|
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 - RT
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 ... 77
1401
« on: January 31, 2009, 19:30 »
I think the problem with shutterstock is the heavy bias for new images can leave ones that should sell way down the default search.
I honestly believe that Shutterstock couldn't give two hoots what sells, they're a numbers game and as long as people buy their subscriptions I don't think Shutterstock care what the buyers do after that, apart from hoping they don't use their full quota obviously. As for the OP's question, in my experience sales on SS are stagnated, it matters not whether I upload 5 or 500 a month the sales remain at or around the same level, but as strange as this may seem to some, I don't class Shutterstock as a 'stock' agency in the true sense of the word.
1402
« on: January 31, 2009, 19:17 »
It's not something that bothers me either way
1403
« on: January 31, 2009, 19:13 »
So i say, well done pixart... at least they are showing a little initiative and belief in their own company.
But what are your views on Pix mac !
1404
« on: January 31, 2009, 03:24 »
RT, you lost your religion? I thought you were a Nikon guy?
Nope always been a Canon guy, I fell in love with the A1 back then, couldn't afford one of course but it was my dream camera, last year I bought myself a pristine one of eBay, it still had that smell of a film camera which you don't get with digital. I must say though that I don't do the Canon v Nikon thing, I think they both make great cameras and I was tempted to switch to a D3.
1405
« on: January 30, 2009, 19:28 »
It seems that if your images are available on fotolia then they are on pixmac also.
Looked through a few images and didn't notice any sales. Doesn't look to promising. No pie there 
I knew I'd heard of them somewhere  and you're right they're all from Fotolia, I've even got images there and have had one sale. I'd have thought that would disqualify you from any 'cash for uploading' even if you were desperate enough to upload there.
1406
« on: January 30, 2009, 18:37 »
Thanks but my intention was to warn others rather than get suggestions, I've already got some Sandisks.
Just didn't want anybody else wasting their money.
1407
« on: January 30, 2009, 17:55 »
That's a big promise to make, but then again it means nothing if they're not around in two years, which if you consider that two of the worlds biggest selling microstock contributors have sold a total of 4 photos between them in over six months it is a very strong possibility I think.
Sorry but I think Pixmac.com is just another wannabe waiting to fail, add it to the list with Yaymicro.
1408
« on: January 30, 2009, 17:44 »
A bit of advice if you own a Canon 5D Mark II, don't buy a Lexar UDMA card - the camera won't format the card, advice on the internet is to format it in the computer, that works and the camera will then format the card....HOWEVER none of the shots you take register when you try to download them onto your computer and when you put the card back in the camera guess what - 'This card cannot be formatted' error comes up. I normally use Sandisk but my supplier was out and sent a Lexar instead. Apparently Lexar have a history of cards not working with Canons - shame I didn't know that before 
1409
« on: January 30, 2009, 09:46 »
If you were one of 1,000,000 contributors to a site that pays 50% and does $1,000,000 in sales, how much would you make?
Depends on how many of the 1,000,000 are your referrals and what the sales of dirt are like there I suppose.
1410
« on: January 30, 2009, 05:28 »
Sorry never heard of him/her, have you tried sending a PM?
1411
« on: January 30, 2009, 05:26 »
Secondly as he keeps telling everyone he is a administrator/reviewer, there's only one reason that anybody would want to sit in front of their computer for hours on end looking at other peoples photos for the lowest wage on the planet !!
No replies on Friends ReUnited ?
1412
« on: January 30, 2009, 05:22 »
What would be the best way to build up a portfolio?
Take lot's of photos and put them in it.
1413
« on: January 29, 2009, 14:37 »
Hmmm... Note to self - Must try harder 
1414
« on: January 29, 2009, 14:21 »
Instead of writing articles about attracting more photographers, why not write about attracting more buyers.. You still get refferals there too..
I think you'll find 'Scrooge McDuck' has done just that.
1415
« on: January 29, 2009, 02:18 »
Best wishes
1416
« on: January 29, 2009, 02:16 »
I think your blog will appeal to anyone that hasn't tried microstock before.
Although money can be made shooting inane subjects I think that boat has sailed except for for odd rare exception, having read your blog it wasn't the niche I was expecting, here's a tip - after you've shot dirt why not lay on it and shoot skies, there's a fortune to be made!
1417
« on: January 28, 2009, 06:35 »
I stopped uploading there ages ago, their payout system is ridiculous, I'm still owed money, my account shows that everything I've sold there is still owing although I have had some payments, how are you meant to keep track of whats owed and whats been payed. Add to this one part of the site say's you'll be payed on a certain date and another part contradicts that with another explanation.
I am adament that they're not bothered about the site, I wouldn't be surprised to see it disappear.
1418
« on: January 27, 2009, 18:47 »
Keywords are intellectual property of the contributor. Your software is stealing these keywords and you are asking money for it? Hmmm... risky.
Keywords would not be considered an original literary work, and they do not form part of the copyright that applies to the image. And how can he be stealing something that anybody could freely use anyway, irrespective of the source. 
1419
« on: January 27, 2009, 09:45 »
I am a TOTAL iStock groupie. I love the site, I jumped at exclusivity and I promote iStock everywhere that I go. I am very proud of being an IS exclusive.
Yet you decided to start this thread! I'm not exclusive but I do love iStock for the amount of revenue it creates for me, nearly everything else about the site drives me nuts. The people that woohoo there and boohoo here always amuse me.
1420
« on: January 27, 2009, 05:01 »
The interesting thing is, that the person who might be most negatively affected, James West with Alamy, is amongst the one who is the most open to that option to sell images at different price points. That's because James West unlike many people is aware of what we sell, and it isn't images it is a licenese to use an image, when people understand what it is they're selling they might be able to understand the different price points.
1421
« on: January 26, 2009, 17:24 »
Jonathan,
As you brought up the subject of model releases a good tip I found somewhere ( it was another photographer but I can't remember who it was ) is to take a photo (RAW file obviously) of the model at the start of the session holding the release they have just signed, this serves two purposes, firstly it gives you a good visual reference for your filing system which is what my source used it for, but from my point of view if you save an unprocessed copy of the RAW file it could serve you as vital evidence should it ever be required.
1422
« on: January 26, 2009, 13:58 »
All micro agencies have indemnity clauses in the contracts, not just new ones.
100% true and it's what I've been banging on about for ages, people need to understand that they are resposible for what they upload, it shocks me when I see comments from people saying they rely on reviewers and agencies knowledge. No reviewer on any microstock site undergoes any sort of legal training, and some of the people running the agencies are giving out misinformation, I've just been involved in a topic at Dreamstime and rather than admit that they're wrong one of the management chose to delete my post and ignore the issue. As for the OP's question, my rule of thumb is that if you remove all the branding and it's obvious who it's made by then it's not worth doing.
1423
« on: January 26, 2009, 07:54 »
Facts:
Unique visitors: 2,300 a day
A year ago: 900 a day
Here are some Facts for you: -I could include the words 'free porn' in the metadata of my website and get probably more unique visitors a day than you've highlighted, so therefore the statistic means absolutely nothing. -Anybody in the business of buying images in any sort of quantity will be very aware of Microstock by now. -Anybody looking to purchase images by searching via Google will be presented with vast numbers of microstock sites long before they come across yours. -One decent stock photograph uploaded to iStock photo plus the other top sites will produce more revenue than any money you'll ever receive via referrals. -Reading through any microstock site forums for the posts of anybody who's ever participated in any 'free image' scheme and the result will be that it does not produce any significant extra revenue. -People will willingly take something if it's free for no reason other than the fact it is free. -Unless I'm mistaken you are not a registered charity and therefore the sole reason you've created this site is to generate revenue for yourself and not to help others. -I have more 'core data' to prove that your site won't work than you have yet provided to the contrary.
1424
« on: January 26, 2009, 04:26 »
If you spent as much time trying to improve your skills rather than trying to make money off the backs of other peoples talent (or lack of in this case) you might find it pays better.
Apart from Dreamstime which give you a payment for just referring people I can't see anybody making any money from this, ( I notice you've kept the Dreamstime referral just for yourself) your site is aimed at freeloaders and the sort of people that trawl the internet searching for sites like yours are not the sort of people that will buy an image, no matter how cheap it is, but they are the type that 'cclapper' has highlighted and will no doubt increase the number of images that are being ripped off each day, especially if they're willing to download an image that is so cr*p that none of the hundreds of microstock sites would even accept it.
As 'flemishdreams' mentioned above why anybody would want to be associated with a site like yours is beyond me.
I only hope that when your site fails which it will, you will be out of pocket.
And please drop the smokescreen of trying to help others make money, this is pure and simply just another tacky referral site.
1425
« on: January 24, 2009, 15:18 »
Why would I pay any tax?! It is ridiculous to pay a tax in my country, when I earn money outside my country. My country did nothing to provide me this job. I did all by myself. Why should I pay them anything?
A lot of people from bosnia work in Iraq with US companies, they earn about 5.000$ per month, and they dont pay any tax to the country! So why should I?! pft.... they can kiss my as*.....
Peter, You're not earning money outside your country, you're operating your business from within your country aren't you, it just happens that you sell internationally. It's no different than if you had a factory producing toys and ditributed them abroad, you'd still pay taxes on the profits you make within your own country. The people you mention in Iraq are in a completely different situation because they are physically there.
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 ... 77
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
