|
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 ... 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58
1351
« on: July 22, 2011, 13:17 »
You've gotta be kidding. 100% acceptance on SS, FT, DT recently. Haven't sent anything to IS for a while so tried 3 of the better ones - 2 rejected so far and not holding my breath about the 3rd. I'd post them only can't be arsed signing up somewhere just to show a 100% version.
1352
« on: July 21, 2011, 09:50 »
Canada has their national day on July 1, so that is another country not at the computers for a long weekend.
Canada? Where's that? 
It's USA's 51st state. 
Seriously, then don't even have their own phone country code.
I had no idea so many people here were such twits when it comes to geography. we're only the second largest country in the world in total area. you might also want to read about country codes before making such silly statements...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country_calling_code
According to that it's +1 also....
1353
« on: July 19, 2011, 15:14 »
On IS you can submit 3D as photos also (unlike the other sites they don't consider these as illustrations so you can "mix and match"). The do need to be technically perfect and pretty photo realistic (in other words "look like" photos rather than illustrations) - you seem to have a few on SS that may work and much more like what you see on IS than the stuff I do. I like the tulip.
1354
« on: July 19, 2011, 04:28 »
.......aside from all this microstock is the King, Queen, Royal Duchess and Archchancellor of the Internet.
Actually, I think those positions are probably occupied by porn 
1355
« on: July 18, 2011, 15:38 »
.....It is also not true that the commissions are going down. the returns per sale have gone up a lot in the last 6 years, from a few cents to over 30 Dollars or more depending on size. Number of downloads have dropped with the price increases, but if you do make a sale, you will be getting a lot more money than i did when I started in 2005......
From the meter thingy you're right at the top end on IS and may well be getting $30 / download - folks in Will's position (comme moi) are still looking at averaging in cents rather than dollars...  Will, IS is not the place to start - much easier to try sites that don't have an "entrance exam" in the beginning to get a feel for what will and won't be accepted...
1356
« on: July 17, 2011, 14:33 »
so how would someone become a reviewer? they ever post on craigslist or anything? It sounds like a pretty interesting job to me
You have to be a photographer first and a bloody good one at that.
Sorry, but thats a load of rubbish. Being a good photographer isnt necessary. In fact, you dont even need to be a photographer at all to be a good reviewer. Ive been dealing with composition, lighting, contrast, colour temperature etc. practically all my life as an artist and can easily pick a good photograph. But ask me to produce a good photograph and I wouldnt have a clue. The requirements for a decent microstock reviewer are 1) a good set of eyes, 2) attention to detail, 3) a good understanding of the market. Really, that's about it.
A microstock reviewer doesnt need to be a photographer to pick out a good photo just as much as a food critic doesnt need to be a chef, a music critic doesnt need to be a musician, a book critic doesnt need to be an author etc. If photographic skills were needed to be able to review an image, then buyers, who arent photographers, will be buying as many crappy images as the good ones.
Very true...
1357
« on: July 11, 2011, 17:33 »
Guys, guys, guys, Baldrick is right. SS dont want BETTER stuff they want DIFFERENT stuff and they dont give a crap whether you are top echelon or not. They are not anything like IS who dont care what kind of boring crap is submitted as long as its TECHNICALLY good. Different wont sell as well as mainstream for the contributor but its additional sales from the point of view of the business.
1358
« on: July 11, 2011, 07:31 »
I knew that links from photostream are not allowed - didn't realise that links from the profile ARE - that's interesting...
1359
« on: July 11, 2011, 03:30 »
There's only a lack of traction if you ignore or don't want to see the evidence - anyway you seem to be agreeing with me (except I'm not taking any moral stance, just recognising facts)
1360
« on: July 10, 2011, 14:37 »
I've come to the conclusion that the rejection reasons given are irrelevant. It now seems to be up to reviewers to decide whether or not they feel the collection would benefit from having something. If they think so, it gets accepted, if not, they hit a random rejection button.
Of course, some rejections will be for the given reason, but once something is good enough in technical terms, it then runs into the "do we want it" layer of reviewing.
DT's "too many of the same thing" when you have three completely different views of a subject may be irritating (and stupid) but at least you know what is happening.
I'm not doing this long and it's only a hobby but what you say is pretty obviously what's happening. I suspect reviewers have giidelines to work to and this is company policy - still has to be some room for personal judgement within these guidelines which explains why there is a degree of inconsistency.
1361
« on: July 08, 2011, 05:34 »
^^^I don't think many people are like that because there are sites where we can see how many downloads they've had and it's easy to see if people are exaggerating.
If they don't share any personal info, we can't. And that one doesn't (yeah go figure why, lol). I'll buy u a beer if you can find out how many DLs I have, just to "make my case"
I saw a post on a forum where the poster was making fun of folks on another site celebrating x downloads in a month - turns out to be the same number the poster had achieved on the same site in a year - I reckon there is quite a degree of exageration.
1362
« on: July 01, 2011, 15:25 »
It's a bit worse than that (and the reason I revoked exclusivity on everything). DT will consider similar images to be also covered, e.g. other images from the same shoot.
1363
« on: July 01, 2011, 07:26 »
I did this recently - need to email and wait 30 days
1364
« on: June 27, 2011, 17:20 »
Probably not the right question but I get your point. If I just look at the images common to both sites over the same time period revenue on IS is only 5 times greater than DT.
1365
« on: June 24, 2011, 15:07 »
Just lookk for mcdonalds, rubic, disney etc etc - they're all there in not "newsworthy" circumstances
1366
« on: June 24, 2011, 12:50 »
So in round numbers that's a return per online image 3 times greater at IS. I wonder how the various sites stack up on this kind of basis? In my case it's about 13:1 averaged over a year (mind you, 13 times bugger all is still not a lot ). I think I've figured out why though ...
1367
« on: June 24, 2011, 06:28 »
So far this month, Dreamstime is beating iStock for me for the first time. I hope it continues at this pace, because it's making up for my iStock losses.
How is this possible? I have <7% of my DT images on IS yet revenue from IS is 75% of DT
1368
« on: June 22, 2011, 13:32 »
sprained ankle 89 images, toe fungus 31 images, not too much spamming - this is EXACTLY the kind of stuff they want
1369
« on: June 21, 2011, 17:39 »
So you're the guy I've always heard about trying to sell the Brooklyn Bridge.
I'll make you a very nice price  lol
1370
« on: June 21, 2011, 10:39 »
I think it is a really admirable idea. I certainly hope it catches on and is successful.
Yeah it is admirable but will never work. I'm not seeing a lot of commercial benefit for the big sites or buyers in signing up unless a critical mass of contributors are prepared to sacrifice immediate short and medium term income for possible long term gain and move en masse.
1371
« on: June 18, 2011, 10:16 »
... Photographers are the suppliers, buyers are the customers and the agency is the retail store that sells our product to the customers....
Thats pretty much QED as far as Im concerned. If I buy a bar of soap (even smelly noobs occasionally buy soap) from a shop, as far as Im concerned, and legally, Im a customer of the shop not the manufacturer of the soap. Of course there is inconsistency and good and bad reviewers - every organisation has good and bad staff. Id bet my last cigarette though that the kind of policy were talking about comes from on high and the reviewers are working to pretty strict guidelines. On the collages front, what has competition of dozens or even hundreds now will shortly have competition of thousands  . I hope at least the folks doing these keep the dimensions to whatever they would normally do for a single image. velocicarpo, I think that this is as simple as putting a valve mechanism in place. Its probably easier and cheaper to control the flow at the review stage than to do something about the stuff already on site. I cant really see why a cull like you suggest wouldnt work unless the kind of subject matter being rejected is actually selling pretty well already and may not be affected by such a cull who knows? Ithn, IS aside, the other sites seem pretty flexible about stuff thats slightly different in fact probably easier than submitting more standard stock. Upside is high acceptance and low competition for sales. Downside is a much smaller potential market.
1372
« on: June 16, 2011, 06:06 »
I reckon it had gone to moneybookers at the same time as the email issued (mine was in paypal on 7th). Probaly a bit of "admin" involved sorting this out and the only folks who can help are SS support.
1373
« on: June 15, 2011, 10:24 »
A commercial arrangement / contract exists between the contributor and DT and between DT and the eventual downloader of the image. There is no such relationship between the contributor and the downloader. The customer pays a fee to DT and DT give you a small cut of this i.e. they are paying you. Therefore, in any meaningful sense, DT is your customer (actually the payment arrangement seems more like an employer / employee relationship). Now, as pointed out in another thread, the rejected images may sell like hotcakes elsewhere but, most likely, instead of, rather than in addition to, other images already there, so you feel the loss - but they dont. Ive seen nothing to indicate the guys running these sites are stupid so if they wont accept both landscape & portrait its from choice rather than ignorance possibly with reference to the supply already available.
velocicarpo
Im around long enough to know that with respect means the opposite :-D Ive have absolutely no reason to doubt what you say if youre actually making a living doing this you must be pretty good. However, this is a matter of commerce, not photography / 3D/ illustration. Do you actually think ANY commercial organisation actually gives a rats ass about quality as long as they are moving product? Have you seen the absolute crap that fills the TV schedules and music charts? Do you really think cheap and cheerful stock photography is any different?
Pixart
Youre dead right 10, 20 images for the price of 1? Talk about giving people enough rope....
1374
« on: June 15, 2011, 06:59 »
Yeah but there are lots of noobs here right now, too many for my liking, why dont they just bugger off to the DPR, forum or something, they never wash and they smell a bit, dont know why, but they do and OH! their images smell as well. Pugh!
Not so. I change my socks as soon as I can lean them against the wall - not one minute longer
1375
« on: June 15, 2011, 05:17 »
I find it kind of strange that folks who refer to themselves as professional seem to be blaming crappy images from noobs for getting rejections from sites instead of looking at their own work. Seriously, any professional in any market place has to know what his customer is looking for and go and meet THAT demand, not the demand he feels that the customer SHOULD have and, make no mistake, in this case DT is the customer and calls the shots whatever any of us think of that. To take the example of spices, there are 22.5 K images there already every spice known to man in every combination from every angle why would they wish to clutter up the site with 20 more of the same in a single submission? No buyer going there for such an image is going to go away empty handed. At least theyre giving the option to make a collage to make the submission a little different or to submit 1 or 2 instead of rejecting them all out of hand. The choices appear to be:
Do something different;
Do collages (if you can be bothered seems like too much work for too little return to me);
Submit where the collection will be accepted.
Pages: 1 ... 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
