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 - FD
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 ... 82
1126
« on: May 05, 2010, 11:23 »
Also, keep in mind that a distributor has overheads to cover. photogs only submit their work and that is it, but the contributor needs to pay for marketing, hosting, and so on and so forth... Yes and a photog gets all his stuff for free. I roam around garbage bins to find props, my cam was a gift from aunt Zenoby and I process my shots on an old Commodore 64 I found on the attic. Models don't need payment since they are so happy to see themselves on real sites, not just facebook. And time, well, that's an endless commodity, and so on and so forth...
1127
« on: May 05, 2010, 11:11 »
Is it ture?
Yes, it is ture!
Are you srue?
1128
« on: May 01, 2010, 21:53 »
Micro revenue distribution over agents in April 2010.  - Faint graph underneath = March 2010. - Misc = SSP + FP + DP + CanStockPhoto - DT almost at 3d position now, has been #2 for 5 years (revenue down 63% compared to April 2009) - SS just follows fresh uploads ( feed the beast and it will purr) - IS slowly but consistently getting stronger with highest RPI - Port size: 1100 (IS = 600, FT = 800), photos only. - No comment about other sites since fluctuations just reflect statistical noise. - Total micro revenue 5% down compared to March 2010, 19% down compared to April 2009, despite 25% portfolio increase. For trend watchers: same chart for April 2009 (April 2010 faint underneath)
1129
« on: May 01, 2010, 04:18 »
I can´t get the ftp to work when uploading to BigStock. Whyyy??? Back in the 18-th century, we uploaded with homing pigeons ( brieftauben). Later, with Napoleon came the semaphore towers, what a luxury!  Seriously, there is an oddity in the FTP upload of BS. You can only transfer one file at a time in FTP. If you use Filezilla, go to the transfer settings tab and set only 1 simultaneous upload.  If it works, you owe me a beer.
1130
« on: April 30, 2010, 21:43 »
My earnings in April 2010 are 30% lower than in April 2009, even thought my portfolio is 40% larger (now up to about 800). ... Not only are there a larger proportion of sub sales at low prices, but the total number of pics sold is getting weaker. +1 Income down 63% April 2010 vs April 2009. Removed EL sale (adds statistical noise by infrequency) down 54%. RPD down from 1.67$ to 0.94$. DT has been many years my nr.2, well in front of IS. This month DT will be at the same income level as IS (with 2x the RPI), also due to growth on IS and a higher RPD (1.14$).
1131
« on: April 30, 2010, 19:30 »
What do u think? I think I´ve done "something" to it... It's a mistake. No real (NASA) image has a globe without any cloud formations. For me, this image is clearly synthetic. As to the shape of continents, I figure those are in the public domain.
1132
« on: April 30, 2010, 09:20 »
Can someone tell me how to edit or delete vectors that are now in "pending" status. If it's pending, the only thing you can do is email support so they will manually delete it. I can feel your pain. I uploaded 17 earlier this week and I can't get them submitted for some reason. The new upload system sucks 200%. Why do people always want to fix a running engine? It was all fine for 5 years.
1133
« on: April 30, 2010, 09:06 »
The way I see it, same as above, in different words, the blacks aren't black and there's noise in the shadows. Looks like digitally lightened shadow areas? Hey, that's the infamous black clipping there in the shadow! I don't have it any more with the 5DII but the D200 had it a lot. You can also induce it when using the autocontrast or autolevels in PS. It's pretty easy to solve with a magic wand selection (tolerance <=  on the deepest blacks, contract 1-2 px, feather by 1-2, then Gaussian blur the selected areas by 0.8-1 px.
1134
« on: April 30, 2010, 08:40 »
There have been reported cases where a kind inspector has removed the poor keywords and accepted the file. I guess I got a kind inspector then today. I had 5 more images accepted after that with not totally relevant keywords removed. At the one reject, he added a note that I should resize it to get it sharp all over. (it was F16 but the image had 2 focus points about 50cm apart and 1 was borderline sharp).
1135
« on: April 29, 2010, 19:17 »
? dude... 'gullible americans' ? =tom The last gullible Americans were the turkeys on the beach that thought the Pilgrim Fathers were going to feed them.
1136
« on: April 29, 2010, 18:57 »
This is a good example to show why 22 people are ignoring this guy. Does he hold the record? I'm working on it.
1137
« on: April 29, 2010, 18:25 »
But they're only newbies and I hope, in time, they can make it up there. They'll need a chance of one year at least. They just exited the grace period where credits were given for free to prospective buyers (or freebie hunters). We can assume they'll put an equally important financial effort to market the site, as they put into collecting images. That effort can only be visible after the Western holiday period, earliest September-October, and there will obviously a lean period between the moment their free offerings run out and real sales take off. There is no reason yet to doubt DP. They have been very fair till now.
1138
« on: April 29, 2010, 18:19 »
For some reason, it has been taken for granted here that "not fully relevant" keywords on the images of non-exclusives are not removed by the IS reviewers, and that irrelevant keywords are just another reason for rejects, even if the image itself is OK. Others, and myself, have already said that when resubmitting an image that was rejected for keywords with the offending ones left out, it mostly gets rejected again for another reason.
I just had an image accepted with 4 "not fully relevant" keywords. Surfing to the edit section of that image (to delete those keywords), I noticed that the 4 were all gone. Is this a change of policy towards non-excluives, or merely the confirmation of the fact that IS doesn't reject for keywords (alone)?
1139
« on: April 29, 2010, 18:04 »
FD-Amateur, for some reason the pictures are loaded interlaced on this image hosting site, so you have to wait for a while before they are shown at full quality, and without the squares. Ah ok... I'm on very low bandwidth indeed.
1140
« on: April 29, 2010, 17:44 »
Oversharpened with edge halos and plenty of jpg artifacts (squares), but I assume those come from the quality reduction for putting them online. For a proper critique, you'll need to put them online in original size and quality, but many free image hosters don't allow those file sizes.
1141
« on: April 29, 2010, 17:35 »
Funny old game - oh, and back to the thread, measuring DT over quarters rather than by monthly sales, it's still in the ascendency. Isn't this just a mere reflection of increase in portfolio smoothed out? The benchmark should really be RPI.
1142
« on: April 29, 2010, 17:17 »
I just searched "engineer" up comes 995 PAGES!! first 2 and 3 pages are full of shots with ZERO downloads, almostn ZERO views and with all respect lousy material. This issue has been covered before. There is the choice between several search algorithms on DT. Clever buyers use "downloads" instead of the default "relevancy" (metadata-based). By coincidence, I did the same engineer search a few days ago. Many images were about engineering, with no engineer present. This was solved easily by checking "with people" in the advanced search. You have to assume a minimum of intelligence on the buyer's side.
1143
« on: April 29, 2010, 00:38 »
WOW! I didn't know that! That's really disgustin! I'll never make 50$ in one year selling images for $0.10!!! It was all in the small print.
1144
« on: April 29, 2010, 00:32 »
You are right. We are all thieves over here. Or at least 95% of us . Not to mention that we sometimes eat foreigners... Yeah, such a shame the iron curtain came down.
1145
« on: April 28, 2010, 05:20 »
Credits there also expire in 12 months, so if you haven't reached payout you start losing your commissions and get paid nothing 
Now, that's nice trick :]]
Yeah those sites have nice tricks, all of them, east of Berlin. Like Fotomind. I told you so  (it will be in the archives). I registered but never uploaded anything. Glad to know I was right, but it was all in the small print.
1146
« on: April 27, 2010, 20:20 »
The partner is assuming all the risk. That's the heart of the matter. It's a paid job since there is no honor at all in it for the retoucher. It's the same as if somebody would start a business, and tell his employees the will be paid according profits in the course of the coming years. That won't fly. The OP should pay his retoucher upfront on an hourly or per picture base, and assume the risk himself. Lookstat offers services like that.
1147
« on: April 26, 2010, 21:45 »
I uploaded a series of ethnic/tribal dancing in mountains last night as editorial. Most were tribal warriors, men/male. The suggested categories were always women, beaches, illustrations.
1148
« on: April 26, 2010, 21:12 »
Probably their time down was due to someone forgetting to renew the host subscription?  They are hosted on webdeal.no on a dedicated server. Normally, you have to manage a server like that yourself. Since they couldn't be pinged nor tracerouted over the weekend, chances are they wanted to implement an upgrade themselves and ran into problems. Sales 1-6/month; latest sale April 22, port size = 355.
1149
« on: April 26, 2010, 14:06 »
You have two alternatives: Polylooks & APIS/Picturemaxx or Fotofinder & APIS/Picturemaxx
Polylooks is a traditional micro sites where the images are RF where as Fotofinder is a macro site. As to Editorial images, you have to set the release to “is not available”
Thanx for the info. So obviously, for non-exclusive RF (that is also on microstock sites), you have to enable Polylooks & APIS/Picturemaxx. Editorial is clear now. Remains the question about the pricing. "Discount" or "Normal" for non-exclusive RF?
1150
« on: April 26, 2010, 13:57 »
It is slow if you add file by file. But you can add entire folders and then it's fast to do. Thanks. Yes I made a temp folder with a copy of the uploads and that is a nice workaround. Whatever works... It's a bit annoying to me that for adding license, release info etc I need to do it one by one and can't to altogether - but again as I can do it with a large group of uploaded pics I don't feel it's a big deal...
I guess you just have to click "has release", since I found no place to upload the release itself. Another point is the "free German translation" of the keywords. How long does it take? Can we check it somewhere?
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 ... 82
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|