|
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 - JPSDK
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 [53] 54 55 56 57 58 ... 74
1301
« on: December 03, 2012, 16:00 »
They are our agents. And if they cant produce dollars, they are not worth while.
I actively pull my port from agencies that dont deliver. I dont let it sit and earn crums.
For one main reason. Then these underperforming agencies are not having me compete with myself on their terms.
But then there is also the "annoy factor".
I will support new and promising agencies with new concepts.
But when an agency begins to smell too greedy and arrogant, the party stops.
In my opinion, its important to not be spread too thinly and sold too cheaply. I can influence that by selecting which agencies I allow to resell my licences.
DT is one agency where the annoy factor has risen, and they do not perform.
But yet, they have some leaway.....
1302
« on: December 01, 2012, 13:34 »
Im just going to make a photoshop action.
Thats not much.
I have one already that tempers the pics for shutter.
Now I want one more, that can isolate things in just one click. Also hair.
1303
« on: December 01, 2012, 12:42 »
Contributor since 2007.
Mature port.
November was average.
Same income as last year or last month.
SS down a bit
FOT half weak
DT dead
Istock low
1304
« on: November 30, 2012, 13:40 »
So they are being hacked. And it is us who have to fight it? Here is the hacker: 
1305
« on: November 30, 2012, 13:21 »
We are a few that have driven our selves nuts trying to understand rejections: 
1306
« on: November 30, 2012, 12:13 »
What contrast to other agencies where you have to upload single files and nurse them through the gateway.
1307
« on: November 29, 2012, 19:28 »
Good and valid perspective, Karen.
1308
« on: November 29, 2012, 16:41 »
That reminds me.
Why dont I get some software that can access the national bank, and have them issue banknotes to me.
I mean. This is fraud on the highest level, and can iStock not prevent it from happening, they should better close the shop.
As it is now they are spreading our images all over the world and undermining both us and the whole business.
And they dare refund us!
1309
« on: November 29, 2012, 13:22 »
If someone makes a blog and collecst data.. Like 100 refunds, well described.
There is a lawsuit to be taken.
Because we are small and independant, it does not mean that we have no rights.
It is their shop, it IS their responsibility.
1310
« on: November 29, 2012, 12:59 »
If someone makes a blog and collect data.. Like 100 refunds, well described.
There is a lawsuit to be taken.
Because we are small and independant, it does not mean that we have no rights.
It is their shop, it IS their responsibility.
1311
« on: November 29, 2012, 12:55 »
Its only iStock, and we should sue them. They cannot keep their warehouse free of thieves and they cannot describe the goods to the buyers content.
Amateurs.
1312
« on: November 29, 2012, 12:36 »
Thats interesting.
Maybe we should take a look at those pictures that only sell at certain places.
1313
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:15 »
So the merchant can not keep the thieves out of the warehouse?
Thats strange, because others can.
1314
« on: November 29, 2012, 04:57 »
Europe, especially UK and Germany, but not France.
North America.
Brazil
Russia
Japan + Oceania
1315
« on: November 28, 2012, 06:51 »
Fotolia upload worked fine 3 hours ago when I uploaded this one: 
1316
« on: November 27, 2012, 13:31 »
Missing is not always missing.
Sometimes pictures are visible in parts of the world on certain searches, sometimes not.
I can understand it can be a challenge to update so many servers and try to make the updates appear in real time.
There are simply too many data.
Image agencies are operating in a borderzone of what is possible.
I understand they have to deal with complex issues, but it's their job to make this work. That's why they keep more than 80% of profits.
Yes it is. That is why we agrre to pay them commission. However this kind of inconvenience, hurts the agency (in theory) as much as it hurts the contributor, it is not one of these cases where the agency tries to fiddle with data streams to earn money on the contributors.
1317
« on: November 27, 2012, 06:25 »
Missing is not always missing.
Sometimes pictures are visible in parts of the world on certain searches, sometimes not.
I can understand it can be a challenge to update so many servers and try to make the updates appear in real time.
There are simply too many data.
Image agencies are operating in a borderzone of what is possible.
1318
« on: November 27, 2012, 06:15 »
Im sorry to hear.
Now you can have two different afterthoughts. One being of course the financial one, that you have already stated. That it was a disappointment.
The other one is a bit different and starts with a question: Now, why is your shutterstock performance not on par with your iStock performance? That is of course because of the benifits of being a sheltered istock exclusive. You know that. But have you thought of the consequenses of this in the long run. Both for iStock and you in particular. Istock exclusive pictures and contributors are loosing competitive edge when first they are let out of the glasshouse.
One thing is to be exclusive with a well performing agency on the rise, but if the agency goes down, and the glasshouse is finally broken, the species adapted to the tropical environment inside cannot survive in the cold climate outside.
You have been brave and left in good time, and you have now learned a valuable and costly lesson: If you want to compete in the cold, you must improve. Be happy that you learned it in good time before the others.
Im sorry if I sound cynical, I might be wrong, the glasshouse might not be cracking and there might not be an exodus underway.
1319
« on: November 26, 2012, 18:52 »
I would just add. Dont worry about things you cannot influence.
Ha ha, yes. Not right in this case. I can try to stirr them up so much that they kick me out. I can delete my port. However. They should listen.
1320
« on: November 26, 2012, 18:46 »
It is not that it gives you the impression that they listen...
1321
« on: November 26, 2012, 18:33 »
I posted a critical post on the iStock forum.
It took 8 minutes before it was deleted and gone.
What is your record?
1322
« on: November 26, 2012, 18:20 »
I happened to find an old interview in May/June 2009 issue of Digital Photo Pro, where Nick Evans -Lombe, GI's COO said:
"We launched the Portal for photographers last June. It's one of the things that the acquisition of iStockphoto really helped us with. From an internal operational perspective, we were quite envious of the tools they had that enabled photographers to quickly get imagery out to market. The Portal has also enabled photographers to have more input over how their images are keyworded, so they can add more of their vision as to what that image is all aboout."
Is it possible that the problem is at Getty's end, and it affects iStock?
Thats just cooperate BS. Noone ever cared about how pictures were keyworded.
1323
« on: November 26, 2012, 17:37 »
What was it Jeff said? or was it Dave?
You cannot change rule No. one.
I would just add. Dont worry about things you cannot influence.
They can have their review strategies or they cannot.
Its not something you can do anything about, so why bother.
That said.
I have just fixed a handle on an old axe, and if a reviewer comes by while I sharpen it, I will take his skalp.
But im not annoyed, not at all.
1324
« on: November 26, 2012, 16:12 »
Review times are not important for the contributor, as long as they are the same for all contributors at the same agency.
However, they are important to the agency.
It does not take long before the customers find out where the fresh images are.
1325
« on: November 26, 2012, 10:52 »
he he
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 [53] 54 55 56 57 58 ... 74
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
