pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: every single post on the istock forum:  (Read 9819 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: May 21, 2009, 21:06 »
0
Careful, the pieman might be lurking nearby ;)


bittersweet

« Reply #26 on: May 21, 2009, 21:10 »
0
He he
Cattle is the cattle anyhow
 ;D
I have the another theory about noise in they heads. One time somehow I see they location in Calgary on Google maps widget I think and look at it about 1,266752734% of milisecond and I deeply in my mind figured that they are in triangle spot of railways which can make interference with every electornic device such as Monitor, LCD, speakers.. etc.....
Somehow this turbulence of electircity my be the reason why they are dont see correct image with they own eyes.
OK
all reviewers are not from Calgary but I am suspicious at that if the first drone nut is from noisy place, and it will trying to find other from the similar noise location eg.(Streetcar Named Desire).
When they catch up other bees by their goal from desired CV of wanabee reviewers they all has the same distortions in they heads (Noise)....

I tell my opinion and hope that I dont hurt anybody...



Hmmm, I don't know... I think with this post, you are giving their "nuts" a run for their money.  :P

PaulieWalnuts

  • You talkin' to me?
« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2009, 21:14 »
0
Suljo for President!

« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2009, 21:37 »
0
He he
Cattle is the cattle anyhow
 ;D
I have the another theory about noise in they heads. One time somehow I see they location in Calgary on Google maps widget I think and look at it about 1,266752734% of milisecond and I deeply in my mind figured that they are in triangle spot of railways which can make interference with every electornic device such as Monitor, LCD, speakers.. etc.....
Somehow this turbulence of electircity my be the reason why they are dont see correct image with they own eyes.
OK
all reviewers are not from Calgary but I am suspicious at that if the first drone nut is from noisy place, and it will trying to find other from the similar noise location eg.(Streetcar Named Desire).
When they catch up other bees by their goal from desired CV of wanabee reviewers they all has the same distortions in they heads (Noise)....

I tell my opinion and hope that I dont hurt anybody...



Hmmm, I don't know... I think with this post, you are giving their "nuts" a run for their money.  :P

Bzzzz, bzzz it is so fuzzyyyy
I cant reeaadd bzzzzz
maybee my translator is not optimized for real goal of my expresion, bzzz bzzz
so I include another word which is may disambuglationjzzzz in prime nuts and drones.
Any how....
I dont know how to say but I mean King chees of all bees (iStock bees), if "she" is in deep "Noise sheet" the children of evolution "read reviewers are in the same"
For now I am noise free on iStock, but also I mean that other world is is in more big trouble, not about noise in pictures but only in noisemakers minds.
Understand you any how...
Ice age 3 is upcoming next month, maybe I will learn something about nuts...
 ;D

« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2009, 22:10 »
0
I like this post :) lately Ive been thinking the same thing- god * it microstock contributors are a bunch of morons. Shocking...

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #30 on: May 22, 2009, 04:05 »
0
It would be funnier if half the people in this thread weren't "new members" but hilarious all the same.

But I have to say... I do miss the days when nearly every thread contained a random exclamation of "BOOBIES!!!!"

 :D


hmm, nice,
i loveeee "Boobies"   ;)

ShadySue

« Reply #31 on: May 22, 2009, 04:29 »
0
Careful, the pieman might be lurking nearby ;)
The pieman is apparently in Spain, though he may be back by now.
OP: Thanks for the post. You should write for Private Eye.

« Reply #32 on: May 22, 2009, 04:34 »
0
IStockBronze: I just went exclusive, and I can tell you, it's the best thing that ever happened to me in my whole life! My sales went from $1.50/month to over $2.00 a month! I am so happy and fulfilled now! I'm going to save up for that (whatever the most expensive Canon is) camera now!

Brilliant - love this part in particular  :D :D :D

« Reply #33 on: May 22, 2009, 05:44 »
0
Great post!  ;D
I was just reading the istock forums. I can stay until I reach the 3rd or 4th 'Awesome!' then I have to go and get a dose of normality.

« Reply #34 on: May 22, 2009, 07:38 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.  At least iStock doesn't require you to upload 40 photos a day to keep up your income.  And I found the IS review system as a non-exclusive to be very good, very helpful in making me a better photographer.  I still don't like the 'artifacting' rejection, but thats just because they don't like the photo in general. 

Why does no one complain about StockXpert where they just say "we don't want that photo", meanwhile its got 40 downloads on DT?

iStock is the leader, so it will get a lo of the verbal punishment, but that just means its still on-top.

bittersweet

« Reply #35 on: May 22, 2009, 07:59 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.  At least iStock doesn't require you to upload 40 photos a day to keep up your income.  And I found the IS review system as a non-exclusive to be very good, very helpful in making me a better photographer.  I still don't like the 'artifacting' rejection, but thats just because they don't like the photo in general. 

Why does no one complain about StockXpert where they just say "we don't want that photo", meanwhile its got 40 downloads on DT?

iStock is the leader, so it will get a lot of the verbal punishment, but that just means its still on-top.

iStock is the favorite target of choice around here. There's no sense fighting it. I think it relieves some of the feelings of failure and disappointment for those who aren't up to learning anything, taking an objective look at their own images, or working hard enough to make it there. (After all, shouldn't they be out shooting instead of here complaining on forums?!) It is so much more comfortable to blame someone else, and if you can get others to jump on your bandwagon, all the better. It also gives all the wannabe comedians an outlet for their angst.  ;)

Of course these are caricatures, and the reason it's funny is because we have all seen examples of exactly that kind of behavior, just like we have seen examples of behavior to which my own statements apply.

But you are right... it's when they stop talking about iStock that we should worry.

« Reply #36 on: May 22, 2009, 08:24 »
0
Yup completely agree with everything.

Bottom line is this though, if you aren't good enough to make it on iStock in some successful capacity, you probably are just wasting your time in microstock.  And yes, out shooting is better than on the forums.  Another reason I'm not online as much.  I usually come online during day-job vs. times when I could be doing other stuff

PaulieWalnuts

  • You talkin' to me?
« Reply #37 on: May 22, 2009, 08:27 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.  At least iStock doesn't require you to upload 40 photos a day to keep up your income.  And I found the IS review system as a non-exclusive to be very good, very helpful in making me a better photographer.  I still don't like the 'artifacting' rejection, but thats just because they don't like the photo in general. 

Why does no one complain about StockXpert where they just say "we don't want that photo", meanwhile its got 40 downloads on DT?

iStock is the leader, so it will get a lot of the verbal punishment, but that just means its still on-top.

iStock is the favorite target of choice around here. There's no sense fighting it. I think it relieves some of the feelings of failure and disappointment for those who aren't up to learning anything, taking an objective look at their own images, or working hard enough to make it there. (After all, shouldn't they be out shooting instead of here complaining on forums?!) It is so much more comfortable to blame someone else, and if you can get others to jump on your bandwagon, all the better. It also gives all the wannabe comedians an outlet for their angst.  ;)

Of course these are caricatures, and the reason it's funny is because we have all seen examples of exactly that kind of behavior, just like we have seen examples of behavior to which my own statements apply.

But you are right... it's when they stop talking about iStock that we should worry.

You nailed it.

Back to work.

« Reply #38 on: May 22, 2009, 09:10 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.  At least iStock doesn't require you to upload 40 photos a day to keep up your income.  And I found the IS review system as a non-exclusive to be very good, very helpful in making me a better photographer.  I still don't like the 'artifacting' rejection, but thats just because they don't like the photo in general. 

Why does no one complain about StockXpert where they just say "we don't want that photo", meanwhile its got 40 downloads on DT?

iStock is the leader, so it will get a lo of the verbal punishment, but that just means its still on-top.

May I dare to disagree?

Probably there is not much specific discussion on the SS forums, but there has been enough discussion about threads being closed and even contributors banned for their activity on site forums of other agencies (DT, FT).
So the criticism exists on this great forum here, it is not only focused on Istock.
Maybe these other forums don't lend them as well to such a satiric view - and maybe that is due to the fact, that no other site has such a huge number of exclusive contributors, who defend and applaude almost every move of "their" agency on the agency's forum.

And about the rejections, just look in the current discussions on DT, there are many people complaining. Again, it's not all about Istock.

To me it just seems (but correct me if I'm wrong) that some Istock exclusives are obviously only interested in discussions about Istock. And so they miss similar discussions about other agencies.

So I would disagree with whatalife as well, Istock is not "the favorite target", it is one target amongst others.

And yes, where I do agree: If they weren't that big in the business, there would be a lot less discussions.

« Reply #39 on: May 22, 2009, 09:12 »
0
btw , who is pieman ???

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #40 on: May 22, 2009, 09:15 »
0

May I dare to disagree?

Probably there is not much specific discussion on the SS forums, but there has been enough discussion about threads being closed and even contributors banned for their activity on site forums of other agencies (DT, FT).
So the criticism exists on this great forum here, it is not only focused on Istock.
Maybe these other forums don't lend them as well to such a satiric view - and maybe that is due to the fact, that no other site has such a huge number of exclusive contributors, who defend and applaude almost every move of "their" agency on the agency's forum.

And about the rejections, just look in the current discussions on DT, there are many people complaining. Again, it's not all about Istock.

To me it just seems (but correct me if I'm wrong) that some Istock exclusives are obviously only interested in discussions about Istock. And so they miss similar discussions about other agencies.

So I would disagree with whatalife as well, Istock is not "the favorite target", it is one target amongst others.

And yes, where I do agree: If they weren't that big in the business, there would be a lot less discussions.

Let's just say that IStock is one mother of  a dysfunctional family   

« Reply #41 on: May 22, 2009, 09:16 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.

You're barely on iStock after yelling like a drama queen over all other sites that didn't let you go, and you already got the "right" istock attitude. Congrats, but I think I'll ploink you. Yack.

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #42 on: May 22, 2009, 09:18 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.

You're barely on iStock after yelling like a drama queen over all other sites that didn't let you go, and you already got the "right" istock attitude. Congrats, but I think I'll ploink you. Yack.

ANCIENT "CHINESE" SECRET...
polishing them rice bowl, la!   ;D

« Reply #43 on: May 22, 2009, 09:27 »
0
Ok, that was pretty funny. Good post!  ;D

« Reply #44 on: May 22, 2009, 09:36 »
0
btw , who is pieman ???

Lobo.  He is known for having a love of pies. 

Not in the "American Pie" sense though.  ;) 

bittersweet

« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2009, 09:45 »
0
btw , who is pieman ???

Lobo.  He is known for having a love of pies. 

Not in the "American Pie" sense though.  ;) 

But we could start that rumor.  ;D

« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2009, 09:51 »
0
You are just too bad, both of you. I just spilled my tea all over my keyboard :-)



« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2009, 10:00 »
0
Yet no one mentions the garbage that is on the SS forum.

You're barely on iStock after yelling like a drama queen over all other sites that didn't let you go, and you already got the "right" istock attitude. Congrats, but I think I'll ploink you. Yack.

I'm on iStock because I don't want to deal with the other sites.  Its not the "right" istock attitude, its the right attitude in general.  I didn't just go exclusive on a whim, I went exclusive because it makes sense for me and a lot of other people think the same way too.  And SS doesn't have exclusives and most of the contributors are much worse with the "thanks SS" or "I love you SS" when they announce they will be sending out checks or their stupid threads designed to stir up commotion or their members peddling 'photo excursions and classes'.  I started on SS and their forums and I've grown to dislike the way the forum is.  I'm very happy this forum has remained very good.  Hate iStock for being well-run, but at least it is a well-run organization. 

I complained about 1 site being stupid about not letting me go.  And I still think that 6 month policy is crap.  Plus I went exclusive so that I could avoid having to listen to people like you and concentrate more on actually taking photos, not posting in forums and uploading to 15 different site when I could make 90% of my non-exlusive income with 10% of the time invested uploading or making bad avatars. 
« Last Edit: May 22, 2009, 10:03 by ichiro17 »

« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2009, 10:07 »
0
Its called humour ichiro! Dont take yourself so seriously  ;)

« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2009, 10:13 »
0
its not good humour then.  its just annoying now ...and it was before too


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1355 Views
Last post May 23, 2008, 11:11
by jsnover
4 Replies
1403 Views
Last post July 06, 2009, 15:27
by bittersweet
376 Replies
39838 Views
Last post October 02, 2010, 13:32
by gostwyck
17 Replies
2401 Views
Last post June 12, 2011, 20:27
by luissantos84
7 Replies
1169 Views
Last post November 01, 2011, 12:43
by Sean Locke Photography

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors