|
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 - Allsa
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 17
151
« on: March 12, 2012, 22:46 »
I don't think anyone's account should be suspended on the basis of one or two accusations of copying. I've come up with what I thought were original, clever ideas, and then would do a search and find out others had already done the same thing. OTOH I've also come up with ideas that had not been done by any other microstockers (as far as I could tell from searches), and yet I will see all sorts of copies turning up after my image accepted, especially if it becomes popular. Some of these people may have simply come up with the same idea as me, but a lot of it is idea theft, plain and simple.
That said, it's hard to be sure if an idea is stolen or not, and it's dangerous to jump to conclusions. I get really irritated when I see people with portfolios that consist mostly of copied work - I think these people have nothing to contribute and should be banned.
152
« on: March 10, 2012, 21:12 »
Wow! Way to make me feel included DT!
I'll make sure to tick the I'm not a photographer box. 
I know what you mean - not one category for illustrators. 
153
« on: February 27, 2012, 20:17 »
Same here, I couldn't make sense out if it, and didn't want to struggle with trying to decipher it, so I quit reading. Unable to read beyond the first couple of lines of your thesis. Please correct spelling, grammar, punctuation and capitalisation and once it is intelligible I may respond.
Thank you
(PS: Maybe you think I am just being snarky; I am not. I am very tolerant of non-native-English speakers having problems with English but you seem to be familiar with the language but think it is clever to avoid using it properly. If English is your second or third language, I apologise for not spending more time on your post)
154
« on: February 16, 2012, 22:03 »
IS on top? Please tell me it's wrong...
155
« on: February 15, 2012, 22:34 »
My best year was 2010. I keep adding to my portfolio, which probably helps slow down the downhill slide a bit.
156
« on: February 15, 2012, 22:32 »
I have no problem you publishing now other than noting what has changed since then.
What would be really interesting is to see if you could get a follow up interview with Kelly, see if his views have changed at all since leaving/being kicked out and see if he can say anything now that he couldn't say then. I know it's not a good idea to burn your bridges, but I suspect he'd be a bit loser in his comments now that he isn't employed by them and if he isn't, well, perhaps he is still a corporate clone.
It's very possible that he signed a confidentiality agreement as a condition of employment, which would mean that he isn't free to say anything critical about IS or Getty.
157
« on: January 13, 2012, 20:36 »
I'm wondering if they report all of our sales to begin with - that would be easy to get away with in the case of indies. I'm not accusing IS of anything, but it does seem strange that they still are at the second highest rank, in the spite of the fact that most people's sales there are abysmal.
158
« on: January 13, 2012, 20:11 »
That's what I thought, with the DT logo displayed. Just wanted to be sure.
159
« on: January 13, 2012, 14:45 »
I found some of my images on this site: http://phototimes.ru/image/the-forgotten-13171535/They have the Dreamstime watermark. Does anyone know if this is a DT partner or an illicit site? I can't identify the language used...
160
« on: January 05, 2012, 20:19 »
Like everyone else my IS earnings are a fraction of what they used to be. What I can't understand is - why are they still #2 in the Microstock Poll Results? So far for Jan; I've earned more at Canstock than I have at IS! In fact, the only site that did worse than IS was BS. It's hard to believe they were once my #1 earner. Someone has to be doing well at IS for them to rank at #2.
161
« on: December 12, 2011, 14:06 »
This is the worst month I've had at IS in years. I'm shocked at how fast my earnings are declining there. It looks like the site is dying - maybe this was Getty's plan all along -- buy it then kill it.
162
« on: December 02, 2011, 13:40 »
My stats look OK, but I still cannot see what images were downloaded during Nov.
Same here.
163
« on: November 30, 2011, 12:13 »
SS might interest me with individual image exclusivity but I probably wouldn't consider total RF exclusivity as we have seen what can happen. Most people liked istock a few years ago, perhaps more than SS. Things can change, especially if one business has most of the market and sells out.
I think we're all better off if no one agency becomes too powerful, look what happened to IS and FT. I never liked IS, but I did think very highly of FT at one time, and I they started out eager to please and treated us well. Then they became the #2 agency after IS and turned 'evil'. Too much power corrupts, for all our sakes, I'd rather see market share spread out evenly over several different agencies.
164
« on: November 30, 2011, 12:04 »
I boycotted TS, until Getty forced me into the PP. I was all set to leave iStock over it, but it seemed like a futile gesture, hurting only myself while accomplishing nothing, so greed won out and I stayed. I stopped uploading there on Sept 28.
I see they have moved 3 of my images over to TS. My earnings are dropping so fast at IS that if it continues to get much worse, leaving them won't make a significant dent in my income. At that point, nothing will be holding me back from deactivating my portfolio. If you deactivate your images on IS, do they do they automatically get deactivated from TS as well?
165
« on: October 06, 2011, 18:04 »
rogermexico's post about 32 minutes ago:
What I'll be doing is highlighting all the little niche growth areas where there's room for more, and provide additional creative direction for interested contributors about emerging trends and areas with opportunities.
Oh good. So anyone with successful niche areas better be prepared for a whole flood of images destroying their income. 
That's how I interpreted rogermexico's post, too. Maybe our thinking reflects 'battered contributor syndrome'.
166
« on: October 06, 2011, 17:33 »
I had a different take than you all. I assumed they were going to make it way easier, like SS, and also way easier to get accepted. This will all be in anticipation of a change down the road where they can put any photo of anyones on PPs but NOT have it on istock, so they have a slough of mediocre images you thought were lucky to get accepted, but then they move them to their much newer, bigger, shinier dollar bin.
If that happens I think it would lead to a mass exodus of independents from iStock. Why would anyone in their right mind want to stay? It's like getting kicked out and sent to the basement to rot.
167
« on: October 06, 2011, 10:31 »
I'm thinking they may plan on making it very, very difficult for anyone to get anything accepted. Then they can flood IS with their wholly owned images, where they don't have to pay any royalties at all. Of course the quality standards will probably be much looser for Getty owned content.
168
« on: October 05, 2011, 21:11 »
His influence? Never heard of him.
He's a Photoshop guru; he's written several Photoshop books and training videos.
169
« on: September 30, 2011, 14:21 »
Fotolia started out playing fair and treating contributors well, but then they became successful and got greedy. Shutterstock has maintained their integrity all along, which is why they're on top while FT and IS continue to sink. A wannabee site may treat us well in the present, but that doesn't necessarily mean they will continue to treat us well if and when they do become successful.
I almost pulled my portfolio from IS in anger, and I considered it with FT as well. That step is too drastic to take, yet I think I should try to do something to favor the good guys, and and find some small way to 'punish' the abusers. I know I'm not important to any agency, but I feel I should at least try to give the good guys some sort of advantage. So far the only thing I've done is I've stopped uploading to IS and FT. It's not much, but it's something. Make me feel a little better, anyway.
170
« on: September 29, 2011, 15:45 »
If Fotlia says they have no problem with the Big 4, do they have a problem with the partner programs of the big 4?
I took it to mean that the offending agencies aren't in the top 4. Since ThinkStock is an offshoot of IS, and participation is mandatory for independents, I'm thinking they don't expect anyone to drop IS to preserve their ranking. I could be wrong about that, though.
171
« on: September 29, 2011, 11:07 »
I don't care - I've stopped uploading to IS, so it has no effect on me.
172
« on: September 29, 2011, 09:48 »
I was originally intending to pull my entire port from IS, but I didn't want to kill off an (ever diminishing) income stream in what could be a futile gesture. Not to mention all the time and effort I've put into uploading all those images over the last 6 years - so I decided to leave my port in place and stop uploading instead. I've also stopped uploading to FT as well. Let the sites that treat me fairly get all my new fresh content.
173
« on: September 29, 2011, 09:38 »
I've wondered about that, too. But I don't think it means that BigStock has no future...
174
« on: September 28, 2011, 17:20 »
While things continue to get worse at FT & IS, they just keep improving at Shutterstock! Thank you Shutterstock!!
175
« on: September 26, 2011, 09:07 »
I think we need to find a way to help the fair sites advertise. The greedy sites have been using the power of crowd sourcing against us - why not use that same power to help the sites that treat us fairly? We could use websites, blogs, facebook, twitter, networking, ect, ect... If we do this sort of thing collectively, I would think our seer numbers would be bound to have a significant impact! Thoughts, anyone?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 17
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
