Author Topic: Exclusively everywhere but IStock (Read 13754 times)

Milinz · « **Reply #25 on:** March 31, 2009, 19:35 »

Quote from: RT on March 31, 2009, 17:02

Quote from: Microbius on March 31, 2009, 16:37
With the exception of SS, which accepts all kinds of sh*te, especially as far as illustrations go, no one of the big six agencies has a greater concentration of garbage than any other.

I disagree, some of the sh*te on SS is much more sh*te than on other sites, but if you read the forums you'll see that some contributors there have trouble getting their sh*te on other sites so they stick only with SS safe in the knowledge that no matter how sh*te it is SS will take it as long as it passes their technical standards.

I agree - I have sh*te images considering iStock solely... Even I am not good enough to be 'illustrator' on istock - which is quite funny because I am on all other agencies... Not other agency have any problem with my vector sales as well as that iStock rejecting almost 2/3 of photos what I send to all. And, I really have thorough picks for stock photos.

But, also what you saw at SS may be the same on iStock but in exclusive area... They sometimes accept images with quite errors which I never would be able to get accepted there as non-exclusive...

MichaelJay · « **Reply #26 on:** April 01, 2009, 01:56 »

Quote from: Milinz on March 31, 2009, 19:35

And, I really have thorough picks for stock photos.

Well, really, I don't try to be mean - but with the exception of one image at Fotolia I didn't see anything that I would qualify as a decent selling image. Maybe this is a question of perception but 10 sales are actually saying that not too many customers share this opinion.

As said, this is not meant to be mean. If you are happy with your sales, go on. But if are trying to make more money, I would recommend stepping back a bit and trying to figure out how to become better.

Microbius · « **Reply #27 on:** April 01, 2009, 04:52 »

Quote from: KB on March 31, 2009, 16:03

Quote from: Milinz on March 31, 2009, 14:05
Particular newest photo of tourist taxi boats

Notice for File #XXXXXXXX: tourist taxi boats‏

The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject. {[ Beach, excursion, Island, Oasis, Sand, sun, Taxi, tourism, Tourist]}
Funny rejection reason with TOURIST TAXI BOATS NOT TO BE KEYWORDED AS TAXI OR TOURIST..
Zeljko, I took a look at the image in question. I have to agree with the inspector on most of those.

Beach - No beach in sight, only water.
Excursion - Seems ok to me.
Island - No land in sight, only water.
Oasis - An oasis from our hectic life? Maybe; I don't know if you'd get many hits because of it, and it certainly isn't the typical meaning of the word.
Sand - No sand in sight, only water.
Sun - I prefer to use the keyword "day" or "daytime" for images that were taken in the daytime, and reserve the word "sun" for when it actually appears in the frame.
Taxi - Implies an automotive taxi, IMO. Use "water taxi" instead. But I do see there are a dozen or two images which have been accepted with the terms "boat" and "taxi". There's that inconsistency you mentioned.
Tourism - Seems ok to me.
Tourist - I don't see anybody, so how could "tourist" be applicable? Use "tourist boat" instead (and DA to tourboat, not ferry!). And don't forget "nobody"!

I hope that helps.

@Milinz
I agree with KB, you can't really put a convincing argument for "Beach, Island, Oasis" and "Sand" looking at it on SS it also has words like "trees" and "speed" attached. You really need to slim down the keywords to get it accepted on IStock.
Given this I was ready to slate the illustration work too but there's actually quite a bit of decent work in your SS portfolio. If you're thinking of applying to IStock as an illustrator again make sure you send them some of the less abstract stuff. The backgrounds will sell once your in but for initial application they like to see that you can actually draw.

Milinz · « **Reply #28 on:** April 01, 2009, 06:57 »

Quote from: Microbius on April 01, 2009, 04:52

Quote from: KB on March 31, 2009, 16:03
Quote from: Milinz on March 31, 2009, 14:05
Particular newest photo of tourist taxi boats

Notice for File #XXXXXXXX: tourist taxi boats‏

The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject. {[ Beach, excursion, Island, Oasis, Sand, sun, Taxi, tourism, Tourist]}
Funny rejection reason with TOURIST TAXI BOATS NOT TO BE KEYWORDED AS TAXI OR TOURIST..
Zeljko, I took a look at the image in question. I have to agree with the inspector on most of those.

Beach - No beach in sight, only water.
Excursion - Seems ok to me.
Island - No land in sight, only water.
Oasis - An oasis from our hectic life? Maybe; I don't know if you'd get many hits because of it, and it certainly isn't the typical meaning of the word.
Sand - No sand in sight, only water.
Sun - I prefer to use the keyword "day" or "daytime" for images that were taken in the daytime, and reserve the word "sun" for when it actually appears in the frame.
Taxi - Implies an automotive taxi, IMO. Use "water taxi" instead. But I do see there are a dozen or two images which have been accepted with the terms "boat" and "taxi". There's that inconsistency you mentioned.
Tourism - Seems ok to me.
Tourist - I don't see anybody, so how could "tourist" be applicable? Use "tourist boat" instead (and DA to tourboat, not ferry!). And don't forget "nobody"!

I hope that helps.

@Milinz
I agree with KB, you can't really put a convincing argument for "Beach, Island, Oasis" and "Sand" looking at it on SS it also has words like "trees" and "speed" attached. You really need to slim down the keywords to get it accepted on IStock.
Given this I was ready to slate the illustration work too but there's actually quite a bit of decent work in your SS portfolio. If you're thinking of applying to IStock as an illustrator again make sure you send them some of the less abstract stuff. The backgrounds will sell once your in but for initial application they like to see that you can actually draw.

No point in sending anything to them - they simply threat me as I am quite some beginner with no expirience despite I live from marketing/advertising design since 1992...

[edit] Also, I really don't have time to guess what would be that what they want me to draw because I can draw anything with pencil or wacom tablet... It is quite stupid from them to expect me to obey their requests if I don't know what that requests are. Also, there is stupidity in that approval for illustrators... They want cartoon - but not in the way I draw them... Also, they want lines to be artsy and artsy is not what stock image is in basic and so on...

Milinz · « **Reply #29 on:** April 01, 2009, 07:16 »

Quote from: MichaelJay on April 01, 2009, 01:56

Quote from: Milinz on March 31, 2009, 19:35
And, I really have thorough picks for stock photos.

Well, really, I don't try to be mean - but with the exception of one image at Fotolia I didn't see anything that I would qualify as a decent selling image. Maybe this is a question of perception but 10 sales are actually saying that not too many customers share this opinion.

As said, this is not meant to be mean. If you are happy with your sales, go on. But if are trying to make more money, I would recommend stepping back a bit and trying to figure out how to become better.

You are partly right... I more do my photography for known buyers in advance payed for it exclusively and under 'gun for hire' principle... So, not much left for upload on stock - especially for micros... But really, on fotolia as you saw there are just part of my images because they've used to reject on random incosistant basis all other I have here and there and there was quite stance of not uploading there for long time... I've started to upload there again in just a month or two back time with my rasterized vectors and from 82 accepted images I am now on over 200 with bronze tier. And now limiting factor is EPS up to 2MB... But I started to upload my newest vector also and seems reviewers like them because no much rejections on that kind of images. Fotolia sells well for me as well as other sites but interesting to say for me is that no rules exist in what image will sell everywhere... It is mostly this one is selling like crazy here and that one over there and some third on some other agency. No, I don't beleive that my photos on micros are wow at all... They are just plain stock images which comply to maybe too precise subjects which comes with low subscription sales... But, mostly they are bought as pay-per-download or ELs... Vectors are the same - some kind of compromises in execution so all agencies to accept them. I am more likely found a way to have some average quality images which comply to all agencies rather than making hits for some specificial agency. No, I am just saying that I have some schedule to follow in growth of my portfolio on all agencies which I prefer more for now and until I see that all that agencies are bringing decent money to me. After some of 2000 images on-line on all agencies I beleive I will have time for 'wow' works to upload. And, I am just at 1/3 of my way to that first goal I plan to achieve... So, there are 1400 or more unique images to draw and photograph or postproscess some old... And, unfortunately there is no time to learn how to comply to iStock needs because my own needs are priority!

And yes - I am learning through this 'gun for hire' jobs alot! And there is always room for improvement to any photographer...

Magnum · « **Reply #30 on:** April 01, 2009, 09:17 »

I think I´ve heard that before, that u hate Istock and are quitting uploading to them

And after a while here you go again...

Milinz · « **Reply #31 on:** April 01, 2009, 16:39 »

Quote from: Magnum on April 01, 2009, 09:17

I think I´ve heard that before, that u hate Istock and are quitting uploading to them And after a while here you go again...

I stopped on CRESTOCK and will not upload Until they give me more than 100% commision - so for them never.
On iStock I never liked their upload interface and their policy... I am liberatian so, I even told them I hate their system and they know that ;-)

Catastrophe · « **Reply #32 on:** April 05, 2009, 12:56 »

Well, each site has their own way of trying to make the most money. In business you have to have an advantage, pick your niche - or you are just another noname site. IS tries to do that by having unique content, SS by having the most. Others are probably the cheapest. Some go for the highest quality, etc.

Those "sh*te" images may be useful to someone - I am absolutely AMAZED at some of the images that have 100+ downloads on lots of sites.

And it shows. Each of the top sites has their own flavor. People buy from different sites for different kinds of images. Everyone knows that lots of images rejected at one site often end up best sellers at another site.

I don't only upload my best to IS. I upload a little bit of everything and see what sells. If one image sells well, I do tend to upload more like that. But it's not a quality thing - it's more of a business images sell well on IS, creative images better on SS, etc...

fotografer · « **Reply #33 on:** April 05, 2009, 13:05 »

Bear in mind that at DT an image with 100 dls might be an assignment image and have never actually sold or in the case of IS be old images from the days when they were free.

Quote from: Catastrophe on April 05, 2009, 12:56