|
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 - pancaketom
Pages: 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 55 ... 91
1226
« on: November 29, 2013, 20:31 »
2013 matches about what I had previously recorded. Prior to Nov 2012 they don't have any regular IS sales reported. At least my balance isn't negative to reflect that. I suspect it will be a while before everything is all sorted out, but the 2013 ones seemed to go fairly quickly.
1227
« on: November 29, 2013, 16:13 »
Stats due to come back later, but in phases. Seems they're going to be updating totals for all years over the next few days  :
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=357892&page=1#post6962956
A bit scary, but I'll hope for the best. 
Does that mean there is something wrong with what is reported before Oct 2013? It will be nice to have things working properly if/when that is the case.
1228
« on: November 28, 2013, 13:55 »
[]
Unfortunately, color casts in digital images aren't always realistic as you would see them with the naked eye - they're sometimes an artifact of a camera's inability to capture different color temperatures from different light sources accurately in a simultaneous way, or simply a matter of the image being set to the wrong white balance.
Realistic?
What means realistic?
It is not very objective realistic
Who says that all lights must give a white color?
Realistically they are not the same color, so it is normal that they appear different colors.
Personally if I look out of the window at night, with my eyes, I see lights of many different colors: yellow tungsten lights, green, blue and pink neons, yellow/red sodium vapor lamps, cyan/green mercury lamps, etc.
This is realistic for my eyes.
In the Ron's photo most of the lights seems to be tungsten or sodium vapor lamps, so the general yellow cast is normal. And it is realistic, it is like this.
Then if some customer needs a realistic view of the docks of Dublin this image will give him something as close as possible to the reality.
If you want less yellow cast you can do it pushing the white balance to the blue.
Maybe it will be more pleasant for the eyes, but it will simply not correspond to the reality and will completely change the mood of the place.
Ah, they don't keep them in a File of Shame for all eternity. 
lol
+1
Yeah, that line didn't sound right to me either. The problem is the camera does capture the color of the different lights correctly and the eye doesn't. So we usually try to tweak things to make it look like you think it looks when you see it with your eyes. This is what we all expect and most of the reason why there is a WB setting in the first place. While I don't always agree with the rejections or the reasons for them, it is interesting and useful to get more insight into what they are looking for and what they think will sell.
1229
« on: November 28, 2013, 13:24 »
I use filezilla - it just takes a few seconds to log on and drag the files to the bottom and then I set process queue and walk away. IS doesn't have ftp at least for pics as far as I know. I used to use deepmeta for them, it still seemed to take longer than all the others combined not counting the upload time when I was off doing something else.
There are programs that will do a lot more, but I don't think they are free.
1230
« on: November 26, 2013, 11:58 »
I'd like to see some more info on the graph for the specific images shown - I don't know the scales, but what happened on the 5th bar in the graph? 0 sales for one month? What was different there?
1231
« on: November 26, 2013, 11:40 »
This year I am about 2/3 of what I made there last year which was barely above what I made the year before. They do seem to be trending the wrong direction plus the last EL I had there was clawed back a month later... Still, they can have good months and are ahead of 123RF and BS and the rest of the small fry for the year. I'll stick with them for a while, but they have not lived up to their earlier promise.
1232
« on: November 25, 2013, 00:47 »
No fees for my latest paypal $ from 123RF and Pond5. I did get dinged for 5$ from Featurepics though.
1233
« on: November 23, 2013, 21:21 »
Would the $1.2 Million be considered an 'EL' 
I think it is more "sensitive use"
1234
« on: November 22, 2013, 13:01 »
Something happened in July that killed sales. Period.
That seems to be the bottom line. And apparently the epitaph.
For you maybe. For me Alamy is performing how I would expect it to perform and I am pleased with the results.
I like Alamy. I am an iStock exclusive but currently seldom uploading there because new content seems to be buried. I assume this will be fixed one day but meanwhile I am enjoying uploading RM to Alamy, improving the quality of my work, doing better stuff etc. I have recently started uploading stuff there which I would previously have hoped to send to E+. And as much as I like iStock I am actually considering pulling some content which never even got a view and trying it RM at Alamy instead.
I agree with what Ron says about people uploading multiple images of very little. But not everyone is like that. There are some great portfolios on Alamy too.
Are you allowed to do that (bolded text)? I vaguely thought at one point that once it went to IS you couldn't send it elsewhere even if you removed it. Nice that you can have an outlet to work on even if IS is not performing for new uploads. Alamy did very well for me last year (number 2 site), this year not so much, and last month was my first zero month there in a while. I have a few sales there this month for EL $ amounts, so not too shabby. Keywording is a bit of a pain and it would have been nice had they actually implemented the [ ] to group keywords. Still, it is another outlet and they haven't totally screwed us (yet?) like some others. They have been slowly eroding though.
1235
« on: November 21, 2013, 11:56 »
IS has a new kind of trust.
Actually I don't think IS or any of the major sites are not reporting sales on purpose. I wouldn't be surprised if some sites mess up because of mistakes and bugs though, and IS seems to be the king of mistakes and bugs. Theoretically mistakes would over-report sales as much as under-report them, but somehow I do trust them not to accidentally overpay us.
It is only when they completely leave a few days off (like with the PP reporting) that we can be sure they missed them. Had they missed 1/3 of them on those days we probably never would have noticed and raised a stink.
I also seem to recall cases where Alamy hasn't reported sales but the photographers saw the images in use credited to Alamy - but with their long term reporting they could claim it was still within the acceptable time.
Unfortunately we mostly just have to accept the sites reporting on faith.
1236
« on: November 21, 2013, 11:00 »
As far as I know the vector artists (if indy) get 20% of the sale price.
It does seem odd when sites either celebrate w/ a discount or screw up and offer a condolence discount that they don't eat the discount themselves.
1237
« on: November 19, 2013, 03:33 »
The only contribs who may gain from this new guide are the ones who are 'honest' in their keywording. Looking at the amount of spamming going on this would be the minority of contributors.
I've reported some of the most flagrant instances I've come across but no action has ever been taken. Either iStock doesn't care or can't be bothered due to a lack of manpower.
I think people spamming the search aren't gaining much or anything at all on iStock, maybe it works on the sub sites where buyers likely download a few images partly because they already paid for them and they search by newest more often. For iStock good keywording is important, not because bad keywords mess up the search (they can't too much since relevancy is attached to each keyword in the main searches) but because that's the only way to get your images found, any extra information is useful for people trying to make a living at this.
well, maybe they have fixed things, but back when I actually tried to figure out how the search and keywording worked I found I HAD to spam to get my images found on the logical keywords (not always, but on a few of my best sellers). Otherwise the CV would change the obvious logical keyword searches to something else. Maybe this is fixed, but going on everything else I doubt it.
Just looking at your most popular images, the top keywords seem to be relevant. I don't think you had to spam, although I see you did do some of that too. Can you point out some cases where you think spamming got you sales?
It seems to be working now - good for them - the 2 files I remember having problems with were the mushroom cloud fireball one and one with a rope loop (since removed).
1238
« on: November 19, 2013, 01:03 »
The only contribs who may gain from this new guide are the ones who are 'honest' in their keywording. Looking at the amount of spamming going on this would be the minority of contributors.
I've reported some of the most flagrant instances I've come across but no action has ever been taken. Either iStock doesn't care or can't be bothered due to a lack of manpower.
I think people spamming the search aren't gaining much or anything at all on iStock, maybe it works on the sub sites where buyers likely download a few images partly because they already paid for them and they search by newest more often. For iStock good keywording is important, not because bad keywords mess up the search (they can't too much since relevancy is attached to each keyword in the main searches) but because that's the only way to get your images found, any extra information is useful for people trying to make a living at this.
well, maybe they have fixed things, but back when I actually tried to figure out how the search and keywording worked I found I HAD to spam to get my images found on the logical keywords (not always, but on a few of my best sellers). Otherwise the CV would change the obvious logical keyword searches to something else. Maybe this is fixed, but going on everything else I doubt it.
1239
« on: November 18, 2013, 19:15 »
It isn't all synched up, but if they are eventually I am quite pleased with the day, since it totaled more than the rather lackluster previous week (due mostly to one big SOD sale)
I hope they manage to get everything back working properly without too much trouble though.
1240
« on: November 16, 2013, 14:12 »
I find that pretty funny to see a similar or almost identical pic. I took one of an Appalachian Trail sign once, and later found 4 or 5 pics of the same sign in various states of weathering with a dead tree in the background losing it's bark. It is also instructive to see the copycat that came first. I have had a number of ideas only to see others have had the same idea before me.
1241
« on: November 16, 2013, 14:09 »
It would be very interesting to see something similar comparing different agencies. I think IS is messed up because of how their CV works compared to most computer searching. Also if it is anything like the keywords that DT lists for the sales about 20% are completely off.
I also find it hard to believe that something like "beach" is really a niche keyword.
Unfortunately this is sort of mixing up keywords and photo selection - Yes, it is important to use the correct keywords, but it should be much more important to use keywords that are appropriate for the image rather than keywords that buyers are searching for.
I also don't trust the source of data. We all know how likely it is that something that has been stated in the IS forums is incorrect - "we have no plans..." and various other statements. Also when you modify a search, how does that factor into the data?
Still, it is interesting, and good to know if buyers search on "female" or "woman".
edit: In looking at their methodology I think it might not be very valid - at least not for telling us what I think they are saying it is telling us. Take for example "christmas" not a subject I would think is a niche subject in microstock. What I think they are saying is that when people bought an image with "christmas" in the keywords, there is a good chance that they searched on "christmas". It certainly doesn't seem like there is any shortage of christmas images. Also on SS it is the #2 search term of all time - hardly a niche. (but for sure still worth putting in your keywords if it is appropriate)
Still, there is some interesting information - like putting "face" in the keywords might make more sense than "portrait". It would be interesting to know if putting portrait in there actually hurt your placement.
1242
« on: November 15, 2013, 19:45 »
I did contact them, and they said it was a partner seller in Brazil that they are going after - so it might be a total loss, or maybe someday we will get something. Not ideal, but that is what can happen w/ shady partners I suppose.
1243
« on: November 15, 2013, 03:07 »
I had a check, I have a partner sale from 22 June that still hasn't cleared. It wouldn't be so bad except that it was 2012. It wasn't a big sale or I'd be more annoyed. Still, you'd think a year would be enough.
1244
« on: November 15, 2013, 02:18 »
ahh 1/800 is perfect for that thanks for educating me :-)
The 1/800 is because a Hasselblad has a leaf shutter in the lens, which opens and shuts more rapidly than a focal-plane shutter, where the two "curtains" move across the film gate together with a narrow gap between them. But 1/800 isn't really necessary for this shot. If the plane is moving at 300kph then it will move only 0.1m in 1/800 or 0.4m in 1/200. The plane is at least 100m away, so the motion blur is going to be insignificant, especially as it is further reduced by panning. By comparison, a tennis ball served by a top pro will travel at half that speed but photographed from the side of the net, 10m from the player, will travel through an angle 5x greater than the plane viewed from 100m. If 1/1000 will freeze the tennis ball, which it will, then 1/200 would freeze the plane.
The larger image size of the Hasselblad offsets some of the advantage of the faster shutter speed, too, as you will use a longer focal length on the 'blad, so the only advantage you are left with is that you have a bigger image if you want to plaster the side of a building with it (or you can use a wider lens and crop if you want to).
I'm sure Gostwyck is right to dismiss my idea of the air force sponsoring it - maybe Hasselblad did, or maybe it was just a very expensive "boys with toys" event. in any case, I reckon a top-end DSLR would have been more suitable for the job.
Or maybe any decent dlsr on a sunny winter day with snow on the ground and then cut out the blue sky background and plop it into whatever moody background you want and don't even mess with the strobes. Not as much fun for a video though.
1245
« on: November 14, 2013, 22:03 »
there is one top contributor (maybe number 2 or 3) having 2 accounts at FT, DT, SS (2nd created recently)
haven't found a 2nd account at IS but he stopped uploading to his main account there 3 months ago
if you want my opinion go ahead just make sure you use a different name, email etc and different models/pictures, they won't notice, I guess we could all open an account and be exclusive, there must be tons doing that!
It's hard for me to see how splitting up your portfolio would be a good idea. Probably either exclusive or not exclusive is the best option not a mix of the two. You would lose RCs on iStock, Bigstock, 123RF and move up levels at other sites slower too. It seems like in most every case you would be worse off doing that.
I agree! opening a second account on agencies doesn't make much sense unless you getting $ instead of EUR at FT but even that can punish you in terms of "best match" unless you keep uploading to both accounts
anyway I was talking about opening a 2nd account at IS as exclusive not other places
Right if you open a second account with different images you'll have a harder time getting RCs on iStock, 123rf, bigstock etc.. than if you had all the images on one account. Creating an exclusive account and a nonexclusive account (with different images like you said) is not going to be better than being exclusive for all images or nonexclusive for all images.
It would be great if you could switch images between them. Then put all the ones that sell on IS into exclusive and move the rest out. In reality it would be hard to decide which go where. If they are going to move sales away from ones that get RC anyway, then that is a moot point.
1246
« on: November 14, 2013, 13:07 »
I wonder if also a number of 1 year subs have expired and the buyers realized that for the number of images they used it made more sense to go with image packs or some other deal where individual images sales yield more $ for the photographer.
1247
« on: November 14, 2013, 12:56 »
I hope they have managed to get all these sales from IS and Getty rather than somewhere that paid a better percent. If there isn't something equivalent for exclusives coming along that is a tough blow.
From what one reads, the sums we are now getting on PP would not be considered very good by exclusives, it's just that expectations are so low among indes. What this has done for me this month is compensate for the loss in earnings from the commission cuts a few months back, putting me back where I was. But the total is still significantly below what I was getting a few years ago. I'm going to end up 10-35% below the same month last year and 20-30% below October 2011, so while it's better than a boot in the face it isn't really something to be deliriously happy about.
Yep, 50% or 250% up is not very much. PP RPD is 5-10% of my regular iStock sales. We also get GI sales which have an RPD of 15-30x more than the PP.
I guess I was saying that if the indy take is doubling (to put it in longer term perspective up to a small drop instead of a colossal drop) and the exclusive take isn't then it represents shifting sales from somewhere to indy sales. It is worth remembering on a regular basis how hard indies are screwed by IS. I am quite curious where these sales are coming from - are they transferred from previous Getty customers, other microstock sites (I would think there would have been a more dramatic drop elsewhere), new customers, previous IS customers. It is odd that it seems to have basically started Oct 1.
1248
« on: November 14, 2013, 11:02 »
I hope they have managed to get all these sales from IS and Getty rather than somewhere that paid a better percent. If there isn't something equivalent for exclusives coming along that is a tough blow. One does wonder if this is a real boost all of a sudden or if they are only now reporting something that has been going on for a while though, with IS you never know.
It is a way to lower RC totals, but personally RC doesn't seem to matter for me anymore since there is no way I am going to make my target.
1249
« on: November 13, 2013, 10:29 »
I got one 3.96 (for me) and another for .58 as well as the usual .28
1250
« on: November 11, 2013, 18:35 »
I think people are mixing stock as in the stock market and stock as in stock images. The stock market stock price is mostly based on what people think other people will pay for something. Sure there is some long term investment and growth thinking, but mostly it is a sort of bubble mentality. If you think other people will be willing to pay more for it later, you buy. All it would take is one bad quarter or some other glitch in the group-think and SS stock could plummet. They already got a heap of cash out of the IPO though, so it wouldn't crush them unless they did something stupid to try to prop it up.
As far as the stock image market, I think it continues to grow, just not anywhere near as fast as the supply grows. So, the sites can continue to see growth even if individual contributors don't. A lot of the SS growth was based on buyers moving there from IS and other sites (mostly because of IS's blunders). That growth won't continue, but I don't think the market is maxed out.
If IS can poach a whole lot of top contributors with sweatheart deals (this means that the rest of us are subsidizing these heavy hitters), they might draw a few more buyers, but I think if you are looking for any type of image you will still be able to find a replacement at SS. If I was a real IS exclusive I'd be pretty pissed about the faux exclusive deals.
Pages: 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 55 ... 91
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
