is going to make a lot of money via high volume sales of very cheap images provided by people who don't understand or care how badly this hurts and erodes the business they supposedly want to be a part of.

Folks, imagine you like spotwelding instead of photography, would you accept an invitation from a car company to come into the local car factory to do some free spotwelding? Noooo, you don't have to stay all day, do it for as long or short as you like (They've got PLENTY of people lining up and waiting for their turns to "contribute". Just like you, they don't need to be PAID, it's their "passion"!)

But you ARE going to get paid! The car company said they'd give you a little something IF a car with your welds sells. It won't be much because the cars are priced cheap in order to maximize sales, but that's OK because you've taken the time to work on dozens of those of those thousands and thousands of cars on the sales lot, so you're sure you'll get your share. However, since there were sooooo many people happy to spend their free time "being a spotwelder" for a few cars here and there, the only people making any significant money are those who are getting a cut from EVERY car sold, the people who run the company...and offer those spotwelders a chance to showcase their talents. (But that's OK, because it's really 'cool' to spot 'your' car on the road and tell your friends and family "Hey, that's my work!")

Kudos to the Photostock guys for a business model (and the salesmanship) that basically provides them with a totally free and plentiful resource of product to sell to people and companies who will surely be happy to get some really cheap art for the projects that will generate and increase their revenues.

If P. T. Barnum (the ultimate salesman) is to be believed, I'm quite certain Photostock won't have much trouble finding spotwe....Er, "contributors".
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (2) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Carlos Delgado, Student/Intern, Photographer
Long Beach | CA | USA | Posted: 6:27 PM on 07.13.06
->> I got an e-mail from some guy from saying he's "recruiting sports photogs for an amateur sports photo service"...
It sounded kind of fishy. Anybody ever heard of it? I don't want to get hustled by a scam.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael Fischer, Photographer
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 2:09 AM on 07.14.06
->> Someone called. Told him I was on the phone with a publisher (which was the truth).

Hopefully he got the message. "We saw your work on Sportsshooter and were very impressed" had all the sincere feeling of "the check is in the mail."
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Bev Daly, Photographer
Troy | OH | USA | Posted: 11:35 PM on 07.17.06
->> Like a lot of other SSers I got the same call. Nice lady I talked to, but can't really see making the switch from photoreflect. Other than the stock angle, why pay $99/year and they still get 15% commission, when photoreflect gets the same commission rate without the $99 fee?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title:
Thread Started By: Ryan Gebely
Member Login:

Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
Who is the one they call Grasshopper? Find out here ::..