And what an outstanding Nature study to reach it with, simply Beautiful!
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.
Show posts MenuQuote from: Allsa on February 11, 2010, 22:46Quote from: sjlocke on February 11, 2010, 21:10
Using free or purchased models with a simple sphere wrapped with a texture does not show a level of work high enough for iStock acceptance (thank goodness). This is the kind of thing that is great for SS, but not for IS.
Had I received a 'not suitable as stock' rejection, your reply might make sense. As it is, it's merely a pointless insult that doesn't address my original question. Frankly, I'm offended by the rudeness of your response.
I wanted to know how to go about submitting images that contain NASA content. I didn't ask for a critique of my work, and if iStock rejected it for quality issues, then they should have stated the real reason for the rejection.
Quote from: Artemis on February 17, 2010, 21:38Quote from: cclapper on February 17, 2010, 21:03Agree very much so! (well, apart from the tax thing which they blew up nicely at first). Another nice detail about them is they absorb refund costs, and the recent EL action where they payed EL's to the contributors after they found a license infringement. They also don't get rich on "sleeping" accounts which makes them come across as less greedy than some of the other big players out there.QuoteIn my view they "just work": I don't have troubles logging in or uploading to, I can't remember an alien octopus, their stats are up to date within an hour, they pay promptly around the 7th or 8th each month, they are very easy to upload to, they have a decent concept of "editorial", they don't move the goalposts during the game, they handled the tax-withholding-thing decently - have I missed anything? I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy here, but these days I'm already content if I'm not "cared about" but if I'm at least not being f*cked around with - like at some other agencies I could name...
+1
It's a relief getting treated correct, nothing more nothing less, some of the other biggies ought to take an exemple.
Just another reason for me not to go for Getty's TS crumbles, SS is doing it in a far more "fair-trade" manner.
Quote from: sjlocke on February 11, 2010, 21:10
Using free or purchased models with a simple sphere wrapped with a texture does not show a level of work high enough for iStock acceptance (thank goodness). This is the kind of thing that is great for SS, but not for IS.
Quote from: ichiro17 on February 02, 2010, 23:20
sorry to hear fotolia is screwing you guys ....again
its the same thing with the agency every time and they will continue to do it
its one of the main reasons i went exclusive - bc having to deal with the issues of bad companies sucks
i hope you guys sort it out soon and you get your monies
Quote from: FD-amateur on February 03, 2010, 08:12Quote from: leaf on February 03, 2010, 07:32Non-exclusives will earn $0.25 per download.No pasaran! (well at least not for me).
DT is 0.35$ for level 1-2 images, and SS is 0.36$. Even a new site like DP gives 0.30$. Getty can stick its stinkstock where the sun doesn't shine.
will remain opted out here, not very impressive and think SS HQ will still sleep well at nights. 
never do take up my full uploade slots even as an independant.
have to ask myself if I do nothing will a big chunk of my income drop drastically, with the other side of the coin being the fact that I have a much larger Portfolio at SS plus Fotolia's performance strengthening for me right now. Dreamstime is not an issue as I stopped uploading there way back as I did not like the six month tie'in and shift to pushing subs. 

Quote from: lisafx on December 14, 2009, 17:46Quote from: sjlocke on December 14, 2009, 17:43
Boy, all that stuff is confusing. Upload this here, or there, or what...
Yeah, very confusing. For one thing they don't mention a category of people who are opted in to the StockXpert partner program but opted out of partner subs on istock.
Quote from: cidepix on December 12, 2009, 22:47
I will stay independent because I am sure other sites will have something to say about this.
Also istock is not going to win me over by burrying my files further down everytime they give exclusives better exposure.
Had they not changed their search behaviour last year to boost exclusives, I would have been exclusive long ago. But they showed me they can not be trusted.
however having spoken to and read responses from buyers many just grab the freebies without any interest of who the contributer is. Guess the possible advantage of the free Image being downloaded on mass is that it may get a better position in the search which would explain your 10 paid Downloads.

Quote from: Tom on November 07, 2009, 01:33Quote from: lisafx on November 06, 2009, 23:51
Meanwhile, to Tom, I agree with you they appear to be dead, but they weren't when I started there and until Sept. I was getting my payouts regularly. So I see no hypocrisy in having uploaded there for over two years and now complaining when they don't pay me.
Lisa, complaining about not being paid is fine and perfectly understandable, but it is also important to draw the conclusions.
Anyway not sure that the Quality really is that exceptional over there
Quote from: melastmohican on October 30, 2009, 22:09
I have been thinking for a while about my next laptop. Is there any advantage of having Mac instead of PC?


Quote from: stockastic on October 30, 2009, 17:33
I'm coming to the conclusion that I should contribute to only a couple of microstocks and dump the rest, because I can't trust them and can't spend time monitoring all the changes they announce. They're rewriting contributor "agreements" every other week, whenever they come up with a new marketing gimmick or sign up a new partner site. My images are on God knows how many of these snaky "partner" sites already. I assume the partners don't actually get the image files, just the right to display thumbnails and resell them - but who knows. My images might even be offered free, if I overlook an email announcing the new rules.
