|
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 - SNP
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 ... 54
1126
« on: September 28, 2010, 19:45 »
Don't know if anyone noticed but Joyze updated the FAQs on the new structure a couple of hours ago. She really should change her avatar if she wants to project a friendlier image.
maybe she doesn't want to. I wouldn't after taking all that crap. I can only imagine the sitemails being sent to her and everyone else. She is really helpful and sweet by all accounts, so it goes to show you even the nicest ones might be done with the haters...BANNED....
1127
« on: September 28, 2010, 17:49 »
@loop: Andrew then too, never met him, but he's always kind and helpful, and seems to be a fairly straight shooter. and Lobo gets a lot of smack downs, but truly, that guy is a really good guy.
1128
« on: September 28, 2010, 17:34 »
@loop: agree entirely about JJ. I can't speak for KK, I've never interacted with him directly but I've heard he is the same, sales this week so far are really good, so something positive seems to be happening. I'm relieved to see that no further news etc., will be announced. closure of some form, not good for everyone but a point to begin at or depart from as a contributor on iStock. I presume January will bring with it an upheaval as RC adjustments begin to affect royalties.
1129
« on: September 28, 2010, 11:12 »
it won't surprise anyone, but frankly, I'm a fairly established exclusive so whether you agree with me or not, this is till information. I think the GENERAL direction we've headed towards has been pretty lucrative, for exclusives. again, I truly appreciate how bad the new structure is for independents. so to suggest that iStock is going down the sh*tter is either something some people here wish to see happen, or simply denial.
to suggest an established brand that is continually being grown to fill more market pockets is being fattened for the slaughter is illogical. I also think that the loudest, most 'convincing' opinions here (Lisa, not including you in this) are from independents, therefore without any experience with Vetta, E+ etc.
1130
« on: September 28, 2010, 10:57 »
So, iStock decides to put images like these into the highest pricing category.
Let's have a look at the keywords for the "adult woman" with laptop:
People
Enjoyment
Cushion
Horizontal
Book
Window
Laughing
One Person
Color Image
One Woman Only
Adults Only
Setting The Table
While a couple of keywords probably slipped through inspection I was surprised to look at an adult woman.
I thought this is an 8 year old girl reading a book.
Wouldn't it enhance sales by using keywords like "female" or "young adult" instead of "one woman only" and "adults only"?
One would think that iStock would pour more effort into this project rather than just dumping Vetta files into this overpriced collection.
the keywording on these images is terrible. it strikes me as an oversight, since so many useful keywords are missing. I just attempted to wiki the file, and its status is listed as 'needs review' and I was unable to wiki it. so clearly they were brought in with existing keywords or something, and will be wikiied
1131
« on: September 28, 2010, 10:54 »
does it matter if we are owned by one VC versus another? as long as operations continue. it's not like Getty Images is going anywhere...
1132
« on: September 28, 2010, 10:32 »
I don't know why so many people have to make a new account to say what they really think... Are they afraid that someone will punish them because they say something bad about Istock or what??
So many new members and "new members" here.
actually, people make new accounts here, not because of fear of iStock retribution--but because their fellow contributors are so abusive at times that they get tired of being bashed. Tyler needs to be more diligent about personal atatcks here. I'm not talking about disagreements or arguments or two way heated discussions. I'm talking about blatantly abusive comments telling people to suck c*cks etc. that stuff is offside, unprofessional and completely abusive.
1133
« on: September 28, 2010, 01:19 »
FWIW, the files in JoAnn's example do not, however, even have any references to any Asian cultures in their keywording. that's a pretty silly oversight if they are aiming these at a regional market...
1134
« on: September 28, 2010, 01:17 »
+ 1
1135
« on: September 28, 2010, 01:03 »
. again, not bothering, who cares
1136
« on: September 28, 2010, 00:46 »
I see the pom poms are back. LOL
no one wants to read stupid posts like this. you're not contributing anything but sophomoric comments to a legitimate discussion
1137
« on: September 28, 2010, 00:46 »
@ Baldrick:
did vetta? since day one, contributors (me at times too) have griped that Vetta files were getting in without a consistent standard. it would be impossible to apply a measurable standard to an entire collection of artistic commodities. IMPOSSIBLE. but you are suggesting that all files will be substandard. in JoAnn's example...those two files are clearly aimed at an Asian market (more specifically Japan, China, Korea etc.). I believe they are simply trying to globalize with regionally specific images in some cases. in other cases like the illustrations accepted, there's nothing wrong with those being imported and priced at a higher price point
obviously some of the Agency collection files will leave us scratching our heads, same as vetta. but overall, I think we'll see a similar outcome as we've seen with Vetta, without any eutrophication of the regular collection.
1138
« on: September 28, 2010, 00:36 »
picking cherries, search on:
dog
woman
car
environment
communication
computer network
computer
all as per usual search returns....
1139
« on: September 28, 2010, 00:31 »
if we're both going to cherry pick examples, we'll be here all night. both our examples are heavily used keywords, that are most often then drilled into including other search phrases...I chose 'business' and 'family' because I believe they are still within the top 5 MOST searched terms. you completely dismissed my example and provided a number of other precisely similar types of search terms.
using your logic, buyers will see the first returns and stop searching. your insinuation is that greedy Getty doesn't care which files line their pockets as long as their pockets stay nicely padded. that's bunk, simplistic and short-sighted bunk. using this logic, our sales would have all nose-dived with the introduction of Vetta files in the best match. instead both Vetta and regular sales have continued to occur. in fact my sales have increased since the introduction of Vetta, and I only have a handful of Vettas.
1140
« on: September 28, 2010, 00:12 »
if these files are substandard in relation to Agency pricing...then what's the worry? a buyer might find them, and then find something similar in the regular collection and purchase that. it's not like these files are coming in, being priced lower than ours and given preferential treatment. they are priced well above reg and Vetta collections....so what's the big deal? assuming they are given any best match boost, which I suspect they will be, they will fall back like any other non-performing file does, which we know happens even with Vetta.
I think you're looking for reasons to be pissed off.
1141
« on: September 28, 2010, 00:05 »
I was feeling a little more 'Dude Where's My Car' tonight....I'm bored of MASH these days, watched too much of it lately.
1142
« on: September 27, 2010, 22:59 »
as opposed the oh-so welcoming and un-cliquey group over here? yeah right 
1143
« on: September 27, 2010, 21:23 »
of course there's a bias towards Vetta. that isn't new, nor is it the point. you know what, you guys have your little club for the disgruntled over here. enjoy throwing sand in each others' faces and peeing in the pool.
1144
« on: September 27, 2010, 20:56 »
that is true, however from a number of posts here today, you'd think Vetta was filling the slots in every search. so I'm just posting my observations. I've literally done not much else today except performing searches when I am not processing images.
1145
« on: September 27, 2010, 20:41 »
those are a lot better than the rejected images uploads. I have found my E+ files sell well, and I put bestsellers in E+ too. Vetta sales have increased too, so probably more visibility. I have done a bazillion searches throughout the day because the posts today have made it sound like the best match returns are Vetta saturated...not so at all. all I can say is thank goodness the 'statisticians' here are not scientists. every search I've returned using random keywords, including big ones like 'business', 'family' and so many others I can't remember them all. the returns are a balanced mix of Vettas, flames, newer uploads and files that seem to be newer well-selling files etc.
nothing much different from the search returns before the new Vetta pricing took effect today.
1146
« on: September 27, 2010, 15:27 »
Good
1147
« on: September 27, 2010, 11:04 »
^ well said lisa. that was my experience with the call too. and as I said in my first post, it was a voicemail that I then replied to, so I have no idea what time the voicemail was left by Andrew.
1148
« on: September 27, 2010, 10:58 »
it's too bad the sample was so heavily weighted by non-exclusives (iStock)...but I suspect that the sample is representative of the community on MS, so that makes sense. it just makes the data less helpful for me.
1149
« on: September 27, 2010, 10:53 »
Thank you....I might have a question, but I have to look at it a bit longer. good information, much appreciated..
edit: never mind, found my answer in the comments on the blog
1150
« on: September 27, 2010, 10:49 »
@shady: I don't know if I agree with that, but it's probably a topic for another thread. I'm entirely offended by the usage of the image. but at the same time, if I use another example...I had every one of my Dachau Concentration Camp shots deactivated, even though they had sold, because the camp is considered a Nazi symbol and they have a zero tolerance on anything related to the Nazi party. one of the suggested reasons was that it could be used to promote the ideology.
maybe it is my perspective as an exclusive, since we have a bit more protection regarding the use of our images, but frankly almost any image could be construed to convey a negative or offensive message with the right copy. to suggest that we keep end use in mind in this context when shooting is absurd. in my example, Dachau is now a memorial to those lives lost. it is a sombre reminder of a terrible period in history. it has a place in the collection, as do images of people with disabilities.
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 ... 54
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
