|
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 - BaldricksTrousers
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 ... 206
1251
« on: May 16, 2014, 01:49 »
We need anther Opt Out Day Promotion to keep the momentum
The momentum is already dead. Stats for today show an increase in the number of images at DPC. About 27,000 were removed while 30,000 were added.
Which actually means that 90% of Fotolia's inspectors' efforts were damage control and only 10% went on building the DPC collection. Having to employ 10 people to get the results produced by one person is not really a sustainable option for any company. Also, remember that Fotolia pretty much claimed that the competition it faced was making it go bust which is why it had to cut the prices of high-ranking contributors. Of course, that might just have been greed and the finances could be as healthy as anything - though the willingness to divert customers to a cheaper option in order to try to win market share suggests they don't value the Fotolia brand too highly. We have no information about Fotolia's financial position and no way of knowing if it is fragile or not. Maybe the place is mortgaged up to the hilt - Getty is - and is vulnerable to any shock .... or maybe it is rolling in cash and absolutely invulnerable. We simply have no idea. So nobody outside the company can know whether this campaign is a real threat to Fotolia's future or not. Don't let the fact that it is a "big 4" site kid you into thinking that it must, therefore, be financially sound because the two things are quite different (remember Enron?).
1252
« on: May 15, 2014, 10:54 »
Right top corner is worst, the other three are similar.
The one in the bottom right corner is the same than the one in the top right corner but with a very higher value of denoise in Lightroom. I don't think that it is a good solution.
The good solution is low ISO + long exposure, as you have previously said.
But I am surprised that there is a so huge difference between 100 and 800 with the D610 which is known to be a very good camera when used with high ISO
There is some low-frequency chromatic noise in the background of the bottom right - presumably put there by Lightroom as it tried to even everything out.
1253
« on: May 15, 2014, 09:17 »
I'm * the trend - if anything I am fractionally above average so far this month, but I only get a scant handful of sales a day there, it's never been very good for me.
(this swearword blocker gets more and more stupid! The word behind the asterisk meant "going against" and didn't start with an f)
1254
« on: May 15, 2014, 06:00 »
Why not try all three and then tell us what you found out?
1255
« on: May 14, 2014, 17:55 »
I've got one on the 1st, on one the 17th and one on the 29th.
1256
« on: May 14, 2014, 17:35 »
Why is so hard to show both up and down votes? I see that on plenty of forums.
On plenty of forums using SMF? I doubt it because you'd have to code the extension yourself. It would probably take a day and I'd probably only break a couple things in the process but I simply haven't spent the time to fight my way through it.
I have made it so posts don't hide themselves now though.
Thank you.
1257
« on: May 14, 2014, 11:26 »
Seems like the royalties are not showing as 100% on today's sales, are other's seeing this?
That's normal (from previous Punctum days).
Some time later (a couple of weeks?) we'll get the rest added.
Some confidence you have 
I still have confidence in iStock doing what they say. (Unlike some others).
My problem with them is that the things they say they will do are usually not good for me.
They may be asterisks, but at least they are honest asterisks.
My comment was basically based on their questionable accounting and programming skills.
Yes, those failings are very disturbing. The best I can say for them is that so far I think they are not making deliberate mistakes
1258
« on: May 14, 2014, 11:09 »
Seems like the royalties are not showing as 100% on today's sales, are other's seeing this?
That's normal (from previous Punctum days).
Some time later (a couple of weeks?) we'll get the rest added.
Some confidence you have
I still have confidence in iStock doing what they say. (Unlike some other sites). My problem with them is that the things they say they will do are usually not good for me. They may be asterisks, but at least they are honest asterisks.
1259
« on: May 14, 2014, 11:01 »
I suspect that it is the "maybe someday I'll need it big so I might as well grab it" syndrome, rather than almost all the subs at DT being sold for use as posters two yards (metres) high.
What if it is not that.
What if the customers know that downsizing from the max size to the needed size gives a better quality?
The customer cannot know, upfront, if a 6Mpx downsized version is really downsized or just crop with inferior quality.
What is needed, then, is a loupe that lets you see bits of it at 100%
1260
« on: May 14, 2014, 10:51 »
Why is so hard to show both up and down votes? I see that on plenty of forums.
Personally, I don't care what up or down votes I get. It doesn't hurt my feelings if people disagree with something.
Same here. Anyone that gets upset because 'someone on the internet disagrees with them' needs to get a life.
Yes. There might be a bit of a misunderstanding there. Let's stick to the question of posts that actually vanish rather than worrying about people being thin-skinned.
1261
« on: May 14, 2014, 09:56 »
Why is so hard to show both up and down votes? I see that on plenty of forums.
I've no idea but if Tyler thinks it might cause problems I would accept his judgement. He's the one juggling the code.
1262
« on: May 14, 2014, 06:27 »
They would, no doubt, argue that ". Always" refers to the $ not to the number of images. The incorrect punctuation makes it impossible to know what is meant.
1263
« on: May 14, 2014, 06:12 »
I used the word "disappear" advisedly. And I gather they are actually invisible if you are not logged in. It does cause problems in following the flow of a discussion someone responds to something that isn't immediately apparent.
I'm not too bothered about ups and downs, though there is bullying. I think it's a bit sad that some people can post anything and get negative votes (and others get positive ones just as easily) but it's not important.
I wasn't aware that the greying-out could be switched on and off by users and if I didn't know I doubt if many others do.
The words "Agree" and "Disagree" might be more friendly than down arrows and hearts, if the system is to be retained
1264
« on: May 14, 2014, 02:55 »
Agreed. But, the simplest thing to do first perhaps may be to let posts remain visible even if they gather a net -10 votes. This will ensure that posts dont get missed eventhough a higher number of people may disagree with the poster.
Yes, that would address it.
1265
« on: May 14, 2014, 02:53 »
"The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away"
What's the betting that if Fotolia manage to lure content back to DFC with this concession they won't find a way somewhere down the line to cut commissions back to 5% again?
I can't help wondering if they really were paying 5% minimum or if it was 4% or 3% in some cases after it had been run through the magical credit to cash-grab conversion formula which ensures that people paid on the dollar rate lose out heavily if a file is sold to someone in the EU or UK.
I wouldn't trust Fotolia as far as I could throw it after my experience there - which was why I quit them some years back.
Anyway, congratulations to all on extracting some concessions from them. But don't think it amounts to an overall victory, or that the improved terms are necessarily permanent.
1266
« on: May 14, 2014, 02:13 »
There are 33,400 members of this site. Under the "down arrow" rule, 0.03% of the membership can gag the other 99.97% by joining together to put 10 down votes on any post they like. Do it quick enough and it will vanish before it gets a chance to pick up countervailing "hearts".
Does that make sense? More to the point, how does it fit with the idea of the site allowing a free exchange of views?
The greatest contributions to a discussion often do not come from repetitions of widely held views but from the lone voice presenting a view that has been overlooked, that may or may not be popular.
Isn't allowing 10 votes to silence an opinion the same as saying the church war right and Galileo was wrong, because he was one voice and more than 10 bishops disagreed with him? Or that the anti-Semitic "100 Authors against Einstein" proved that Einstein was wrong and the 100 right, just because they out-numbered him? Einstein's retort was that if he were wrong, then it would only need one person to prove it.
It's a wonder that none of the stock sites have taken advantage of this to conceal criticism of their action.
Shouldn't the "disappeared ones" be brought back from oblivion? If you dislike someone I believe there is still the "ignore" option available.
1267
« on: May 14, 2014, 01:17 »
It's always been a slow site for sales.
1268
« on: May 14, 2014, 00:42 »
...
1269
« on: May 13, 2014, 15:07 »
Has Lisa got barred from the forum because of those negatives, or has she just left? She certainly should not be barred, she's always been a very helpful and sensible voice. What's more, I can still see her posts though I can't see her profile.
I think using negative votes against someone just because they hold a different opinion from your own is not really a good way of proceeding. Vote people down for being rude or offensive, but not for stating what their position is and why. And if there is some automatic banning system based on negative votes now, then I think that should be scrapped.
I hope she'll be back with us soon.
1270
« on: May 13, 2014, 09:43 »
DT should not be listed under "Big 4". 123RF sells tons better.
For you, but not for me. DT usually generates about 4x what 123 does
1271
« on: May 12, 2014, 12:52 »
From my perspective, when Getty allowed Google Drive to give away thousands of images for free, and then decided to give 35 million images away to bloggers for free, it was game over for microstock producers. We are all on borrowed time since then, whether or not we opt in to DPC.
To paraphrase one of Gostwyck's expressions, we are all just fighting about how to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic at this point.
I'm going to try not to sound like a jerk asking this, but... why are you still here then? If it's over, why bother? The only thing worse than rearranging the deck chairs on the microstock Titanic would be wasting time in an Internet forum talking about rearranging the deck chairs.
And why speed up the sinking? To overuse the Titanic analogy once more, why punch more holes in the ship?
I plan to still be doing this years from now. I've got nothing else lined up, so I hope I can keep at this for a while longer anyway. And I suspect that everyone here has the same hope, otherwise we wouldn't be here. Even for the most pessimistic of us, there would be no point in discussing any of this if there really was no hope of changing anything in this business.
I don't know which of you is right but I do think it's over-optimistic not to prepare for the worst. I've always had an exit strategy. The longer my earnings keep going (and I'm actually small fry compared with a lot of you "high-comm-value" guys) the better, but I've always had an eye on the day it all slides away. Maybe I'm just one of nature's pessimists.
1272
« on: May 12, 2014, 10:18 »
Site's up for me ... unlike the sales
1273
« on: May 12, 2014, 08:58 »
I was Makrostocker for long time. Then thousands Micro Stocker have ruined the macro market. But I survived.
Now the time has turned further. And I'll survive again.
Good photographers can always live off their photos!
And that's all I have to say. Have fun and make new images.
I just don't understand how you think it will benefit you to undermine microstock - or maybe you just want revenge on us for wrecking macro .... or are a fotolia employee? .... or something? Or maybe you just think - like one person I know does - that the microstock market is going to die anyway, this is the last gasp as it all goes down the drain and so you might as well be one of those who squeezes a last little bit of money from the end of it?
1274
« on: May 12, 2014, 08:49 »
Ohhh, I'm so a bad girl. 
No, not bad. Just silly. 
1275
« on: May 12, 2014, 08:35 »
Are we not all grown-up people? Can I decide how I want? This is my business. And I decide how I want!
DPC is not much worse than microstock for macro photographers a few years ago. Times are changing.
And didn't microstock push down the prices on trad agencies by at least 50% or more in a few years? Are you happy to be part of a scheme that will drive down your earnings from microstock by a similar amount? Of course, it is your decision but it was a very bad example to pick. Go and ask any "macro" stock photographer whether he or she wishes the micros had never existed and you might find out how you may feel about DPC a few years on from now.
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 ... 206
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
