|
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 - heywoody
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 ... 58
1251
« on: December 16, 2011, 05:58 »
It isn't down for me.
Submit end seems ok but if you try and look at your port......
1252
« on: December 14, 2011, 18:37 »
On your account page there are buttons to opt in or out of various types of selling - guess you can just opt out of everything until you're ready (never tried this myself so no promises). Need to be quick as you probably have sales already 
1253
« on: December 14, 2011, 05:42 »
What do they mean by 'you agree to be bound'? Presumably you can always remove your images?
I believe it means that the contributor agrees in advance to any changes that SS, at its absolute discretion, chooses to make to the contract and such changes are as binding as if in the original agreement. They could (and I don't believe for 1 second they would) decide that a year's notice is required to remove images ...
1254
« on: December 13, 2011, 18:44 »
A winning personality and a habit of saying "the drinks are on me"
1255
« on: December 13, 2011, 18:42 »
Item 14 of those same terms states that "...Shutterstock reserves the right to modify these terms at any time and to notify you by an announcement on your login page of the modifications. You agree to be bound by all such changes."
Wow! A contract between 2 parties where one side can move the goal posts at its discretion. Suppose they decided to dilute the ownership of images on the site?
1256
« on: December 12, 2011, 18:51 »
I understand that you are bitter about not making the grade for SS, ZR, but it is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that "the money" is at Fotolia rather than Shutterstock.
Shutterstock is way ahead of Fotolia in both earnings and in business ethics, whether it is about cutting commissions for suppliers - which Fotolia does repeatedly but SS has never done - or about unreasonable delays running into months in making payments to artists, which Fotolia has routinely done and Shutterstock has never, to my knowledge, done.
This is true and, fundementally, how can you make any kind of earnings comparison between a site where you have a presence and one where you don't?
1257
« on: December 12, 2011, 09:16 »
Look at his profile page and you will see the list of people that consider him a favorite photographer.
Achilles name is on that list. If his pictures made lots of money at my site, he would be my favorite also.
Conversly, he / she is but one on a very long list of someone's favourites.
1258
« on: December 11, 2011, 06:26 »
"any person caught looting will be shot"' Does this mean that the 2nd person caught looting will be let off with a warning?
Anyone who thinks they are surrendering too much with an SS EL should check out what they're giving away on FT.
1259
« on: December 08, 2011, 11:48 »
Hmmmm... All the big 4, however badly folks believe they are treated, have level structures based on performance and / or exclusivity so new contributors can aspire to better things. This development is making "2nd class citizens" on something as arbitrary as a date and is fundamentally unfair.
1261
« on: December 07, 2011, 17:45 »
The word "any" is open ended - looks like usage allowable under the agreement.
1262
« on: December 06, 2011, 19:05 »
Life is too short to contest rejections, even a best seller. Acceptance / sales on other sites carries no weight on DT so if you want to appeal you need to address the rejection reason - in this case, as Anita said, by offering to remove the "similars" (and having the model release).
1263
« on: November 16, 2011, 14:56 »
I had one approved on DT before SS this week - that hasn't happened before
1264
« on: November 14, 2011, 10:43 »
Arrgh - visions of Borat in the thong 
1265
« on: November 08, 2011, 10:53 »
Let's not forget that images rather than contributors rise through the levels on DT so, assuming sales volumes are broadly similar, earnings per sale can increase much more quickly. My average this month so far is $2.50 on DT and 0.50 on FT with similar volumes and port size. That would double for exclusives.
1266
« on: November 04, 2011, 19:40 »
There's a thread over in the SS forum - looks like the vast, vast majority of the 300,000 have 0 images and most of the rest are pretty small time.
1267
« on: November 03, 2011, 09:37 »
Again, I dont see any disrespect to DT or its contributors in Grandpas post. All he is saying is that DT is more beginner friendly which it most certainly is. Instead of using an entrance exam to control the flow of substandard images they use acceptance ratio as a throttle far easier for someone starting off to get a feel for what is and isnt acceptable and to start building a portfolio. The exclusivity terms are easy enough to meet and actually very attractive in the beginning. As a result they have a population of exclusive contributors who are very loyal to the site many of whom would otherwise present serious competition to independents on other sites again this is saying something positive about DT and its contributors. I suspect (and this is me just taking a punt) that better sites just means sites with more sales activity in my (limited) experience IS and SS both have far higher sales and revenue per online image (as opposed to revenue per download).
1268
« on: November 03, 2011, 03:54 »
I would certainly look at DT before FT if you really want to become exclusive
1269
« on: November 02, 2011, 06:28 »
So Viorel poked a little fun, no biggy, Ive seen much worse. I think he picked the wrong target though as Grandpa is 100% correct in what he said and very positive about DT and not disrespectful of their contributors as some have interpreted: But i can recommend DT to all users:
- to buyers, becose i have my photos for sale on this site, but DT has too love sales...
- Id certainly pimp my DT port before any of the others but it is true that sales per image are much lower than on IS or SS - to photographers, expecially dreaming about exclusivity- they will not be allowed submit their images on others, better selling sites! DT is the best site for beginners: no exams, no tests, most friendly. Who stay on DT, never will be an competitor for us on better sites. So, all to Dreamstimes!!! DT certainly is the best for beginners for the reasons stated. He isnt saying they remain beginners, in fact saying that exclusives will never be competition on other sites is stating that the work is good enough to be competition.
1270
« on: October 28, 2011, 06:19 »
Views take a few days to synchronise unless you do an edit - strangely this seems to be just a display thing as sorting by views you will see things in the correct sequence even though the counter is wrong. I don't tyhink sales without view is unusual, possibly just someone using up the subscription and buying based on the thumbnail.
1271
« on: October 26, 2011, 14:57 »
I really cannot understand the "collage" thing at DT. If I wanted the OP's high resolution image of the camshaft, should I really download some collage where the camshaft is small? Or should the OP make collages that are for example 25,000 * 25,000 pixels so he would not need to downsize the image? And then I would need to download the full size file just so I can get the d*mn camshaft in full size? Thinking about this makes my brain hurt...
Did Jackie Chan sign a model release for that?
1272
« on: October 13, 2011, 10:48 »
Not everyone agreed with Mr Bush's thinking, of course.
Very true. Some of us even questioned whether it could be characterized as "thinking".
Even so, he had a point, " better to prevent then cure" by the time you have to cure something, its often too late.
However, killing people off with medicine while trying to prevent an ailment that was never going to affect them is worse than pointless.
Just so...
1273
« on: October 12, 2011, 18:20 »
My portfolio is going to end up quite small there. I'm not uploading anything new because they are rejecting too much. I have a lot of images that haven't sold after 4 years, some of them do quite well on other sites.
I'm really curious how someone who's "IS dial" is pointing to the north east can have a problem with image acceptance on any other site?
1274
« on: October 10, 2011, 09:13 »
Because with credit packs, special offers, weird conversions between credits and different currencies, credits bought in one currency and redeemed in another one, different rate in buying or redeeming credits, it's easier to pay contributors even less than official - already low - percentages. Injecting noise in the system is everything to win unnoticed.
That's one part of the story.
The other part is that sites don't want the overhead of massive amounts of small payment transactions (one dollar each...). And customers, who need more pictures may not want that as well.
And: Credit packages are a good way to make customers spend money they otherwise wouldn't spend. I'd like to know what amount of credits bought is not used over the long term. At best this is additional profit for the agency, at least is it an interest-free loan.
Whatever about conspiracy theories, all it seems to do is muddy the waters, adding complexity for no good reason. I take your point but its just as easy to buy a package of x images for y dollars or euro as to buy z credits and then spend it on x images...
1275
« on: October 10, 2011, 06:53 »
Why have a pseudo currency for buying stock photos when almost everything else you buy on the internet is a simple real currency transaction? I note that SS deals in actual money.
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 ... 58
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
