|
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 - leaf
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 ... 390
1101
« on: February 28, 2013, 04:58 »
maxal and tickstock need to lay off eachother. Whoever continues the little spat after this post will be given a little break.
1102
« on: February 28, 2013, 04:12 »
It did submit automatically ! and that keyword was present and caused rejection !!
Which is why I had to resubmit manually ! Now always submitting manually, until problem solved 
I noticed that on some images submitted to Fotolia. Fotolia listed that keyword in the exif
1103
« on: February 27, 2013, 18:16 »
1104
« on: February 26, 2013, 18:26 »
Thanks for responding to the questions here Scott. It's always appreciated.
1105
« on: February 26, 2013, 15:01 »
Does Google generate banners with referral code?
Pro-Macrostock, but still putting SS's banner on his site.
Nice catch! 
the banners are automated by google, he doesn't choose which ones get displayed.
if you have a stock blog you'll flooded by microstocks ads.
He's got one google ad (currently serving Dreamstime to me) and one Shutterstock ad which he obviously put up himself as it displays his referral code.
1106
« on: February 25, 2013, 17:15 »
Here's a few more suggests from this thread on Google - I know you've solved your problem but I always find it nice when searching the 'net when there are a few solutions in a thread. It turns out the problem was actually that brushes have a max size of
2500 pixels and if your canvas is over that size, it will not allow
even a smaller selection to be a brush preset and that is why my Define brush preset was grayed out.
.....
After a little more experimentation with the brush preset I see that it does in fact work by selection size. My selection was just a little too large.
1107
« on: February 25, 2013, 17:11 »
There's always a lot of people hiding in the shadows. If you were to put a poll in this thread saying 'are you interested' you'd get a lot more responses that people having to say me me, or respond in the thread. There are also lots who follow the forum but don't post. Come out of the shadows you ghosts! 
1108
« on: February 25, 2013, 17:06 »
Agreed. He is simply saying that if your numbers are small it is hard to make any statistical relevant conclusions with them. If a person's sales are 1 sale one week and 5 another week, that is 500% difference week on week. I think when sales start to level out to 10% variation week on week for several weeks one can start to draw conclusions... but even then it is very statistically small. The person selling $1000 a week is still a drop in the bucket of iStock's $10,000,000/week
1109
« on: February 25, 2013, 09:43 »
If you are not trying to be accepted as a "founding photographer" then there is no way would I let them judge me without seeing what they are about. I would rather wait a month or two instead of being banned for a year.
IS had 600,000 files when I joined them. Monkey business started in 2009 and dominated IS. I am in no hurry but I do hope this becomes something great for the artist.
Good advice. Unless you know the types of images they are after - you are probably better off waiting to apply until you do know.
1110
« on: February 24, 2013, 09:42 »
My first suggestion would be to consider if you really want to upload to iStock in the first place given the Google / Getty issues.
The second suggestion is to use the (free) Deepmeta software. http://www.deepmeta.com/
1111
« on: February 24, 2013, 09:39 »
Perhaps you didn't have the brush tool selected? If you were on the pen tool or crop tool the brushes probably wouldn't be available.
1112
« on: February 24, 2013, 09:36 »
Hi,
Welcome here. Thanks for introducing yourself and linking to your port.
1113
« on: February 23, 2013, 17:09 »
Are they going to give any information about the site before it goes live?
I'm pretty sure they have a couple videos up their sleeve which perhaps they'll release soon https://twitter.com/stocksyunited
1114
« on: February 22, 2013, 06:54 »
1115
« on: February 22, 2013, 03:23 »
I uploaded 20 files yesterday, still haven't shown up yet. I can see them sitting in my ftp account at SS, but they just don't seem to be getting processed. Frustrating.
Same here
ditto. I deleted mine and am trying to upload again.
1116
« on: February 21, 2013, 09:36 »
You can't use your EF-S lenses on the 5D Mark II either
1117
« on: February 21, 2013, 08:36 »
I feel iStock is better at looking at the image overall and if the content was great, they would be a little more lenient on the technical side (noise, blur, banding etc). Fotolia, Shutterstock and Dreamstime get out the magnifying glass to check quality. Creative use of focus or noise is generally out of the question.
1118
« on: February 21, 2013, 07:45 »
Good luck with the new non-exclusive venture. Each site has it's quirks / likes and dislikes, I'm sure you'll learn them soon
1119
« on: February 20, 2013, 15:14 »
157 exclusives for photos, how can it be that only 87 said iStock had their highest RPI, the other had better in Alamy or Getty or other?
Exclusives are not shown the question of what agency is your best earner or highest RPI.. because we know the answer is iStock. If you were only submitting to Viscoimages they would be your highest RPI.. which is useless data to collect.
There are some independents who only contribute to one agency. It might be better to restrict the question to those who contribute to multiple agencies rather than just ignoring IS exclusives. As you said the data would be useless if the contributor has nothing to compare.
The question also assumes the portfolio sizes are about the same on each of the sites compared.
You are right - in the future I should allow people to answer which agency they are exclusive to. There are a few Dreamstime and Fotolia exclusives - which would end up giving shutterstock an even bigger piece of the pie for people who are submitting to multiple sites. In regards to portfolio sizes on various sites - I feel that is a bit of a mute point. I have the RPI question to try and fish out which agencies are actually returning good $$ per image (even if people have small portfolios on that site) - such as iStock - but the overall income takes into account how hard it is to get images online. I'd be making 2x more on iStock if it was easy to get my images online (and I still wanted my images there after recent events).. but instead most of my income comes from Shutterstock where they have good earnings and it's very easy to get images online.
1120
« on: February 20, 2013, 10:21 »
157 exclusives for photos, how can it be that only 87 said iStock had their highest RPI, the other had better in Alamy or Getty or other?
Exclusives are not shown the question of what agency is your best earner or highest RPI.. because we know the answer is iStock. If you were only submitting to Viscoimages they would be your highest RPI.. which is useless data to collect.
1121
« on: February 19, 2013, 15:43 »
welcome here.
1122
« on: February 19, 2013, 08:36 »
Many thanks for this again Tyler, much appreciated.
Interesting to see some of the figures - average earnings considerably up and full timers up also. I guess all recent occurrences will tend to show through next year and we see an even more dramatic swing toward Shutterstock world dominance!!
Yeah, it will be interesting to see how things develop. There have been a number of changes already this year that will affect next years results considerably.
1123
« on: February 19, 2013, 08:09 »
1124
« on: February 19, 2013, 07:26 »
Isn't there a difference in premiums if you do this for a living (professional) versus just owning equipment as a hobbyist?
There is for me. I just called my home insurance again and they said - yes it would be cheaper if you could insure your camera within your home policy.. but I can't do that - sorry. If you are using your camera for a business it needs to go in your business insurance... because of the risk and how much it is used. The thing is - I probably use my camera a lot less than a lot of hobbyists. So far my best solution to get the cost down has been to simply insure less of my equipment. I cut out the insurance on things that a burglar wouldn't steal if they were going through out house (like large lights and stands etc).
1125
« on: February 19, 2013, 06:31 »
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 ... 390
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
