|
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 - disorderly
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58
1401
« on: March 01, 2009, 23:57 »
February was my best month yet, beating January by 9% and February, 2008 by 27%. Not bad; I wonder how I'll do in March... | Shutterstock: | 32%, | up 59% | BME | | iStockphoto: | 18%, | up 27% | | Fotolia: | 15%, | up 20% | BME | | StockXpert: | 12%, | up 2% | | Dreamstime: | 11%, | down 14% | | 123RF: | 6%, | up 4% | | BigStockPhoto: | 4%, | down 21% | | Crestock: | 2%, | up 7% | | CanStockPhoto: | 1%, | up 70% |
1402
« on: February 27, 2009, 16:26 »
In case I wasn't clear, I wasn't arguing against the value of HTTPS for confidential data. Logins should always be secure, as well as pagest that pass credit card information. But for everything else, the question is whether the overhead is justified by the risk of abuse if the information gets out. Personally, I don't care if someone can discover that someone at my IP address ordered those videos, as long as they can't get to information that will permit them to impersonate me.
1403
« on: February 27, 2009, 15:37 »
The short answer is that HTTPS is expensive. All that encryption and decryption adds significantly to server load. It's worth doing when confidential information is being passed, but the rest of the time it's just overhead with no benefit.
1404
« on: February 25, 2009, 11:55 »
I'm a Transmit user as well. However, my upload process relies more on the Terminal and the ftp command. I upload to my web provider first with Transmit. Once the files are on my server, I run a shell script (my website runs on FreeBSD, which gives me full shell command access) that uses the ftp command to upload to each of the agencies in turn. Then I go into each site and set categories. The upload is a lot faster, since my web provider has a lot more bandwidth to most of the sites than I could get from my DSL connection, and once it starts, I can go on and use my connection for other things.
1405
« on: February 20, 2009, 11:38 »
Thanks for the update, Achilles. I wasn't worried, both because my interactions with Dreamstime have all been positive, and because Ssuper's note read like someone spreading malicious gossip for his own nefarious reasons.
1406
« on: February 16, 2009, 14:25 »
One point worth mentioning is that getting the right keywords is essential to an image's long term success. A good image with bad keywords may sell early on because clients are looking at new images in a category. After that it's about showing up in searches, and that's where the right keywords make all the difference.
1407
« on: February 13, 2009, 14:14 »
The article is wildly inaccurate, but in its favor, at least it's short, and it has a tone that anyone with a modicum of sense will recognize as not caring enough to do proper research. But that's always been my impression of Ken Rockwell; where Thom Hogan puts effort into both research and explaining and justifying his opinions, Rockwell seems to delight in expressing how little effort goes into his. A photographer friend of mine met both Hogan and Rockwell. She listens to Rockwell, not because he's more knowledgeable, or more understandable, or more comprehensive. No, it's because Hogan was unapproachable in person, where Rockwell was a nice guy. Me, I'll take the crank with the reasoned opinions, thank you very much. (Oh, and for the record, Mr. Rockwell, sometimes those $.25 sales aren't. Like that $28 extended license I got today from Shutterstock...)
1408
« on: February 12, 2009, 21:13 »
I've been using a slightly edited version of Shutterstock's MR, which every other agency has accepted without issue. (I removed the two references to Shutterstock.) Even iStockphoto accepts this release now that I've added my name and address to the form.
1409
« on: February 12, 2009, 01:07 »
Since no one has mentioned it, let me recommend Graphic Converter as a keywording solution for the Mac. I used its Browse Folder function to select a set of images and edit titles, descriptions, keywords and the like. It lets me edit IPTC data without affecting the bits of the image. It also has a lossless rotate that I use as a first step on my portrait format images.
1410
« on: February 07, 2009, 01:02 »
What's to remember? I just upload everything via FTP. I haven't hit a limit on FTP, just on submission. So once the FTP is done, I keep submitting until it tells me I have to stop. Computers are good at numbers, so I don't have to bother...
1411
« on: February 04, 2009, 11:27 »
Btw. - where am I to request money at 123??? I have finally reached payment (after several months!!! - terrible...) but I cannot find out how to request money.
You don't. They'll pay you around the 15th of the month after you reach the payout amount.
1412
« on: February 03, 2009, 10:08 »
Brian Ibbott hosts the website for his Coverville podcast on BlueHost. It's a reasonably busy site, with a modest forum. BlueHost is a sponsor for his show, but I doubt he'd be hawking their wares if he wasn't getting good service there.
1413
« on: January 29, 2009, 02:57 »
Just to follow up, I received a response from Elena that was both an explanation (a bug in the software their reviewer used) and an apology, which was gracious of her. All ten images were re-reviewed and accepted. I'll upload a bunch more and see how I do.
1414
« on: January 28, 2009, 11:33 »
He's no more a hypocrite than the rest of us. I realized a long time ago that if I had to kill and butcher my own meat, I'd quickly become a vegetarian. Heck, there are lots of jobs I pay somebody to do that I wouldn't do myself.
1415
« on: January 28, 2009, 11:31 »
Thanks; I've sent them a message. I have to say that it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in their competence.
1416
« on: January 27, 2009, 21:06 »
Thanks, John. As I said, I'm mystified. If anybody's curious, here are Shutterstock links to the images in question, all but one of which are safe for work or family or whatever: Accepted, accepted, rejected, rejected, rejected, rejected, rejected, rejected, rejected (contains nudity), rejected. Curious to say the least.
1417
« on: January 27, 2009, 17:22 »
After reading a few positive comments here, I thought I'd give Featurepics a try. I uploaded ten photos at random. (Okay, not really at random; I grabbed every fiftieth picture from my SS portfolio.) Checking back just now, I see that eight of ten were rejected. Which surprised me, but hey, I had a similar experience the first time I uploaded to Fotolia. But here's where it gets weird.
The reason for the first rejection: "we are limiting "balloons" category". Okay, I can accept that. It's a picture of a hot air balloon in flight, although what they have against balloons I can't imagine. But then I go to the second rejection. "we are limiting "balloons" category". Uhhh... that's not a balloon. It's a plane. And the third: "we are limiting "balloons" category". Um, guys? I'm pretty sure those aren't balloons under her blouse, if you know what I mean. Nor are the models in photos number four, five, six, seven or eight smuggling any balloons. And if you can't tell the difference, well, I think we have a problem...
1418
« on: January 27, 2009, 12:19 »
I'm not seeing anything like a rebound. This month I'm on target to equal my second worst month at iS in two years (May 08), with of course a far larger portfolio. I'm only up 13% over December 08, my worst month, which was down 40% from November.
1419
« on: January 27, 2009, 12:11 »
Of course iS isn't a totalitarian state; it's neither totalitarian nor a state. I do find their forums an unappealing place to be, both from the heavy hand of iS and even more from the rah rah of iS apologists when a discouraging voice is heard. More than any other site, I get a true believer vibe from iS members. I used to spend a lot more time on the SS forums, which I felt had a higher content value.
As for results, iS has been sinking for me for a while. My monthly earnings are down about a third, and this month iS has slipped from second in earnings to fifth. Granted, I have a lot more images on other sites, but that's due to iS's restrictive upload policy. I have a backlog of 1400 images, and it'll only get worse!
1420
« on: January 24, 2009, 10:06 »
I can't say it's unfair; if Fotolia didn't get paid, why should they take the hit alone? But incompetent? That I'll agree with. To take a year and a half to figure out they have an accounting problem, and then to ding us without so much of a word of warning are signs both of incompetence and lousy supplier relations.
1421
« on: January 22, 2009, 11:29 »
Can I show my statistics, or I belong to photographers with "tiny data set"??
Of course you can show them, but you also ought to put them into context so we know how meaningful they are. Percentages aren't much good without knowing something about the raw numbers behind them.
1422
« on: January 22, 2009, 11:20 »
I just had a reminder of how volatile the numbers can be: a single extended license sale at Fotolia pushed them from 5th to 3rd for the month. And that's with a few thousand images on each site and close to a thousand sales a month. If things can be that volatile for me, they're basically meaningless for someone with a handful of sales.
I don't have a top 4; I have a top 5, with the order for 2-4 changing regularly. At the moment the order is SS, SX, Ftl, iS and DT. Actually, Albumo is ahead of DT in 5th, but that's due to a bounty they paid on the last three months of uploads. Not something that will occur very often.
1423
« on: January 21, 2009, 10:49 »
You're welcome to include mine.
1424
« on: January 21, 2009, 10:28 »
I believe being independent has had an impact on my ability to grow as a photographer. Since I started submitting, I've used image acceptance and sales results as guides to how I'm doing. Being at multiple agencies helps considerably; it reduces the effect of house styles and arbitrary reviewers on my sense of what's good and what's stockworthy. Just because particular agencies (I'm lookin' at you, Fotolia!) think some of my work is crap doesn't make it so, and having other agencies decide differently and customers voting with their dollars helps me understand where I'm doing it right and wrong.
And at least for me, the difference in income between exclusive and independent is significant. iStock has never been more than 40% of my monthly take; this month it's 14%. That's money and validation I'm not willing to give up. Granted, some of that may be due to the huge backlog of images I can't upload to iStock yet due to their laughable weekly quota. And granted, there would likely be at least some revenue boost just for leasing my soul to exclusivity. But I don't believe it would be worth what I'd lose.
1425
« on: January 20, 2009, 17:24 »
You mean it was just a come on? I feel so... so... used. 
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
