|
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 - Fred
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 15
126
« on: March 12, 2010, 21:01 »
Finally got my last payment from StockXpert. Sorry to see them go.
fred
127
« on: March 09, 2010, 21:14 »
I have not yet deleted my images, but today I could not log in. I requested my password, and I got a "This account has been cancelled!" message.
Same thing happened to me today. I had deleted all my images and requested final payout a couple of weeks ago. Still no payout and now i can't even log on. Hope I see my money soon. c h e e r s fred
128
« on: March 07, 2010, 16:09 »
Thanks guys. Will use your referral links if I sign up.
c h e e r s
fred
129
« on: March 07, 2010, 08:24 »
I am trying to get started selling audio stock. I have just been accepted by iStock's audio section and am waiting for my first submittals to be reviewed.
Can anyone recommend some other sites?
Thanks and
c h e e r s
fred
130
« on: March 02, 2010, 09:46 »
Thanks everyone. I will just start bugging support I guess.
c h e e r s
fred
131
« on: March 02, 2010, 08:40 »
I deleted all images and requested payment about two weeks ago. Still nothing in my PP account and things look the same at StockXpert - i.e. I show funds in account there with no images etc.
Anyone get their final payout from them yet?
fred
132
« on: February 14, 2010, 15:28 »
Asking hypothetically ... What if Getty gets it right with ThinkStock and creates a viable competitor to Shutterstock's subscription model?
How bad do things get for contributors?
How good do things get for contributors?
-Mark
Wait and see? That's what I've really been trying to say.
Actually, I think that is a bad choice in this case. If you wait and see - i.e. leave your images on StockXpert to be sold on ThinkStock - you are helping them to succeed with this lower commission rate. You would be competing with your own images wherever they are (SS, FT, BigStock, etc.) at lower prices. Sounds like cutting your own throat to me. Will be cashing out and deleting my port from StockXpert soon I think. fred
133
« on: December 19, 2009, 07:24 »
Right you are, Fred. Only the most gullible among us could be shocked, shocked, that an ad may be skirting the truth. They need the government to "save" them? Why not a "truth" csar for every facet of our lives? God, how boring.
Yeah, I guess I better stop replacing those overcast skies with cloudy blue ones. I might get fined, or sued or put in jail for misrepresenting the weather! c h e e r s fred
134
« on: December 18, 2009, 16:31 »
This is silly! All the problems in Britain and the rest of the world and they want to spend money on this?
How much are the inspectors going to cost? Who's going to administer the enforcement?
Just more lawyers looking out for lawyers - making work for them. Give us a break!!
They should just make advetisers run the following text before and after every add.
"If it sounds to good to be true -- it probably is!!"
fred
135
« on: December 17, 2009, 10:24 »
My first mont at Shutterstock I made $54 second month $30 with about 50 images. I saw a steady decline with a few ups and downs over the next 18 months until I was making about $20 a month with 300 images. My BME was my first month until this month when I finally broke it - but it took two EL sales to do it.
My experiience may be uniique - I don't think so - but you should not depend on continung to make $55 a month with 75 images. Shutterstock apparently gives big search breaks to newbies the first few months but you gradually fall back into the pack.
iStock has been my best site over my 30 months with them on a pretty regular basis - until this month - and I only have about 1/3 the number of images there as on Shutterstock. That is why I contribute there. My other sites (FT, DT, BigStock, StockXpert, 123RF) average about $7 a month but if you are uploading to 2 sites uploading to a few more isn't that much extra work.
fred
136
« on: December 16, 2009, 07:49 »
I would send the real estate agent a friendly letter stating how he can license the image for use and how he wasn't allowed to use the image for free. He may not of know that he wasn't able to use the image. There are a lot of people that have no idea about royalty free stock or how it works.
Seems unlikely that he didn't know what he was doing, since he had to get around Flickr's security to get a usable image ("screenshot or something".) You might try and find a lawyer to write a letter and take his payment on contingency. fred
137
« on: December 14, 2009, 06:44 »
Do you have all your images opted into the partner program?
Actually, I was wondering how that might affect my sales but I have been opted out all along (opted out of all subscription plans) so I'm not sure why it would start showing up now. Any thoughts would be appreciated. c h e e r s fred
138
« on: December 13, 2009, 20:57 »
Well, you have 132 images of random travel snaps. You can't expect consistent sales on that.
What was your download total for November?
Thanks for looking. I know I should not expect much consistency with such a smalll port but it has been pretty consistent over the last 20 months or so. Lots of ups and downs but never fluctuating even 50%. November was about average at 22 dls so I am a very far off of November so far. Previous Decembers have not been bad. Just whining really. Thought it might be something technical - but I can't think what - so just checking to see what everyone else was experiencing. Thanks to all for the replles. c h e e r s fred
139
« on: December 13, 2009, 09:25 »
December is slow after 20-Dec, not now yet 
So far my sales in December is above average (but I suspect the total for month will still be below average after the drop that will come soon).
Thanks for the info. If mine drop to zero for the rest of Dec. this will be a really sad month for me.
140
« on: December 13, 2009, 09:24 »
Right now, at 500, there is no acceptance requirement. Apparently, the new rule next year will be over 500 and over 50%.
Thanks, I'm not thinking seriously about going exclusive - especially considering my Dec results (see other thread) - but I will check next year to see if I still would be able to. Trying to raise my approval rating so I coulld have the exclusive option is the biggest reason I have so few images there. If it is not going to matter I will start submitting a lot more. c h e e r s fred
141
« on: December 13, 2009, 09:04 »
I reached bronze about 1 year ago and am now at about 500. Interestingly when I first made bronze I could not become exclusive because I did not have a 50% approval rating. I just checked again and it now says i can go exclusive - but I am still not at 50% approval and the rules still seem to require 50%.
Anyone know anything about this?
fred
142
« on: December 13, 2009, 08:58 »
As my images meter shows I am a very small player at iStock (132 images). However, my sales drop for December is so bad that I contacted iStock support (FWIW). I have just a single sale this month - average would be 10 or so. I know December is supposed to be slow (although I have a BME on SS ) This is orders of magnitude lower than what I was getting 2 years ago for December.
Anyone else have similar experience there recently?
fred (whining)
143
« on: December 08, 2009, 07:46 »
I think Fotolia has the best idea. Providing prints through third party sellers like Bilderking. I know this is controversial here but if we expect retailers of decoratiive prints like Bilderking to buy EL's of all our pictures because a few might sell we are dreaming in color. Better to let Bilderking's customer purchase a standard llicense for the picture they want from Fotolia with Bilderking's account. We may not get many sales that way be we don't lose anything and every little bit counts in this business.
fred
144
« on: December 06, 2009, 08:03 »
DevianArt is basically hobbyists messing about with PS and enjoying the accolades of their fellow hobbyists isn't it? I can't imagine there's many, if any, people seriously trying to earn significant sums let alone a living from it. Let's face it, it is hard enough earning a living from conventional stock sales as it is and most DA work is not particularly commercially oriented and the site is not targetting stock buyers.
I think we are probably better off being grateful for the few sales we do get from DA members rather than hammering them with emails demanding to know whether they are complying with the intricacies of the license.
In the event that one of them produces a masterpiece which actually ends up on posters/calendars/whatever, and it includes microstock-sourced elements, then it might be worth taking action. Until then you are probably better off expending the time & energy into producing more stock than chasing the tails of these hobbyists.
I agree, especially with the last paragraph. If someone uses one of your images improperly and it makes it really big you will probably become aware of it and be able to make a big settlement for the infringement. However, if you shut down every infringing usage as quickly as possible there is no possibility of this happening and you may be cutting yourself out of a big payday. After all if it doesn't sell any or only sells a few it probably is not hurting you anyway. fred
145
« on: November 11, 2009, 13:58 »
Personally, I think the photographer should have explained what he was shooting. In acting evasive, he obvously arouses suspicion.
I have done soots in sensitive ares, metro, airports, hydro facilites. On most occasions, I am approached by a security officer, which is normal.
I answer their questions and even offer my id's. I have never been detained, nor, ejected from a place.
This photographer was obviously looking to cause a problem by refusing to respect the situation more than anything else and it does not help other photographers in the future.
A.
Perhaps, but the police also need to recognize - or be trained to recognize - the limits of their authority. Belligerence from a police officer overstepping his authority does not help other - more responsible or more knowledgeable - policemen in the future either. fred
146
« on: November 11, 2009, 10:05 »
You has a photographer have certain rights. A police officer has certain rights. The police have the right to detain you until they determine who you are and determine you intent. ...
Only if there is probable cause. Taking pictures in an unposted unregulated area is not probable cause. If the officer had probable cause then he needed to express it to the photographer. It is pretty clear to me that the officer is either very poorly trained or just wanted to throw his weight around. fred
147
« on: November 11, 2009, 07:58 »
Like I said, I don't see what's wrong with doing something to prove your point.
I agree completely. If people don't do things to prove their point, others may never even know that a problem exists. Maybe I just get upset seeing tax dollars spent uselessly.
So what did this guy accomplish?
What was the terror threat level when he was asking the guy questions? Was it completely out of line to consider the possibility that somebody taking a photo of the entrance to a subway was up to no good?
I would much rather err on the side of caution than having our police turn a blind eye to something that raises the hair on the back of their neck. Anyone that sets out to screw with the cops simply to prove a point deserves whatever hassle they get in my opinion.
Erring on the side of caution really does NOT get it. If the cop here really wanted to be cautious he could have just blown the guy away -- thats what they did in London. I would much rather risk a terrorist incident than live in a police state. Risks of being injured or killed in a terrorist attack are much lower than just about any of the daily risks we all take like crossing the street, or driving to work. People are almost as likely to be injured or killed mistakenly by a policeman - erring on the side of caution - as they are to be injured or killed in a terrorist attack. In the U.S. we have been protected for a long time from police erring on the side of caution and overstepping their authority in the pursuit of ordinary crime. We can't give that up now and let the overzealous or power hungry police officers and departments hide behind the threat of terrorism so they can terrorize us.
148
« on: November 11, 2009, 07:32 »
I finally took a look over there. It's Different I must say. Kinda like if Flickr all of a sudden allowed you to sell your images. Flickr does have some great images on it along with the little "what is that" snaps. I am not saying it's a bad thing though. It's just a different style. If it sells then keep at it.
I think I might have a go at it and see.
Edit: Signed up and got 10 for review. Got to wait and see ... along with Warren...lol.
I really don't get it. To me their collection makes Flickr look good. I see very few images that rise above the level of junk and badly focused junk at that. fred
149
« on: October 29, 2009, 06:48 »
Dreamtime notified me yesterday that I have photos from 2004 that haven't sold.
So the two options that I have is delete or donate since stock photography is a numbers game I chose to donate. Maybe I will get sales out of this?
I don't think so. Only under these circumstances that I would ever donate. 
Most of us have images at multiple sites. It seems suicidal to donate an image at one site while you are trying to sell it at another. The way images sell - some sell at some sites and not at others - means that if you do this at alot of sites you could eventually end up with a significant part of your portfolio being free somewhere on the net . Users could just find an image they like and then use tineye to see if it is in some free archive on another site before buying it. Donating is a lose lose situation. Do not do it. fred
150
« on: October 26, 2009, 12:40 »
Yes, make sense, I had 260 images when I passed the barrier...
Did passing through the barrier hurt much?  Good news, you are half way to a pay increase.
I like the SS FAQ: And after earning a total of $500, your rate will increase to $.33 per download, with a tiered set of pay increases as you reach the $3,000 and $10,000 milestones. If you make $250 per month, that's $3000 per year from images that would normally be collecting dust on your hard disk!...
Interestingly, the SS Submit home page still shows the increase after $500 to be $.30 - its was raised to $.33 over a year ago!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
