|
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.
Topics - jsmithzz
1
« on: January 29, 2018, 19:57 »
Sorry if this has already been answered elsewhere, but I'm just getting back into stock photography after a year long hiatus and am trying to make sense of ESP and all the other changes.
1) Are Getty stats reflected in Deep Meta? I didn't see anything in the stats that indicated any Getty sales.
2) Are the stats in Deep Meta pretty much what we got before the switch to ESP?
2
« on: January 16, 2017, 17:23 »
The removal of all the financial stats and the lack of answers from support both directly and in the Getty forums is the last straw for me. I'm finally moving on. I've done research and think I've narrowed it down to Shutterstock and Adobe. Was wondering what experiences you've all had with either of these sites both good and bad. I know I posted about SS a while ago, but am asking again because things do change quickly.
3
« on: May 15, 2015, 20:34 »
I know that the current max display for Instagram is 640x640 pixels. However, I just read their FAQ's which say you can upload many times that resolution. Is there any advantage or reason to upload more than 640 that I'm not thinking of?
4
« on: October 18, 2014, 09:20 »
I think the numbers speak for themselves.
5
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:09 »
If any of you are curious as to what customers think of the latest changes, look no further than IS's FB page. What a train wreck. I was cautiously optimistic about these changes, but after reading many of the comments, that optimism is gone. Nice going Getty. You've just about killed off iStock. https://www.facebook.com/istock
6
« on: January 25, 2014, 09:27 »
A couple hours ago I uploaded a few images and each time a message came up saying that the thumbnail wouldn't load until you completed the upload process. Why did they change this? I can't even inspect the image as it will be shown to customers until AFTER I finish and save everything? Ridiculous.
8
« on: August 17, 2013, 01:14 »
From Lobo... "I've seen mention of how newer files are experiencing some weirdness with their similar offerings. This is entirely related to keyword order. However, as newer files have actions performed on them the keyword weight of the more relevant keywords will increase the relevancy of the similar files that are provided. We are going to put together an updated Keyword Guide for early September. In the mean time I would suggest people try and add their most relevant keywords before adding their more general keywords." http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=355588&messageid=6927338Lots of gripes about new files not selling, and I wonder if this is the culprit since it seems that the relevancy of certain keywords changes over time. For the large amount I upload, I depend on Deepmeta heavily for keywording, and it alphabetizes everything, so that would certainly explain a lot.
9
« on: July 05, 2013, 08:16 »
How are files chosen for Editors Pick? Seems to me it's more like it's given to people they like. I just browsed through a very sub par portfolio with nearly half the photos marked as "Editors Pick" from a contributor (who I'm not going to name) that is active in the forums and very "pro" iStock. I looked at another portfolio with much higher quality images with almost nothing marked. So what's the deal? And does Editors Pick also seem to affect best match ranking?
10
« on: July 01, 2013, 07:51 »
I'm currently exclusive with iStock but thinking of dropping my exclusivity so I can sell at Shutterstock. At iStock I sell around 40 files per week and take in about $200 which is WAY LESS than I used to. Anyway, looking at Shutterstocks rate schedule, I'd need to sell many, many more licenses to equal my income at iStock.
Here's my question, with the lower prices and subscription model, do you find that your volume is high but your commissions per file low? And for those who also sell at iStock and made the jump to Shutterstock, how do your sales compare between the 2 sites? Everyone seems to like SS, but the thought of selling my images for 25 cents a DL is a little hard to wrap my head around.
11
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:13 »
12
« on: October 08, 2012, 09:43 »
Try doing a search on iStock. Someone just sent me an e-mail telling me that search is broken. I tried and just get a "Tell me more" message.
What buffoons are running the show at iStock? Why so many problems? Why can't they get their sh*t together?
13
« on: January 17, 2012, 01:50 »
In your opinion, which one of the three has worked best for you?
14
« on: October 03, 2011, 21:56 »
Was searching in forums and this was locked (I always seem to get quicker answers here) but was also wondering about cloning out things like small lights or other very minor reflected things for pictures taken through a window that wouldn't at all impact the overall image? http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=286702&page=1
15
« on: September 14, 2011, 07:54 »
I'm curious as to what full-timers do for health insurance for those that aren't on a spouse's health plan? I suppose this mainly applies to Americans since every other country in the world seems to do a much better job of taking care of their citizens than we do.
Am mulling going full time within the next 1-2 years, but this is a big sticking point for me since it would cost me a fortune to insure myself privately.
16
« on: May 31, 2011, 07:55 »
Not sure if anyone's noticed this, but it's interesting to see the responses to threads like these... http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=329740&page=1Had this been posted a year or two ago, contributors would be rushing in and gushing about how great iStock is. This post got one measly response, and not even a positive one at that. Goes to show how much they've alienated their suppliers IMHO.
18
« on: May 11, 2011, 07:55 »
Do you put your iStock income as foreign-earned income. I haven't bothered up until now, but someone had mentioned to me that I should.
19
« on: May 06, 2011, 01:53 »
I could've sworn I saw a thread earlier in the day about photographers wanting to try to put together a call. Did this get deleted or am I just not looking in the right place?
20
« on: May 03, 2011, 23:23 »
I've seen some posts in the forums about people who've removed all their files from E+ recently and been happy with the decision. It seems that there may never be a best match boost for E+ as hinted at when E+ first rolled out as that question still goes unanswered. One thing I have noticed though is the files that have lots of Vetta and Agency competition are doing much better now than before the best match shift.
With all that said, it seems that a lot of customers are rejecting Vetta/Agency files in favor of cheaper files. Was curious as to who has made a conscious decision to remove the E+ designation from their files and what the outcome was? Only about 5% of my files are E+ currently, but I'm thinking of ditching E+ in favor of steadier DL's.
21
« on: April 11, 2011, 19:37 »
Has the best match dust settled? I sure as hell hope not. Looks like everyone's sales are totally tanking. I know mine have. The only thing that has propped up my sales this month is an EL for $100 earlier this month. What I don't understand is why iStock is continuing to alienate its customers that have made iStock what it is by pushing these high priced Vetta and Agency files. Don't get me wrong, I like getting a Vetta/Agency sale now and then, but the bulk of my income comes from non-Vetta and non-Agency files. Customers are clearly upset and are leaving. It almost seems like Getty purchased iStock and is now summarily killing off its former competitor at its own expense and has turned it into a mid-stock agency. iStock scared the pants off of Getty at one time by offering low cost, quality imagery. Don't they learn? Prices for photos are being driven down by the glut of content on the internet. Most (not all), but most people aren't going to pony up tons of money for Vetta/Agency files after years of paying reasonable prices on iStock. They're just going to take their business elsewhere. Getty has no idea who their customers are at iStock. And when they do figure it out, I'm afraid it'll be too late. The horse is already out of the barn. Just my 2 cents. ETA: Looks like it's being discussed here... Very grim. http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=323102&page=1
22
« on: April 08, 2011, 05:31 »
I don't expect people to post their iStock specific salaries in here but was curious to see how much people were making on average per month via a poll and whether or not it was enough to support you as a full time gig where you live as cost of living varies widely around the world.
ETA: My income varies wildly from about $300 a month to as much as $1,000 but I usually average round $500 or so. Where I live it definitely helps with paying the rent but not much more than that.
23
« on: March 16, 2011, 18:36 »
Sorry if this buried somewhere in the mountain of messages on the iStock forums, but when they deduct our accounts for the fraudulent DL's will our stats be updated too?
24
« on: March 11, 2011, 23:43 »
1.asx.asp.null<value>
25
« on: January 21, 2011, 10:36 »
Here ye! Here ye! According to Lobo, the phrase "+1" is now banned in the iStock forums, and all instances of +1 have been deleted.
Are you kidding me? Do they not have better things to do than treat their contributors and buyers like children on a playground? iStock is already notorious for having a heavy hand in their forums and locking down threads, but this really does take the cake. It really is like treating us like a group of pre-school kids, not to mention it just smacks of micromanagement at its absolute worst. If this is any indication of how they treat their employees, it's no wonder the site is having the problems is does. Un-f*ing-believable.
I think I need to go vomit now.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
