|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Erin Cadigan
Pages: [1]
1
« on: January 24, 2020, 12:29 »
I'm debating whether or not to keep the "Pro" subscription. I discovered that there is an Adobe discount of two free months (per year I think) of the photographer's package. I used the code and Adobe created two months, so there'e $20. What are the other true benefits though? I recall hearing people talk about getting license requests through their Flickr accounts. Are there any plans for Flickr to introduce their own licensing program? Thoughts?
I think that Flickr rumor about licensing has died with the sale to Smugmug, but maybe not? I mean a tie in with prints, would make sense, but for stock, the market doesn't seem to be open for new agencies and growth. Only way DP made it was paying people 50c an upload, and filling their collection. Which you can guess is all the same images that the top agencies already had, from the same people.
After that, commission changes, price drops, they are down in the has been sites with 123RF and the rest. What I mean is, there just isn't a demand or place in the market for another general stock agency. POD, why not? They have everything in place for that?
Reason for answering. Get 300 accepted on Adobe and you get a free year of Adobe CC. 
Yes!!!! I didn't submit enough to AS the past few years to get the free year. This year, since allowing editorial, I've already passed the requirement. Hopefully they'll continuing offering it!
2
« on: January 23, 2020, 20:48 »
I'm debating whether or not to keep the "Pro" subscription. I discovered that there is an Adobe discount of two free months (per year I think) of the photographer's package. I used the code and Adobe created two months, so there'e $20. What are the other true benefits though? I recall hearing people talk about getting license requests through their Flickr accounts. Are there any plans for Flickr to introduce their own licensing program? Thoughts?
3
« on: January 11, 2020, 11:51 »
As a best practice, list the most important keyword first, the second most keyword second, etc. Once you get to keyword 11, the weight in search is pretty light as I understand it so it's less important you post the remaining keywords in order.
Another important note...I received confirmation that updating the keyword order on files that have been online for a while will not have much, if any impact on the search results.
-Mat
Thanks for that, Mat, especially the info in the 2nd paragraph.
I've been wondering if doing that might make a difference, but it would be a lot of work. I'm happy to know I don't need to bother with it. 
I've been wondering this I've looked at some of my older images with alphabetical keywording, etc. Would it work to delete some of these older images, especially ones that sell well elsewhere, then reupload them with better keywording?
4
« on: January 11, 2020, 10:38 »
I still upload to Alamy even though it can be slow. I find the uploading process easy and then if I have some free time I tweak the keywording etc. The only thing I do immediately is tag the images as editorial if necessary. I've found Alamy's customer service pretty cool. They reached out to me not long ago about a customer that wanted to use an editorial image for a wall piece. I was able to lift the editorial status so the customer could download it, and I made a nice chunk of change. So, they're quite nice there and I'll stick with them since they pay well for the images that do get sold, even if they only sell occasionally!
5
« on: January 11, 2020, 10:30 »
For quite a while Bigstock has been reviewing the quickest, in my experience. I've had things reviewed literally within minutes. Dreamstime is way faster than it used to be, for sure.
6
« on: January 11, 2020, 10:29 »
Footage rejections at Shutterstock are totally random, at least it seems it is like that. I have some iPhone footage accepted (even if it is not totally noiseless) and lot of videos from great full frame camera rejected for noise (and there is really no noise). Basically, I would recommend to shoot at 4K with iPhone and submit that as Full HD.
Before you make any big moves with your equipment, workflow or anything, try to resubmit those same footages again a couple of days later. No need to edit or change anything. Shutterstock reviewing process is so random these days, the AI can be incredibly good and incredibly stupid at the same time, so it's impossible to predict the outcome. That's why I always wait a day or two, maybe submit a new batch, before I give it a new shot for those rejected footages or photos. Most of the times they are all approved faster than I can say "Microstock - not worth it"! 
Thank you for your information! I was wondering about random rejections and trying to resubmit. Since I'm new to the footage game, I've actually decided to apply to Pond5 for exclusive video status. They've accepted the few I have right away and I'll see how I fare there before trying to go crazy submitting elsewhere.
7
« on: January 10, 2020, 09:08 »
Thank you! Yeah, I know...it's just easy compared to shooting with my old 5D Mark II, which I had not desire to use for video! I've been switching to 4K when recording, hoping for great quality, but they were taken inside, so it definitely could be lighting. I'll have to shoot something outside and see if I don't still get the same rejection. Thank you for the app recommendation. I really know nothing about shooting footage or editing it right now. Need to learn!!!
8
« on: January 10, 2020, 08:17 »
So I've been submitting stock for almost 13 years, but just (really just) decided to start attempting to do some footage. I've recorded some super boring clips on my new iPhone 11 pro max, just to see if they meet the technical requirements. My first two clips were accepted to Adobe, but apparently they are missing some of the tech requirements for SS, and not simply because they're boring cooking footage! I initially received a rejection for it "resolution/aspect ratio." I went back into the editor and adjusted it to a 16:9 format. The same one was rejected again for that reason after changing it. I also had rejections for noise/artifacts, etc. I can easily see these errors in my photos, but I'm missing it in the videos. Does anyone here use an iPhone for shooting footage and what settings to you use to insure suitable quality. I really want to capture some more footage but not until I stop with the rejections. What am I missing?
9
« on: January 11, 2017, 09:02 »
The same exact thing happened to me last night. I woke up to an entire batch rejected due to file size. Is there a need to downsize due to new requirements or something or was it a glitch? 
10
« on: June 30, 2016, 14:12 »
Glad I'm not the only one. Very perturbed considering how many years I worked to get onto SS. I corrected a recent few where I inadvertently used the same description for a set of food photos. Some very slightly different. BUT, I have no repetitive words and I don't spam. I hope they will clarify, because I have over 1000 images in my port...I can't possibly review every one...that was done already when I submitted them! 
11
« on: April 09, 2016, 10:15 »
Same problem here, with both FTP and web uploads. Worst thing is, when I try to add the missing data to the already uploaded image, it usually doesn't allow the additions. When I click save, the same window reappears without the data... 
12
« on: May 12, 2015, 21:12 »
I emailed BS yesterday and they responded this morning. They said that after looking at the photos, they are certain they weren't altered in post production and they put them back in my queue to be resubmitted!
Speaking of editorial, they did however, just reject a batch of editorial photos showing the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy several months after the storm. That surprised me. They said they weren't newsworthy, yet they've sold quite a bit through other stock sites, especially around the anniversary of the storm.
13
« on: May 10, 2015, 08:59 »
I know Semnick, I should calm down, but I was annoyed. I see so much of the crap that microstock sites accept (overall, not saying BS), and when I get rejected for something that I know is improper, it bites. Bigstock was probably the first agency I was accepted to back in 2007, so they are close to my heart. Still, I don't think they would look photoshopped to someone who knows the technique. I've used the motion blur and radial blur features in PS, but nothing beats the beauty of the look SOTC. On a side note, how are your sales there? I've been inactive there for quite some time, but I'm only seeing a few bucks a month. Back in the early days, I feel like I made more with less images, although the industry wasn't as saturated...LOL...
14
« on: May 10, 2015, 08:42 »
I have to vent this morning and see if anyone else has had similar problems... I've been working on submitting my entire catalog of images to BS after they've been sitting in queue for the past year or so. I've been getting about 50 accepted per day and have increased my approval rating significantly. The good part: the review is very quick at BS right now. Here's the bad and highly annoying part. I had 6 photos that I took in NYC where I did panning shots of city taxis. There were at least one or two shots where I panned and "racked the lens," if you will. Other than basic exposure corrections and the like (which I was always led to believe as acceptable in editorial), nothing was changed. I wake up this morning that all six photos were rejected due to post production of editorial images.  These are images that I have on SS and several other sites. They are high quality and I didn't break any rules in the editorial department, IMO. So, are BS's reviewers full of BS? Do they have a knowledge of basic photography techniques to know that a shot like that can be obtained by using a special in-camera technique? Are they experienced photographers? Am I naive to think that - LOL??? I'm not sure if I should reach out to them or not. It only upset my approval rating slightly, but I'm annoyed none the less. I feel like I want the photos approved and the original rejections erased, if possible. You can't make this BS up! Here is a link to one of the photos in question. http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-191611349/stock-photo-new-york-april-a-panning-technique-was-used-to-photograph-new-york-city-taxis-and-show-motion.html?src=AzHklddA2hBSVxfb4SCkWw-1-17
15
« on: May 20, 2014, 20:14 »
Well it all makes sense now, and it stinks! LOL 
16
« on: May 20, 2014, 13:50 »
Hello, I originally joined FT back in 2007 and left briefly in 2013 to go exclusive with another agency. I never officially closed my account, however, I deleted my images to comply with my exclusivity. I should mention that there were SEVERAL years where I uploaded few if any images to the site. According to my dashboard, I have 60 downloads and I'm at the "white" level. When I check the history of my actual downloads, from 2007 until now, I have over 90 images actually downloaded. Does anyone know if this is an error or does your ranking reset or something over the course of several years. Something just doesn't seem right and I want to make sure that I'm not missing something before I contact support. Thanks! 
17
« on: May 20, 2014, 13:38 »
18
« on: May 17, 2014, 07:49 »
I'm new to SS, so I'm not yet familiar with the reviews. However, I just had a batch refused yesterday all for noise. 
19
« on: May 17, 2014, 07:46 »
I know there's a lag from when the images are first sold, but this was my overall earnings balance in the upper right corner that seemed to decrease. If nobody else had an issue I have to assume I had a brain fart and made an error! 
20
« on: May 16, 2014, 13:36 »
I keep track of my stock earnings in Excel. I could have sworn that I had more money in my SS earnings this morning, and now it's less. Is anyone experiencing this, or is there a glitch that causes this? Do they issue refunds??
21
« on: May 14, 2014, 08:29 »
Thank you Mantis. Although I have had a physical "account" with SS since 2007, I have only just been accepted as a contributor within the past month. I'll have to check just in case!
22
« on: May 14, 2014, 08:13 »
Can anyone tell me if this "Bridge to Bigstock" is still an option on SS? I can't find anything on their forums since the search option is down . My next question would be, is it even worth it? I have about 100 images or so on BS since joining in 2007. I had two payouts back then and then things came to a sudden halt. What I read about them here doesn't seem all that positive anymore. Thoughts???
23
« on: May 11, 2014, 18:19 »
It must be the same reviewer who asked for a model release for this: 
24
« on: May 10, 2014, 10:07 »
Thank you Jo Ann. I'll keep my fingers crossed and keep plugging away. It's a step in the right direction to finally be accepted at least! 
25
« on: May 10, 2014, 09:28 »
Hello, I recently left DT exclusivity to spread my wings. I was finally accepted at SS on my fifth try (since 2007). Within the first five days, I have 58 downloads, which is more than I'd ever had in a month on DT, even while exclusive. I'm happy about this activity, but it also a bit nervous that it won't keep up. From what I've read so far, sometimes uploads get immediate sales and then fizzle out. I'm looking to find out if this is the case and what your experiences are so far with SS. I've posted this same question on the SS forum, with only one response. Happy to be here!!!
Pages: [1]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
