|
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 - Karimala
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61
1426
« on: June 23, 2007, 09:05 »
Edit: Oh, I meant to mention that I've had to put a post on the FT forum drawing their attention to the fact that in 'my messages' the 'inbox' is misspelt as 'my indox'.
'My Indox'? I mean c'mon; how sloppy and amateurish can you get.........?
That's hilarious! :-) Sorry...I'm at a point where all I can do is laugh. The sort dates in the stats are also backwards, upside down, whichever way you want to look at it.
1427
« on: June 23, 2007, 09:02 »
Where are all of these new sites coming from? It reminds me of the influx of new sites a couple of years ago, most of which no longer exist.
No more for me. At this point, they either have to stand out from the pack in some new, innovative way, or have some kind of a proven track record before I bite.
LuckyO is the last new site to catch my attention right away, and it was due to three things: 1) Bryan's track record and experience with start-up companies, 2) a fresh site that doesn't appear to be just the same ol' regurgitated photo site, and 3) providing ways to meet and educate their contributors.
1428
« on: June 22, 2007, 14:06 »
Hear hear! I spent a lot of time building my portfolio and learning the trade in the beginning, but now I don't have to spend nearly as much time. 2/3 of my living is made from earnings from microstock and growing every month.
1429
« on: June 18, 2007, 17:10 »
$1 EL??? What's that?
I sold one image today.
Do you see any speed improvement in the new version?
Regards,
Adelaide
The extended license now defaults to $1, so you have to change it now on every photo.
1430
« on: June 18, 2007, 15:49 »
I'm also too lazy to downsize, so I just give 'em what I got. However, I do upsize to meet Alamy's requirements.
1431
« on: June 18, 2007, 04:19 »
They announced that instead of boosting the cost of a credit to $1.36, it would remain $1 and to make up the difference added the new small size. I've sold one small size since the update, and the royalty was 35 cents (at bronze).
1432
« on: June 18, 2007, 00:58 »
I don't mind the sites requiring that I send them my SSN number, because it's necessary for tax purposes.
However, with regards to Fotolia I have a serious problem with the fact that our SSNs are submitted over an unencrypted connection and then actually stored on our profile page for any hacker to find. This has been brought to their attention numerous times, and I had hoped with v2 this would change, but it hasn't, so in the next few days I am going to close my account. It's been five months now since they were first made aware of the problem, so there is no way am I going to continue doing business with them anymore.
1433
« on: June 16, 2007, 10:14 »
Made it as far as one of my unprocessed photos this time, only to discover that all the metadata disappeared (title, keywords, and description), so now I have the pleasure of reuploading about 50 photos.  And of course, the categories STILL aren't in alphabetical order...I mean really, how hard is it to arrange the categories in alphabetical order so we can find them more easily?
1434
« on: June 16, 2007, 09:43 »
I was able to get as far as my stats page and could view my stats for June before the site went down again...but it took longer than ever. Hopefully they'll get this all sorted out soon.
1435
« on: June 15, 2007, 23:54 »
Karimala, it took me awhile to figure out how to log on to their upgraded site but if you just type in your username and then password, press enter, it should work. I've already written to them and they said they'd add a logon button.
I tried that, but it just took me to another login page. And I tried it in both Firefox and IE with the same results. Sent an e-mail to support. BTW...looking forward to meeting you in Vegas! :-D
1436
« on: June 15, 2007, 23:43 »
Has the pay-out been reduced to US$50? Great, then I'm finally next to my first one!
Regards,
Adelaide
You have to change the amount to $50 in your profile. The default is $100.
1437
« on: June 13, 2007, 21:03 »
I'm only with NDR, and no sales as of yet. I did notice today though that they have upgraded to 2.0 and it looks pretty good from what I can tell. Funny thing is that I can't find the login link now! Maybe it's temporarily dismantled.
I decided not to go with NLS, because something didn't sit right with me when I toured the site and read the Nikon forum where it all started. Didn't sound well planned.
RSI is just going to have to wait until I start more hearing about movement. There just isn't anything special that sets them apart from the pack yet.
1438
« on: June 13, 2007, 20:16 »
I think I'm the only person around who has seen an increase in sales since the announcement. But that's really not saying much, because last month was my 2nd worst month in an entire year.
1439
« on: June 13, 2007, 20:14 »
Yes!  Maybe now I can catch up on my backlog with 30 per week.
1440
« on: June 13, 2007, 17:07 »
...SurveyMonkey does not like me today...
1441
« on: June 13, 2007, 13:27 »
I just noticed this thread was started a year ago, but what the heck...these are my numbers from May 2007. Shutterstock = 40%, up 21% from previous BME (December), 1 EL (4 in March) iStock = 31%, down 12% from previous BME (March), 3 EL Dreamstime = 12%, up 7% from previous BME (March) StockXPert = 6%, down 44% from previous BME (April) BigStock = 5%, down 14% from previous BME (March) 123RF = 3%, up 144% from previous BME (November), 1 EL Fotolia = 3%, down 48% from previous BME (March), second lowest earnings per month in a year. Overall BME by 6%CanStockPhoto, LO, FP not tracked by percentage of sales (percentages limited to sites where I receive a payout at least every other month). CanStock = up 135% from previous BME (November); due in part to uploading 500+ photos and their discounted credits promo LuckyOliver = up 14% from previous BME (March) FeaturePics = down 98% from previous BME (February); no sales since March 1; earnings are from referrals only
1442
« on: June 13, 2007, 13:04 »
Argh...SurveyMonkey appears to be down. Can't get to the page. I'll keep trying though!
1443
« on: June 13, 2007, 13:03 »
The good news is that my sales don't seem to have been affected by the latest change. The bad news is they are down overall now that exclusives are once again getting preferential placement, and I had my first zero DL day in nine months on Sunday.
1444
« on: June 12, 2007, 00:29 »
It's still a positive week! :-) StockXpert provided you with a published clip that you can show your own prospective clients. That's kinda sorta a big deal.
1445
« on: June 11, 2007, 22:45 »
Bryan did put up a graph and the number of images online is increasing more than the number of sales. I think that a high percentage of those new photos wont sell for a long time, so having more sales will help images that are more likely to sell. It wont be long though before the site is swamped with images that don't sell. That can't be good and I hope the push for sales improves soon or photographers might decide LO is not worth uploading to. Perhaps it is time for a few big adverts in the designer magazines. That seems to work for the big sites. Waiting for the perfect site before advertising seems risky in a market that can change quickly.
Sharpshot's post brings Fotolia to mind. They jumped right out of the gates with big advertising and a sloppy website, drummed up lots of sales overnight, and then proceeded to neglect the site for a year now. That decision has left a ton of disgruntled buyers and sellers, and I am so thankful that LO isn't following that path. Everyone at LO is working incredibly hard towards building a solid reputation and a reliable, multi-functional user interface that will work when the big print ad campaign comes. They did an outstanding job developing a site that makes us, the contributors, want to come back and upload. Now we just need to wait a bit while they work the same magic for the buyers.
1446
« on: June 11, 2007, 21:31 »
There's probably a thread for this, but I didn't find it in a quick search... so I'll ask it here anyway.
I occassionally do a google search on myself or on a keyword imbedded in one of my pix somewhere on a stock site. Usually I can get a couple, few dozen of my pictures come up in the images section on the first several pages of Google. LO, IS, FT, SS and others... the majority of them are always IS and LO.
Under the LO hits, my pictures were displayed, but when I clicked on some to establish a link, ...........it went to some other photogs portfolio. I'd estimate that about 40% of them went to another's pix even though mine was displayed.
Is this to be expected? I'm not a mastermind of the internet. Any comments would be apprecitated.  -tom
Man, I wish my memory was what it used to be! LOL I actually talked to Bryan about this, and if I remember correctly he said that's normal, because Google is also picking up the collage of photos at the bottom of the page and their related keywords. Something like that.
1447
« on: June 09, 2007, 04:36 »
I'd love to see an extension, too.
I've been working my tail off building up my portfolio in order to stay on the front page of the Top 50 contributors list, which also translates to mean I've been working extremely hard to achieve those 100 sales before the July 19th deadline. Somehow I've managed to say in the Top 50, but I don't think I'm going to make the deadline (it'll be close). It would be pretty awesome if LO could reward the top contributors who don't quite make 100 with an exemption or an extension or something.
1448
« on: June 09, 2007, 04:21 »
Sweet!
1449
« on: June 08, 2007, 11:15 »
62 sales, no ELs, and halfway to payout. Like everyone else, I saw my sales drop in the first part of May, but they came back with a vengeance after they tweaked the search engine in the middle of the month to bring forward some older images (I've been there almost a year). I had 11 sales between May 14 - 30, zero sales between May 1 - 13.
As for FeaturePics, I haven't had a sale since March 1 with a portfolio of 1000 images. I keep asking myself how they are ever going to have the money for marketing, if they are paying a 70% commissions, 1.5% referral bonuses, and whatever they pay their reviewers and staff. I'd rather receive less commission and have that portion of the funds go into marketing for my images and site upgrades.
1450
« on: June 06, 2007, 15:17 »
ah yes, got it. thanks.
that does seem to be how things work.
The times I have been in the paper - which included a head and shoulders shot - no release was signed.
this is confusing.
Yeh...it is confusing. As Ed mentioned, every paper and agency has its own policies and some enforce strict ethics codes and some don't. And verbal consent, which is provided by giving the photographer your name and contact info, is considered to be as valid as a signed release.
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
