pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: isyndica  (Read 21247 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: June 30, 2009, 11:14 »
0
Is anyone using this service?  Is it worth it?


« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2009, 11:49 »
0
I tried them. I like stats section, they support many agencies but two major are missing, IS and SS.

« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2009, 11:29 »
0
IS is not supported but SS can be added using the Generic FTP connector. We have currently over 20 channels supported and will add more.

Cora, what do you think of the service so far?

« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2009, 23:18 »
0
IS are always missing because they are the only agency that has no ftp upload.

my impressions of isyndica as far as the service goes are excellent! not too sure about the price.

there are some more thoughts from people at
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/isyndica-com/

« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2009, 15:20 »
0
I like it a lot. With my incredibly slow internet, it's even more of an advantage. I wrote a blog recently on the service. Sorry for the repetition for those who have already seen this.

www.microstockposts.com/isyndica-life-just-got-a-little-easier/

edit: link change
« Last Edit: January 15, 2010, 10:09 by Komar »

« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2009, 17:51 »
0
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 #6 on: July 10, 2009, 00:23 »
0
Today they tweet about adding Veer and AlwaysHD. How about IStock and Shutterstock we have been asking for a while?
I don't think it's a question of iSyndica not wanting them. IS is currently not supported and SS are for whatever reasons not participating yet. However, I think both these agencies could participate if they wanted to, I hope they do in the future. Dreamstime, Fotolia, StockXpert, 123rf, BigStock and currently 16 others think it's a good idea.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2009, 01:37 by Komar »

« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2009, 01:29 »
0
interesting list of sites supported, some I didnt know.

doesn't this just do fxp (ftp site to site) the same as uploading to your own web space then using ftp / fxp software to transfer from there to all the others? or am I missing something?


« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2009, 11:24 »
0
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?

Melastmohican

To answer your questions:
- SS and IS: Nothing would work better than users like you contacting them and telling them you'd like to use iSyndica with them.
- Pricing is something we are trying to adjust. There are definitely changes that will be made. Anyone who'd like to give their input on pricing should get in touch with me. We'd love to get as much feedback as possible on that

« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2009, 12:58 »
0
I have been using it for a couple weeks now to populate some of my older channels with older images.  Basically, I was only uploading to Shutterstock for a long time, and wanted to even out my portfolio on other channels and add yaymicro and cutcaster.

The simplicity of use, ability to embed keywords (where I had forgotten to on old images), and the stats reporting have been very good.  In all an invaluable time saver for me. 

And my stats have proved out with a 20% increase in sales so far this month.  I got the basic plan, which has more than paid for itself, though when my credits are spent, I will just hold off uploading for next month.  Not enough credits in the basic for someone with a large portfolio.

It's a fantastic service for people who have to pay for bandwidth usage, like some I know in South Africa.  One upload makes sense.

It's a bummer that SS and IS stats don't show, but now I am only checking in on a couple stats pages a day instead of the OCD of checking all of them.

Excellent service, IMHO.
 ;D



« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2009, 13:49 »
0
I have completed you survey.

In general my answer is I like syndication and stats but I am not willing to pay for storage. I already paid in some places and I would rather using files stored there instead of having another copy. Are you considering using customer storage account. Can I grant you access to my S3 storage?

As I said I am small fish. I do not make enough to justify service like that. If you want to go to the masses of microstockers it has to be low percentage of their monthly income. Remember that majority does not even get paid every month due to payout minimum.

« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2009, 16:06 »
0
Thanks melastmohican

For those interested, we've setup a little survey to understand how best to adjust our prices (hint: we are lowering them soon).

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=jAg_2bb4nsZH8Lk5rVckf0rg_3d_3d

Follow us on twitter and facebook for more updates!

« Reply #12 on: July 10, 2009, 16:32 »
0
Remember that majority does not even get paid every month due to payout minimum.

75% will upload have a few sales but never make a payout, that leaves 25% of contributors as a market, discount a percentage that only upload to one, two or three big sites, from the photographers that are left what percentage will reach a payout but only after a long time, so what is the real number of core users that upload often and might use and benefit from this service.

What is the cost of marketing to these photographers as organic growth will be to slow, the websites are not going to promote a product that encourages dilution with a quicker and wider distrubution channel via it's competitors, that could be why IS and SS are not onboard?

There will be waves of new photographers that will subscribe, for a month or two, upload a few images, the dream will die the bubble will busrt and they will close their account.

How do you intend to connect with the many Photographers not using this forum!

David  ???
« Last Edit: July 10, 2009, 16:45 by Adeptris »

« Reply #13 on: July 10, 2009, 22:44 »
0
"4. On a scale of 1-4 rank how much you like the following features"

1 is high, 4 is low right?

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=jAg_2bb4nsZH8Lk5rVckf0rg_3d_3d



« Reply #14 on: July 10, 2009, 23:06 »
0
4 being the highest. I have clarified it in the question. Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2009, 23:24 by hlth »

« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2009, 16:43 »
0
It's a great concept, but too pricey.  Especially for footage.  I know of an up and coming competitor on the footage side that will offer flat subscription pricing, so I'm waiting on that.

« Reply #16 on: September 03, 2009, 10:04 »
0
JFYI:
The only secure page on iSyndica is their login. All other site credentials are taken over open channels.

For me it means "We care about our security. Yours? Your problem". Honestly, I'd never trust somebody with such attitude, even if surface manifestation of this attitude will be fixed.
   
I am wondering, is it enough for the site to say "All sensitive information is recorded through secured SSL communication and dual-encrypted in our database" for people to give it complete trust?

« Reply #17 on: September 04, 2009, 21:05 »
0
I've been using this service since they first started.  I love the product.  I have a slow internet connection so it's saved me time in uploading and having the stats in one location for so many sites is very helpful.  The company is very receptive to comments/suggestions.  Love it and strongly suggest it to everyone!  Feel free to use the link below if you want to check it out.

http://vds.isyndica.com/Affiliate/scrappinstacy

Stacy

« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2009, 04:07 »
0
JFYI:
The only secure page on iSyndica is their login. All other site credentials are taken over open channels.

For me it means "We care about our security. Yours? Your problem". Honestly, I'd never trust somebody with such attitude, even if surface manifestation of this attitude will be fixed.
   
I am wondering, is it enough for the site to say "All sensitive information is recorded through secured SSL communication and dual-encrypted in our database" for people to give it complete trust?


This was an unfortunate error on our side. We have just released our latest update today and you will notice that SSL encryption is now provided on the page for channel credentials. It was incorporated before, but felt through with the previous release.




« Reply #19 on: October 31, 2009, 22:49 »
0
@ hlth: will all my files be tracked for sales, even if they are not submitted with isyndica? Or is it enough, if isyndica knows my site-credentials to get the stats?

And there's something else i didnt find in your FAQ section: If I need additional credits, can I buy them in packages (100, 500 1000, 5000)? Or do I get one credit per cent and can pay for e.g. 274 or 2871?

Thanks in advance

« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2009, 12:05 »
0
Hum...I've tried the 4,99$ subscription yesterday and I don't think I will stay another month: the 200 credits was almost spent in 2 days for 14 pictures upload at 8 sites and one video at 4 sites.
Today their uploading is far more slower than mine at 100kb/s, I'm waiting since more than 30 minutes and the uploads freeze even if I refresh the web page. Definitively too expensive for only data storage and not working uploading. ???

« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2009, 12:58 »
0
Update:  Almost 2 hours I've started uploading six pictures to 10 sites and 123rf, shutterstock, stockxpert and fotolia are freeze, I have enough credits remaining, so it's a system malfunction.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 13:20 by Smithore »

« Reply #22 on: November 04, 2009, 07:39 »
0
Update:  Almost 2 hours I've started uploading six pictures to 10 sites and 123rf, shutterstock, stockxpert and fotolia are freeze, I have enough credits remaining, so it's a system malfunction.



Hello Smithore

Can you share some more details? Your case seems rather unusual. The best way is to contact us at our support page.

http://www.isyndica.com/contact

****

@pdesign : We will get all your stats, that it is uploaded with us or not. And as shared recently, yes you can buy pay-as-you go credits in packages of varying sizes.

« Reply #23 on: November 04, 2009, 07:49 »
0
Thank you, your service have already reply, explaining stability issues of the new release and offer me 500 credits.
Now it seems to working correctly.
Thanks

« Reply #24 on: November 04, 2009, 08:44 »
0
Thank you, your service have already reply, explaining stability issues of the new release and offer me 500 credits.
Now it seems to working correctly.
Thanks

Ok great - Glad this was sorted out :)

« 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 $$

RacePhoto

« 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

« Reply #50 on: February 17, 2010, 13:19 »
0
I'm sure they'll continue to improve the service :)

Be sure to put your put your requests on their wish list ;)

« Reply #51 on: March 30, 2010, 15:48 »
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.


Signed up with them a few months back and I must say I realy like it.  Sure it seems it only saves you bandwidth, which means litle when you have a good internet connection (my case as well).  But see, I don't have the generate a 5MP version for SS off of the 12MP version I send to DT, FT, off of the 48MB version I send to Alamy: the system does all this for me automatically.  I upload my 18MP images with the keywords added in lightroom and onfigured my agency accounts so custom variants are created for me automatically.  No more * around with 10,000 versions for each agency or worse, having to manage updating keywords on all those variants.  That by itself is worth paying 20 bucks a year to me, though actually I upgraded to a premium subscription with their new pricing change.  I'd prefer is I didn't have to pay for each file transfer, but at the end of the day, I save so much time that it's a smal price to pay

Can't imagine why you would finagle over a few dollars and then waste hours and hours trying to hack something up with Filezilla and still not have any solution to upload different resolutions to different agencies, having to create all of those yoursef, and manage them (and add the * color profile and all that mess for Alamy).
Wish they did a bit more for model releases though.  It's great they added them but I still have to go tie them up on the agency site and they don't support iStock for MRs yet.

That said, I heard rumors that they're converting their affiliate program to give out cash instead of credits, so... go ahead and make me some money  ;D newbielink:http://vds.isyndica.com/Affiliate/hdrhack [nonactive] - you really won't regret it - stop wasting your time trying to figure out hacks that only waste more of your time - are you in to sell photos or to fart around?

« Reply #52 on: March 30, 2010, 16:17 »
0
If you are only doing stills then it *might* just be as easy or easier to upload them to agencies yourself.  But if you are doing video and contribute to a bunch of agencies, iSyndica is a godsend.

I have the fastest non-business internet connection you can buy in Kansas with 2mbit upload speed.  I can upload a single 250mb clip to Pond5 is a little more than 4 minutes. But not all sites have FTP as fast as Pond5.  That same clips takes 15 minutes to upload to one EU agency I submit to and almost 45 minutes to another.  In February I produced and uploaded well over 100 clips.  There is no way I could have distributed them everywhere I submit to without iSyndica.

And their new pricing structure is great.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2010, 08:10 by dnavarrojr »

« Reply #53 on: March 31, 2010, 04:32 »
0
Signed up with them a few months back and I must say I realy like it.  Sure it seems it only saves you bandwidth, which means litle when you have a good internet connection (my case as well).  But see, I don't have the generate a 5MP version for SS off of the 12MP version I send to DT, FT, off of the 48MB version I send to Alamy: the system does all this for me automatically. 

Can't imagine why you would finagle over a few dollars and then waste hours and hours trying to hack something up with Filezilla and still not have any solution to upload different resolutions to different agencies, having to create all of those yoursef, and manage them (and add the  color profile and all that mess for Alamy).

Do u really resize for different agencies !??  heard of this before, but I just send my measly 10MP to ALL !!  Why do this ??

What's this about Alamy and colour profiles ??  in the dark here too !! 

I agree it's a nice package, I just have the $20 one, but it's worth 12 a yr for me to see ALL my stats laid out on 1 page !!  :)

Fotonaut

« Reply #54 on: April 13, 2010, 11:27 »
0
I have come to love aspects of iSyndica, but feel stuck with the Standard subscription only for the unnatural restriction to only one Custom FTP channel (which Shutterstock must occupy).

I actually feel kind of ripped off, as their pricing page simply check marks Custom FTP channels (plural) and boast "You can configure up to 20 customized Generic FTP channels and transfer your items to any accessible FTP and Secure FTP servers as easily as with natively supported agencies." at the end of the page.

No mention of a crippling restriction to only one Custom FTP channel.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2010, 11:29 by Fotonaut »

« Reply #55 on: May 05, 2010, 07:51 »
0
I cannot upload anything to Isyndica. I have a standard subscription, but the java or whatever uploader seems broken. Uploads terminate after a few seconds with some 417 error. Does anyone else have that problem?

« Reply #56 on: May 05, 2010, 08:15 »
0
You should try to upload by FTP, all the infos are on your account page

« Reply #57 on: May 05, 2010, 08:43 »
0
You should try to upload by FTP, all the infos are on your account page

FTP upload is only available for premium and pro accounts not for standard accounts.

« Reply #58 on: May 05, 2010, 08:51 »
0
I see.. Time to upgrade then ;D

« Reply #59 on: May 05, 2010, 20:21 »
0
I see.. Time to upgrade then ;D

why spend more money? standard subscription is sufficient for me if it works as advertised.

« Reply #60 on: May 22, 2010, 02:05 »
0
I see.. Time to upgrade then ;D

why spend more money? standard subscription is sufficient for me if it works as advertised.

Hey shiyali - sorry to hear about this problem.  Shouldn't be happening and if Standard works fine for you that's perfectly fine as well.  Contact us on our support and we'll work it out for you.  We're using a Flash uploader that usually works just fine but in some cases indeed has a few issues, so we'll also have a regular form post upload coming in pretty soon to address such cases.  But there might be something we can do for you in the meantime.  E-mail or use our contact form.

Cheers - S

cascoly

  • Photography, travel & online games at cascoly.com

« Reply #61 on: May 22, 2010, 12:16 »
0
i looked at it, but it doesnt really do much for me at  the moment -- i just set uploads at the end of the day;  my bottleneck is clicking thru indiv images on dt, big,  to add the worthless categories or on ft to tfr keywords that yhey could EASILY read themselves since they capture all the info.   you still need to do that with isyn

i played with video a bit last year, but with 100 clips, only pond has shown any results - not a sale at ss, revo; but i decide to try again, isyn will definitely be my choice

s

Envato ElementsMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
33 Replies
18658 Views
Last post May 23, 2010, 13:50
by cascoly
0 Replies
1870 Views
Last post July 10, 2009, 16:32
by hlth
0 Replies
2505 Views
Last post November 05, 2009, 17:11
by melastmohican
4 Replies
2730 Views
Last post November 27, 2009, 16:41
by Jonathan Ross
6 Replies
4526 Views
Last post April 30, 2010, 13:56
by sweetgirll

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements