MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: F'in clueless IStock Posters  (Read 5657 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 19, 2009, 01:28 »
0
Ok, so these cluseless Istock posters always bring up their proprietary crap software called "deepmeta" on my posts as to why they don't implement FTP.  Ummm.. hello clueless dolts, I'm trying to create a workflow that works the SAME across all the sites, and um, your crappy Deepmeta is not quite fitting in with my workflow. Let's see if you genious IStock programmers can figure out what numerous others have before them, and implement a simple, reliable process called FTP, or even SSH FTP, I don't give a sh_t. Deepmeta is a f'in load of crap.


« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2009, 01:33 »
0
Classy. Real classy.

« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2009, 01:37 »
0
Classy. Real classy.

thank you, like i'm trying to fit your definition of classy

« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2009, 02:14 »
0
Well you're certainly fitting my definition of genious.

« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2009, 02:54 »
0
Well you're certainly fitting my definition of genious.



Ha ha ha.. Nice!!!

BTW - Genious I think Istock does it intentionally so that people only upload their best stuff..

fotorob

  • I am a professional stock photographer

« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2009, 03:11 »
0
Quote
BTW - Genious I think Istock does it intentionally so that people only upload their best stuff..

I never quite grasped the concept of a picture agency that puts bricks in the way of people who want to give them pictures.

michealo

« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2009, 03:36 »
0
Quote
BTW - Genious I think Istock does it intentionally so that people only upload their best stuff..

I never quite grasped the concept of a picture agency that puts bricks in the way of people who want to give them pictures.

& you probably never grasped the concept of wheat & chaff either ...

« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2009, 04:15 »
0
Quote
BTW - Genious I think Istock does it intentionally so that people only upload their best stuff..
I never quite grasped the concept of a picture agency that puts bricks in the way of people who want to give them pictures.
& you probably never grasped the concept of wheat & chaff either ...

And obviously, Istock carries all the wheat and the others carry the chaff.  ;)

But the original poster is wrong about FTP. His argument was "workflow". Well, any uploading workflow contains two phases: the actual physical upload of the bits which is automatic, and the work on the site which involves categories, MRF attach, agreeing with terms, set licenses, and disambiguation in the case of iStock. This second phase isn't automatic and hence it takes up most of the actual time spent in the upload process. Mostphotos has the shortest phase 2 with no categories and no MRF. I stock happens to have the longest one with the disambiguation added.

What Deepmeta allows to do is prepare phase 2 offline in all ease, then use inbuilt FTP to upload automatically and in an unsupervised way (phase 1) to Istock. Deepmeta is better than just FTP. Imagine Istock would have just FTP and let you do all phase 2 on the site. The workflow would actually be longer.

So apart from the crappy classy style of the post, the point taken is wrong.

And by the way, the upload issue has been hijacked by the limits issue and the rejection issue. If this is going to be another Istock bashing round, I'm out.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2009, 04:19 by FlemishDreams »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2009, 05:25 »
0
Quote
BTW - Genious I think Istock does it intentionally so that people only upload their best stuff..

I never quite grasped the concept of a picture agency that puts bricks in the way of people who want to give them pictures.

It's so you upload your best stuff. The sites that make it easy to send everything encourage people to FTP hundreds of similar shots of out of focus overprocessed brick walls and their cat fluffy.

Istock seems to be more focused on buyers than contributors. They already have a ton of images so do they really need to bend over backwards for contributors? Probably not. They're more selective so they get contributors who submit more saleable stuff rather than people who submit as much as possible to every place they can.

« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2009, 05:53 »
0
It's so you upload your best stuff. The sites that make it easy to send everything encourage people to FTP hundreds of similar shots of out of focus overprocessed brick walls and their cat fluffy.

Not on DT. You can try it once, then hit the LCV/similars brick wall of rejections, and your upload privilege approaches 1 per day. On SS, you can get a warning. After 5 warnings, you're out.

« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2009, 05:59 »
0
Im soo glad there are agencies thinking this way.     When the rest have to piss off their contributors by deleting millions of pictures in panic.  Steady stand Stands Istock (and Fotolia probably).

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2009, 06:10 »
0
Ok, so these cluseless Istock posters always bring up their proprietary crap software called "deepmeta" on my posts as to why they don't implement FTP.  Ummm.. hello clueless dolts, I'm trying to create a workflow that works the SAME across all the sites, and um, your crappy Deepmeta is not quite fitting in with my workflow. Let's see if you genious IStock programmers can figure out what numerous others have before them, and implement a simple, reliable process called FTP, or even SSH FTP, I don't give a sh_t. Deepmeta is a f'in load of crap.


I think Istock should make it easier for people who "get it". Like people who stay above an acceptance rate of X% and whose images sell on average of $X per image per month get FTP with higher upload limits. Performance should be tiered so the better you do the less limits you have. Then if you get the urge to start submitting crap your performance will quickly fall and FTP would be revoked.

This would encourage contributors to submit and maintain higher quality technical and saleable images. It would also encourage people who are struggling to improve. People who don't get it, don't perform well, and don't improve will take the easy route and continue FTPing large quantities of crap everywhere else.

« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2009, 06:51 »
0
Ok, so these cluseless Istock posters always bring up their proprietary crap software called "deepmeta" on my posts as to why they don't implement FTP.  Ummm.. hello clueless dolts, I'm trying to create a workflow that works the SAME across all the sites, and um, your crappy Deepmeta is not quite fitting in with my workflow. Let's see if you genious IStock programmers can figure out what numerous others have before them, and implement a simple, reliable process called FTP, or even SSH FTP, I don't give a sh_t. Deepmeta is a f'in load of crap.

I suggest you boycott IS and keep your fine portfolio elsewhere in protest.  You'll show them!

vonkara

« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2009, 06:53 »
0

I suggest you boycott IS and keep your fine portfolio elsewhere in protest.  You'll show them!

ROFL

Microbius

« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2009, 05:43 »
0
As came up in another thread, this way of "encouraging" the upload of people's best work isn't having the desired effect. It might encourage exclusives to send their best stuff, but non exclusives just send the same stuff everywhere and end up with a que at IStock till their slots free up (as our world doesn't revolve around one outlet).

« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2009, 10:15 »
0
photox, you're right, IStock is a pain.  They do everything differently than the others and are the hardest microstock to deal with.  I don't submit to them because I found it too aggravating.  Others say the earnings make it worth jumping through the hoops, but I didn't find that to be the case with my images.  I may try again in the future.


« Reply #16 on: April 20, 2009, 10:24 »
0
I like DeepMeta and I use it. It really saves my time. I just noticed that upload is faster using FTP. Maybe I'm not right, but it looks to me that DeepMeta is a bit slower than FTP. Anyway, the difference in speed doesn't bother me much, as whole process is simplified if you use DeepMeta.


donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #17 on: April 20, 2009, 12:47 »
0
The reason I like deepmeta is not only because you can do you editing outside of iStock but also because after you upload your 15 and have to wait for the next 15 to free themselves, you can still add photos to DeepMeta and get them ready for the next one without having to wait till you upload again. I also always put my pending files in their own file untill they are approved and it makes it much easier to add those files and not have to worry about which ones you still needed to upload to iStock.

lisafx

« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2009, 12:55 »
0
I've never uploaded with Deepmeta.  But OTOH I haven't found istock's upload process to be particularly tedious.  I open as many browser tabs as I have images to upload.  Pretty simple.

Of course the disambiguation is a bit of a PITA, but that has to be done whether in a program in my computer or on the site. 

For people who are very frustrated with the process at istock, how many are you uploading at once?  With my UL limit of 30/week I upload around 10 images on three different days.   

I suppose I might get aggravated if I did all 30 at once, but I prefer to space them out anyway in hopes of getting more exposure in the new uploads tab.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2009, 12:56 by lisafx »

« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2009, 12:56 »
0
The reason I like deepmeta is not only because you can do you editing outside of iStock but also because after you upload your 15 and have to wait for the next 15 to free themselves, you can still add photos to DeepMeta and get them ready for the next one without having to wait till you upload again. I also always put my pending files in their own file untill they are approved and it makes it much easier to add those files and not have to worry about which ones you still needed to upload to iStock.

Right! As usual, I submit my images to other sites and I have to wait for IS slots to get free. So, I add images in DeepMeta and I simply wait, and I don't have to keep in my mind what i have to submit, an what I already submitted. I also like statistics feature in DeepMeta. You can easily see your statistics without surfing the site.

« Reply #20 on: April 20, 2009, 13:30 »
0
lisafx  "I open as many browser tabs as I have images to upload.  Pretty simple."

As a software developer who's worked on web sites I can only LOL at being forced to jump through crazy hoops like this just to transfer a bunch of files.   To me (an IStock outsider) it sounds like a sort of abusive relationship that IS regulars have come to accept as somehow normal.




« Reply #21 on: April 20, 2009, 13:38 »
0

DeepMeta,   Sounds too much like an Eastern Philosophy to me, I can't write keywords while in a lotus position.

« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2009, 13:47 »
0
lisafx, what bothers me the most with the browser upload is when an error is encountered, which then results in all the keywords being lost and I have to do it all over again. DeepMeta makes it all much more organized, especially if you are also uploading to other sites, and you don't need to remember to upload images to iStock later. As Whitechild said, you can add them to DeepMeta even before you have the slots open. Also, a very good feature is that one can copy keywords from one image in the queue to the other, which can be very useful for images i the same series.

lisafx

« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2009, 16:05 »
0
lisafx, what bothers me the most with the browser upload is when an error is encountered, which then results in all the keywords being lost and I have to do it all over again.

If you are happy with DeepMeta, more power to you.  I am not trying to talk anyone out of using it.   But the OP doesn't like it for whatever reason and I am suggesting an alternative :)

As for the IPTC data though, you don't need to have DM to preserve your keywords.  Anyone who is actually adding their keywords on istock or any of the other sites is really wasting time.  I add titles, keywords, descriptions in photoshop and if there is ever a glitch while I am submitting an image on istock the keywords are still there in the IPTC. 


As a software developer who's worked on web sites I can only LOL at being forced to jump through crazy hoops like this just to transfer a bunch of files.   To me (an IStock outsider) it sounds like a sort of abusive relationship that IS regulars have come to accept as somehow normal.


If I was a software developer it would probably drive me nuts too.   But I am not about to let such obstacles to persuade me to abandon a site that provides me with the largest portion of my income.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2518 Views
Last post April 24, 2008, 09:00
by News Feed
0 Replies
2371 Views
Last post May 15, 2008, 06:45
by News Feed
0 Replies
2225 Views
Last post June 24, 2008, 08:00
by News Feed
0 Replies
1730 Views
Last post October 30, 2008, 10:30
by News Feed
41 Replies
6288 Views
Last post April 19, 2013, 08:22
by Chico

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle