|
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 - bad to the bone
151
« on: June 24, 2009, 22:36 »
well good idea, and why should i give a "best" image not to an macro agency? They pay more?
Just an idear... of a rookie.
Ups...and not to forget: just as an idea of an humbleness rookie who never ever would like to lift his head over anyone like lisa or puravida, who are the rulers here.
152
« on: June 24, 2009, 22:28 »
it's June > sales start to go down it you haven't summer pictures, then came July > sales go down even if you have summer pictures, then...you wouldn't believe but it happens every year, came august and sales slow down again at an unbelieveral rate.
It's bad because no reviewers and no agencies concept can be punished for this...its just the way how advertysing-business work. It's not 9 to 5 and not Januar to December. Better you call your lawyer to make them work every day, every month like every secretary.
Ups...and not to forget: just as an idea of an humbleness rookie who never ever would like to lift his head over anyone like lisa or puravida, who are the rulers here.
153
« on: June 24, 2009, 22:00 »
All professionall programs are orientated on print production (CMYK) and banding is allmost a little or non problem in print because you have more bandwith and less contrast.
In RGB the colours are more brilliant but have less bandwith, but in the meaning of "what you see is what you get" its not necessary to have any parameter for output a picture in any other way as it apears on your screen while you create it. If you create a picture for microwebsite, in RGB-Mode, you have to had a look at its appearence on your screen. Thats no mystical and hidden secret, it's just the idiot way of proofing any image.
If Microagencys would only take printablepictures you had to do a proofprint...i don't know if you know what this means, if you had the knowledge to do this and how this had to be handeld you wouln't shout out in the manner you did.
There're two simple ways to proof a picture for two different needs.
RGB-have a look at you screenapearence.
CMYK, calibrate your screen, do a proofprint
If you don't have any idea how difficult and physical different this two kinds of appearence of an image can be...you better never ever buy any program, buy a retraining on web-and printdesign, for beginners.
Ups...and not to forget: just as an idea of an humbleness rookie who never ever would like to lift his head over anyone like lisa or puravida, who are the rulers here.
154
« on: June 23, 2009, 14:39 »
me also
155
« on: June 22, 2009, 20:47 »
hey ghostwick,
the more i read in this forum, the more i understand why microagencies behave like constributors habe only (the s-word) in their head.
I remember to be told last week don't take anything here personal... But maybe i didn't get the point and this rule exist only for the new ones or anybody who didn't agree with the lemmings. :-)
156
« on: June 22, 2009, 20:07 »
...still waiting for someone who tells that veer accept only special type of pictures with higher quality or more "arty" look. Until now i read only the same old discussions i've heard already about any other agency. Where is the veer-hype? :-)
157
« on: June 19, 2009, 02:49 »
@clivia
If they want to close StockXpert, they would - in my opinion. Maybe they will pick out only portfolios what sells, but they have to integrate them if they want to integrate the customers of StockXpert.
Thats one reason more to upload because i sell at StockXpert, same images what are rejected by istock.
158
« on: June 19, 2009, 02:40 »
@ puravida
how funny is this opinion, you realy think anyone can have some thousends of images and will be prepared for any case.
Any time i need a picture i search again and mostly i didn't get what i'm searching ... meanwhile i have a big pool of images i sold but never ever i take someone twice.
Microstocks are overloaded with copys of copys from pictures what sells but if you search images you need, you can detect a lot of wholes in any agencys portfolio.
I have a long list of images that doesn't exist.
Sales go down this time because it's summer, again, like every year, how unestimated it seems like, it happens every year.
159
« on: June 19, 2009, 02:17 »
Still uploading at StockXpert because same images are rejected by Istock are accepted and sell just in the minute by StockXpert. They do also if they slip throug the review at istock but most of them where rejected.
160
« on: June 18, 2009, 21:58 »
In this case, it's definetly not a logo. It is offered for private use at private websites.
In my opinion.
Bertold
161
« on: June 12, 2009, 02:35 »
So you try to find out why StockXpert hides your photos from their customers and you will told me they don't do so with any kind of illustration?
My first upload at StockXpert was a photo, takes some hours to review and had 19 views since 26 May.....that doesn't seemed to me like hiding fotos away from customers.
@ clivia
I had a look at your images at StockXpert, there's a photo from 24may with 5 downloads, what are we talking about?
162
« on: June 12, 2009, 02:29 »
wich of the tree accounts i tried to open? and with witch password - i tried them several times, all failed.
163
« on: June 11, 2009, 23:54 »
very funny...this thread is about StockXpert-problems. As you can see on the right side StockXpert just changed position with FT. And all i said is: it doesn't seems like a problem at StockXpert, to me.
But, if this thread is just for moaning and victims...i'm sorry, my intention was just to give a statement out of my view.
If you want to bath in your tears...please continue, don't pay regard to me.
164
« on: June 11, 2009, 23:00 »
Okay, Veer is great....all others are loosers. Sounds like a lot of beliefers to me. I don't belief in beliefers. I belief in sales. Until now i don't see any reason to belief...they announce me not more profit then elsewhere, if they do, i will give them a try...until then i'm happy about 27 sales, 49$, with an average of 26 images in 3 weeks...on StockXpert. I knew, this looks fine to me because i'm just an idiot. I'm shure nearly all of you earn more and expect more...because you deliver "real" quality...not as me poor little newbie. What do you think under what trash can i crawled out to allow myself to tell you my thoughts? ( I hate this, why is it elsewhere necessary to piss on someones leg to get respected).
BTW: i never constribute to SS because they pay so low, as bad i can't produce images - even if they sell them most.
@ helix 7
Not "me too"? Istock and Getty do the same just at this moment and they have quality and images.
And also the know-how since years, what means nearly hundrets of years in this business.
165
« on: June 11, 2009, 21:26 »
holyshit, what is the problem with StockXpert....i just joined there 3 weeks ago. And my experiences are very good. Does this experience put an "idiot" sign on my head.
Most of my sales i do elsewhere. I just tried StockXpert because there is so much bad news about StockXpert.
166
« on: June 11, 2009, 21:17 »
@whatalife
well, if they want to do so...don't you agree they have to have better commissions for constributors who do better and more strenght in selection?
I followed the "Veer" threads since a while and also had a look on the images of people who told to be in the game. That's not better stuff than the average. And it will be payed like average stuff elsewhere.
Nobody has to be a marketingpro to tell you, that launching a "me too" project in an already established market with average quality for customers and constributors is not a good idea - especialy if you have an image for delivering high quality.
167
« on: June 11, 2009, 21:06 »
But this thread is about general actions on StockXpert and by StockXpert. If new uploads doesn't have visits or downloads because customers don't like them...whats the matter? Do pictures what customers are interested in. That's not the problem of StockXpert.
168
« on: June 11, 2009, 20:52 »
@puravida
seems like you got my constribution not right, i'm not doing "good" artwork, i do images that sells well on microsstock. Good artwork is not for micromarket. And...i start with StockXpert last month, not: i started first in my microstock career at StockXpert.
But i think it is okay, if anybody have anywhere a "new" in his profil it is normal that somebody feels dedicadet to handle them like rookies. If you need this for your self-assurance...feel free to do so.
169
« on: June 11, 2009, 18:04 »
No photos, yes. Do you think this makes any different?
170
« on: June 11, 2009, 18:03 »
But...veer has an image for selling best artwork...how is this compare to sell microstock.
If some company change from highest standart to lowest.. what should i think about?
I think they have a problem.
I think also: they have no experience in selling poor pictures and handling of customers who buy a picture for some dollars.
I think also: they kill their brand and that's all they have.
Veer is dead. I give them 24 month.
Bertold
171
« on: June 11, 2009, 17:28 »
3d illustrations - all pixels, only one photo, not one single vector.
Btw. my sales increase elsewhere (slower than last quater), but i'm just celebrate my fist anyversary at 25 June and upload permanent (nearby 1000 Illustrations online until now).
172
« on: June 11, 2009, 17:26 »
well, i liked the concept of Zym but unfortunally I never ever get almost registered... how funny.
I tryed it 3times. never get a mail for confirmation. (Don't tell me i've had to have a look in my spam folder)
I don't use unusual programs (Mac OSX, Safari, tried also Explorer)...no way.
173
« on: June 11, 2009, 16:50 »
After reading this thread i'm nearby to be shamed of, but, I started last month to upload at StockXpert, every image takes just hours to be reviewed, 99% been accepted and i sold a lot in the last three weeks.
I'm more than happy about this try. And, the reason I tried this was just because there are so much "bad" news about StockXpert I supposed to read PR related threads. So i would like to find out an myself.
StockXpert is life, have the fastest review i ever saw and sells fantastic! If i take the average of my pictures with the income...they will get my bestseller in a while.
regards
Bertold
174
« on: May 16, 2009, 13:01 »
IS miss thousands of pictures what were accepted and sell well on nearly any other microstockagency. Because of their politic to reject illustrations what are not verctors. But why not, if they feel well with this....
Ther're also illustrationagencies who don't take photos, photoagencies who don't take any kind of illustration and a lot more of agencies who are more specialized.
Some month ago some of my rasterillustrations slipped through review and into my portfolio, they sold best of all my images there. But...the effort to upload und the quote of rejection is that high IS turned to an uninteresting agency for 3d pictures.
On the other hand, they sell vector illustrations like hell...and take nearly all of my work.
Maybe this is not as stupid as it seems like on the first view. They stay specialized as best agency for vectors and sell well...i don't see any competitor as big as IS in vectorworks.
175
« on: May 11, 2009, 08:52 »
@ ghostwick: IS don't like my stil of 3d-illustrations (they have to be photolike, what mine are not), so i stopped uploading some month ago. But at the moment i start a new portfolio there.
After some month in business i saw that i most sell at europa. Now im interested in finding out what sells in US-market.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
