|
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 - null
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 ... 63
1101
« on: November 11, 2008, 06:00 »
It also happens that Sandralise has a nice bunch of images on all the sites that count...Thought it would be nice to bring this to attention... That wasn't the issue. The issue was that the crap MP factor steeres the search engine, not sales. Back last May (I can't check exactly when since the site is programmed way too heavily and it takes ages to come up here in the Philippines) I had 3 sales in a row, right after or a week after uploading. Reason? We all had around the same MP index then. I know you are connected to the site in some way, but I'm sorry, the concept doesn't work, unless you are prepared do your daily homework of 'write your comment here' tricks. I want to be judged by professional reviewers, not by a social network. And that is so ;-)
1102
« on: November 11, 2008, 03:20 »
I usually get about 1 or 2 sales a month. This month I've had 3 and I'm happy with that!
Yeah right. You have a MP score of 2197.5, one of the highest. That means you must be busy all day logging in and out, rating and posting since sales don't count at all. For me, I don't have time and energy for that kind of silly Flickr games.
1103
« on: November 10, 2008, 09:58 »
My only wish is that they would have a "delete image" button since they don't react to my request to cancel my account. I don't sell my best 10MP shots for 25 lousy cents, sorry.
1104
« on: November 10, 2008, 09:50 »
I guess FP is dying. Just one sale since July and I used to have 1-3 per month. When is the funeral? Maybe a group funeral would be cheaper.
It seems that no site started after 2005 made it or will make it. Peanuts and loads of work uploading and in some instances even helping to debug the site. SS,DT,IS,FLA,STX,123 is already enough work.
1105
« on: November 09, 2008, 21:35 »
YES, I chimp all the time with models zooming in on the eyes to see if they are razor sharp. under F16. Now and then the cam focuses on the point of the nose. I also look at the histogram. Time lost by chimping (and re-doing the shot) is much less than trying to correct in Photoshop or lose good poses.
1106
« on: November 09, 2008, 10:58 »
Alexa changed measurement stats: For the other sites too? or is it a conspiracy? 
1107
« on: November 08, 2008, 09:56 »
11/05 - 7 11/06 - 11 11/07 - 6 Used to be double... This one, uploaded a week ago, is becoming quickly a bestseller. If you can't beat the depression, join it ;-) 
1108
« on: November 08, 2008, 06:38 »
I turned off the plugin and clicked a few adds  I used the dreaded Internet Exploder for that. Did some surfing too with that dreaded W3C incompliant monster. Gosh... the Internet looks ugly without Adblocker. 
1109
« on: November 07, 2008, 11:37 »
"Poor composition/Cropped subject: Chopping off part of subject makes photo harder to use generally :-) thanks"
It would be nothing funny in this rejection if it was limited to first two words 
Well reviewers at BigStock have only a limited number of rejects reasons to chose from, and this is probably the closest they could find. Some sites are worse. Take IS: when they reject for distorted pixels, they really mean we love our exclusives 
1110
« on: November 07, 2008, 11:25 »
Do you have an idea if chinese MR exist somewhere ? I don't think that RF sites take MRFs in Chinese. Unless you speak Chinese yourself or your model speaks English, you'd better ask a local to explain the essentials. One could wonder though what the legal value is of a document signed by a party that doesn't understand the language of the contract. To be on the safe side, I'd let them sign both a Chinese and and English version, but you will need to make sure that those are exact 1:1 translations and certified like that by a notary public.
1111
« on: November 07, 2008, 10:55 »
Premium members will of course stay ad free. Like FirexFox users that installed the AdBlock Plus plugin. I see ads nowhere...
1112
« on: November 07, 2008, 02:00 »
Can you guess? It is obvious!
It was rejected for cropping.
Running the risk of being a partypooper and you getting mad at me, I have to agree with the rejection reason. There is a cropping/framing problem here. People in sunsets are very difficult to do and not only for technical reasons, like spanning the huge luminance differences. We all have the tendency when standing in the water to keep our cam safe from getting wet. The result is you don't have the horizon in the image, and especially with sunsets this makes it slower for our brain to extract the object shape. Personally, I mostly try to have the shoulders over the horizon. This yields a surprising and eye-catching composition which has more chances to be sold. You will have to lay down in the surf and you need one eye on the surf to protect your cam. Seawater and DSLRs don't mix very well. As an expample, this shot (not mine) from Istk. Which one would you buy? Yours or this one?  An example of a shot while I was laying down with the cam just a couple of inches above the water level. Imagine how it would look if I were standing up and I had the model surrounded by just water ... 
1113
« on: November 06, 2008, 11:49 »
I thought I would open this up for discussion after all the conversations I have had with graphic designers, advertisers and publishers who explained how they like to search when using keywords only. Seeing how you guys think about this could help us as well bc we are relying on your user generated keywords so we need to make them work for our search algo and fit for what we are learning from how buyers/people are searching on Cutcaster and how they like to search using keywords.
...
What are other ways that people will search using keywords? For what it's worth, I wrote an article about keyword strategy a while ago. Keywords used can be seen on sold photos on Dreamstime, and to my surprise, about half of the sales went without keywords. That means that visual search plays an important role, and keywords aren't the full story. Often, not more than 2 simple keywords are used. To facilitate visual search, it would be important to add thumbs of " similar photos" and " more photos from this photog's portfolio" like Dreamstime does.
1114
« on: November 06, 2008, 11:09 »
Just got 12 rejects in a batch of 15, uploaded 2 weeks ago, and reviewed now. Reject reasons are various, mostly inappropriate keywords and artifacts at full size. They also don't accept abstract designs on T-shirt but they do on neckties. This one was rather funny:  Moire pattern showing up in suit. Please correct or repair: (the raw was correctly exposed and no changes have been made except cloning out of the pimples in the face - is there a raw tailor in the audience?)  And this one:  A number of clouds appear very oddly off-color and unreal in this file: (sorry guys but that's how clouds are in the tropics near sunset)  I think I rest my case. Keywording/disambiguating especially for Istock isn't worthwhile if they just accept 3 out of 15, given that it takes 30 minutes. Moreover my recent D200/raw stuff almost never gets downloaded, but my old 3MP P&S jpg does. Life is too short for Istock, I presume.
1115
« on: November 06, 2008, 09:12 »
People really do scan and not read things, you would be surprised how easy it is for people to get confused in ecommerce. What about a picture of a sexy girl with headset? Not that there are many pictures like that on stock of course  How do you ship an item like that? A carton box with punched holes in it?
1116
« on: November 05, 2008, 07:45 »
1117
« on: November 04, 2008, 14:08 »
Hope the breeze gets up next month Where did I hear that before? UnluckyOliver or Snapshotvillage?
1118
« on: November 04, 2008, 13:47 »
U mean Sirius right ? Seriously?
1119
« on: November 04, 2008, 12:21 »
I can say no sales. None, zero, zilch. For weeks in fact. Didn't notice anything special. My real knock came in June 2006 when they introduced the controlled vocabulary - and they probably started with their emphasis on exclusives or tweaking the search engine. Since then my portfolio doubled but sales staid low. Mostly my old crap sells now (3, 8MP, DSC), not my newer less-crap (D200). I upload now and then when idle, but my weekly upload limit went down to 15 (huge numbers of rejects for "artifacts") so I mostly forget. Not that it matters much since they are only my 5-th earner, but anyways for your (and everybody else's) info: 
1120
« on: November 04, 2008, 11:48 »
EXCLUSIVES GET
- More money = ok
- More uploads = ok
- Less rejections = ok
-MORE VIEWS OVER THE REST OF US = NO WAY
get serius
Or become exclusive Serius is the brightest star in the night sky with a visual apparent magnitude of −1.47, almost twice as bright as Dreamstime, the next brightest star. The name Serius is derived from the Ancient Greek Σεριος. What the naked eye perceives as a single star is actually a binary star system, consisting of a white main sequence star of spectral type A1V, termed Serius Exclusives, and a faint white dwarf companion of spectral type DA2, termed Serius Serfs.
1121
« on: October 28, 2008, 07:12 »
The only thing I can see that's common to all of these images is multiple spaces in the file name. Could be another bug. It's not a matter of multiple spaces. YAY had this too in the beginning and they solved it by UTF-8 on the server since for some reason some of the spaces are non-standard or non-breakable. It only happened under an older version of XP while renaming in the file explorer of whatever Bill calls the good old File Manager these days.
1122
« on: October 27, 2008, 07:08 »
Flemishdreams... we uploaded a new release of code last week which contained a bug in IPTC extraction. Ironically, it was a change to the code to implement your excellent suggestion to honor a "newline" as a valid leyword separator in imbedded IPTC data. Hahaha, yes, I found out this week that the IPTC extraction worked. The reason for the "newline" is that it seems to be universal amongst sites, and also Flickr. I have a (free!) tool online in js that also allows to experiment with separators and sites tend to vary. IPTC extraction can be a mess. From the time I was Coppermine contributor, I remember writing php mods to cope with the way Irfanview and Adobe save IPTC. It took late UnluckyOliver weeks to figure out. The current problem is that some FTP batches
. And the MRF module... well, nobody beats CutCaster on that ;-).... yet.
1123
« on: October 26, 2008, 11:50 »
Can't stand this site.. They are low paying/sales and high rejections (super high rejections) I uploaded 10 shots (7 accepted) somewhere early this year as a test and made a whopping 0.75 dollar on it by 3 sales. Sorry, but selling shots for 0.25 that sell for 10 or 50x that price on other sites is insulting. It's a waste of time, so I canceled my account today.
1124
« on: October 26, 2008, 11:43 »
Please tell me Crestock is not going down! Crestock is not going down
1125
« on: October 25, 2008, 10:06 »
do you really like MP? is it more like flickr with people rating your photos.. very amateurish. Correct. When everybody had about the same MPI, I sold 3 shots quickly after upload, the last one in April. After that, nothing any more. Go figure, they give you even points for logging in. What's more, sold pictures don't contribute to your MPI at all, unlike what the MP guy claimed here. I logged in lately (after many months) just to find a shot of a Swedish guy on the frontpage, that had an MPI of 1000+. His portfolio is stockwise crap. My MPI still hovers around 40-50. The philosophy of the site just stinks. Obviously there are rating clubs and MP doesn't do anything against it. Very Flickerish indeed. I stopped uploading and around Xmas I'm going to dump them, along with SV, Crestock, Zym, YAY and some others that couldn't live up to their promise, and just concentrate on the big 6.
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 ... 63
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
)
