|
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 - Rahul Pathak
101
« on: January 12, 2009, 19:33 »
Great link! Never saw that site before. I'm usually stuck at Lee Torrens' site. 
Lee and his site both rock. There are far worse ways of spending your time 
103
« on: January 12, 2009, 17:10 »
I signed up to try, but I feel quite nervous about giving my login data. Whatever, it is mentioned that stats per image over sites are grouped. Does that mean that lookstat has some sort of image recognition software, or do we have to specify ourselves which image is which on the different sites?
Thanks for trying out the service. Please feel free to email me directly (my email is on my profile) and I'd be happy to call you to talk about security and our future plans. LookStat attempts to match images across multiple sites automatically. We occasionally get this wrong and plan to release a feature that allows you to correct any errors you notice in the matches. Once that is done, the system will recalculate your stats. Our goal was to have the system do as much work for you as possible.
104
« on: January 12, 2009, 12:10 »
I registered into lookstat with one stock site ( just in case:) ) and I will do the rest after security confirmation from security audit or a good words from wellknown high profile microstock contributors. But so far everything looks good.
The data which the program collect is looking good and I can see it's huge benefit to contributors in a long run. We can have much more knowledge about what is selling and when and overall statistics as well. But ofcourse you have lot of coding work to get everything done, so good luck with the development phase.
Maybe you could provide simple secure interface specification to low earner/smaller sites which they can implement to allow easier integration to lookstat (I think that way sites win(they might more users since good contributor tools) and lookstat get information easily and more securely etc (e.g. seperate passwords for data gathering etc) ).
I will post ideas and suggestions in the future if I get good ones:) .
br, MjP
Hi there, Thanks for being willing to try us out and for the kind words of encouragement. Please feel free to contact me directly at anytime as well. We definitely have a ton on our plate from a development standpoint, but user input is always very valuable and definitely shapes our thinking. Your thought on providing an API is a great one and it's something we have definitely talked about internally. My guess is that we will be very focused on moving the product forward in the immediate term, but that an API is definitely something we should do. Thank you again for trying us out. I'll definitely be in touch as our third party seals get put in place but in the meantime, here are a couple of mentions: http://blog.lookstat.com/2008/11/24/some-encouraging-early-feedback-on-lookstat/Cheers, Rahul
105
« on: January 08, 2009, 09:55 »
I'm not a big player in the micros but I signed up and from what I see so far it will serve me well in the future. Once you have all six sites in, it will be a great tool.
Thanks for signing up and the kind words. More sites are definitely in the works...
106
« on: January 08, 2009, 06:56 »
Is there any third party security audits planned on site security so we can trust to store our passwords? And how about thawte or similar daily security scans etc?
The idea behind the system is very good and I will gladly use the system, but I need to well known third party confirmation about site security before I can trust my passwords to any third party organizations.
br, MjP
This is a great point and a very reasonable perspective. My intention had been to put in place McAffee daily secure scans (as seen in the footers of DT/SS) and I have no issue with a 3rd party review either although I must confess I have not yet selected a provider yet. I'm very proud of our commitment to security and I'm confident that from a technical perspective we're doing the right things so I have no issue whatsoever with either of these steps. My belief on trust was that I needed to build it directly with the community by being transparent and available, asking our users to talk about us and then using 3rd party validation after that. Overall I think your suggestion is terrific and it is definitely something we plan to do, I just wanted to share my thinking behind why it hadn't happened yet. Basically, this is a long way of saying that we'll act on this item in Q1 of this year and I'd be happy to get in touch with you with an update once I get that ball rolling. Thanks for taking the time to share your perspective and being open to using the service in the future. Rahul
107
« on: January 07, 2009, 23:14 »
I'd be more interested in seeing my sales volume by image in a coherent manner. Istock is best in that regard with their Sales per Month stat as an example. SS's stats suck big time, worthless in most cases. It would really help to see all my images plotted out with sales stats per site. Just dreaming, I know. But I wonder how many sales are lost by, say, SS, by not providing meaningful results for contributors?
This is one of the core features we're working on - individual image sales history across multiple sites plotted over time. Not being able to look at this data in a consistent way has always irritated me and I'll be thrilled when we solve it.
108
« on: January 07, 2009, 20:09 »
I have signed up. Might as well get some stats.
Thanks for giving us a shot!
109
« on: January 07, 2009, 18:27 »
RT - I think is prudent to think about security and we take it very very seriously. Truth be told, I would much rather not require credentials to make this work. As sites implement this sort of thing, we will definitely adapt. Until then, we will be very paranoid about security and as transparent as we possibly can to build trust. I'm proud of the job we do in terms of safeguarding user data but I do understand and appreciate the concerns. Thanks for the good wishes and for sharing your perspective. If you'd ever like to chat live, it would be my pleasure.
Perrush - thanks for signing up to try us out. Your point about exposure is definitely valid although in theory, as images age, exposure and quality should correlated - high quality images get viewed more, get downloaded more etc. I did a interesting quick and dirty on conversion rate and human emotions on DT a while back and it was pretty interesting. I'd love to get my hands on search data - keywords:views:dls would be huge. I know a couple of people are doing some interesting things with SEO that could let you correlate inbound traffic & referrers to click through but it's not perfect. Please let me know if you have any questions as you explore LookStat.
Cheers,
Rahul
110
« on: January 07, 2009, 17:26 »
Hello Rahul,
I have been playing with some of my stats there are some fun features in here. You asked for the problems more then what is working. Well everything works great for me and although it has only been an afternoon I would love to be able to set the dates that I am checking on. For example a pull down date box that lets me set specific date periods such as Dec 22nd thru Dec.1st or something of the sort. Does that make sense. You already have them broken down into days and weeks and month but I would like a little more control if that is something you could manage. Not all my data is up yet and maybe we can talk on the phone next week when it is all up and running.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Hi Jonathan, Glad you were able to get in and check things out. I hear you loud and clear on date ranges and it makes perfect sense. That functionality is very high on our list of product priorities. I'll definitely look forward to chatting next week. Thanks for taking the time to try us out and to share your thoughts. Rahul
111
« on: January 07, 2009, 14:08 »
SJ - If you have some time, I'd love to spend 30 minutes chatting with you about some of the metrics that matter to you. It would be great to get a clear understanding of your requirements and for us to see if we can meet them.
112
« on: January 07, 2009, 10:29 »
Although Yay has had a slow start (and the name is the worst ever), they are increasing for me, and 2.50 or 5.00 Euro for a download is a very decent pay. I need around 20 downloads at SS to earn 5 Euro. At the moment, they seem to pass the other small agencies. For me, they are already ahead of SV, FP and Crestock (December and January until now).
Great to know re: Yay. Thanks for sharing your experience with them.
113
« on: January 07, 2009, 10:27 »
Neustock - was great chatting with you on the phone and thanks for your time and suggestions and the kind words below. I hope we can meet in person before too long.
sjlocke - Deep Meta is a great piece of software for IS and does provide a tremendous amount of detail for IS exclusives. Your points about tracking earnings by shoot or by category, or by model over a specific timeline are very well taken and those items have been part of our roadmap for a while. We've also gotten this input from quite a few others so it will definitely be part of what we offer. We are not there yet. Hopefully, you'll give us a whirl when we get some of those features in place.
schamle - With LookStat, we're focused on cross site earnings tracking so we match images across sites and provide an integrated view of image performance. At this stage, we're just tracking earnings at DT/IS/SS. Specific items coming very soon are more sites, individual image sales histories and the ability to query your stats over an arbitrary time slice - which images sold best from June 2008 - Sep 2008, for example.
We decided to release a fairly early beta to the community so we could involve our users in defining the evolution of the service. I've also been soliciting input (here and elsewhere) about which sites we should be thinking about, what metrics matter etc. We've gotten a ton of great feedback and we're working hard to get some of those ideas into the service.
To the new users trying out the service - thank you! I really appreciate your willingness to give us a shot and look forward to getting your input.
Cheers,
Rahul
114
« on: January 07, 2009, 10:01 »
Thanks a ton for the quick response. This is fixed and working perfectly.
115
« on: January 06, 2009, 19:35 »
It sound like that Lookstat will implement the statistics first for the Big 6 first. Will they also include Cutcaster soon?
John and I are chatting in the very near future. I'll definitely share more details when I can 
116
« on: January 06, 2009, 19:26 »
Avava - Thanks a ton for taking the time to meet with me and for trying out LookStat. I learned a great deal from our conversation and I'm looking forward to your feedback both positive and negative. It's great to hear the good stuff, but even better to hear about what we need to be improving.
John - appreciate the kind words and looking forward to the next time we meet in person.
If I can answer any questions about LookStat, please don't hesitate to get in touch. If any of you are in the Seattle area, I'd be happy to sit down with you in person.
Happy 2009 everyone!
Rahul
117
« on: January 04, 2009, 03:47 »
I take the other side of the coin. After doing microstock for two years, I've found stats like these absolutely meaningless. Yes, there are statistics that matter, but the percentage of total income from each agency isn't one of them - particularly so when total income isn't included as part of the picture.
[/quote]
Fair point. There are definitely numbers that matter more than composition of sales. (Although that may be useful in deciding where to invest time/effort.)
sharply_done : If you have metrics you care more about, I'd love to hear about them. No need to share specifics, I'm more interested in the general metrics. Please PM if you feel that would be more appropriate. I don't want to take this thread off topic.
118
« on: January 04, 2009, 00:34 »
Hi All
I Just want to say that the new age of digital player is so dialed in. I am one of the few old guys in stock that tracks his numbers in Macro stock business but when I look at these color coded lists and percentage breakdowns WOW!. This is definitely a new revolution. I think it rocks. This is just one of the things you are all bringing to stock, real analysis that you are not afraid to share. Bravo.
AVAVA
I completely agree with this sentiment. Well said.
119
« on: January 02, 2009, 13:44 »
I think the posts in this thread show that the "earnings rating" poll results shown on the right side of the page don't actually correlate to real people's information.
Great point. I think there's definitely a lot of variance - especially in the rankings for each individual. Having said that, the big 6/7 tend to be largely the same for most people.
121
« on: December 31, 2008, 20:29 »
IS
DT
SS
FT
BigStock
CC
123
in that order for me. StockXpert may not be around by the end of 2009 if Getty decides that 1 micro is enough. I know when I tried to sign up in Nov they weren't accepting new photographers.
Thanks a ton for sharing and great point on StockXpert. I'm also surprised that CC is doing better than 123 for you (although people have been telling me that 123 has been slowing for them.)
122
« on: December 31, 2008, 12:30 »
lol. very nice. (like the quote in your signature block btw)
123
« on: December 31, 2008, 12:26 »
You're right about the time load for sure and your top 7 lines up well with what I've been hearing from here and from others. Thanks for taking the time to weigh in.
124
« on: December 30, 2008, 13:02 »
How do you keep track of what's being said? Do you just check in frequently?
Yes, I am here everyday. Geez...
Regards,
Adelaide
Don't worry - I'm likely to be right there with you...
125
« on: December 30, 2008, 12:49 »
I apparently do have notifications enabled. This is the painful thing. Also, they used to work before. * gremlins
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
