|
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 - Tryingmybest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 23
101
« on: December 04, 2015, 16:04 »
39084 of weed. This is a conspiracy. Obviously someone at the top at SS LOVES marijuana and all such pictures will be approved. I think I'm going to make a series of marijuana people, animals and nature backgroundswhich will include variations as website buttons. Sorry to change the subject.  I think that their next step will be to accept any crap, like did iStock about one year ago
You mean this crap?
http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest
OMG. At first I thought that was broccoli. LOL.
I will also say that since mediocracy sells, the problem of being found is exacerbated.
Yes, it is just going to cause buyers to have to do more wading to find what they want. That is never a good thing.
103
« on: November 14, 2015, 19:29 »
is the 123 upload broken?
If you're talking about the FTP processing function, log out and log back in. That always works for me.
104
« on: November 05, 2015, 11:54 »
On a 5,000+ portfolio I am having double the sales than pre-Adobe. Payouts are much more frequent for me. Rejections are up. But I am very happy with the progress. 
105
« on: November 02, 2015, 17:12 »
NO. But I see them advertising on Facebook: Unlimited downloads for $99/year 
106
« on: October 30, 2015, 17:14 »
Use the releases tab. Choose "Other" as the type. (Sorry for my english I'm using a translator)
I would like to load vector files with DeepMeta
Example: I want to upload a file where I used an apple fruit photographed by me, I used the mesh in Illustrator.
But the reference file (photo) where load in the program?
Thanks
107
« on: October 30, 2015, 17:12 »
108
« on: October 30, 2015, 16:49 »
I think there is comming a competition about the contributors. First Adobe and now Istock with a increase.
If we contributors are better organized or united in a club for example we can take a much bigger piece of the pie.
Yep. JSnover for President.
109
« on: October 17, 2015, 10:44 »
110
« on: October 16, 2015, 13:11 »
I don't dislike Yuri. He's a bellwether for our industry. I found the comments (and his responses) in his article on his site more insightful than his article. The only thing I don't like is that he feels bitter toward the MSG forum. I think there are a lot of folk that hide behind their keyboards writing nasty things that they would NEVER say to the person's face.
that's true too... i agree. then again, if i were Yuri Arcurs , or as big as he is in microstock,
i would say everything i feel ... against everyone on msg,etc
and not give a r@ts ar$e what they think ...
why???
simply because i am Yuri Arcurs. and that's exactly why you have to admire him , like or hate him,
he wiped us all with his sales in microstock...
and many hate him for that.
as for me, i don't like or hate him, i just like the idea that someone actually could make that much money in microstock... and it wasn't me 
Indeed. Slander is the penalty of leadership. He's got a very bright future. But so do we, as individuals, if we focus our energy on improving our skills and avoid other distractions.
111
« on: October 15, 2015, 11:40 »
After being quiet for quite a while, Yuri breaks his silence evaluating Adobe Stock:
http://arcurs.com/2015/10/a-closer-look-at-adobe-stock/
My favorite part is in the conclusion where he complains about the "mediocre" quality of images at Fotolia and Shutterstock. :-)
What are your thoughts?
I don't dislike Yuri. He's a bellwether for our industry. I found the comments (and his responses) in his article on his site more insightful than his article. The only thing I don't like is that he feels bitter toward the MSG forum. I think there are a lot of folk that hide behind their keyboards writing nasty things that they would NEVER say to the person's face.
112
« on: October 11, 2015, 00:05 »
Try again with the same 10. I'm almost certain they will get accepted. You got stuck with one of the exceptional reviewers. You'll make more money being on IS and SS. Once you get a nice automated workflow, you can work with other agencies.
113
« on: October 10, 2015, 22:23 »
This is the best, in the same image:
Focus--Subject is blurry, too soft, or out of focus when viewed at full resolution.
Noise--Image contains excessive noise, grain, artifacts and/or is poorly rasterized.
Overuse--Image has excessive noise reduction and/or excessive sharpening effects applied.
So ...
1. is too soft but too sharp in the same time 
2. Has to much noise, but i used excessive noise reduction.
3. I used excessive sharpening but is too blurry and too soft.
I don't think the problem is in my garden
This is one from a set with 95% rejection after a set in the same way with 100% approval.
The reviewer might think that your photo is:
1. too soft
2. poorly rasterized (eg, banding)
3. too much noise reduction
I get variations of these "reasons" especially on long exposure photography.
For some reviewers it is hard to believe that 5dm3 is a low noise camera, that a good technique like ETTR is naturally reducing noise levels, and that water or clouds turn soft and silky when the exposure is long enough.
As mentioned above, try adding 0.5% gaussian noise.
The photo will definitely be worse, but it will look more "natural" to some ignorant reviewer.
Lol!
The artificial noise trick worked again! My latest batch was 100% accepted!
This is so stupid!
Why should a SS customer buy the equivalent of an ISO 200-400 photo instead of the clean ISO 100 original, available on other sites?
Amazing and shocking. They are truly ruining the reputation of skilled reviewers.
114
« on: October 08, 2015, 11:03 »
course it could be interpreted as 25% of zero... :-D
That made me laugh. Thank you. 
115
« on: October 07, 2015, 13:32 »
Yeah, I got one of those last weekend. Ridiculous. So I resubmitted Monday, it got approved no problem, then I avoided submitting Friday and Saturday this week. I think this reviewer is a person who agreed to be available on weekends but would rather party, so just rejects everything on Saturday and Sunday to get it over with.
We need to come up with names for these folks. Weekend Willy or something like that.
116
« on: October 05, 2015, 14:29 »
It seems the 100% rejection "Poor Execution" vector reviewer is back from vacation. 
117
« on: September 21, 2015, 12:46 »
@Striving, please send me an email and include your login name or account number. I will look into this for you.
regards,
Mat
Thanks Mat. I sent you a direct message through this system.
118
« on: September 21, 2015, 10:46 »
They are being so extreme with this policy--especially for illustrators who make drawings on the computer. SS is only requiring sketch sources. But writing up releases for computer-based cartoons is too far. I make paintings once in a while on canvas or paper. I scan them and submit them. That is understandable when it comes to release. But this new policy is too much. 
119
« on: September 21, 2015, 10:27 »
Well, they rejected all of my illustrations for not having model releases and KW issues. I draw the people and objects out of my imagination and attached the sketches. 5,000+ diverse portfolio with growing sales. Stupid. Absolutely stupid.
120
« on: September 18, 2015, 12:50 »
Well, I tried their Indexing release procedure and it was actually easy. But I just attached a flattened source file. If they want model releases, then forget it. Unless I'm submitting paintings, there's no way I'm going to do model releases for all my computer illustrations.
121
« on: September 18, 2015, 12:45 »
Thanks everyone. Wow. I wish they would be more clear if it is indeed a SS type of policy. I create almost everything on computer now. I'm going to try resubmitting first. Uploading source files is annoying. 
122
« on: September 17, 2015, 22:26 »
Have any illustrators with 5,000+ portfolios on Fotolia suddenly been getting mass rejections for their vectors with these completely unhelpful (an irrelevant) rejection notices?:
A model or property release was not attached.
When a photograph, vector or video file includes people or property, you must submit a signed release authorizing the usage of the file for resale.
There is a problem with the model/property release you submitted.
The release doesn't contain a signature, is not in JPEG or PDF format, or was illegible.
Your file contains elements likely protected by patent or intellectual property laws.
You did not provide documentation to show permission to reproduce this subject. If you have obtained permission, please present this documentation by writing a brief description in the comment field.
123
« on: September 17, 2015, 13:20 »
I can see why they would do it but very frustrating. Are they going to use stock images as a loss leader to promote/retain CC subscriptions.
Contributors need to be respected, though, as that content doesn't magically appear for free. Going to sit tight and hope Adobe will do just that - you never know they could increase contributor rates at some point....
SCUM Adobe only cares about making sharecroppers out of software users. Do not trust them.
124
« on: August 28, 2015, 23:21 »
THANK YOU ! Hi all,
I am happy to announce another great change has been made for contributors when uploading to Fotolia/Adobe Stock. When indexing your images you are no longer required to select sub-categories. The option is now available for you to simply select the main category when submitting your content.
You are certainly welcome to continue selecting sub-categories for fine tuning search results. However, it is now up to you.
Many more exciting changes and tools are being prepared for you so stay tuned!
-Mat Hayward
email: [email protected]
125
« on: August 27, 2015, 12:10 »
I know. I posted first  .
Indeed!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
