|
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 - Dr Bouz
101
« on: November 24, 2008, 12:46 »
well... the best way of course is to submit images that is going to be accepted at the first place  ( inspect images on 200%, choose up to 10 really focused keywords etc..
102
« on: November 24, 2008, 12:17 »
well i believe this is really hard to "measure". but you surely need less time when you work with just one site.
103
« on: November 24, 2008, 12:07 »
did you ever consider possibility that money is not the only thing in somebody's life?
i myself did not go to exclusive on i.s. because this inconsistency on meny ways. but actually this is the main and only reason. - i can not "give my body and soul" to someone who is not o.k. with every one with his associates in a business.
if you are not o.k. with someone today (on example somewhere in summer is announced that exclusive uploads with even kwd spamming are going to be corrected, and that non-exclusives are going to be more offensively rejected (as the image of the dog above) - how do you call this? - is it o.k.? -and from the business point of view - this is not wise - you are waisting reviewers time twice - once for reviewing, and once more for re-reviewing. wise? - well, i'm not sure..).. so - if you are not o.k. today with someone - this is likely that you are going to be not-o.k. with someone else tomorrow.
having exclusives on the first pages of best match, is o.k. having files that are "on the line" accepted, more money/dl's - that is all o.k. but....
104
« on: November 24, 2008, 11:35 »
magnum, these keywords are here, but this is actually :
closeup, mixed (or purebreed) dog, headshot, mouth open, outdoors,
if you had + only animal thongue, i believe this would be accepted (if only kwds are rejection reason).
105
« on: November 24, 2008, 11:15 »
the main non-o.k. thing on istock is a huge inconsistency about every rejection reason.(exclusives vs non-exclusives). on example, i have some 65% acceptance ratio on "regular" uploads, and 105% on files reinspected by scout... as an owner of printing company for 15years, i can say (from the long time real-life experience) that i believe that "artifacts" on example is more than 50% wrong rejection reason. from the other side, as a potential buyer of images, i would like all agencies to have some maximum of 10 or 15 keywords per image (o.k. i personaly think that 5-7 would be quite enough). on example, i would still reject this diego's image. on example, this is not recreation(al pursuit), if i need "smiling, young woman, sitting, armchair, home interrior" - i would not need this smile, even, i would not need this image if i search with "book" (although the books are actually here), i don't need "white" also. etc.. and of course, as a photographer also, sometimes i realy ask myself do the people who inspect my images have any basic photographic experience. (or if the answer is "yes", i ask myself - did these people ever moved a "mode" ring on their cameras on something else than green letters "auto" (my cameras, do not this "auto" option - so, i have problem  )
106
« on: November 24, 2008, 10:43 »
if i can remember one by one cent was used for financing some really bad bad projects, but i can't remember the movie, was it superman, or batman 
107
« on: November 24, 2008, 10:40 »
no, people are NOT recognizable, at least not all of them, but, warren is right - that's dt's policy which is "said" at the very start - so, there is no space for being angry. - if you can achieve mr's, - o.k., and if you can't - well - give up with this image on dt, and that's it.
108
« on: September 27, 2008, 06:33 »
wow. this was really fast. yesterday i did a payment requiest on dt, -and just checked - money is on my mb account. cool. i'm going to buy some food'n'beer
109
« on: September 22, 2008, 05:35 »
unfortunately my country is not in pay pall paying system, that's whi i put ? sign in my previous post. - i just wandeedr how high is a paypall fee.
110
« on: September 22, 2008, 05:08 »
?
transver via mb: ~2.8$/transaction + my bank takes some 4.5-5$ (which is still much less than if i make payment vie checks)
111
« on: September 22, 2008, 04:06 »
peep, i wander why did not you open a pay pall account at the first place?
112
« on: September 18, 2008, 03:40 »
nice way to borrow some money with no fee
113
« on: September 09, 2008, 04:15 »
of course that acts would never ever be necessary . - when you have an atomic bomb - you actually do not have to use one. -that's pretty enough for the other side to know that you have one, and that you won't hesitate to use one, -if you have to. that's how every business works. fair deal? hm... not sure... pretty fair? - sometimes.. and there is only one atomic bomb on this market - our images. only one side has one -we - the contributors. problem is that is broken apart on small selfish portfolios of each of us. just imagine that strength which starts with "we - the Contributors ..." well' 11 15'. my fishing-start time is 11 30'. so..
114
« on: September 09, 2008, 02:42 »
yes, but, helping other people is also in the human nature. and thirst for justice either. well... let's put this that way... i am also a sport-shooter, and sportfisherman. - angler. (means, that i catch fishes on some wooden/metal/plastic baits - one by one). (i'm just to go on the river today ) - when i see a group of fishes active, i am mostly able to catch 'em all. o.k. - i'm a C&R, but, if i would not be the one - there would not be any fish in the river behind me. - whole school of fishes - with "one by one" method would be grounded. -when i catch one - this is not other fishes problem, and whole group actually is not really affected. - and, again, one-by-one - thay are all gone.. (hm... i just become a poet, on English language ) -and if i would drop a fishing net - that would be noticed by whole school as a "general" problem, and they would all try to escape, and most of them would - i would catch only a few. interesting? one-by-one - and all fishes gone, catch'em all - and almost all are free. and you got my point - if fishes were organized, and have a good communication - when i drop my lure in the first cast - if whole bunch were alarmed, and act as one body - to swim away - i would catch none. have a good day my friends, until tomorrow. "gone fishin' "
115
« on: September 08, 2008, 14:21 »
yes, i agree with the posts above completely too.
but again... if there is enough of faith - the hills can be moved.
116
« on: September 08, 2008, 09:36 »
here where i live, we say something like: " if there is a willing - there is (must be) a way" . - in every business people that do some job are individual competitors - but, there is also something called "loyalty to the profession" every good change in the history was done when there was a critical mass of individuals who were willing to make these changes. - and yes - "everyone told them it's impossible" . from the other hand - monopole is a good thing in business - for one that have this monopole. - and we-contributors are in the position to have monopole on the industry. microstock images are ours - not our ma's, or aliens, or whoever.. - WE have images. customers buy images. not sites, not customer supports, not ftp uploads, not... - the main reason why we are all here are our images. of course this would be hard, but impossible? - not. i just wondered. (remember StockXpert recently ) - if we want something (or do not want) - there has to be (and there always is) a way.
117
« on: September 08, 2008, 04:07 »
... take a part in some microstockers organization - some kind of syndicate, or something like that? with some strict rules.
on example - one of basic rules would be - if agency blackmails some of members, or all the contributors for various reasons - whole organization to give-back -either with "no, we do not agree with this - we'll delete all of our images" ? -and to be ready to act that way?
118
« on: September 07, 2008, 07:50 »
cool.
119
« on: September 07, 2008, 07:21 »
haha - i just noticed i'm completely banned from dt forum. "cool"
120
« on: September 06, 2008, 08:13 »
yes, i am banned from the forum out there - i wrote the truth, but dt is keeping their "interesting" forum moderation policy (silly, if i can say). - unfortunately pay pall is not an option in my country. when i try to cash checks - i have to wait a minimum of 30 days - when check arrives to my adress. and bank fees are not acceptable. -so i wrote that i'll have to delete my images, and i already stopped to upload images - because of 6 months rule there.
but i have to admit, that i believe that dt is having really big problems using mb service (already posted by achiles on the dt forum). some my friends rally had a problems with mb - and support is really a "snail speed".
the main thing that is really making me nervous is that dt is acting like they have images, - and forget one - the main important thing - that they sell our images - we (agency, and contributors) are all making money on our images, not on agency's services. - similar thing that happened recently on StockXpert.
anyhow - that atittude ( "no we would not have mb option, if you did not need one" .... really? -shows what that agency think about us - contributors - that we are a bunch of idiots - which is not o.k.
but, an the other hand - as i already said - i can understand all this , and of course, i hope that things are going to be solved on a good way for all of us (that we in non-pay-pall countries are going to have mb option avialable soon.
121
« on: May 06, 2008, 07:35 »
i did withdrawn of two small amounts of money on my moneybookers account, (first one on 16th april) and still nothing happened.
how about you others?
122
« on: April 17, 2008, 11:56 »
some 1300 i believe..
a few minutes after...: 1503
123
« on: April 17, 2008, 11:52 »
important: reviewers (in my opinion) are mot than 50% right. - i cryed few times to scout - that s some 5:1 for me so far now (or 5:2). - but that's a pain in the ass... i rather give up (and take my money on some of competitor sites). time/nerves saving advices: -don't look on "exclusive uploads" (a lot of crap accepted)(that's understandable - we all love all kids, but our own kids are precious to us ) -dont' even think to look on "exclusive uploads" -if you still have dilemma - should i look on "exclusive uploads" (on the main page) - advice is: NO!. of course - i'm not talking about "exclusive flags" these people are really good - i'm talking about exclusives with some (or less) 1-2k images, and less than 20k dl's.. reviewers on is sometimes look on exif, and not (even) on photo => reviewer with lack of photographic experience (and yes - there are ones too) - can reject image with some fool reason based on exif, and not on a real photo. *illustration: one of is photographer-colleagues told me via e-mail that he had his files rejected due "overfiltering/artifacts" with (crop) camera he havs. -images, of course are excellent, with excellent both, models, make up, and postproduction. ...and he is international known . when he deleted exif data - he had less rejections. and when images were done over a 5d image - as a new layer in photoshop- all are accepted (where all this noise/overfiltering/artifacts has gone? ) interesting?
124
« on: March 20, 2008, 15:00 »
if person can identify themselves - photo requires a release, and that's o.k.
but one of the best stupidities on dt is that i had a nude body parts rejected with asking me to upload release, and a copy of some kind of ID (passport on example - that's nice too- flat scans of us currency are not allowed (which is o.k.), and flat scans of some person's passport are asked to send over internet .
i think that i asked support "whose release, and passport do i need? - i do not remember which was the answer.
another one nice stupidity - recently i had image rejected with "this image do not need release" - but i have to say that i could easily identify person on the photo. - for this i am sure i had no reply from support. (i pointed on that issue with "i can't believe that you rejected ...(that) image with that rejection reason.
but.. life goes on..
125
« on: March 17, 2008, 15:09 »
StockXpert is fair on that issue, because everyone can choose opt-int/opt-out subs. - so if someone is happy with 0.3$ for 12mp image - that's o.k. if someone is not - that's o.k. too.
i would call this "fair deal"
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
