MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: isyndica  (Read 14935 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: November 04, 2009, 10:33 »
0
Looked on iSyndca this morning and was able to set up for iStock...a great leap forward...now if they can get Shutterstock on there it's a no brainer to use them.


Today they tweet about adding Veer and AlwaysHD. How about IStock and Shutterstock we have been asking for a while?

The other issue is price, I think it's to high for majority of microstockers. How about percentage of what they track? They report that I am making $20 a month and they wont $12 out of that?


« Reply #26 on: November 21, 2009, 00:39 »
0
I signed up today and set up Shutterstock as an FTP account...there is a way to do that...but alas, no earnings from them in the analytics display...yet.

It sure is worth 4.95 per month just to not go through looking on 12 sites or more every day or so to see the sales...and it is definitely worth 1 cent per image per site to have them distribute...it has saved me so much time today...I even got to watch a movie with my kids!

Give this some serious thought...it takes much of the pain out of uploading.


Looked on iSyndca this morning and was able to set up for iStock...a great leap forward...now if they can get Shutterstock on there it's a no brainer to use them.


Today they tweet about adding Veer and AlwaysHD. How about IStock and Shutterstock we have been asking for a while?

The other issue is price, I think it's to high for majority of microstockers. How about percentage of what they track? They report that I am making $20 a month and they wont $12 out of that?

« Reply #27 on: November 21, 2009, 07:18 »
0
Yes Pixelbitch,
I don't know why Shutterstock earnings, at least the daily total, can't be represented in the analytics display, a simple plugin ( an excellent) like picniche does it!
I think the prices are ok for pictures but really high for video: 10 cents for uploading a video at only one site is expensive and the space storage is actually ridiculous: 20Gb for 10$ per month and you rapidly need to buy credits if you intend to upload more than 10 video per month!!
I think the storage space must be at least x2 or x3 for the same price and the uploading credits for video 5$.

 

« Reply #28 on: November 21, 2009, 10:25 »
0
I imagine they charge by the estimated bandwdith the average image or video uses when they distribute...perhaps the files sizes differ by a factor of 10.

PicNiche is good but it does tend to take over my Firefox browser window.




Yes Pixelbitch,
I don't know why Shutterstock earnings, at least the daily total, can't be represented in the analytics display, a simple plugin ( an excellent) like picniche does it!
I think the prices are ok for pictures but really high for video: 10 cents for uploading a video at only one site is expensive and the space storage is actually ridiculous: 20Gb for 10$ per month and you rapidly need to buy credits if you intend to upload more than 10 video per month!!
I think the storage space must be at least x2 or x3 for the same price and the uploading credits for video 5$.

 

« Reply #29 on: December 01, 2009, 09:48 »
0
Hello Smithore

iSyndica does have a firefox plug-in that has SS analytics. http://www.isyndica.com/addon

I would also suggest looking at iSyndica's pricing page http://www.isyndica.com/pricing - It seems that you incorrectly equated the cost of a subscription to the storage offered.

Cheers

Yes Pixelbitch,
I don't know why Shutterstock earnings, at least the daily total, can't be represented in the analytics display, a simple plugin ( an excellent) like picniche does it!
I think the prices are ok for pictures but really high for video: 10 cents for uploading a video at only one site is expensive and the space storage is actually ridiculous: 20Gb for 10$ per month and you rapidly need to buy credits if you intend to upload more than 10 video per month!!
I think the storage space must be at least x2 or x3 for the same price and the uploading credits for video 5$.

 

« Reply #30 on: December 05, 2009, 08:45 »
0
yes I know there's a plugin, but We nedd analytics in the isyndica site, not as a plugin!

yes I know the pricings, I've already signed for a "plus" subscription for 20 GB and i've already 6Gb used in one month with some video, did you think users going to upgrade subscriptions every month to reach finally the 159$/month plan for only storage and uploading? Actually storage space cost almost nothing everywhere!

« Reply #31 on: December 07, 2009, 03:35 »
0
Hello Smithore:

There's a post out there if you want to contribute to the request:

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=73811

Regarding storage, we are trying to understand how to improve that part the best. I'm definitely taking note of your feedback. In the context of footage, HD space is a tricky issue.

« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2009, 11:17 »
0
Question to iSyndica users: what do you see as benefits of the site over PicNiche or StockMon + FileZilla?

« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2009, 11:28 »
0
Question to iSyndica users: what do you see as benefits of the site over PicNiche or StockMon + FileZilla?

Well its web-based, so I can upload images once using my bandwidth, then manage my collection from just about anywhere.

Maybe not as important for those who have fast connections, but it saves me a lot of time and $$

Uncle Pete

  • Evidence please...

« Reply #34 on: December 09, 2009, 17:01 »
0
Question to iSyndica users: what do you see as benefits of the site over PicNiche or StockMon + FileZilla?

Microstock Monitor hasn't worked as a plugin with Firefox for about a year. Not compatible with newer versions. The website still lists Lucky Oliver as a site you can monitor. I'm kind of suspicious that it's dead and gone. Otherwise, I liked it when it was active. Good for a quick glance at what was going on with the sites.

For a low level, low volume, low sales (low life?) like myself, I can't see paying for iSyndica just to check stats. It would cost more a month than I bring in from micro.  :D

I still use ProstockMaster and check agencies. The demo version works just fine for looking at general stats, minus SS of course. It isn't perfect but the price is right!

« Reply #35 on: December 09, 2009, 17:12 »
0
Question to iSyndica users: what do you see as benefits of the site over PicNiche or StockMon + FileZilla?

I use ProStockMaster + iSyndica(free sub) , best of both really ! ;-)

No analytics though, shame that.  Had them to start with while they were free to try, but now costs at least $4.99.  Not a lot, but more than I earn ;-)


« Reply #36 on: December 09, 2009, 20:37 »
0
Question to iSyndica users: what do you see as benefits of the site over PicNiche or StockMon + FileZilla?

In addition to the convenience of bandwidth saving and automated distribution, I'm using iSyndica to tidy up my portfolio. I've uploaded my 40 best selling photos (as identified by LookStat, ironically) to iSyndica and have gone through manually marking each one as accepted or rejected, and submitted ("syndicated") photos that were missing on some agencies.  Now, 40 is very little, but applying the 80/20 rule or long tail theory, these 40 photos make more than 80% of my income.  I've also used the convenience of iSyndica to join new sites Veer Marketplace and Vivozoom, and to get my best sellers on to sites where they were missing, namely Cutcaster and YAYmicro.

I don't see iSyndica as direct competition to picNiche or an FTP program yet.  I use them all. I upload to iSyndica using an FTP program (in theory, I haven't actually done this yet), use iSyndica to distribute the files, and then use the picNiche toolbar submission assistance. All are welcome improvements to workflow.

« Reply #37 on: December 15, 2009, 17:25 »
0
iSyndica do many less important things but don't do (maybe can not do) the most timetaking thing: keywording. without submission prosess, iSyndica means nothing. multiple uploading can be done with fxp methods with much more cheaper. "analysis your earning" is just a "financial masturbation". Lookstat says they do everything in their site but only with 2 sites. it is also another story..

Is there any company can really do all the processing? I would like to give my photos and expect to see them online in every sites that I want. Whenever there is a ready company for that, I can pay for it. (even much more what iSyndica ask for now) Until that happens, Sorry but iSyndica is a waste of money.

« Reply #38 on: December 15, 2009, 17:39 »
0
 ;D  ;)

« Reply #39 on: December 15, 2009, 19:00 »
0
If you keyword all your images in Lightroom or similar before uploading to iSyndica then they appear just fine in all the sites you distribute to when you come to submit the images. If you want the full service then go take a look at Lookstat...but be prepared to pay per image for the service.


iSyndica do many less important things but don't do (maybe can not do) the most timetaking thing: keywording. without submission prosess, iSyndica means nothing. multiple uploading can be done with fxp methods with much more cheaper. "analysis your earning" is just a "financial masturbation". Lookstat says they do everything in their site but only with 2 sites. it is also another story..

Is there any company can really do all the processing? I would like to give my photos and expect to see them online in every sites that I want. Whenever there is a ready company for that, I can pay for it. (even much more what iSyndica ask for now) Until that happens, Sorry but iSyndica is a waste of money.

« Reply #40 on: February 02, 2010, 22:39 »
0
I just signed , I have to say I like isyndica,  but few things that come to mi mind about my use of isyndica:

First , in your catalog page you can sort  images by date and image title , there should be an option to sort them by file name , at least it would be very important for me and for many
people I know , that are using serial number infront of the name of the file.

Then , in the upload ( or syndicate ) page , you can see what images are uploaded where. Well , i doubt that anyone has started using isyndica from his day one , people have many images that are
uploaded to some sites but not to other.

I think an option to also manually set what images are uploaded where would be more than helpful , and make things easier.


Only my first impressions

« Reply #41 on: February 03, 2010, 08:31 »
0
iSyndica do many less important things but don't do (maybe can not do) the most timetaking thing: keywording. without submission prosess, iSyndica means nothing. multiple uploading can be done with fxp methods with much more cheaper. "analysis your earning" is just a "financial masturbation". Lookstat says they do everything in their site but only with 2 sites. it is also another story..

Keywording is just the most tedious for me - as others have said if you keyword before uploading its much faster. Isyndica allows you to have a final check of keywords before submitting, and tends to be more accurate with getting metadata in the right places for each site than using FTP.

In terms of overall time saved, its much better than any other option out there that I'm aware of.

Is there any company can really do all the processing? I would like to give my photos and expect to see them online in every sites that I want. Whenever there is a ready company for that, I can pay for it. (even much more what iSyndica ask for now) Until that happens, Sorry but iSyndica is a waste of money.

Its only a waste if you don't have the need for it - managing a large number of files is very effective with this site - compared to what I'd pay in bandwidth or internet time its actually really quite cheap.

« Reply #42 on: February 17, 2010, 00:41 »
0
I have been with Isyndica since Beta testing and think the service is fantastic. Any issue I have had has always been rectified promptly, but the biggest bonus was when they added Istock. Uploads via Istock get the metadat to stick and go where it should, which I could never achieve through direct uploads, so that alone is worth the cost of my subscription for me.

« Reply #43 on: February 17, 2010, 02:32 »
0
iSyndica do many less important things but don't do (maybe can not do) the most timetaking thing: keywording. without submission prosess, iSyndica means nothing. multiple uploading can be done with fxp methods with much more cheaper. "analysis your earning" is just a "financial masturbation".
+1
I never understood why people would pay for Isyndica. The only thing it saves is bandwidth. If you have enough of that, Filezilla does the same, and free. There is this hoax going around that Filezilla only can upload to one site at a time. It's not true. You can queue your images to all sites you want and then let it go. You can also send different file versions to different sites, like 5MP to SS and 12MP to DT,BigStock, etc... something that Isyndica doesn't do.

« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2010, 02:37 »
0
If you keyword all your images in Lightroom or similar before uploading to iSyndica then they appear just fine in all the sites you distribute to when you come to submit the images.
That's not an issue because it's equally true for Filezilla. What the poster meant is that Isyndica only does the upload (like Filezilla), but even when you have all the metadata in the IPTC, you still will have to submit on every site to categorize, attach releases, and click all the proper boxes.

« Reply #45 on: February 17, 2010, 02:41 »
0
Uploads via Istock get the metadat to stick and go where it should, which I could never achieve through direct uploads, so that alone is worth the cost of my subscription for me.
But you still have to do the disambiguation on site, and attach/upload model releases I guess?
The onsite disambiguation is much slower than the one in DeepMeta. DeepMeta also attaches releases. DeepMeta is free.

« Reply #46 on: February 17, 2010, 03:17 »
0
I just signed , I have to say I like isyndica

I think an option to also manually set what images are uploaded where would be more than helpful , and make things easier.


You can do this actually - when you select an image/channel combination, a small pop up on the lower right of your screen will ask you if you want to mark the image as
Uploaded to Agency/Accepted by agency/Rejected by agency

Hope this helps

« Reply #47 on: February 17, 2010, 05:47 »
0
I upload now images, videos and audio via Isyndica, it is very handy to have all in one place:)
The platform is always improving. Among the small features  I like is the fact that I can manage my uploads i.e put if they have been accepted or rejected (so I don't use a excel spreadsheet) and the integrated spellcheck is pretty neat:)
I use the promoting tool quite a lot as well on facebook with a customized watermark

« Reply #48 on: February 17, 2010, 06:46 »
0
iSyndica is a very good service !  I use it all the time :)

« Reply #49 on: February 17, 2010, 12:27 »
0
I just signed , I have to say I like isyndica

I think an option to also manually set what images are uploaded where would be more than helpful , and make things easier.


You can do this actually - when you select an image/channel combination, a small pop up on the lower right of your screen will ask you if you want to mark the image as
Uploaded to Agency/Accepted by agency/Rejected by agency

Hope this helps

Yes I know now , was just using it for short when I wrote that , didn't saw that option in pop up window at first

It would be great for me that they have the option to see filename in syndicate page and to sort images by filenames , but it great tool in general and I think ill use it from now on

Microstock InsiderPhotoDune

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
33 Replies
12481 Views
Last post May 23, 2010, 13:50
by cascoly
0 Replies
1007 Views
Last post July 10, 2009, 16:32
by hlth
0 Replies
1960 Views
Last post November 05, 2009, 17:11
by melastmohican
4 Replies
1818 Views
Last post November 27, 2009, 16:41
by Jonathan Ross
6 Replies
3062 Views
Last post April 30, 2010, 13:56
by sweetgirll

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors