I saw the infamous "sexy" layout. Unfortunately I didn't have the sense to save it off for future discussion. My first thought was I hope that is a stock photo, because having a third party capture that image might be more awkward than posting it in a scrapbook gallery. Second, the title didn't work for me, it was something like "every life is precious". I think a more appropriate title may have been "Do me now".
Did you all rush out to buy the kit to scrap your last sexcapade? Any recommendations for kits appropriate for scrapping your after hours adventures. Does anybody really scrap that?
Carry on with whatever is going on...CU sharing, DST banning, digital art vs. digital scrapbooking, Christina Renee's grand re-opening, GSO thread abuse....
1,445 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1445 Newer› Newest»Not all stockphoto sites list the actual photographer but it is still within the terms to use them.
Here's one:
http://www.imageafter.com/terms.php
If stock photos are in the public domaine they don't always have the photographers name. I use a lot of stock and I have no idea who the photographer is and there is no way to find out.
July 6, 2009 9:45 PM
------------
Then they are probably stolen. If they have no information on them, chances are they were ripped from somewhere.
To answer
Why can't you find out? Where do you find these stocks photos? If you download them from yahoo groups or other pirate sharing groups, of course, you won't find the photographer's name. *eyeroll*
July 6, 2009 10:37 PM
and
Then they are probably stolen. If they have no information on them, chances are they were ripped from somewhere.
__________________________________________________Obviously you have not done any research in this matter so you might want to do that before you spout off or roll you eyes.
Here's a reputable site with no photographers names at all. It happens to be a great resource site. It's owned by
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com/
Free Stock Photography TOU" Check out our awesome collection of free royalty free stock photography collection. Yup! They are free to use even for PAID work." Below is the stock photo section
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com/gallery/index.php
As another poster stated Imageafter.com also has free to use photography
Here is their TOU
WHAT CAN YOU DO WITH IMAGE*AFTER IMAGES AND TEXTURES?
you CAN modify our images and textures in any way you see fit
you CAN use our images and textures in your own work, whether it be for personal or commercial use
you CAN redistribute or sell our images and textures ALTERED OR UNALTERED as part of printed work (e.g. posters, cd-covers, postcards etc)
WHAT CAN'T YOU DO WITH IMAGE*AFTER IMAGES AND TEXTURES?
you CANNOT REDISTRIBUTE our images and textures as part of an online resource site like our own, i.e. use them to directly compete with us.
Be my guest and click on any photograph and tell me the photographer's name or that the photo has been stolen, pirated..... These are reputable resource sites that have been around for a very long time.
I think they were referring to the stock photos of children and people, like the Annne Geddes photos seen in the DST gallery. As far as I know, those are NOT okay to be used in this way.
No. The you-must-be-stealing- them comments were refering to any stock photo where a photographer's name or other information cannot be found.
And to this comment:
Why can't you find out? Where do you find these stocks photos? If you download them from yahoo groups or other pirate sharing groups, of course, you won't find the photographer's name. *eyeroll*
That is a really REALLY stupid comment. First, just because a photo doesn't have owner information attatched to it doesn't (even slightly) imply it's been illegally obtained. Second, just because it may be illegally shared doesn't mean it won't have copyright information attached to it. Talk about making statements out of your ass!
12:10- you're making the dumb argument. The other poster is absolutely correct. You're grabbing from an unreliable, unknown source.
Even if you don't know the photographer. A credit to the site you downloaded from would be nice albeit not necessary.
how about a blank statement...
photo is stock ~ I take no credit for it.
I know this gets into the whole I digiscrap for an art outlet versus I digiscrap for memories debate.
but geesh, I open up this thumbnail and see pics that MAKE the kit! lol
the hardest part to me in scrapping is useing my pics. That is why I love making QP's easy peasy (for an art outlet..ha ha)
now my thoughts are going, lets blank out all the pics in the gallery...ha ha
like the Annne Geddes photos
---
These would not be open source. And they aren't ok to use. And I'm disappointed when I see a scrapper using these types of images.
But NOT all photos on the internet are illegal to use and NOT all photos have the photographer's name. If the photographer releases it into an open source gallery, the copyright is gone. You can usually tell if these galleries are legit because the photos are just slightly above average.
12:10- you're making the dumb argument. The other poster is absolutely correct. You're grabbing from an unreliable, unknown source.
_______________________
Whatever you say, boss.
I notice a lot around digi land, the pot calls the kettle black. Designers have a lot of balls to criticize their customers for TOU violations when they themselves don't always do the right thing.
I think this holier than thou attitude of telling customers what they can't and can not do with the items they purchase will not last. The customers are just sick and tired of it and will search out designers that are not so restrictive. As I am scrapping I use stash from all over the place. I do not want to open up every TOU to see if what I am doing is ok.
Selling me a CU item and then telling me what I can do with it is total B.S. Once I buy CU it should be my decision if I want to make a freebie or include something in a template. You want to tell me what to do with it, then I don't want to buy from you!
pwv=scouln
I am scouln at all the TOU's out there.
Selling me a CU item and then telling me what I can do with it is total B.S. Once I buy CU it should be my decision if I want to make a freebie or include something in a template. You want to tell me what to do with it, then I don't want to buy from you!
__________________________________________________
9 out of 10 designers would say great go for it because if you can't understand why we have TOUs then we don't want or need your business anyway.
and 9 out of 10 customers are more then happy to go along with Designers TOUs becasue they understand the amount of time it takes to make kits that are undersold in the first place as most designers don't even make minimum wage.
Sorry you're just another who wants something for nothing and then wants to do with it as they want as if you spent the many hours it takes to make 1 kit besides doing the research and everything else designers go through to design. It's too bad you are the 1 out of 10 who feel so entitled. I hate to break it to you but you aren't entitled to a damn thing.
If stock photos are in the public domaine they don't always have the photographers name. I use a lot of stock and I have no idea who the photographer is and there is no way to find out.
-------------------
Then you should credit the stock photo site. To omit any photo credit implies that you took the photo.
Here's a reputable site with no photographers names at all. It happens to be a great resource site. It's owned by
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com/
---------------------------------
In this case, you should put in your credits:
"Stock photo from adigitaldreamer" or "Photo from http://www.adigitaldreamer.com"
I think this holier than thou attitude of telling customers what they can't and can not do with the items they purchase will not last. The customers are just sick and tired of it and will search out designers that are not so restrictive. As I am scrapping I use stash from all over the place. I do not want to open up every TOU to see if what I am doing is ok.
-------------
I hope you're right. Just take a peek in the DST S4H forum and you'll see many people who are frustrated by the inconsistencies in the TOUs. I wish there were an up-to-date list of all the designers and CU item designers that have generous TOUs without all the restrictions.
Selling me a CU item and then telling me what I can do with it is total B.S. Once I buy CU it should be my decision if I want to make a freebie or include something in a template. You want to tell me what to do with it, then I don't want to buy from you!
---------------------
AMEN! I feel the same way! And if I buy something with these restrictions, and the TOU restrictions aren't stated BEFOREHAND, then I'm going to ask for a refund because I don't even want it in my stash! I want to be able to use my CU supplies freely without worrying about reading all the TOUs.
Sorry you're just another who wants something for nothing and then wants to do with it as they want as if you spent the many hours it takes to make 1 kit besides doing the research and everything else designers go through to design. It's too bad you are the 1 out of 10 who feel so entitled. I hate to break it to you but you aren't entitled to a damn thing.
-----------------------
I don't agree with this at all. She is BUYING a CU product, so I don't know how you can say she wants something for nothing. She simply wants to be able to use CU products without having a lot of restrictions and having to go back and recheck TOUs everytime.
9 out of 10 designers would say great go for it because if you can't understand why we have TOUs then we don't want or need your business anyway.
and 9 out of 10 customers are more then happy to go along with Designers TOUs becasue they understand the amount of time it takes to make kits that are undersold in the first place as most designers don't even make minimum wage.
Sorry you're just another who wants something for nothing and then wants to do with it as they want as if you spent the many hours it takes to make 1 kit besides doing the research and everything else designers go through to design. It's too bad you are the 1 out of 10 who feel so entitled. I hate to break it to you but you aren't entitled to a damn thing.
--------------------------------
hmmm...maybe with this attitude is why you are making less than minimum wage
I think if I was doing a job making less than minimum wage, I would look for a different job instead of assuming that my customers should change their attitude so I could make more money.
Do you really think that 9 out of 10 customers really care how much time you put into designing and how little money you make. I think most customers are happy to buy a kit that they like and get a good deal.
I only scrap for myself so generally TOU are fine with me. I am not a designer, I don't S4H, but I like to share elements I create with fellow scrapbookers. I've always been under the assumption that if I don't create it, I don't share it. So everything I share I have made myself.
But hypothetically, if I purchase something that is CU I would expect to be able to use it how I want. Why should I only be able to use it for something I sell and not for something I want to share. Why is it a designers business what I would use a CU item for?
I really truly don't understand CU items. Using CU items reminds me of paint by numbers. You are using someone else's art not your own.
Then they are probably stolen. If they have no information on them, chances are they were ripped from somewhere.
__________________________________________________Obviously you have not done any research in this matter so you might want to do that before you spout off
------------
You might want to check yourself for spouting off. I said PROBABLY, I'm assuming you know what that word means. I never made any blanket statements, I never do.
Besides, just because a site has TOUs and yaps on, doesn't mean that the people who are uploading are reputable. If there are no credits to the photos, I'm very vary about using them. There are a lot of free to use stock sites out there that do have that information. I'd rather use them.
There are some designers that like to use free sources that they don't have to credit. But they sure want credit for their stuff. Which of course is rightly deserved. Personally I will credit all my sources. Stock textures, brushes, even a color scheme idea. I especially will credit fonts. I hate it when I buy a kit and it has word art, or elements with words and I don't know what font was used. It makes it hard to match up additional journaling or words I want to add to tags.
In the long run if you treat others how you want to be treated life will be good.
But hypothetically, if I purchase something that is CU I would expect to be able to use it how I want. Why should I only be able to use it for something I sell and not for something I want to share. Why is it a designers business what I would use a CU item for?
July 7, 2009 7:35 PM
-------------------
I would have to agree with this. If I bought a CU item from a place like Shutter Stock, I could easily make something from that item and share it, as long as I'm not sharing the original CU. I'm not really sure why some designers think they can dictate that I do with what I buy. It's only a courtesy that I abide by their terms. They would never know what the heck I did with their products if I didn't tell them.
There are some designers that like to use free sources that they don't have to credit. But they sure want credit for their stuff. Which of course is rightly deserved. Personally I will credit all my sources. Stock textures, brushes, even a color scheme idea. I especially will credit fonts. I hate it when I buy a kit and it has word art, or elements with words and I don't know what font was used. It makes it hard to match up additional journaling or words I want to add to tags.
In the long run if you treat others how you want to be treated life will be good.
July 7, 2009 7:44 PM
----------------------
Word!
I really truly don't understand CU items. Using CU items reminds me of paint by numbers. You are using someone else's art not your own.
July 7, 2009 7:36 PM
-------------
I'd have to disagree.
A long time ago at SBG they had a challenge whereby you created a 'groupie'. Everyone who wanted to play was given a base item to use. The creativity was amazing. Sometimes it was hard to pick out the base item even though you knew what it was. I see CU items in the same way.
It's like cooking, you either stick to the recipe or you use it as a spring board to create something new.
LOL, that was funny! When I started scrapping 4+ years ago the S's included such places as SBB and SBE. Those stores are still going strong after all these years. What is it about them that they don't seem "in vogue" any more like the smaller trendy boutiques? Obviously they still must have a (large) loyal fan base to keep going.
July 5, 2009 4:20 PM
--------------------------
Don't forget DSP, it was also one of the main ones and still is. And it still creams ALL of them traffic wise.
There is no difference in Digital TOU than in copyright protection laws surrounding music and movies and I'm sure you "Get" why those rules apply. If digital scrapbook products were a physical item, the question of TOU fairness wouldn't even come up. You are all just whining because you would really LIKE to use these products any way you want.
To bad. TOU aren't going to change. Digital designers also have the right to protect their creations how they wish while providing a wonderful product for consumers.
I will say it would be nice for stores to offer a type of blanket TOU for all designers that sell from them. It might be easier for consumers rather than having to read through each designers specific TOU rules.
No, I'm not whining because of the TOUs, I used to have them myself. I'm fed up with designers having no clue at all how to write a TOU and therefore they are also constantly changing them and I'm expected to keep up with that. Sorry, that's not the way it works.
I've bought other digital items and put myself on the mailing list. Guess what? Those places email me when they change their terms. Too bad that most digi designers can't do that. They have a mailing list and are quite willing to mail you with sales and promotions but can't be bothered to let you know if they changed their TOU. That is simply bad business.
That's my complaint.
I really truly don't understand CU items. Using CU items reminds me of paint by numbers. You are using someone else's art not your own
---------------------
You truly think this? I'm sorry about your limited understanding and lack of vision.
Don't forget DSP, it was also one of the main ones and still is. And it still creams ALL of them traffic wise.
^^^^^^^
Technically true, I suppose. Shows you the power of being on the first page in Google. For myself, and I'm guessing quite a few others on here, it was probably one of the first stores we ran across. Point is, it didn't take me long to figure out the quality there was pretty poor relative to many other stores/designers (at least in my opinion), so I moved on and never looked back. One of these days, I'm hoping someone, anyone, takes over that slot. Too me, the first page or so of hits when you google for digital scrapbooking sucks and is a poor representation of what this industry really can be.
DSP was never my style. Once I found Shabby Princess, I had a measuring stick to measure by.
Here's a reputable site with no photographers names at all. It happens to be a great resource site. It's owned by
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com/
---------------------------------
In this case, you should put in your credits:
"Stock photo from adigitaldreamer" or "Photo from http://www.adigitaldreamer.com"
--------------------------------------
more likely then not the credit is in the Designers TOU and not anywhere else. If I use stock for a LO I normally do credit the site. I do use some photography that are from people I know and they do not want to be credited at all. They like their privacy.
CU products were never meant to be used as is. CU products were meant to be used as a resource. You take that resource and you use it in your designs and you make it your own by changing it. Crediting CU product is a courtesy more then anything else. I don't want people to think I made something when I didn't and I DON'T want others to use my stuff and take credit for it. YOU DIDN'T DESIGN THE ORIGINAL PIECE SO WHY SHOULD YOU INSIST ON USING IT ANY WAY YOU LIKE. At least be nice enough to credit me in your TOU like I have credited you if you are using my stuff in product for resale. If you are using it for scrapping I don't care to be credited at all.
For me that's the crux of the issue. If you are going to publically display (or sell) your work, then people would (quite reasonably) suppose that you made it all yourself. If you didn't, then you should be honest about that.
If you're just making stuff for yourself, friends, family, etc then I don't care whether you credit or not. It's only when you're 'taking credit' for something in a public place that it matters, for me.
Designers are allowed to have whatever TOU they want. They made the product, it's theirs to do what they like with. If you purchase it or get it free, you're understanding that it is yours to use in a manner that abides by those terms. If we all just said "go ahead, do what you like with my prodcut," what would be the point of even trying to sell anything? Too many people already do this and it's getting more and more noticeable with the giant flood of "designers" simply sticking things together in a pack and reselling it with no other creative input on their part.
On that note, in a sort of opposite thought, my largest pet peeve with this whole business is when someone uses something that's completely within the terms of the product and then gets accused by someone OTHER than the original designer and copyright holder that they are not using the product in a proper way or that the way it's being used isn't "right" or "ethical."
If you see something being used in a way that "you" don't think is proper but it isn't your product, the ****ONLY**** right you have to say anything at all is to notify the original owner of the product. If the original owner doesn't care, why the hell do you? (you in general).
I am so goddamn sick of designers sticking their big, fat brown noses in where they don't belong. Competition is good and is healthy for the industry. However, when the competition starts messing with people for doing things with someone else's stuff or making assumptions and opening their big mouths without a hint of any thought process behind it...that's just outrageous and completely unacceptable behavior.
Designers have a lot of balls to criticize their customers for TOU violations when they themselves don't always do the right thing.
---
Who's actually done this? And what was the offense on the customer's part?
And not all designers are violating someone else's tou. It's incredibly small minded to lump them all together like that.
On that note, in a sort of opposite thought, my largest pet peeve with this whole business is when someone uses something that's completely within the terms of the product and then gets accused by someone OTHER than the original designer and copyright holder that they are not using the product in a proper way or that the way it's being used isn't "right" or "ethical."
If you see something being used in a way that "you" don't think is proper but it isn't your product, the ****ONLY**** right you have to say anything at all is to notify the original owner of the product. If the original owner doesn't care, why the hell do you? (you in general).
---
Great Post!
Too bad it happens on this blog on a regular basis.
What is there to complain about. If you don't like someone's TOU, don't buy from them. Buy from the designers that have terms that match with what you are doing.
If I go into a restaurant and don't like the way they cook their chicken, I just don't order it next time. I don't expect them to cook their chicken the way I want it or the same way the restaurant down the street cooks it.
Designers have the right to have whatever terms they want. And they don't all have to have the same terms.
I think if someone is in business as a designer or S4H they should make sure they understand the terms of anything they purchase. If the designer's terms aren't posted at the site just email them and ask. As a business person it would be unwise to buy something and have no idea if the terms meet your needs or not.
What is there to complain about. If you don't like someone's TOU, don't buy from them. Buy from the designers that have terms that match with what you are doing.
---------------------
The problem is that many times the TOUs are not available to see prior to the purchase. I wish CU Designers would start including a copy of the text of the TOU right there in the product description. Then there wouldn't be any surprises.
I think if someone is in business as a designer or S4H they should make sure they understand the terms of anything they purchase. If the designer's terms aren't posted at the site just email them and ask. As a business person it would be unwise to buy something and have no idea if the terms meet your needs or not.
-------------------
I've tried this too. I've emailed designers to ask what was needed to use their product for S4H and I never received a response. There was no mention at all of S4H in this particular designer's TOU, so I have to assume it's a 'no'. And the fact that they didn't respond to my email...well I don't know what to say about that.
I think I'll create a generic email with all my specific questions and send it to each designer before I purchase. Something like:
-Can this CU product be used to create a flattened blog header?
-Can this CU product be used as part of a freebie offering?
-Can this CU product be used as part of a kit offered as a challenge posting bonus?
-Can this CU product be used as a resource for creating a part of a layered template (ex. using part of it as a shape)?
etc etc.
I'll ask them to answer instead of me trying to decipher all the different and sometimes incomplete TOUs.
Whoa I think I just slipped into a coma.........zzzzzzzzzzz
I lost all my links to the "other" smack blogs. Do any of them even exist anymore?
Has anyone found out what is up with Melanie Colosimo??
DST 3 ISO Wizard of Oz requests and as if by magic a post appears for a new kit....ta da...Wizard of Oz...me thinks I smell a rat...
Actually, I think a designer that made an "Oz" kit did a search and plugged her kit into all of the ISO posts FOR "Oz" kits.
Happens a lot, but I thought the same thing when I saw all 3 posts this morning too, LOL.
I miss Scrappy Sheep's blog... the one that started it all. Taggers were never mentioned *boring*
I miss Scrappy Sheep's blog... the one that started it all. Taggers were never mentioned *boring*
July 8, 2009 8:38 PM
----------
What? Who mentioned taggers? No one has for ages until you showed up.
Give me a freakin' break 8:40. It was just an observation. We never discussed them at that blog. Here it cycles in and out with regularity.
Pull your panties out of your asshole.
I opened up the August issue of Creating Keepsakes and on page 6 the first sentance of the founders note mentions The Wizard of Oz. How random is that?
Give me a freakin' break 8:40. It was just an observation. We never discussed them at that blog. Here it cycles in and out with regularity.
Pull your panties out of your asshole.
July 8, 2009 9:45 PM
-------
You should follow your own advice. Talk about anger issues. Sheesh. Do you over react like this to everything in your life?
What's everyone having for dinner? I need new ideas.
We are having Osso Bucco. Yesterday we had spinach and chicken with fettuccine. The day before, we had tacos and the day before that, we had beef stroganoff.
Has anyone found out what is up with Melanie Colosimo??
July 8, 2009 4:44 PM
----
This may not be what happened but you can request to be banned from DST. Maybe she got fed up and left?
This may not be what happened but you can request to be banned from DST. Maybe she got fed up and left?
July 8, 2009 11:09 PM
---------
Why not just remove yourself instead of asking to be banned. The banning just raises questions. I understand you are just putting forward a theory.
Don't forget DSP, it was also one of the main ones and still is. And it still creams ALL of them traffic wise.
July 7, 2009 8:45 PM
_____________________________
I had no idea what site you were talking about, so I Googled it. Zoinks! What a festering pile of crap that site is!!! My head still hurts from looking at the shitty kits they have for sale there. They might get a lot of traffic, but I'd be willing to bet that most of those people just click away ASAP and are probably turned off of digi scrapping forever after looking at that shit.
^^^^^^^^^
LOL
*groan* not the DSP discussion *again*
I had no idea what site you were talking about, so I Googled it. Zoinks! What a festering pile of crap that site is!!! My head still hurts from looking at the shitty kits they have for sale there. They might get a lot of traffic, but I'd be willing to bet that most of those people just click away ASAP and are probably turned off of digi scrapping forever after looking at that shit.
July 9, 2009 12:04 AM
--------------------
And where do you shop? I don't shop at DSP, but I wouldn't describe as a file of festering crap.
I think a lot of their traffic comes from stuff other than their kits. It looks as if their classes and tutorials/universoty get quite a draw. For people just getting involved in digiscrapping, these are probably a great resource to get started and learn your program etc. Probably many of the students start off getting their first supplies there (before they discover there are much better designs/stores out there LOL LOL). Can't think that more experienced scrappers would be much interested in their products, though - not really my style either.
I think this was the point Nubia was trying to make...
the effect that lots of scrappers posting at DST were using stock photos on their layouts and not crediting the original photographer.
It is hypocrisy to slam her for doing more or less the same thing they themselves continue doing.
July 6, 2009 9:06 PM
_________________________
You don't really expect fairness and common sense to come from a DST syncophant?
The whole rigamarole of judging someone's LO credits as complete and accurate is just one more way those self-appointed VIPs can make themselves feel better at another scrapper's expense.
We are having Osso Bucco. Yesterday we had spinach and chicken with fettuccine. The day before, we had tacos and the day before that, we had beef stroganoff.
-----------------------------------
Where do you live? I'll be right over for left overs!
One of the things that bothered me about the whole Nubia things is that even after she proved that she had used quick pages that she got online, people were still posting that she was stealing layouts and altering them. They were not bothering to read and comprehend all the posts. A couple of times I wanted to jump through the computer and slap someone and say "did you read all the posts before you replied?"
I also think that people were down on her because she isn't a scrapper. I think we have a sense of comfort that the layouts we post online stay in our little galleries and are viewed by our fellow scrappers. The thought that a personal layout is floating around the internet being viewed by who know who sent some people over the edge.
So even though Nubia wasn't taking layouts from the gallery, people realized how easy it would be for someone to actually do that. The paranoia got dumped on her.
I am also shocked that fellow scrappers sent her hate emails. I can not imagine such juvenile behavior.
Nubia made a good point. Images are being shared all over the internet. We should be a bit more careful of what we post in our galleries. If we are going to post something and make it available to the public, we should not act so shocked that someone has copied it and is sharing is someplace. I wonder why the galleries are open to the public. Isn't there a way to set it that you have to be a member of a site like DST to view the gallery?
-----New topic-----
Why is the Lily Pad having a desinger call? This is their first ever. Why now? Who do you think applied/will get in? Who should move there?
Right 10:10. Your posts are bipolar.
July 9, 2009 11:43 AM
I'm not surprised that she got hate mail. What I am surprised about is how cool & collected she managed to stay during the entire thread.
You're right, she got dumped on unfairly by some designers & a lot of scrappers.
I'm glad that none of my favorite designers were in that thread. I think that past piracy threads, discussions on the blog has taught most of the designers that it's better to deal with it privately and show professionalism on the public forum.
FWIW, I also think it's really naive to think that anything you place in the gallery can't be downloaded onto someone else's computer with or without a private password. Same goes with what you post online too.
I'm not a bit surprised that she got a bunch of hate mail from DST people. So much self-righteousness, hypocrisy, and posturing over there. Those kind of pile ons happen on a regular basis, especially when the topic is TOU or piracy.
And where do you shop? I don't shop at DSP, but I wouldn't describe as a file of festering crap.
July 9, 2009 1:43 AM
_________________________________
LOL, I don't shop anywhere. I don't need to, I get plenty of CT kits to keep me busy, and they're all much better than the crap at DSP.
I am also shocked that fellow scrappers sent her hate emails. I can not imagine such juvenile behavior.
________________
You can't actually mean that if you regularly visit smack blogs. It doesn't surprise me in the least she got hate mail as I have witnessed some really backhanded and lowbrow behavior since becoming a designer more times than I can count. I can only imagine what some of the mail she got said in them.
Yeah DSP is so disgusting, ITA! Those designers all look like a bunch of newbies with their "style".
Oh and CU items, I read one the other day and they actually expect you to not even recolor anything as it destorys the integrity of their work! ROTFLMAO! Are you serious? I can't recolor your items now to match my page? That's BS as far as I'm concerned, if I want to use your ribbon that I purchased and it's blue and I want green I will go ahead and do so thank you very much. Bwahahaha! Full of yourself much?
Oh and CU items, I read one the other day and they actually expect you to not even recolor anything as it destorys the integrity of their work! ROTFLMAO! Are you serious? I can't recolor your items now to match my page? That's BS as far as I'm concerned, if I want to use your ribbon that I purchased and it's blue and I want green I will go ahead and do so thank you very much. Bwahahaha! Full of yourself much?
July 9, 2009 3:21 PM
-------------
That's 'cause recoloring a recolor makes it look crappier. ;)
I'm using stuff for personal use. I'm not sharing. AND I recolor. OFTEN. Who is this designer so I won't buy from her? I rarely read the TOUs because I'm just using for personal use for scrapping. I really shouldn't have to!
Laura Bavin and Carol Harden have some really beautiful products. Not sure why they are getting the criticism.
Where do non CT scrappers hang out?
Who criticised Lauren Bavin or Carol whatever her name is (she's the new one? Wonder if she'll last longer than the previous new ones)? Nobody.
Having said that, Lauren is the biggest copyist in the digital world and DSP stuff in general is pretty poor (not to mention over priced and under sized) compared to the goods available elsewhere. The world has moved on.
You DSP pimps are so bloody obvious. Get over yourselves.
Just because someone sticks up for DSP doesn't make them a "DSP pimp" jeesh can't someone like something different than you do? It's fine that you don't like DSP. Just because you don't like DSP doesn't mean others can't like it without you calling them names.
Yeah DSP is so disgusting, ITA! Those designers all look like a bunch of newbies with their "style".
Oh and CU items, I read one the other day and they actually expect you to not even recolor anything as it destorys the integrity of their work! ROTFLMAO! Are you serious? I can't recolor your items now to match my page? That's BS as far as I'm concerned, if I want to use your ribbon that I purchased and it's blue and I want green I will go ahead and do so thank you very much. Bwahahaha! Full of yourself much?
July 9, 2009 3:21 PM
----------------------------------
What a load of utter bullshit! Maybe check your facts before you spout crap like that.
I have seen tons of recolored DSP stuff in their gallery.
Where on earth do people get this kind of crap? Sheesh!
Because they (the pimps) come on here saying they don't know why Lauren and Carol are getting criticised when they WEREN'T. That's what makes it obvious pimping.
WV: dingi
How appropriate, have you SEEN the DSP website?
Yeah DSP is so disgusting, ITA! Those designers all look like a bunch of newbies with their "style".
July 9, 2009 3:21 PM
I would much rather their beautiful artwork than scanned & CU stuffed rubbish... anyday!
You don't get out much do you Robyn. Er, sorry, I meant '5.30pm'.
What a load of utter bullshit! Maybe check your facts before you spout crap like that.
I have seen tons of recolored DSP stuff in their gallery.
Where on earth do people get this kind of crap? Sheesh!
_______________________________
Uh duh. Look again at the post you were responding to. She had one paragraph about DSP and another about CU items. Two totally different topics that happened to be in the same post. Her comments about CU items weren't directed at DSP at all. You can stop hyperventilating now.
Who are Laura Bavin and Carol Harden? Are they at DSP? I just looked and I didn't see them.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are good designers at DSP, but there's no way in hell I'm going to wade through 35 crappy designers to find the 5 that might be good. Too much work. Right at the top of their main store page they have their monthly sales. The kits in that section are really blah and amateurish. That doesn't exactly motivate people to look further into the store.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are good designers at DSP, but there's no way in hell I'm going to wade through 35 crappy designers to find the 5 that might be good. Too much work. Right at the top of their main store page they have their monthly sales. The kits in that section are really blah and amateurish. That doesn't exactly motivate people to look further into the store.
July 9, 2009 5:54 PM
------------------------------
Which site are you at?? There aren't even near that many designers at DSP!
I don't see any monthly sales either. There are the July releases, if that is what you mean??
5:54 back again! I just realized when I googled Digital Scrapbooking the first place with the initials DSP that came up was Digitalscrapbookpages.com. But then I googled Lauren Bavin and found her at digitalscrapbookplace.com. I'm guessing that's really the DSP y'all have been talking about. My comments were about digitalscrapbookpages. Very confusing!
Who criticised Lauren Bavin or Carol whatever her name is (she's the new one? Wonder if she'll last longer than the previous new ones)? Nobody.
Having said that, Lauren is the biggest copyist in the digital world and DSP stuff in general is pretty poor (not to mention over priced and under sized) compared to the goods available elsewhere. The world has moved on.
You DSP pimps are so bloody obvious. Get over yourselves.
July 9, 2009 4:57 PM
**************************
How funny. I've never even bought anything from DSP. In fact, I'm a designer at another store who is quite satisfied with her earnings and doesn't need to slam other designers or stores. Get over your ASSumptions....
5:54 back again! I just realized when I googled Digital Scrapbooking the first place with the initials DSP that came up was Digitalscrapbookpages.com. But then I googled Lauren Bavin and found her at digitalscrapbookplace.com. I'm guessing that's really the DSP y'all have been talking about. My comments were about digitalscrapbookpages. Very confusing!
July 9, 2009 6:16 PM
--------------------------
Oh yeah, digitals is crappy although it appears slightly better than it used to be...
It is an older site too but not as old as the others.
How funny. I've never even bought anything from DSP. In fact, I'm a designer at another store who is quite satisfied with her earnings and doesn't need to slam other designers or stores. Get over your ASSumptions....
July 9, 2009 6:39 PM
------------------------------
Who says DSP designers do?? I haven't seen them slam anyone else?
Sounds like you are making 'ASSumptions'.
DSP designers do seem proud of their designs, but I have never seen them slam anyone else. They obviously put a lot of heart, creativity and effort into their designs, why shouldn't they be proud?
Anonymous said...
Question for designers:
How many digi kits do you need to sell before *you* consider that kit successful, & you are happy with??? (I'm referring to one individual kit release). 20 kits? 100? 1000?
I imagine this will vary amongst designers depending upon how long they've been designing for, & other factors, etc..
Just thought this would be an interesting topic to discuss.
PS. I'm not referring to your individual satisfaction from designing a kit, because you don't need to sell any to be satisfied with your own design
June 26, 2009 7:08 PM
-----------------------------------
any other designers willing to answer this? thanks.
Who says DSP designers do?? I haven't seen them slam anyone else?
Sounds like you are making 'ASSumptions'.
July 9, 2009 6:54 PM
**************
I wasn't talking to the DSP designers. I was addressing the peeps who were slamming them @@
I wasn't talking to the DSP designers. I was addressing the peeps who were slamming them @@
July 9, 2009 7:38 PM
-------------------------]
ROFL! Ok, cool then. ;)
any other designers willing to answer this? thanks.
July 9, 2009 7:28 PM
-------------------------------
Before I was designing were I am now, I considered 5-10 sales in the first month a good selling kit.
I am now in a better store and consider anything over 20 sales of a new kit in the first month a good selling kit. In 6mths I sell around 100 of my better selling kits.
I expect to do better as I get more kits in the store however and as I build my customer base more and the members of the site get to know my work better.
Who criticised Lauren Bavin or Carol whatever her name is (she's the new one? Wonder if she'll last longer than the previous new ones)? Nobody.
Having said that, Lauren is the biggest copyist in the digital world and DSP stuff in general is pretty poor (not to mention over priced and under sized) compared to the goods available elsewhere. The world has moved on.
July 9, 2009 4:57 PM
---------------------------------
Only 2 of the new designers left and they went to a really crappy site I forget the name of. Sounds to me like they weren't up to scratch.
Robyn Gough is still there and I think I remember seeing she was made Senior designer.
Lauren is one of the most talented designers around, not many designers can make their designs from scratch as beautifully as Lauren can. She has a lot of experience designing and it shows. She has been around for a long while and she is the last person I would consider a copiest.
Carole was an apprentice who I think has recently been promoted to full designer.
Who criticised Lauren Bavin or Carol whatever her name is (she's the new one? Wonder if she'll last longer than the previous new ones)? Nobody.
-----------
While they weren't criticized individually, the whole of the DSP designers were considered crap. So, everyone who said negative things about DSP criticized those designers as well. That's hardly nobody as there is a bunch of posts telling us how poor DSP is.
-----New topic-----
Why is the Lily Pad having a desinger call? This is their first ever. Why now? Who do you think applied/will get in? Who should move there?
July 9, 2009 12:14 PM
-----------
Why? It's called a recession. They are obviously needing more revenue. I have no idea who will apply or get in. While there are tons of designers out there, I only ever seem to see the same 10 or so circling the block and changing stores.
Only 2 of the new designers left and they went to a really crappy site I forget the name of. Sounds to me like they weren't up to scratch.
^^^^^^
Sounds to me like you're an idiot (or completely clueless, or a DSP sycophant). You choose which.
Hmmm. Think this is the way this post should have gone....
---
Player 1: "I'll take 'Asinine' for $200, Alex"
Alex: "And, here's the clue - The dumbest post ever on DST HOF"
Player 1 rings in: "Why is the Lily Pad having a desinger call? Why now? Who do you think applied/will get in? Who should move there?"
Alex: "Wow, not just one correct question, but 4! Bonus points for Player 1!"
While they weren't criticized individually, the whole of the DSP designers were considered crap. So, everyone who said negative things about DSP criticized those designers as well. That's hardly nobody as there is a bunch of posts telling us how poor DSP is.
********
Yep. And here's one more. DSP sucks. Sorry if the truth hurts.
Yep. And here's one more. DSP sucks. Sorry if the truth hurts.
July 9, 2009 9:31 PM
----------------------------------
Yeah, and you are not the judge jury and excecutioner! LOL
Good thing taste is subjective.
Yeah, and you are not the judge jury and excecutioner! LOL
-------
LOLing at your own bad joke is a bit odd, don't you think? Just sayin'...
LOLing at your own bad joke is a bit odd, don't you think? Just sayin'...
July 9, 2009 9:49 PM
---------------------------
Seriously?? Sheesh! ROFL whatever!
Yep. And here's one more. DSP sucks. Sorry if the truth hurts.
July 9, 2009 9:31 PM
----
I'm not a DSP supporter, so no truth hurting here. I was just pointing out the error. I'm not really sure why a positive or non negative post about DPS makes someone a DSP supporter. Shows what a very, very limited view some people have. Sometimes things are just shades of gray.
I'm not a DSP supporter, so no truth hurting here. I was just pointing out the error. I'm not really sure why a positive or non negative post about DPS makes someone a DSP supporter. Shows what a very, very limited view some people have. Sometimes things are just shades of gray.
July 9, 2009 10:03 PM
----------------------------
I agree. The DSP bashing is getting a bit tiresome. Why bother? Is there some need to beat them down? Does it make you feel better to do so?
Do you feel it will help YOUR sales to try and make DSP look bad?
Same with the SS bashing, that is just as tiresome. I never go to SS but am a bit over the bashing. It's BORING
I'm not a DSP supporter, so no truth hurting here. I was just pointing out the error. I'm not really sure why a positive or non negative post about DPS makes someone a DSP supporter. Shows what a very, very limited view some people have. Sometimes things are just shades of gray.
^^^^^^^^^^
I'm not sure I follow your logic on why this is an 'error', but if you think so, then cool. I don't necessarily think everyone that posts non-negatively about someone/something makes the poster a huge advocate, but then again if you're posting something on a smack blog that's not negative to begin with you're in the minority anyway. There's ususally 3 types of posts here: some sort of smack, then posts by supporters of the smack, or people from or affiliated with the smackee trying to do damage control. Well, I guess there is a 4th type of post about what people ate for dinner or some such BS. Call that 'black and white' if you will, but seems to be the way this blog rolls...
I agree. The DSP bashing is getting a bit tiresome. Why bother? Is there some need to beat them down? Does it make you feel better to do so?
Do you feel it will help YOUR sales to try and make DSP look bad?
Same with the SS bashing, that is just as tiresome. I never go to SS but am a bit over the bashing. It's BORING
**************
I'm open to suggestions on who else to smack. Got anyone in mind?
I'm open to suggestions on who else to smack. Got anyone in mind?
July 9, 2009 10:20 PM
---------------------------
ROFL... how about Ruby... should provide some entertainment! LOL She always seems to be in the thick of it. I think she likes the attention.
ROFL... how about Ruby... should provide some entertainment! LOL She always seems to be in the thick of it. I think she likes the attention.
July 9, 2009 10:23 PM
----------------------------------
good point! Notice how DSP started being brought up here when SHE started designing for them....
I just read this on a blog and thought of DST: "They shit rainbows and give birth to unicorns or something."
LOL. We've mentioned shitting rainbows, but giving birth to unicorns? LOL
9 out of 10 designers would say great go for it because if you can't understand why we have TOUs then we don't want or need your business anyway.
and 9 out of 10 customers are more then happy to go along with Designers TOUs becasue they understand the amount of time it takes to make kits that are undersold in the first place as most designers don't even make minimum wage.
Sorry you're just another who wants something for nothing and then wants to do with it as they want as if you spent the many hours it takes to make 1 kit besides doing the research and everything else designers go through to design. It's too bad you are the 1 out of 10 who feel so entitled. I hate to break it to you but you aren't entitled to a damn thing.
--------------------------------
Don't care about the other posters, I totally agree with you.
and 9 out of 10 customers are more then happy to go along with Designers TOUs becasue they understand the amount of time it takes to make kits that are undersold in the first place as most designers don't even make minimum wage.
-----------
Which is why 9 out of 10 customers are screaming for sales, because they are so appreciative. No, I'm not a designer, I'm just tired of people begging for sales, it's pathetic.
Notice how DSP started being brought up here when SHE started designing for them....
July 9, 2009 10:24 PM
----
Oh come on Robyn, that was when you started at DSP too, and you're still there. DSP bashing hasn't increased, but the defending has. Co-incidence?
-----------
Which is why 9 out of 10 customers are screaming for sales, because they are so appreciative. No, I'm not a designer, I'm just tired of people begging for sales, it's pathetic.
But they'll always do it! They'll always have a sale!
Anonymous said...
Hmmm. Think this is the way this post should have gone....
---
Player 1: "I'll take 'Asinine' for $200, Alex"
Alex: "And, here's the clue - The dumbest post ever on DST HOF"
Player 1 rings in: "Why is the Lily Pad having a desinger call? Why now? Who do you think applied/will get in? Who should move there?"
Alex: "Wow, not just one correct question, but 4! Bonus points for Player 1!"
July 9, 2009 9:30 PM
--------------
sorry 9:30. some of us are tired of beating dead horses. this blog just sucks. nothing new. same dead horses. blah.blah.blah. LAME.
While they weren't criticized individually, the whole of the DSP designers were considered crap. So, everyone who said negative things about DSP criticized those designers as well. That's hardly nobody as there is a bunch of posts telling us how poor DSP is.
July 9, 2009 8:47 PM
***********************
Exactly. And calling Lauren Bavin, who was here longer than most of today's trendy designers, a copyist, is laughable at best.
Uh duh. Look again at the post you were responding to. She had one paragraph about DSP and another about CU items. Two totally different topics that happened to be in the same post. Her comments about CU items weren't directed at DSP at all. You can stop hyperventilating now.
July 9, 2009 5:44 PM
Thanks 5:44, some people can't read can they LOL! No it wasn't DSP that you can't recolor, them being crap was a different subject.
What's the consensus on DD? I don't hear much about them. Drama-free?
Anonymous said...
What's the consensus on DD? I don't hear much about them. Drama-free?
July 10, 2009 1:53 PM
-----------------------
When you say "DD", are you referring to Designer Digitals?
Anonymous said...
What's the consensus on DD? I don't hear much about them. Drama-free?
July 10, 2009 1:53 PM
-----------------------
When you say "DD", are you referring to Designer Digitals?
July 10, 2009 4:23 PM
Yes.
What's the consensus on DD? I don't hear much about them. Drama-free?
July 10, 2009 1:53 PM
--------------
So much to be said about DD, so little time.
I'm not a huge DD shopper, mainly b/c I can't afford to be, but they are one of the VERY FEW stores that are run professionally. They are consistent with new releases, sales, and high quality freebies. The site is more secure than most, and they have always notified before doing drastic upgrades. They stay out of all the BS drama, and their designers and CT don't shriek and preen and pimp all over the place-very refreshing. Everything I've bought from them has been high quality.
I did have one bad experience with CS--Katie's husband handled it, and he was pretty unresponsive and then rude about fixing their mistake. It was on a paypal order that he had to manually send through since they won't take paypal-grr. That's the other complaint-they don't take paypal. I know it's probably b/c they've spent a lot of money on their own secure credit-card processing, but it still sucks.
I wouldn't shop there for a long time after my CS incident, and now I just mostly pick up their 25 cent and 99 cent items, and once in a while I buy something off my huge wishlist on Thrifty Thursdays.
end of novel-sorry it got so long.
^^^^^^^^^
Curious why you think DD is 'more secure' than most? Not criticizing, am really just trying to understand the comment.
I've never really spent much time on DD at all, but just went and looked at a few things. Seemed a bit 'meh' to me and a little pricey given what was included in the kits I looked at. By no means did I look at all of them, admittedly.
As far as Paypal goes, I don't know about DD in particular, but a lot of stores dislike or avoid Paypal for a very good reason- their fees suck, especially on small purchases. I forget exactly what they are, but it's something like 25 cents + 5% or thereabouts, so selling something for less than $1 or so is pretty much a non-starter if you have Paypal as a payment method. Visa/MC/Amex is way more cost effective, so all of you customers out there, if you want to help out and reduce everyone's cost, use CC's instead...
Oh come on Robyn, that was when you started at DSP too, and you're still there. DSP bashing hasn't increased, but the defending has. Co-incidence?
July 10, 2009 2:53 AM
------------------------
Not robin but I actually think it is less than it was, not by much but definately less.
----
Oh come on Robyn, that was when you started at DSP too, and you're still there. DSP bashing hasn't increased, but the defending has. Co-incidence?
July 10, 2009 2:53 AM
----------------------------------
Oh yes, and she is the ONLY person who could possibly be defending DSP... I mean there is no way one of their 140 odd thousand members could be defending them, right?
Always gotta love it when people think they know who is posting....
Did you see the babe announcement at Sweet Shoppe. What a joke!
http://smackityo.blogspot.com
Did you see the babe announcement at Sweet Shoppe. What a joke!
http://smackityo.blogspot.com
July 11, 2009 1:52 AM
Bitter, much?
Not using paypal just protects the store owner and the customer. No chargebacks... and if you have a complaint, you do so through the credit card company.
10:14- why don't you just get a paypal CC? It's linked to your PP account.
You can actually get a lot of quality items if you just buy the 2 $0.25 items every week, and the 1 $.99 every month. Fill up your wishlist, and only buy when they're 30% off on Thursdays or during quarterly sales.
These days, I only shop DD, and two shops that are single designers. Once in a blue moon I'll buy Dani's kit at SS... but that's only if I have to have it.
hahaha - at the ssd smackblog - not bitter, are we!?
I think that some of the girls are bitter, but did you see the results? Some of the new girls don't even have galleries. What a slap in the face to those girls who worked so hard.
I don't think DD is ran too professionally. they have crappy customer service. I have dealt with them (CS) twice over the years....I have been dealt with curt comments and little room for compromise or satisfactory resolution of the matter.
The funny thing is that I now only buy the 25cents items. I think for the most part their items are too much. Their site is too hard to search.........
I feel like I get my CS issue resolved by only spending 25cents every now and then.....I have a satisfaction that they are not earning anything on me.......
I dont really pay attention to the TOU's. I buy what I like and use it as I like.......
Let someone come after me......
There's also the Paypal plugin that will generate a onetime CC number for you...
Did you see the babe announcement at Sweet Shoppe. What a joke!
Why is it a joke? 5 of them are incredible scrappers, 3 I've never heard of.
You sound like someone who wasn't chosen and are bitter about it.
I can tell you from experience stores are looking for personalities as well as great scrappers. If you post ugly stuff in the DST forums, forget about being chosen no matter how great your layouts are. Sorry, just the truth.
If you post ugly stuff in the DST forums, forget about being chosen no matter how great your layouts are. Sorry, just the truth.
July 11, 2009 12:42 PM
_______________________
That's what some pple would consider
as blackballing. A practice that has been denied to exist by DST supporters when the issue was brought up.
Statements like this indicate that it IS indeed common practice for designers to blackball someone in the community.
If you post ugly stuff in the DST forums, forget about being chosen no matter how great your layouts are. Sorry, just the truth.
July 11, 2009 12:42 PM
_______________________
That's what some pple would consider
as blackballing. A practice that has been denied to exist by DST supporters when the issue was brought up.
Statements like this indicate that it IS indeed common practice for designers to blackball someone in the community.
July 11, 2009 3:34 PM
-----------
That's not black balling. You won't get hired for a job if you are publically a jerk online. Why would they hire someone that isn't going to represent SSD in a positive manner?
Black Balling from the community would be if ALL the designers and ALL the stores wouldn't except that person and kicks them off the team. I would say that Amanda Dykan has been black balled. So it does exist but in exreme cases.
And I agree, someone sounds bitter. There were a few people that I was surprised weren't on the list. But I suppose they represented themselves in a not so kind manner.
I don't know who applied so I don't know who to be surprised about that they didn't get chosen.
It could be that they are on too many other teams, etc.
I think that some of the girls are bitter, but did you see the results? Some of the new girls don't even have galleries. What a slap in the face to those girls who worked so hard.
-----------------------------
Just because they don't have galleries at SSD, doesn't mean they don't have galleries. There is a life outside of the little SSD bubble.
Now if they have no gallery at all, that's odd, but if it's merely a case of they are not active at SSD who gives a you know what?
It doesn't seem like stores can win no matter what they do.
If one of their ct says something offensive, the store gets smacked here for not firing them.
If they choose not to hire ct members that are obnoxious, they are accused of blackballing.
I'm not sure if that's considered blackballing but why on earth would they want someone who spouts off or is offensive in any way, always involved in the drama.
There's too much talent out there to take the chance on them. I will always choose quiet ones over the "hot topics" posters. 'Nuff said.
that smack blog didn't stick around long.
LOL, I noticed. Maybe someone was too close to discovering who was bitter about not being chosen for the SS ct.
looks like the selection committee did a good job overlooking that fine member of the digi community.
So, all of this leaves me wondering. If you were voting on a site ct, what would you exclude someone for? Political posts? Religious (or anti) posts? Just too much personal stuff?
Same question in reverse? What would keep you from buying from a designer?
Who almost got discovered?
No idea but the blog was all about the SSD new ct and how unbelievable the winners were.
I have no idea who even applied, don't really care but someone did. lol
So, all of this leaves me wondering. If you were voting on a site ct, what would you exclude someone for? Political posts? Religious (or anti) posts? Just too much personal stuff?
All of the above, plus if someone was previously on my ct and flaked out on me, I would make sure everyone else knew.
if someone was previously on my ct and flaked out on me, I would make sure everyone else knew.
Why do ct members do that? Just quit already and don't lie about it!!!!
I don't mind if people express their opinions on politics, scrapping, whatever. But I would not vote for someone to be on a CT if they were outright rude or disrespectful to someone in expressing those opinions. There's a fine line but one can express an opinion without getting personal.
if someone was previously on my ct and flaked out on me, I would make sure everyone else knew.
Why do ct members do that? Just quit already and don't lie about it!!!!
July 11, 2009 8:19 PM
why? hmmm, let me see:
here is a kit, it goes to the store in 2-3 days, and will sell for $3-10. then go on sale for 1/2 and a month from now be a $1 sale. But right now I need the CT to:
1. Make 1 or 2 layouts
2. upload to a photo site or email me an attachment of the layout that has been saved for web size.
3. Then on release date do the following:
a. upload to at least 3 gallerys include the links that you have to search for, and make sure you save those links and post them so I can make sure you did them.
b. some want the praise game, others enable threads,
c. blog about me on your blog
d. bump up any and all threads about the kit
e. whoops, almost forgot, I also need QPs and bragbooks for a train we are doing, so make one and then zip it, don't forget my TOU and the kit preview on it and upload to server, and blog it like this.
For all this,
you get a smiley from the designer on a private blog and a free kit.
wow, wonder why they flake?
some CTs have real life issues and the designers puke on them in private forums
as one stated here on this blog, if one of MY CTs flaked I would make sure everyone knew...wow
it's a weird world this CT business.
I read the comments how we should be more business like:
yet CTs are your employees, and make like pennies an hour?
oh that's right they aren't employees, they are your friends....nice
Wow... you must have had some bad experiences with designers... I'm so sorry. The ones I CT for don't have these many requirements.
I have a whole week in which to create my layouts, sometimes more if I choose to. I also don't HAVE to use a kit if I don't like it. I choose only the ones I really want.
I admit that I LOVE getting the kits for free, because I LOVE my designers' work.
Even if I had to buy those kits, they are usually so jampacked with stuff that I can easily produce 4-5 layouts for myself. I just pick the 2 I like most for my CT requirements.
I don't have a blog, but even if I did I would post the layouts I created and advertise my designers. I do enjoy posting my layouts in the galleries. For me it's not so much promotion for my designers than showing off something I created and getting comments (yes, I am a comment-junkie, LOL).
Sometimes 2 of my designers will ask for Quickpages and I always volunteer for those. It's not much extra work because I already created my layout(s).
Honestly, I do this for myself and because I enjoy scrapping. Yes, I get all my product for free. And for me it's not a big issue posting layouts to galleries as payback for the kits I get. I would never be able to afford them otherwise.
Who almost got discovered?
July 11, 2009 8:12 PM
------------------------------
Annie
Yikes!
http://www.the-lilypad.com/store/product.php?productid=1824&cat=0&page=1
^^^^^^^^^
serious?? that is insane! I love her work, but even if I did do S4H I would just find someone else that I like just as much and use their work as long as TOU allow for it....
I thought Miss Mint (Peppermint Creative) was ridiculous. Kate just blows everyone out of the water! There are too many designers (who have better designs) that allow S4H use for FREE.
Who wants to make all of their projects look like a kindergarten craft anyways?
Wouldn't it just be a lot easier for her to say 'I don't want you to use my stuff for S4O'? Same meaning, 90% fewer words.
What a joke those Kate Hadfield S40 prices are! What do so many designers have against s40 anyway??
I must have missed something. What was the deal with the blog that got deleted? What did it say about SSD?
Wow, Kate is charging less than a professional would and people scream about it. I'd rather buy her license than use most of the stuff out there. Kate's products are well made and original. They don't look cookie cutter like a lot of the stuff out there.
She, herself is cookie cutter. Her designs are not that diverse.
There are several bitter girls that hang out at SSD and call it home-I can only imagine who it was-but Annie surely is a possibility.
Hooray for the new Sugarbabes.
serious?? that is insane! I love her work, but even if I did do S4H I would just find someone else that I like just as much and use their work as long as TOU allow for it....
July 12, 2009 3:18 PM
__________________________________________________
I'm sorry I don't know Kate Hatfield but I think that $85.00 is rediculous for a yearly license for S4H.
What's the consensus on DD? I don't hear much about them. Drama-free?
July 10, 2009 1:53 PM
--------------
So much to be said about DD, so little time.
------------------------------
Amen! DD is definitely not drama free. They just put on a good show for the public.
Now, I'll probably take a hit here but I have my big girl panties on so I think I can take it.
All this S4H stuff and requiring a special license ($85....ummm no thanks), honestly, I live on the other side of the world from half of these designers are they really going to know if I created a page for a friend? Or I made a scrapbook of flattened images for a friend and they happened to give me a few dollars as gratitude for my time?
I'm of the mindset that I bought and paid for the product so it is mine. Same as with paper scraps, I buy it it's mine and if I want to make a book for someone and charge a few dollars for my time and effort then so be it.
I am not sharing the files or copying those as that I do believe is very wrong before anyone decides to misread, skip words or read something that isn't there. I am specifically referring to creating a book or page for another person and receiving some sort of remuneration for my time and effort
$85 is not ridiculous at all. If you purchase 5 or more of her products throughout the year then you are saving $'s by doing it this way. You then get to use those products over and over. It is not $85 to use the products for 12 months only, it is so you can save money if you tend to purchase multiple products from her for S4H throughout the year.
I think it is completely fair that a designer ask a decent price for S4H usage. They have spent a long time creating the products and then you pay a pathetic $4 or something like that and then make money from it, does that seem fair???
Probably a lot of designers give you the privilege of S4H options for free because they are too scared that you won't shop with them anymore if they charge you for it. I say well done to the designers that do charge.
I treat my S4H as a business and appreciate that the designers do too. I have no issue paying a designer a fee for their products, as this is absorbed into my fee for my clients anyway.
I think it is completely fair that a designer ask a decent price for S4H usage. They have spent a long time creating the products and then you pay a pathetic $4 or something like that and then make money from it, does that seem fair???
----------
Fair? Are you kidding me?! If they are only making $4 on a kit, they need to rethink what they are doing. They make the product ONCE and they sell it much more than once. They don't create the product from the ground up for every single kit sold. I'm so over the whole they work hard and charge only this much argument. It's totally bogus.
It only works if you strictly buy KH products. Thankfully, she added the one product ricing. Still won't buy it... and will still use S4H friendly designers.
Fair? Are you kidding me?! If they are only making $4 on a kit, they need to rethink what they are doing. They make the product ONCE and they sell it much more than once. They don't create the product from the ground up for every single kit sold. I'm so over the whole they work hard and charge only this much argument. It's totally bogus.
--------------------
I didn't say they MADE $4 on a kit! I said they may sell it to you for $4 and then you can make money off it if you choose to. In total they may make $4 or they may make $400 who knows and who cares, I was just stating that $4 is nothing for an item you can then make money off, so a fee is fair.
There are designers out there that certainly don't create a kit from the ground up because they are full of CU! But there are others that take the time to create things themselves and not simply recolour someone else's product. Sadly these are the minority it seems but they are out there!
what's the big deal? her pricing is about the same as Shabby Princess, Peppermint Creative and Little Dreamer but she is giving you and option to save money if you purchase a fair bit from her. Makes sense to me.
When I buy beads from a bead store to make product to sell, they don't give a hoot how much I orignally paid for the bead and how much I'm then selling the finished item for. Even if I bought a unique bead at $20 and then I used that bead for a necklace, which I sell for $50, the original artist doesn't give a poo that I sold it on for more. I'm not really sure why digi designers get their knickers in a twist about it. I paid for it, I should be allowed to do what I want with it.
^^^^^^^^^^
I understand 100% what you're saying.
I think it's different with digital products, though. You can buy a $20 bead, turn it into a necklace and sell for $50. But that's a one-time deal. With S4O/S4H/CU you buy one product for $4-$6 and then create something new to sell for (say) $25. But you can use that same item over and over and over and end up making (say) $100-$200 with it.
I'd love to know why there are so many who think they are Entitled to do with a product whatever the hell you want to do with it without following a designer's TOU. That's why there are TOUs in Designer's products and that's why different designers allow some things and don't allow other.
What gives you the idea that just because you've purchased a kit for $4.00 that you own the rights to the kit. You only own the right to scrap with that kit, or use it for CU, or use it for S4H or make hybrid products for sale all by which the Designer has allowed by TOU but you aren't ENTITLED to do whatever you think you can with that kit just because you bought it.
You live in an apartment? You pay rent for that apartment? Just because you pay rent doesn't give you the right to use that apartment for any purpose you chose like making it into a meth lab or having wild parties because you signed a lease.
Well just think of a designer's TOU as a lease. You pay money for a kit but you don't own the rights to it and so you can't just do whatever the hell you want with it. It's really a simple concept that unfortunately I doubt you will ever understand. So please don't purchase my product. I'd rather lose a sale then sell to you.
In reality, how often do you use that item again, and again, and again. I can only think of a very few items... Unless you're using your own quick pages that you made (the freakin' CTs are whoring those out themselves! LOL)
Sorry, but an apartment lease is so not the same thing. I am not leasing product. I purchased it, just as I would purchase clothes or art supplies or a car or whatever else I can spend my money on. Granted, I do not share my products, but to say that I can't make something for someone else and give it to them is simply ridiculous. I can do that with art supplies or whatever else I choose. I'm sorry that some of you designers may have gotten burned with people pirating your stuff, but that is the price you pay for the industry you are in. Just like there are shoplifters in the world. Not everyone is that way. I hate the mentality that designers think they can control what we do with the products once we purchase them. We gave you the money you set the price on, done. It's ours now. I choose to make pages for my family, but I'll be damned if you tell me I can't give them a gift or make someone else a book (even for money) without paying you yet again. Sorry, but I'll gladly take my business elsewhere. There are too many designers out there with great products I'd rather buy from than those who constantly bitch bitch bitch about the business they choose to be in.
And as for the SSD CT thing, I also entered. I am a bit bitter but I guess I should have realized that it is a popularity contest just like all the others. I am a great scrapper, but not as outspoken and active. But it still seems like all the same names over and over... I mean really, how can someone be on multiple store teams? I guess they have a lot of time on their hands. OK, I'm done bitching. :)
I hate the mentality that designers think they can control what we do with the products once we purchase them. We gave you the money you set the price on, done. It's ours now.
__________________________________________________
ahhhh but you see this is the attitude that can get you sued if in fact you are using the designs to MAKE MONEY and sometimes even for freebies that you give someone other then as used in a gift. The designs you purchase are either copyrighted by myself or as in my TOU by others that have given me permission to use their in my kits and are not owned by me.
Just because you buy something doesn't necessarily mean you have license to do anything with it. Most art products have copyrights. I can't take a jeweler's designs and copy them bead for bead and sell them as my own. In fact if I wanted to make my own beads, you might want to look and see on the package if the beads you are trying to copy in fact have a copyright. Try taking Scrapbook Papers and use the exact design for papers for another company and see if it doesn't get you fired.
We live by rules and regulations. If you think that copyrights and trademarks don't hold weight then you go for it.
I don't believe we are talking about YOU taking a kit and making a scrapbook for your family as a gift. Or buy those beads and create a like item from some designer to give to a friend. We are talking about people using others designs for PROFIT whether you are another designer, do S4H, or make hybrid items for sale. If I haven't given you permission to use my designs whether for pay or a freebie being given away to others, then you are again going against my copyright. The law upholds the copyright of others so if you think you are entitled to do with all that in mind go for it but don't come crying if you get sued or railroaded out of the scrapbook community for piracy.
If you are just wanting to make gifts and not profit then do what you will. I don't dictate what my customers can do as long as what they are doing doesn't go against my copyright. Plain and Simple
Anonymous said...
I am not leasing product. I purchased it ... We gave you the money you set the price on, done. It's ours now.
July 13, 2009 8:38 AM
--
No, you don't own it, you purchased a license to use it, but you didn't purchase ownership.
The license you purchased covers what you are allowed to do with it, it doesn't make the product YOURS. Just like any software or other digital product. That's what a TOU is, the terms of the license you purchased.
Can someone tell me why designers will have a CT call and then you never hear anything again? No announcement, no acknowledgement, nothing. This seems to be happening a lot lately.
why? hmmm, let me see:
July 12, 2009 10:18 AM
Why wouldn't you just quit then? That's what I was saying, either quit or fulfill your obligation.
You agreed to the terms when you were accepted, right?
Designers are afraid to "fire" ct members for fear of getting smacked here anonymously so we're in this limbo. It saps my mojo.
So please don't purchase my product. I'd rather lose a sale then sell to you.
July 13, 2009 7:52 AM
I call BS. You don't mean that at all. If you did, you'd sign your name. You ARE afraid of losing our business, if you even have it to begin with.
I am not leasing product. I purchased it ... We gave you the money you set the price on, done. It's ours now.
____
And if you buy a music CD or MP3, does that make it yours to do what you want with? If you buy a movie on DVD, can you then make copies of it and give it away/sell it? If you have your photos taken professionally, can you then take a one of those photos and make as many copies as you want to give away?
Just because people do those things, doesn't make it legal to do so.
Your whole metality on what you think you can do with what you buy is twisted.
I understand 100% what you're saying.
I think it's different with digital products, though. You can buy a $20 bead, turn it into a necklace and sell for $50. But that's a one-time deal. With S4O/S4H/CU you buy one product for $4-$6 and then create something new to sell for (say) $25. But you can use that same item over and over and over and end up making (say) $100-$200 with it.
July 13, 2009 2:15 AM
-----
So what? Good for them if they are doing such great business! I would be happy if a S4O user were doing that well with one of my products! it just gets my products in front of that many more people! Just because she makes $200instead of $25 should not make any difference to you. You already got your sale and got paid. Usually they are selling these items either printed or flattened. I just don't get the fuss.
No, you don't own it, you purchased a license to use it, but you didn't purchase ownership.
The license you purchased covers what you are allowed to do with it, it doesn't make the product YOURS. Just like any software or other digital product. That's what a TOU is, the terms of the license you purchased.
___________________________________________________
Thank you!!! You have hit the nail on the head. Said what needed to be said in as few words as possible.
Well just think of a designer's TOU as a lease. You pay money for a kit but you don't own the rights to it and so you can't just do whatever the hell you want with it. It's really a simple concept that unfortunately I doubt you will ever understand. So please don't purchase my product. I'd rather lose a sale then sell to you.
July 13, 2009 7:52 AM
-----------
I'd rather not buy from you either, so I guess we are even, aren't we? I really hate this superior snobby attitude some designers have. I used to be one and I still think some of them and their TOUs are ridiculous.
We are talking about people using others designs for PROFIT whether you are another designer, do S4H, or make hybrid items for sale.
------------------
And there is the crux of the matter. I'm so sorry that I'm making more money out of your product than you are.
So what? Good for them if they are doing such great business! I would be happy if a S4O user were doing that well with one of my products! it just gets my products in front of that many more people! Just because she makes $200instead of $25 should not make any difference to you. You already got your sale and got paid. Usually they are selling these items either printed or flattened. I just don't get the fuss.
July 13, 2009 12:34 PM
------------------
Sing it to me Sistah!
I am not leasing product. I purchased it ... We gave you the money you set the price on, done. It's ours now.
____
And if you buy a music CD or MP3, does that make it yours to do what you want with? If you buy a movie on DVD, can you then make copies of it and give it away/sell it? If you have your photos taken professionally, can you then take a one of those photos and make as many copies as you want to give away?
---------
It's not the same thing. We are making something different from the product, not copying and reselling the kit, as in your analogy where we are copying and reselling the CD.
Once again, some of you are confusing pirating with S4O. It's not the same at all.
Designers are afraid to "fire" ct members for fear of getting smacked here anonymously so we're in this limbo. It saps my mojo.
July 13, 2009 10:27 AM
---------------
Oh please tell me you are kidding. If it bothers you, don't come. It's that simple, it really is.
It's not the same thing. We are making something different from the product, not copying and reselling the kit, as in your analogy where we are copying and reselling the CD.
Once again, some of you are confusing pirating with S4O. It's not the same at all.
July 13, 2009 5:59 PM
THIS. ITA!
Once again, some of you are confusing pirating with S4O. It's not the same at all.
___________________________
But if my terms don't allow S4H and you do it anyway, it is essentially the same thing.
Just because you buy something does not give you free and clear ownership to do whatever you want with it.
It's amazing how many people can't grasp this simple concept. Go buy some Disney photos, scan and extract the characters and then go start your scrap-for-hire business on ebay and see what happens. I know people do this already and don't give a shit but you see my point. Then again, the people arguing against this probably already do that and really don't think they're doing anything wrong.
How do you figure reselling an item (whether a derivative or not) that is specifically for personal use only is not pirating?
guess it's a good job I only scrap for me. I do read TOU and most of the kits I own/lease/rent are in fact S4H. I'll admit I never even knew what that meant until 7 months ago.
As for the analogy about an apartment and the meth lab....I own my house and can't have one of those either so poor choice for a comparison.
To the designer who doesn't want my business, please tell me who you are and I will make sure that my evil money does not dirty up your account.
If your designs are S4H then what's the big deal? If they are not then a very valid arguement.
I think the original poster meant it tongue in cheek as in how would you find out? Not saying it's right or the proper attitude just that how would you be able to know if someone in Antarctica took one of your kits, made an album and sold it?
Not justifying anything, so don't shoot the messenger.
I got this kit at "Rent a Center".
The kit is going into foreclosure. The repo man is after me.
I 'rent' a movie, meaning that it has to be returned to the store after a specific amount of time. If I'm only leasing a digital kit, then shouldn't it be returned after a certain amount of time? If a digital kit is 'leased' then why is it called a 'purchase'? Why am I thanked for my 'purchase' after checking out?
we would like to offer you a renewal on your lease for this kit in the amount of $5.00. This will be good for one year and 50 uses.
Anonymous said...
I got this kit at "Rent a Center".
July 13, 2009 8:02 PM
_________
LMAO
To the designer who doesn't want my business, please tell me who you are and I will make sure that my evil money does not dirty up your account.
July 13, 2009 7:49 PM
Word! I think the person who called BS on you (designer who doesn't want the business) was completely correct. You're a hypocrite. You typed some seriously high and mighty words, so why don't you now back them up and put your money where your mouth is??? Surely, it wouldn't hurt you to lose a few sales from some "renegade" S4O types!
we would like to offer you a renewal on your lease for this kit in the amount of $5.00. This will be good for one year and 50 uses.
July 13, 2009 8:42 PM
I know that this post was TIC, but it seriously wouldn't surprise me if designers tried this kind of shit.
Digital designers are the worst kind of prima donnas. No where else in crafting will you find people that design supplies so obsessed with what their customers do with them. And so divided on industry standards. After a few years of watching all the crazy antics, I don't think there will ever be enough professionalism in digi to come up with some much-needed industry norms or standards.
Keep on with all the drama llama mama BS, because all it does in the end is make it so frustrating for people who are trying to play by the rules, that eventually they'll just throw their hands up in the air and S4H/S4O any damn way they want, and there really isn't much that the rabid, prom-queen types will be able to do about it without a whole hell of a lot of time and resources on their hands.
Why would it be surprising? Some designers do this already by having a limit on how long you can use a S4H item or how many uses you get with one purchase. It's pretty much the same deal...If you want to use the kit more, you need to buy it again or pay for a renewed license.
It's amazing how many people can't grasp this simple concept. Go buy some Disney photos, scan and extract the characters and then go start your scrap-for-hire business on ebay and see what happens. I know people do this already and don't give a shit but you see my point. Then again, the people arguing against this probably already do that and really don't think they're doing anything wrong.
July 13, 2009 7:28 PM
-------------
Yet another bad analogy. I'm not selling your kit or pieces of your kit as is. Nor did I extract them to sell. I'm selling a flattened image, made from your kit. In some cases, all I might be selling is the actual printed page. How does this effect you? It doesn't. They can't do anything with the flattened image and if they could, they wouldn't be hiring me to do their pages for them because they are quite capable of doing it themselves.
"I must have missed something. What was the deal with the blog that got deleted? What did it say about SSD?"
I'm wondering this too, also, how do you ladies know it was Annie?
She seems really nice.
I'd like to know what it said.
I bet it was interesting.
I'm mainly a lurker over there, but it seems like some girls got the shaft big time.
I thought it was really funny that in there little e-zine it said you need to be active at the Sweet Shoppe forums and then they picked some girls that aren't active there at all.
Whatever, I know they probably lost some of their biggest customers over that.
Post a Comment