|
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.
Messages - cwwmbm
Pages: [1]
1
« on: June 18, 2013, 20:38 »
Hey Sean, if I'm not overstepping, did your experience change since you last updated here?
If there's anybody else who's willing to share some info I'd be grateful as well
2
« on: December 10, 2008, 15:11 »
If istock wishes to be an exclusive only agency, why don't they just say so and stop wasting the time of non-exclusives? Their current policy allows non-exclusives to upload but ensures that they will have very few sales by giving very poor exposure. Non-exclusives then have to consider whether it's worth the effort to continue with them. No doubt istock prefers to keep us on a string so that they can make something from us if their exclusives can't cover a particular image request. However it means we have to invest considerable time and effort for very little reward. Of course, istock could change their policy tomorrow, so no one wants to risk writing them off. I think if exclusives had to work so hard for so little on istock they might have second thoughts too.
They don't want to be exclusives only, I thought it's pretty evident. Otherwise they wouldn't let you submit stuff. But why they should give you an edge over lets say SJ or Lise or DNY or whatever? Of course all these guys have the priority in best match. The rest of the whining I'm not willing even to comment on, if you think that you put more effort then you're paid for then just quit submitting to IS.
3
« on: December 10, 2008, 14:29 »
First, I think that the second image is much better than the first one. So it actually proves the point that better image will be selling better.
Second, why IS should NOT favour exclusives in best match? I mean - it pretty much obvious that they do but why is it wrong? Why everybody's eager to prove it like it's some kind of bad deed?
4
« on: December 10, 2008, 14:21 »
In May we will release a premiere collection of our best, exclusive content.
When I read it, I didn't understand "exclusive contributors", but content, so I thought they would invite some images from non-exclusives to be part of their collection - with the contributor deleting them from any other site. Further in the same original post, if I am not mistaken, they said something like "exclusive members would be able to offer images for the collection", or something like this.
My understanding was:
- Exclusives will be able to choose images for the collection (maybe a % of their current online images)
- Non-exclusives may have images picked up by IS staff invited to the collection, provided these images become exclusive.
Maybe this was not what they meant from the start, but that was my comprehension, maybe due to not being a native English speaker.
Regards,
Adelaide
Exactly. It was not put very clearly (hence the corrections), I agree, but it never said that anyone except exclusives would be able to participate.
5
« on: December 10, 2008, 14:17 »
Whatalife 
I read it myself. Twice. Give you my word, it did say that independents will be allowed inside the Premiere Collection based on invitations.
Trust me
It did say so.
And you're right. I couldn't care less. Let them have it, the Premiere Collection I mean.
It is the best of what exclusives on Istock have on offer.
I wouldn't like them to call it 'The Best Stock Collection in the World', though.
Simply because that's not true.
Independents beat exclusives hands down. By far.
Still, let them have it! It is their business plan, let them live with it.
I couldn't care less...
All the best,
Anna
I cannot trust you because I saw it 2 minutes after posting and it did say what Mr. Locke quoted here - premiere collection will contain only exclusive content. You might have got your impression from forum posts where some individuals missed that part and ASSUMED that everybody will be able to participate into collection.
6
« on: March 06, 2008, 14:30 »
I got mine removed last year, I just wrote and asked them. They responded within a few days...
Bloody hell, they haven't responded to me after a month 
7
« on: March 06, 2008, 14:07 »
Also last week the 'newness' element of the best match equation was changed to give newer files a higher placement in search results.
This 'newness' component changes four or five times each year, which is why you'll see remarks like "Oh, it's nice to see some of my old files selling again" or "Why do my new files not get any views or sales?".
How do you know that?
8
« on: March 06, 2008, 13:10 »
hi there,
i know there is a forum for this site, but it doesn't seem to be attended by anyone. I want to delete all my stuff at GS but I can't find a way to do that. I wrote to support twice but they are silent (it's been a month). Does anyone know how to delete portfolio from this site?
9
« on: April 25, 2007, 18:41 »
Well that's good news - if it is possible to achieve 10 downloads per day at FT then that is a target worth aiming for.
Thansk for all your reassurances on this thread everyone.
Yes, this is possible and not very hard to achieve in fact I have about 700 images online on Fotolia but have to say that 90% of all downloads I get is from latest 200.
10
« on: April 25, 2007, 14:02 »
You gotta be joking. I'm at about 250-300 in 7 days ranking and I sell i average 8-10 pics per day. Top 2 photogs (Andres and Yuri) sells about 150 per day. I know that to be in top 1000 for the 7 days ranking you have to sell like 2-3 per day. Simple math - yes, they do sell 10,000 images per day.
Pages: [1]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
