|
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 - topol
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 20
101
« on: September 15, 2015, 18:26 »
Eventually the stock sites willbie themselves out of business if they keep heading in this direction. Once people can no longer make money creating stock images the supply will dry up.
Sums up exactly what I think. They all need to realise at some stage that the part of the equation that is the contributor is just as important to them as the end buyer.
No sale without something there to buy.
I think this is already happening. Maybe not enough that they notice yet. The bunches of new bies, or former exclusives uploading large ports disguise the fact that the big sellers aren't producing so much, and def not the HCV images they were uploading a few years ago. I hardly bother to upload anymore, and many of the top ports I notice are not producing as much quality or volume as back in 2010-2013. If buyers want the best quality images they are better off looking for the ones from a couple years back. Or on RM sites which is where the top talent are putting there best work.
RM sites have already gone broke....
102
« on: September 04, 2015, 18:04 »
We're seeing the final stage of 'crowdsourcing'. This is where it ultimately leads. And with 50 million images already accepted, there's no possibility of cleaning up the inventory.
I think cleaning up the collection would be quite easy actually, a couple of full time employees dedicated to the task could get it under control in a few months. I mean just the icon example I pointed out, that's tens of thousands of images right there, and you issue a serious warning that stops them uploading the same garbage again, that's thousands less images out of the queue every week. So maybe $80000 a year, which is a total drop in the ocean for SS.
But lets face it, it's the opposite of what SS wants to do, they want to inflate the number of images in the collection so they can sell it to share holders. For the same reason Facebook spams up my inbox telling me I have "notifications" when I don't, just to get my login so they can claim a billion people use the site every day or whatever.
Nah, I dare to say It's even simpler, no employees, no developers needed... there are already thousands of people sorting out the images: the customers. They just need to drop the super-unpopular images that nobody even looked at for years. I bet the collection would go down well below 20 mill in a blink...
103
« on: August 21, 2015, 07:53 »
Hard to keep up with the current flood.
Impossible is more fitting.
You don't have to keep up with the 'flood'. You have to produce better quality than most of it... and most of it is crap quality to be honest.
104
« on: August 12, 2015, 05:36 »
Is it worth giving exclusive images to Stocksy instead of uploading to all the micros and alamy? Their sales would have to be good to make me want to join. I never got a response to my initial application and I'm not sure I can be bothered now.
nope, very low sales... and they pretty much from the start denied to ever have any "utility type" pics like stuff / people on white, as if they wanted to ensure the sales stay low. weird
105
« on: August 05, 2015, 16:03 »
I am wondering, if I'm shooting with a camera that has 28 mp, and in 3 years new cameras are probably going to have 40mp, are my photos today will be obsolete in 3 years?
How are you handling the technological advances in terms of old photos?
The fun part is that sensor megapixels are increasing, while less pixels are needed then ever before, since almost everything only ends up on a webpage nowadays.
106
« on: July 17, 2015, 15:59 »
The problem is that microstockers aren't really a bunch of people that can just meet up in a conference room and sit down to talk things over and convince each other about steps to take. One contributor is from France, the other from India, the next from Italy, then next from Russia or Ukraine... They don't have common grounds even on basic things like financial needs, copyright protection, expenses, etcetc....
107
« on: June 20, 2015, 06:46 »
Let someone who appreciates what Stocksy is take your place. Believe me, there's a long line of people ready to do that.
Please do the forum a favor and quit trolling. Your problem is that stocksy isn't a fixed number board where the reason for taking up someone is an emptied seat. I will start removing pics from them by the dozens if things don't change and they can't deliver (I doubt I will be the only one), but that won't help you, because you can get in by being a "good enough photographer". How about that?  Btw, stocksy also has millions of dollars to back it, and it shows in some things, the site itself is very well put together f.e.
108
« on: June 20, 2015, 06:12 »
You should also provide some freedom to your contributors if you want them to develop as photographers and have richer imagination and original ideas in the future.
Stocksy is way more restrictive than micros. Not caring about noise or super accurate focus doesn't mean much when they want people presented in an extremely narrow style and manner. They also seem to be even more picky about model's prettiness than micros. Most of my models are severely attractive, and for a test out of curiosity I did submit somewhat less good looking ppl's pics - one of the reason was that general claim that they like having more 'authentic' stuff. They were still far better looking then average, but basically the whole series got rejected almost instantly. Just to understand why the reason is pretty clear: I had plenty of shots of accepted from a series on the same location, pretty much same lighting, same theme, but a very very attractive model. I'm not saying that's a problem, sure most ppl want their models as beautiful as possible, and I'm not even complaining about this rejection, I uploaded it to other places... but that's the point, all the others took them, and it's getting a nice amount of downloads. So it's pretty clear that others give you more freedom, and it works too.
109
« on: June 20, 2015, 05:44 »
..it's astoundingly arrogant to suggest they change their entire business model to cater to your <300 image portfolio.
Troll. That's a total logical fallacy as the shots are up there, they accepted them. I produced the kinda shots for them they wanted, and they gladly took them. ...but wasn't that obvious from the start, from the fact that I'm in with a port there? Some of you people have some serious comprehension problems. What was your concept, that I was pushing blurfaced people isolated on white to them for a year, and they kept rejecting them, so I came here??? Or what, how... I'm sorry, I can't even guess, this is so naive... Who is it a legitimate competitor to? Can you show some source / proof of that? A company like Shutter doesn't even have to care about Stocksy exactly because they just see a site that for some mysterious reason collects those mostly LCV pics, that they only keep around to show some variety.
110
« on: June 18, 2015, 05:37 »
EU is the socialist utopia created by the banks, for the banks.
Errr ... isn't there a bit of a disconnect here? Last time I looked the banks were pushing capitalism for all it's worth.
Not necessarily. Many of these people who want more and more wealth, will acquire it by offering you some product / service only because they have to. If a time comes where they can just take your stuff, or they can just make you work for them and that's it (slave) they will do it - and they are starting to act like a new aristocracy.
111
« on: June 17, 2015, 14:22 »
nah, far from angry, just irritated by dumbness.
Well, I think the dumbest part I have read in this thread so far was this statement:
so sry, but the ball is not in my court.
Obviously you didn't understand what you were doing when you picked photography as a source of income. You are a self-employed business person who can freely decide whom to make business with. No other entity owes you anything. The ball is always in your court.
Trollboy, you need to grasp the incredibly complicated concept that I was talking about the curation.
112
« on: June 17, 2015, 07:12 »
Why do I have repeat everything a 10 times? Are we adults here? I'm done with this.
Wow, you really are angry. Quite an entertaining tantrum.
nah, far from angry, just irritated by dumbness.
113
« on: June 17, 2015, 03:07 »
I'm not saying it's a fraud just that is acutely mismanaged. I am taking my work elsewhere. Most ppl jump at anything, that's why most of the population just get by, and a small % have good fun lives.
Also from other statements you have made, I can only conclude that you have submitted images that are way different (more artistic? less commercial?) than what you successfully sell everywhere else, and now you are complaining that your personal sales are disappointing. Okay, can happen. You can't make everyone happy.
Thru a few rounds of tries, I conformed to their wishes, they were happy with it, they selected & preferred those, and it led to almost no sales. The stuff they liked the most has the worst sales - so sry, but the ball is not in my court. But I already wrote about this. Why do I have repeat everything a 10 times? Are we adults here? I'm done with this.
114
« on: June 17, 2015, 02:55 »
You misdirected yourself, I do make good money with stock, and I was hoping for stocksy to do even better with more artist freedom, instead it's the worst. Also it's not macro.
So what you have Stocksy do differently?
Imho, stocksy should sell most of the stuff that other micros do, but only the very-very best, premium versions of it + exclusivity. That would more than justify it being a special agency worth bookmarking, no need to narrow it to this childish instafilter hipster style. They started saying, and even advertised this on their front page, that they 'don't have stuff like people on white, shiny beauty shots, ppl just gesturing'... yeah great idea, lets ditch some of the stuff that outsells almost everything else everywhere. The 'stock that doesn't look like stock' mantra is nonsense, the stuff they accept still instantly looks like stock from a 100 miles away - thank god, or they would sell even less. If dropping pro style was a great idea, why don't companies just go around buying selfies from kiddies on FB? Once again, this whole concept is childish and counterproductive. What are they afraid of, that their art course visiting buddy with a handlebar moustache won't talk to them anymore, if he notices they sell beauties on white for example? To prove my I have stuff up that is a lot more like regular stock, because at the start they were a bit more lax with forcing this BS on ppl., and guess what, the regular stock-like stuff outsells the rest, by far. Seeing what was posted here they also should pay more attention to technical quality. I never thought about that regarding stocksy, my stuff is generaly very high tech quality, I presumed most others are similar. Micros overdo this horribly, stocksy seems to fail the other way. I'v been a buyer too, for years and years, and I can assure you, both me and clients would have been very pissed at getting files like the ones I saw here. If it happened several times, it would definitely mean going somewhere else for stock. I also remember the argument for stocksy being what it is, that they will attract some "special bunch of clients", and that those very often would be the type that is big and/or has big budget. I call 200% total BS on that too: 1 - Stocksy is not particularly expensive at all, so why would it be about big budget? somewhat better than average blogger can buy these pics anyday. 2 - That special type of client does not exist, at all. After a few years I'v seen thuosands of usages of my "regular stock", and there is no criteria to sort the customers whatsoever. They are any type you can ever imagine, from little bloggers, small 3rdworld companies to elite financial services "only for sophisticated investors" (aka billionares), luxury real estate projects, giant worid brands, special image companies with niche beauty products... anything. Also if you have some very-very special shot you might want to reconsider sending it to stocksy, many photographers would still consider it selling out cheapo with those prices, and I would have a hard time arguing with them. One last thing: no matter how special stocksy tries to be with the style of shots, you can be pretty much sure, that a place like shutter will have almost the same stuff too, likely even more if it than stocksy, among their 40 million stock, so sorry, but it's a wasted effort. That's pretty much it, I could have summed it up in medium sized post already and be done with it, but fanboys just keep trolling and sadly it's my weakness that I often can't keep myself from retorting to even the most obnoxious trolls. To shut down even more trolling I didn't voice these on stocksy because after a few rounds of communication it was painfully obvious that it would be pointless. It would be judt local fanboys trolling there too, and the management repeating their mantras posing coolio. I'v seen this countless times.
115
« on: June 16, 2015, 16:02 »
116
« on: June 16, 2015, 15:59 »
I have been with Stocksy since 2013, and I am constantly amazed at their transparency, growth, and commitment to their members. I am making GREAT money with them, more than all of my other micros times 10. I am so happy to be a part of the co-op and I feel very honored that I was lucky enough to get in. I am a working professional photographer and not a teenager with an Instagram account.
Topol, I'm so sorry that you feel like Stocky is a fraud and is giving you smoke and mirrors. All I can say about that is that you should politely excuse yourself and take your work elsewhere. There are many that would jump for joy at the opportunity to be a part of the community.
I'm not saying it's a fraud just that is acutely mismanaged. I am taking my work elsewhere. Most ppl jump at anything, that's why most of the population just get by, and a small % have good fun lives.
As far as I can see, Stocky is a small CO-OP Macro agency with some decent photographers, nothing more, nothing less. If you want to go back to the Golden years of printing money with your camera, it's gone. If you can make more money elsewhere do it. I think it's your expectations that are mismanaged.
You misdirected yourself, I do make good money with stock, and I was hoping for stocksy to do even better with more artist freedom, instead it's the worst. Also it's not macro.
117
« on: June 16, 2015, 15:17 »
you are uploading to multiple agencies and you wonder why od is falling on SS? smart customer find your images cheaper.
your are digging your own grave...
That has been true for years, and it only changed in the last few weeks.
118
« on: June 16, 2015, 14:23 »
I have been with Stocksy since 2013, and I am constantly amazed at their transparency, growth, and commitment to their members. I am making GREAT money with them, more than all of my other micros times 10. I am so happy to be a part of the co-op and I feel very honored that I was lucky enough to get in. I am a working professional photographer and not a teenager with an Instagram account.
Topol, I'm so sorry that you feel like Stocky is a fraud and is giving you smoke and mirrors. All I can say about that is that you should politely excuse yourself and take your work elsewhere. There are many that would jump for joy at the opportunity to be a part of the community.
I'm not saying it's a fraud just that is acutely mismanaged. I am taking my work elsewhere. Most ppl jump at anything, that's why most of the population just get by, and a small % have good fun lives.
119
« on: June 16, 2015, 13:20 »
I just looked at past meeting recaps and the word "kick-ass" doesn't appear anywhere, plus they are available in full for members.
How many images do you have online? Have you ever tried to talk to the editors about your declines? Why do you keep uploading if you say you aren't making any money on Stocksy?
Liar, it's there in member news, with the amazing kick-ass, almost exactly as I wrote.
120
« on: June 16, 2015, 13:12 »
Fantastic guys. You dont come across as a cult at all, where the person outing some criticism on the cult is ousted
that's why I don't give ratsass about other people saying they are so happy there. Same thing with Istock, everybody was so happy, ousting those terrible negative folk... and suddenly from xxth monday on, when the last straw broke the camels back, almost everyone was pissed, and apparently pissed since at least several years by then.
121
« on: June 16, 2015, 13:07 »
I care exactly because I am a member
Prove it.
Lol, you are joke. What am I supposed to do, copy paste from their forums? I can do that for you, but I just didn't want to intrude on ppls stocky insider stuff.
Okay, since you're content hiding behind the comfort of anonymity, let's pretend you are a Stocksy member. That would mean you're also a part owner of the company. Since you're such a big fan of the co-op business model, what have you done to contribute? Have you proposed any resolutions? Voted at the meetings? Participated in any forum discussions? Responded to any requests for community input? Contacted HQ with ideas? Have you done anything at all besides bash the company any chance you get?
I did vote previously. But when one of their meetings ended, they wrote on the site that they wouldn't post a transcript, like they promised, (because it would be long and boring or some similar excuse), but instead we get a "kick-ass" summary. Woo-hoo. Also a few times I got the rejection for some shots that tehy 'don't want peopole juts posing by themselves without context, because that's contrived and too ordinary-stock-like'. Than I visited stocksy front page and the curated collection there was loaded with shots of peple posing alone, pretty forced (vsisbly amateur models). After reading, seeing all of that I decided to stay away from the whole thing beyond uploading and the most necessary communication with the so called "curators"
...and before you start whining again: I have good acceptance % there. I looked around and it was very clear that most ppl get a lot less shots from their series accepted then me - but sorry, other people's gullibility won't change my opinion.
Interesting. So, you have never voiced out your dissatisfaction there, never participate in the forum except lurking and come whining here.
You might want to read my post again (or just read it). I don't start conversing with ppl who talk like that. If I want to hear more "kick ass" deals, I'll watch TV shop or ads for payday lenders.
Seriously?? You refused to talk to them just because they don't talk the same way as you??? Come on, you should have better reason for avoiding talking to them.
You are a troll. I clearly said how they talk like we are in kindergarten. I know this style it totally repulses me and all intelligent / pro ppl I've ever known. From more than a decade of workplace experience it always represented ppl who cannot be negotiated with. the "ye, ye whatever, thisiscool coz' wearecool" untill stuff breaks down ppl.
122
« on: June 16, 2015, 11:09 »
I care exactly because I am a member
Prove it.
Lol, you are joke. What am I supposed to do, copy paste from their forums? I can do that for you, but I just didn't want to intrude on ppls stocky insider stuff.
Okay, since you're content hiding behind the comfort of anonymity, let's pretend you are a Stocksy member. That would mean you're also a part owner of the company. Since you're such a big fan of the co-op business model, what have you done to contribute? Have you proposed any resolutions? Voted at the meetings? Participated in any forum discussions? Responded to any requests for community input? Contacted HQ with ideas? Have you done anything at all besides bash the company any chance you get?
I did vote previously. But when one of their meetings ended, they wrote on the site that they wouldn't post a transcript, like they promised, (because it would be long and boring or some similar excuse), but instead we get a "kick-ass" summary. Woo-hoo. Also a few times I got the rejection for some shots that tehy 'don't want peopole juts posing by themselves without context, because that's contrived and too ordinary-stock-like'. Than I visited stocksy front page and the curated collection there was loaded with shots of peple posing alone, pretty forced (vsisbly amateur models). After reading, seeing all of that I decided to stay away from the whole thing beyond uploading and the most necessary communication with the so called "curators"
...and before you start whining again: I have good acceptance % there. I looked around and it was very clear that most ppl get a lot less shots from their series accepted then me - but sorry, other people's gullibility won't change my opinion.
Interesting. So, you have never voiced out your dissatisfaction there, never participate in the forum except lurking and come whining here.
You might want to read my post again (or just read it). I don't start conversing with ppl who talk like that. If I want to hear more "kick ass" deals, I'll watch TV shop or ads for payday lenders.
123
« on: June 16, 2015, 10:23 »
I care exactly because I am a member
Prove it.
Lol, you are joke. What am I supposed to do, copy paste from their forums? I can do that for you, but I just didn't want to intrude on ppls stocky insider stuff.
Okay, since you're content hiding behind the comfort of anonymity, let's pretend you are a Stocksy member. That would mean you're also a part owner of the company. Since you're such a big fan of the co-op business model, what have you done to contribute? Have you proposed any resolutions? Voted at the meetings? Participated in any forum discussions? Responded to any requests for community input? Contacted HQ with ideas? Have you done anything at all besides bash the company any chance you get?
I did vote previously. But when one of their meetings ended, they wrote on the site that they wouldn't post a transcript, like they promised, (because it would be long and boring or some similar excuse), but instead we get a "kick-ass" summary. Woo-hoo. Also a few times I got the rejection for some shots that tehy 'don't want peopole juts posing by themselves without context, because that's contrived and too ordinary-stock-like'. Than I visited stocksy front page and the curated collection there was loaded with shots of peple posing alone, pretty forced (vsisbly amateur models). After reading, seeing all of that I decided to stay away from the whole thing beyond uploading and the most necessary communication with the so called "curators" ...and before you start whining again: I have good acceptance % there. I looked around and it was very clear that most ppl get a lot less shots from their series accepted then me - but sorry, other people's gullibility won't change my opinion.
124
« on: June 16, 2015, 09:27 »
this thread says it all why microstock photography is soooo terrible bad, repeating, soulless, indefinitely boring and technically perfect.
Just look up SS facebook page, they have plenty of special little collections, they probably have a lot more stocksy-esque stuff then stocksy. Many way bette than juts insatfilterstyling. I don't consider that a good thing actually, but it's there. I wouldn't put more creative stuff on micros.
125
« on: June 16, 2015, 09:14 »
I care exactly because I am a member
Prove it.
Lol, you are joke. What am I supposed to do, copy paste from their forums? I can do that for you, but I just didn't want to intrude on ppls stocky insider stuff.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
