|
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 - null
Pages: 1 ... 51 52 53 54 55 [56] 57 58 59 60 61 ... 63
1376
« on: January 24, 2008, 11:34 »
Does istock have FTP? Istock is different. It is God's Gift to Stock, and (non-exclusive) contributors are mere mortal serfs. On-topic: if a lonely simple programmer at GeckoStock can set up a flawless FTP on a server at his kitchen table in his spare time, why can't Bill Gates' own Snapvillage do it in aircooled datacenters with leather seats and 21" flatscreens? Perhaps because the best FTP servers run on Unix 
1377
« on: January 24, 2008, 11:30 »
Stop moaning about the lack of FTP, they accept CDs or DVDS in the post! Sure honey. Ever tried to send a DVD from the rural Philippines? First you have to bribe the postal office, then the customs because every DVD is considered contraband. Sending by DHL is about 90$ or 130 kg of rice. For a site that doesn't sell? No thanks. I'd prefer to send the pixels in a big bag with horse and carriage.
1378
« on: January 24, 2008, 02:32 »
Well I wasn't confused because I didn't know there was such a thing as a CMS. The way I've created websites is to used a template, mainly for the graphics (tabs, etc.) and then coded the front and backend myself. Since the Joomla demo is down, what exactly does it do for you? As CMS, apart from Joomla, Drupal has been mentioned. There is WordPress too. For a photog, I think Joomla is better than WordPress (but Iofoto for instance uses WP). What it did for me? Funnel random traffic from all over Google and Flickr/Yahoo to one place and then distribute it back all over my sales sites, with a preference for FeaturePics since they accept all and give me the highest yield. One big collector of traffic is Flickr. Does it work? Yes... I have a payout again on FP and I noticed that 1/2 of my DT sales are without search terms, so they stem from visual search or direct portfolio entry. I got about 70,000 matches now on Google, and I'm on rank 1,100,000 at Alexa. There are a lot of prospective buyers around, for instance blogs and small businesses that even don't know about stock. I'm the one that inspired FP to install the free bloggers license of 130px thumbs. Collect that long tail in the market and drive it to your portfolio. It can make a (small) difference, but if you don't want to put in the effort, ShutterStock alone still gives the bulk of sales. I plaid around with Coppermine gallery 2 years ago, even wrote mods for it as a contributor. It was a waste of time: you can't replicate one of the big stock sites just for yourself. Also forget direct sales unless your name is Yuri Arcurs. For now, I see a personal site just like a funnel that funnels traffic in, and redistributes it over my RF agencies, nothing more. I got most of my ideas from Dan Heller's excellent writings about personal business strategy online for individual photogs. The days of programming a site yourself in Notepad or Dreamweaver are long over. Use a CMS and concentrate on content instead of on form. What a Content Management System like Joomla does it this. It gives you a front- and back-end for your site without hassles. You just have to (1) put in content (articles, images) and (2) tweak the design: layout, menus. No programming needed, not even HTML. The look and feel is done by a template, and there are many templates around for free. You can even change template on the fly if you want to change looks: content and site map (menus, articles) stay the same. I took the advice of Rinder and chose a very simple B&W design, to let the images speak. This is what I'm currently working on, but it's largely unfinished. Click here (it's safe). It should be accessible since my host Hostgator is up 99.9% of the time.
1379
« on: January 24, 2008, 02:04 »
I just realize how stupid I was to upload to Albumo last year. All those images are locked for 400(?) days, and with no sales. I just read Karimala's warning about it too late. As to BigStock, they have a lock-in period of 3 months, but I'm quite confident that Tim or Dawn would make an exception for one photo if you'd ask nicely.
1380
« on: January 24, 2008, 01:52 »
I would suggest SV buys GeckoStock. GS has been programmed marvelously with a MRF section for instance that is as good as the one from Crestock and 123RF. GS is a garage operation with one hell of a programmer but no resources for marketing and SEO. With just a new orange-white template, SV would have it all, working FTP included.
And I also wish SV would stay away from my keywords. I can't find my own pictures back because they change my keywords so they became irrelevant.
1381
« on: January 21, 2008, 21:16 »
- I assume your hoster has php and mysql. - I have the impression people here confuse between a template and a CMS. - I use Joomla as CMS now, and for 2-3 years, on several sites. IMHO, it's the best framework around, and it's free (Open Source). - As a template, I use one of the free templates around for Joomla, no sweat. - My galleries are hotlinked to my FeaturePics portfolio (where I get the highest price and they have all) so I save on bandwidth. - This my current Joomla 1.0 site. - This weekend I started a new site based on Joomla 1.5 with the Rhuk_Milkyway free theme. I just changed the site logo (obviously) an some minor CSS things. The result is here but just have a peak there for the look and feel, since it's far from finished: most content is still empty. Check this article to see how you can let your site work for you: all photos with the article are linked to a FeaturePics sales page - but you can take any site. - On the Joomla forums, you can post a request for a coder that can install your menus and articles for you - but I suggest you learn it yourself. It's not that difficult. - The main things is that you have a very clear idea about the site map first. If it's simple like HOME - PORTFOLIO - LICENSE - CONTACT - and you have the content ready, it's maximum 1 day, back-and-forth emailing included. If you can't find a Joomla guy for under 50$, just send me a PM. - And if you don't have a hoster yet, I still rent out 2$/month slots on my Hostgator host.
1382
« on: January 21, 2008, 19:52 »
"But be warned that I am on high troll alert so if you have nothing constructive or useful to say, you may find your message and/or account suddenly vanish. " I read that statement from Duncan too, and it's still there. Quite blunt. Zu Ihnen... spricht der Fuhrer ;-) Well, if that's what he thinks about his contributors, that says enough. Especially about canceling the account, and the money in it! They have a peculiar keyword policy now, deviant from all other sites. You can't use some words any more like color, beautiful, red. I asked twice on the forum what the forbidden list was, so I could adapt my tagging script, but didn't get any decent reply. I'm hesitant about insisting since they are on high troll alert, and I'd hate to see my account vanish two dollars away from payout I had no sale from December 6 till January 15. Half a year on Canstock feels like a day on Shutterstock.
1383
« on: January 16, 2008, 22:46 »
Works fine here.
(I use the the FP gallery too).
1384
« on: January 14, 2008, 23:57 »
Make sure you have a bald model. Or make her/him wear a cap. Isolating hair on a non-totally white background is an utter mess The fastest and cleanest way to go is shooting on an overexposed white background, certainly around the hair area.
1385
« on: January 13, 2008, 00:40 »
We have upload over 100 images to PSC and it is much better than IS by leaps and bounds IS has one of the worst upload systems. Agreed. They also have that stupid upload limit that is fine for people with constant net access, but nor for me. I'm lagging behind there 400 images and I will never catch up. I also can't afford to do the cumbersome disambiguation process online. They should have an offline application for that. ust remember you cannot upload images to PSC that you have on microsites, PSC is traditional stock pricing, we use them and Alamy for our RM stock. That isn't in their user agreement, as far as I could read. They are non-exclusive. I will upload some selected shots on PSC that are on micro too, and then see. If they sell, I can always disable them on micro. Eggs and baskets.... After all, they are just beginning.
1386
« on: January 13, 2008, 00:17 »
Dreamstime is a big dissapointment for me. I expected a lot more. Dreamstime works in depth. Unlike SS, I never sell recent photos there, only older ones (at least 2-3 months online). Your sales won't plummet on DT when you don't upload for 2 months. DT is a hell of a long-term investment. If your time is limited, the most rational thing to do is to upload your full portfolio on Dreamstime first, and judge after 6 months. In general and for most people, Dreamstime is better than Fotolia, given the same port size. You have 4000 on Fotolia and 600 on Dreamstime. The comparison is not fair.
1387
« on: January 13, 2008, 00:10 »
GeoPappas, what is good of 70% if I have 1 sale per month?! If I dont earn at least 100 dollars per month, than it is not worth the time of uploading, keywording and stuff... Don't tell me you don't have your keywords in your IPTC! Featurepics reads those of course, along with image title/description. You don't waste time uploading: it's just an extra tab in your FTP client. A minute to "cook" your shots on the site: set license type, price, etc... and then just once click to go: no categories. To Leaf: 3 sales per month is not much, but when you price at 10$, it's still 21$ for no sweat at all. For a poor guy like me, that's still 1/4th of an average month at SS... for no sweat. The main advantage with FP is that you can use it as a hotlinking host to your portfolio on your own site, thus skimming the long tail of the market of occasional photo buyers, and saving you bandwidth and the hassle of putting up a shopping cart. If you treat FP just like another MS site (upload, sit back, and wait) and if you price your images just at 2$, then don't do it. For Chode, it's not an option. He is used to 100$/month and more.
1388
« on: January 12, 2008, 07:02 »
I put a couple of hundreds there last September. The site has a fresh look and some features are neat, like the positioning of the watermark. They promised to add a MRF section, but nothing yet. Except for FTP, the site didn't change much the last 4 months, which suggests it's a garage operation.
On the Alexa ratings, TPS is on rank 1,600,000 which is even lower than my own personal site at 1,100,100; go figure!
No sales at all, so me thinks it will go down the drain sooner or later. I'll pull the plug next September.
1389
« on: January 12, 2008, 04:59 »
I'd like to revive this old thread about the Photoshelter collection, since I was accepted yesterday. I'm now crawling slowly through the do's and don'ts, but since this site is fairly new, there is not much info on forums from real contributors.
Content: does the PSC really prefers people shots over landscape/objects shots, as they state?
Reviewers: are they liberal or conservative? Do they prefer plain from the cam (like iStock), artsy, or popped-up (like ShutterStock). What are the most frequent reject reasons and do they also use the this is not commercial reason?
I read about the upload/cooking process on tags/description. It seems to be as cumbersome as the one on iStock. Is it really that bad?
Finally, what about view count and sales there? Or is it still too early?
1390
« on: January 12, 2008, 04:16 »
I'm amazed you're not doing well on DreamsTime, since Fotolia is slower in general. You should upload more to DreamsTime, since IMHO, it's the best MS site around for sales-per-picture. They are utterly professional, they have a stable site, and they have a very good strategic view.
The best subscription site of course is ShutterStock, with fast and easy sales of recent images, so it helps your cash-flow. You can leave DT alone for 3 months and keep your income. You can't do that on SS.
A site I would recommend is FeaturePics, which isn't really competitive to DT and SS if you use it properly.
Because:
- You are totally free to set your pricing (don't go below 6$ please)
- You are totally free to set the license type (RF,RM,RF-extended)
- The upload process is just 1-click (or 2 clicks in case of a MRF); there are no categories.
- They let YOU decide what content you upload - it's YOU that decides what is commercial or not.
- They give you a flat 70%.
But only if:
- You are prepared to down your own marketing. That means you will have to have your own website and use FP as a glorified shopping cart.
- If you are not prepared to do that, there won't be many sales on FP, as people here found out.
You can also consider BigStockPhoto which is slow but steady, and gives about 50% of DT for normal sales. I never had an EL on BigStock however, and I had some on DT. So in terms of $, DT makes much more.
1391
« on: January 11, 2008, 21:29 »
Someone opinion about upload strategies?
Yes, about your price on FP. I changed all to 6$ (for 10MP) and it didn't make any difference. Sales keep coming. What are we complaining about low prices, when, given the chance to set prices higher, we still offer images for low prices?
1392
« on: January 10, 2008, 08:17 »
I just had another 4$ sale at FP. The previous one was on Jan 6, also 4$. The next sale will lift me over payout again. 2-300$ per year is not that bad for a site like FP. My 10MP shots are at 6$, but resizable. I have many full size sales.
I have to add that till now, FP is the center of my web-promotion. With the huge commission of 70%, FP can't do a massive ad campaign, just net promotion. I didn't sell at LO either, that's why I quit. Like Karimala said, it's a mystery why some people sell at certain sites, and others don't.
1393
« on: January 09, 2008, 11:17 »
Great! A very innovative feature! I saw that half of my sales at DT came from just one single keyword, and that the keyword isn't necessary related to the image bought. My mature lesbian couple was sold by the keyword man.
1394
« on: January 08, 2008, 02:54 »
Of course this is not directed against the sites, and not against subs. As Duncan once pointed out on the CanStockPhoto forum, designers download much more than they need under a sub, try some pics out, then pick one for production. That's very well possible with a 3 or even 2.5 MP version.
As Yuri Arcurs found out on SS, designers even abort the download of a large size, which corroborates this guess. There is no problem with sub only sites like SS, where you can upload downsized versions (personally I always upload 6MP there). The real problem is with the mixed sites.
There could be a solution, a Solomon's verdict that satisfies all: photogs, sites, designers. That is, a mixed site only offers the small size of a shot under a sub license, like up to 3MP.
1395
« on: January 07, 2008, 11:24 »
I opted out at StockXpert when they launched subscriptions. Minimum MP at SS is a good idea. DT is a headache though. I just opted out of subs at StockXpert though my port there is small. At SS, I already uploaded at 6MP instead of full size. DT is a real headache. I like it a lot, especially for the EL's. I still trust Serban's good judgment and I always will. Opted out of sub at StockXpert: Yuri Arcurs Freezingpictures GeoPappas Smithore rene sharpshot ldambies epixx latex FlemishDreams.
1396
« on: January 07, 2008, 06:03 »
Not gaining revenue is a downer, but seeing your images everywhere must be a buzz. Probably the same kind of buzz that Vincent Van Gogh got as he knew his Sunflowers were sold for 100M$, and when he barely could afford the paint when he was alive ;-)
1397
« on: January 07, 2008, 05:12 »
I read the comparison with groceries here but me thinks that you should rather compare with the restaurant business.
Subscription is all you can eat for a fixed price. The food is OK, but fatty and starchy to get you full fast. A clever eater goes first for the oysters and the seafood (if there is any) but most are seduced by the cheap dishes near the entry. Anyways, a stomach is finite and most people just don't eat all they can.
Microstock is the fastfood restaurant were prices are somewhat higher but you can choose. The food is in disposable plastic cups. All is plastic. The spoons, the forks, even the ketchup is wrapped in plastic.
You will have to queue in a very brighly lit hall full of gossiping and screaming teenagers, then fight for a place somewhere and get over with it quickly.
Midstock is the better middle-class restaurant where you are served in a relax way at your table, with some music, in a cozy atmosphere, with real dishes and real glasses and proper forks. You don't have to queue, you are being served and taken care off. The food is better too.
Macrostock is the 5-star restaurant. It has all that midstock has, but better. The food is top-notch. Prices are much higher but you get value for money, the best caviar and seafood. Those restaurants have many customers, often you have to make reservations.
Now who would make the most money? The fastfood chain or the 5-star restaurant? Designers obviously want to pay for convenience and for finding the right top notch quality shot fast. They don't have time (=money) to crawl through google or cheapstock to see whether the same image is available elsewhere for 1$ instead of 10$.
Another thing: you can serve different types of food but not degrade a photo. You can downsize but it's still the same photo. What if a fastfood restaurant offered the caviar, just in smaller portions?
Finally, what about a regular restaurant customer that sees that at the same counter, an all-you-can-eat customer gets the same hamburger for less?
Yuri Arcurs offers the worlds finest caviar and sushi. He caters the best restaurants. Now suddenly, this exquisite brand name Arcurs concludes a deal with McDonalds or all-you-can eat to serve the same caviar, only in smaller portions. What will customers think? Arcurs fools us and he is throwing pearls to pigs. Plus the screaming teenagers in McDonalds don't even know the difference between caviar and fries with ketchup.
Just a thought. I am getting hungry.... ;-)
1398
« on: January 07, 2008, 03:52 »
I read Richard's detailed explanation Message (which I appreciated, esp. since he included his plans for upcoming year), and wondered: Are Messages more private than Forum posts, google-wise? Yes since you have to be logged in to read them. The bots can't log in, they can only crawl through stuff that's public on the Net. The forum is exposed to the Net, messages aren't. I would also not quote from that private message as a matter of honor and decency. He was pretty open and honest about the inner workings of GS. Perhaps too open. I don't agree though with his strategy to lower prices. He wants to be the cheapest on the market. Wrong move. We can read it all here over the forum, by pros like Yuri Arcurs. Price doesn't really matter for a designer that costs 150$/hour, overhead included. Convenience and choice does. ShutterStock can get away with 0.30$ per shot, by sheer volume. GS should find a niche. The least we can say is that the site operator is bloody honest and we don't have to worry about our shots if the operation ever stops.
1399
« on: January 07, 2008, 01:25 »
Well it is a fact that review times at DT are extremely high at the moment, 8 days or so. That thread was closed. So what?
1 - The thread was closed but not deleted. The last post I ever made at iStock was just deleted. I know of an independent forum (not SMG) that deletes posts.
2 - Dreamstime is the only site that gives an ETR. Isn't that nice? Other sites can be just as slow on rush periods but you never find that out till after the review. You can just guess, hope, and pray.
3 - Apparently there was a submission peak since during the past holidays; photogs had more time to upload, while many reviewers took a break.
4 - The worst thing a site can do is bring in new untrained reviewers in a rush, that turn out queer rejects. Me thinks quality control still has a priority over speediness in a business that thrives on quality. Whoever wants his shots online fast can just go to Flickr.
5 - There is also a good side on the 8-day review time at DT. My recent batches are online at SS (downsized) already for days. A few shots made it right into my most popular ones. If that special reviewer at DT dares to turn them down as not commercial, I can object with DT support with some solid facts ;-)
1400
« on: January 06, 2008, 12:07 »
*praying*...I hope so...about the spam...gonna check it tomorrow... I had the same problem. I had hidden my mailto under a javascript (old trick) but the bots apparently got intelligent enough nowadays to read over it. Yap I got loads of friends, like the Ghanese rich guy that wants me to handle the fortune of his uncle, a Nigerian banker, a Chinese trader with an offer I can't resist, the UK Lottery, Paypalsupport, and Miranda that fell for my charms. I just wonder why they all want my bank account number? I thought true love was priceless  The best way to handle contact is by a webform. If you are able to tweak php a bit, there are many Open Source webforms on the Net for free. In his tutorials, Dan Heller mentions that 3x more people post inquiries and remarks by webform than by email.
Pages: 1 ... 51 52 53 54 55 [56] 57 58 59 60 61 ... 63
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
