MicrostockGroup

Just when you think you'll never waste any more time with a new micro stock site along comes... http://www.timestockphoto.com

We took a look, but there are a few unanswered questions...

"To sell your photos, you first have to sign up as a member. Then just sign in and add a few images in your private folder to show us what you can do. Then post a message on the forum explaining why should you become a photographer!. Once your application is approved, you may begin uploading your photos! "

Hey, we don't have any enemies, so far as I know, but what about those that are a bit more noisy on the forums?  Say you put your post on how you are such a brilliant photographer with a proven track record... and your post goes hot because everyone jumps your ass.  Wow.  While I'd be tentative about posting a "Please Accept Me" post, I'll sure be interested to read them

Ok, so you get your images up online, and you sell one! YAY!!
At what point do you hit payout? At every sale? after $50? after $5,000? When? The $20 bonus for submitting is good, but without knowing what payout requirements are, it's impossible to see how good a deal this is (Albumo offered the same, and is basically dead with a lock-in of 400 days on your images, zero communication from admin)

What about deleting images? Is it easy to do? or do we have to go thru admin to get them removed? Are they locked on the site for a certain amount of time before they can be removed?

What about advertising? Saw the site was just put up in the last month.  What movement is going to be made in that area? Is the site going to remain in Beta for a few months while bugs are worked out? Or is it considered Live already?

The only payment option I saw was for Moneybookers.  Is there going to be Paypal or check options, as well?

These are just a few questions I have...

Quote: "This Agreement will be governed under the laws of the Province of Bangladesh and the federal laws applicable therein."

From their membership agreement. Any experts in Bangladesh law around?

If someone were to start a new site, I'd offer these ideas:

Allow photographers to set their own prices, no subscriptions.  Split the sale 50/50.

Limit the number of photos a photographer can have online, based on their conversion rate (say a max of 250 to start and then increasing as downloads increase).

Peer-to-peer review to weed out the crap instead of some hired idiot who makes arbitrary decisions.  If enough users flag a photo as crappy, dump it. 

A weighted review system where your photos climb in the ratings based not only on how many users like it, but also against a formula that includes how many photos of others the artist has rated him/herself.  This gets the photographers involved in keeping high quality stuff on the site.

Images that don't get downloaded in a year get removed.  If it's not popular enough for at least one person to download it, then get rid of it.

This could be fixed with a weighting system.

• Photographers uploads a photo
• Goes into a review queue where only other photographers can view and rate
• It's a very good photo, but you give it a poor rating while most others don't and it goes online, you lose points
• It's a poor photo, but you give it a good rating while most others don't and it gets rejected, you lose points
• The position in queue for review is based on your overall rating points

This type of system encourages photographers to properly review photos.  Also, you give very specific instructions about what to look for (technical issues, not whether or not you actually like it).  Photographers that upload but never review may never see anything actually get online.

Feedback from ratings is available to the uploader so they can upload a replacement or have the knowledge for future submissions.

STOP WASTING YOUR TIME PEOPLE!

I say this every time someone posts this nonsense.  You are doing nothing to further yourself financially because these new sites aren't going to make it.  If Lucky Oliver didn't make it, these sites won't either.

Give it up, go macro if you want another source of income

 

I forgot to mention that I got the info about this new site in a SITE MAIL AT StockXpert. From member sohan_bd.

Clicking on that member you get his info page, empty except for:

Details of sohan_bd

I bet sohan_bd will get his walking papers from StockXpert soon.

I also just realized that by starting this thread about 23 minutes have been wasted with the above responses.

So I declare this thread DEAD. OVER. FINISHED. DECEASED. Please do not respond any more and wasted any more time.

the same here: no hope for the new sites and trying Alamy.

The only valid parameter for ranking is sales. "Artists" should be kept totally out of the mix.

I am not totally opposed to new sites, but time is better spent increasing your portfolio variety, size, and overall quality to supplement the sites that are proven good earners. For beginners, uploading a port of 100 mediocre shots to a dozen sites and trying every new one that pops up is just a waste of time.

I don't know why sites bother with reviewing.  Just approve based on whether the image was approved by DT or SS or IS.  Their reviewers already have a good track record and are competent - contributor complaints are about the images they reject not the ones they approve.

The money saved on paying reviewers could go to marketing and/or increased commissions.  Time lag might be a problem I guess.

fred

It's funny, right now 80% of my images can be removed from Canstock, Stockphotomedia, etc. Because a) the images are so poor b) they don't have traffic (?)
Seriously I agree with this rule but this must be a more complicated formula, based on site traffic.