pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - Svetlana

Pages: [1] 2
1
Shutterstock.com / Re: Petition to stop spammers
« on: November 04, 2016, 00:28 »
Ok, so they do not really want to eliminate spam. Let them at least tell us that everyone is allowed to use it. Rules should be the same for everyone, right? ;D

2
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock do nothing with spammers.
« on: October 29, 2016, 05:23 »
Shelma1, indeed. Wow...

3
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock do nothing with spammers.
« on: October 29, 2016, 03:35 »
Apparently, if you send a letter to SS about specific images, they do contact the author and ask them to change the spammy description.

4
Their statement that this thing doesn't involve enhanced licenses is clearly false, just look at any photo. You can buy it for 1 dollar, even the enhanced (or extended) license.
I am sorry, do they really offer extended licenses for 1 dollar, on top of everything else?? Do they give this information on their site? I cannot find it there :(

5
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS September sales down 50%
« on: September 21, 2016, 08:42 »
Could the new DepositPhotos' "DollarPhotoClub" have anything to do with lower sales (especially fewer ODs) on SS?

6
SS can now offer whatever custom deals for ELs they like. No matter how small the price is, SS is now paying the author a percentage, and not flat 28$ for each EL.
I think that's what the previous lack of flexibility mentioned in the letter meant. Either that or they're going to make standard EL tariffs lower for the client.

7
Shutterstock.com / Re: 723,027 new images added this week!
« on: January 25, 2016, 01:57 »
Here's another one... and one more.
I wonder how many such ports have been added recently and how the numbers would change if these were deleted (or not accepted, in the first place).

8
Shutterstock.com / Re: Uploading Error?
« on: September 12, 2014, 19:53 »
Sean Locke Photography, it happens if you miss the "Drag and drop your files here or" area when dragging and dropping. Once you drag outside of the marked rectangular area, it opens your file instead of uploading it.

9
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 21, 2014, 06:26 »
Latest stats:

Fotolia: 29,149,813 images
DPC: 22,288,409 images
Difference: 6,861,404 images

10
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 18, 2014, 23:45 »
Quote
Stats:
Fotolia: 29,074,942 images
DPC: 22,226,912 images
Difference: 6,848,030 images

It would appear, some contributors opted back in, after all...

Not necessarily. But surprisingly, there are still some people uploading to FT, and that increases also the DPC count.

I think so.
As compared to June 12:
(Fotolia: 28,928,757 images
DPC: 21,984,779 images):

Growth @ Fotolia: 29,074,942 - 28,928,757 = 146,185 images
Growth @ DPC: 22,226,912 - 21,984,779 = 242,133 images

11
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 18, 2014, 02:36 »
Stats:
Fotolia: 29,074,942 images
DPC: 22,226,912 images
Difference: 6,848,030 images

It would appear, some contributors opted back in, after all...

12
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 12, 2014, 02:12 »
Stats, as of a few minutes ago:
Fotolia: 28,928,757 images
DPC: 21,984,779 images
Difference: 6,943,978 images

13
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 11, 2014, 00:23 »
Stats (as of about 15 min ago):
Fotolia: 28,894,090 images
DPC: 21,963,402 images
Difference: 6,930,688 images

14
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 10, 2014, 23:33 »
The thing is, it's not enough if we (the contributors) support fair agencies by uploading to them. We need to either get the buyers to support them, too, or withdraw our images from any "not fair" agencies so that the buyers have no choice but to turn to the fair agencies. This is a much, much bigger challenge than opting out of DPC/leaving Fotolia and letting other contributors know what's going on.

15
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 08, 2014, 02:25 »
Stats:
Fotolia: 28,808,585 images
DPC: 21,888,576 images (latest change: 08-06-2014 11:08:59 (Moscow time) -13,424 images)
Difference: 6,920,009 images

16
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 07, 2014, 07:37 »
Latest stats:
Fotolia: 28,803,691 images
DPC: 21,893,144 images
Difference: 6,910,547 images

17
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 06, 2014, 10:28 »
Recent numbers:
Fotolia: 28,787,358 images
DPC: 21,891,992 images
Difference: 6,895,366 images

18
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 04, 2014, 23:56 »
Recent numbers:
Fotolia: 28,746,698 images
DPC: 21,845,945 images
Difference: 6,900,753 images

19
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 04, 2014, 01:29 »
Latest stats:
Fotolia: 28,715,484 images
DPC: 21,826,093 images
Difference: 6,889,391 images

20
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime
« on: June 03, 2014, 03:51 »
Does anyone know, is it safe to turn the Alliances back on now, if I do not want to participate in the testing program?

21
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 01, 2014, 10:08 »
The stats suggest that some contributors have opted back in... which is sad.
Not necessarily. Could be new images uploaded to Fotolia by contributors who didn't opt out.

22
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia D-Day (Deactivation Day) - May,1
« on: June 01, 2014, 01:13 »
The stats for DPC (Moscow time):

Date and time            Images on DPC   Change
01-06-2014 08:08:59   21,756,707   6,542
01-06-2014 06:08:53   21,750,165   166
01-06-2014 05:08:58   21,749,999   708
01-06-2014 02:09:04   21,749,291   2,617
01-06-2014 01:08:57   21,746,674   462
01-06-2014 00:09:01   21,746,212   3,231
31-05-2014 21:08:59   21,742,981   7,808
31-05-2014 19:08:54   21,735,173   492
31-05-2014 18:08:57   21,734,681   1,516
31-05-2014 17:08:55   21,733,165   4,645
31-05-2014 15:08:59   21,728,520   322
31-05-2014 12:09:00   21,728,198   1,656
31-05-2014 10:08:59   21,726,542   1,245
31-05-2014 08:08:57   21,725,297   243
31-05-2014 05:08:59   21,725,054   -775
31-05-2014 02:09:02   21,725,829   11,372
30-05-2014 23:09:00   21,714,457   2,137
30-05-2014 20:08:59   21,712,320   198
30-05-2014 17:09:00   21,712,122   11,590
30-05-2014 09:08:56   21,700,532   -1,032
30-05-2014 08:08:56   21,701,564   -159
30-05-2014 06:09:01   21,701,723   3,857
30-05-2014 04:08:57   21,697,866   639
30-05-2014 03:08:56   21,697,227   279
30-05-2014 01:08:59   21,696,948   808
30-05-2014 00:08:59   21,696,140   869
29-05-2014 23:08:58   21,695,271   1,453
29-05-2014 21:08:56   21,693,818   1,538
29-05-2014 20:08:56   21,692,280   510

Latest numbers:
Fotolia: 28,601,269
DPC: 21,756,707
Difference: 6,844,562

23
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime
« on: May 30, 2014, 13:46 »
One thing is for sure-I know some agencies that would have never asked us. Sure, you know what agencies I'm talking about
And right now such agencies are reaping what they sowed.

24
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime
« on: May 30, 2014, 12:37 »
I have nothing against Dreamstime, in fact I made my first sale with them (and a credit one at that), so I quite like this agency. They are not my biggest earner but they're all right.

It's just that we're all quite touchy at the moment, what with DPC and other bad news. If only we had more information about this possible deal. If only there was a way of knowing it's not gonna hurt us more than benefit us.

25
Dreamstime.com / Re: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime
« on: May 28, 2014, 17:21 »
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?

If I were DT I wouldn't be thrilled with this approach.  If many or most of the contributors whose work they selected for this beta chose to sit on the sidelines, there's less likelihood the potential partner would be impressed by the offering.  DT would have to keep finding replacement images to fill in for the ones you yanked out.  Then if the test goes well and a lucrative deal is implemented, you want to hop back in? 

To me, fairness means those who are willing to support an initiative like this should be the first (maybe even only) contributors to benefit from it.
Wouldn't it be their loss or the loss of their new partner, if they limit the number of contributors (and works) participating in the program?

Pages: [1] 2

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors