|
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 - Artemis
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 20
151
« on: April 05, 2011, 16:59 »
I honestly dont think its a jump on the bandwagon, its just the most sensible thing to do as non-exclusive.
iStock has lied, deceived, suspectively cheated, shown incredible greed and arrogance while cutting my already miserable commissions there etc; the only thing i can do about that is try to convert customers to sites that are better value for them, pay me A LOT more commission and treat me with respect. Again, its the most sensible thing to do and has nothing to do with hate campaigns.
152
« on: April 05, 2011, 16:48 »
Got the response i expected from CR today (at least it came quick!)
Due to privacy reasons they cant go into details but the mere $10 royalty for a 125 credit EL is correct and can be the result of very old credits floating around (as if) or various discounts (more likely).
Bah (bah, bah!).
153
« on: April 05, 2011, 08:56 »
Would you guys think a $10 EL at less than $0,50/credit (which is about 1/3rd of the normal credit price) is a valid reason for complaint? I really dont know, imho it sounds very incorrect but thats my guts speaking, not sure if this is the sort of thing BBB is for..
I would try the forums here, the istock forums and contacting iStock support before anything else.
No, that credit price is not out of the ordinary, unfortunately.
But just because its not out of the ordinary it doesnt mean its ok and we shouldnt complain about 'bad business'. If i hire a real estate dude to sell my house for me and he on his own decides to sell my house for 1/3rd of the price we agreed on, just because the buyer is 'a good loyal customer' its not ok either...
154
« on: April 05, 2011, 07:55 »
True Tyler; for now im just going to wait for the response from CR ... i'll keep you guys posted 
155
« on: April 05, 2011, 07:54 »
thesentinel: nope; its a 125credits unlimited reproduction/print run EL 
156
« on: April 05, 2011, 06:47 »
Thanks Tyler I wont try their forums, im 100% sure Lobo will forward me to CR and lock the thread, so i skipped that step and put up a ticket for support, 99% sure though i'll just get the standard 'its a discount for certain buyers' reply, but i'll await that one before taking further steps
157
« on: April 05, 2011, 05:57 »
Hi nruboc,
Glad it worked out for you. My images are still there in spite of several complaints and requests of removal. My mails are being forwarded and I never hear back. I was thinking about sending a DMCA takedown notice, but this seems better.
I just have no idea which radio buttons to check here ?
Does your complaint concern employment practices?
Yes No
Does your complaint allege discrimination?
Yes No
Does your complaint allege civil rights violations?
Yes No
Has this complaint case ever been involved in litigation?
Yes No
Hi There,
I put 'No' for all of those, but you may interpret 'employment' in the first question differently. Since they are paying you. I think either a Yes or No for the first question would apply
Thank you. I decided to put no for all of them. Hope to finally see some action and I find my complaint very legitimate as I already tried to deal with iStock directly.
As Lisa said, I hope people won't abuse the system. I know it's more complicated than so, but legally they would be in their right to cut commissions whenever they want to right? And I don't see how they would address this sort of complaint with anything other than a "no thanks". (And no, I don't endorse the paycuts)
I agree, just complaining in general about istock and how it works would probably have a reverse effect, i was thinking about for example the people who see $0 royalties for about 2 months now and as only reply get: we're looking into it...all the others who want their images gone from the PP or the other way round, etc. all very specific and justified things to form a complaint for... Would you guys think a $10 EL at less than $0,50/credit (which is about 1/3rd of the normal credit price) is a valid reason for complaint? I really dont know, imho it sounds very incorrect but thats my guts speaking, not sure if this is the sort of thing BBB is for..
158
« on: April 04, 2011, 16:03 »
There are so many valid things to complain about, thanks for posting this nruboc, i hope many of us will file a complaint
159
« on: April 04, 2011, 15:26 »
I sent them a ticket mainly because i want to SOMETHING... but i expect a standard reply about discounts being given to 'loyal customers'.
We really, really need this audit get going... i've heard around in my surroundings but there doesnt seem to be anyone who knows enough to really help out or give the right info so i cant get it started ;(
160
« on: April 04, 2011, 14:13 »
I just received freaking $10 for a 125 credit EL! At $1/credit i should receive $21,27... this means LESS than $0,50 per credit!
I'm so outraged i want to go over to freaking Calgary and slap someone in the face....still thinking about shooting a ticket to CR, but i guess i already know what the answer will be. ARGH!!!!!!
161
« on: April 03, 2011, 09:37 »
I agree on the sliderthing caspixel; i just did a search for "dog" and the first 6 pages were Vetta and Agency ONLY (apart from vectors). No trace at all from the other collections. The dogs i had on the first page and 2nd page of the best match are gone... didnt bother to look for them anymore after page 10. No surprise, of course the favorite istock darlings are well represented (no, OVER represented) in this best match again. Bah, the shamelessness 
162
« on: April 02, 2011, 10:25 »
Well. I still count Dreamstime as one of the most contributor-friendly sites. I can't recall Serban ever shafting us like a couple of other well-known agencies. When he does change the commissions there is always a good bit somewhere else to balance it out. Unless this leads to a huge shift to subscriptions, it should give quite a nice boost to earnings IMHO. And who else is giving us a rise this year?
Absolutely! It's THE site i'll keep promoting to everyone. I also applaud them for their constant effort to try and keep improving their site; the dynamic search, the geolocations (i first thought that one was a bit unnecesary, but now you can browse stock images through the world map i see how its handy), etc etc etc!
163
« on: April 02, 2011, 10:23 »
I'm roughly 35%-40% down compared to march 2010. (that being said, apr.2010 was my 2nd best month of last year and i stopped uploading in september..). What i have lost on iStock i more than gained on Shutterstock though
164
« on: April 02, 2011, 04:51 »
Wholeheartedly agree with Cathy here above! I dont care how excited Veer is to grow it's and our revenue by partnering; i never asked for this and i DO NOT WANT my images on all sort of buggy sites (and prove is here yet again, no watermarks, no copyright info,...).
It's too easy to say 'yeah yeah we're considering this', while honestly, i don't think you *really* are considering it, you just "haven't ruled it out", which is a very different connotation.
I'd also like to know, are our images there mirrored from the Veer site? they have their own watermark so i assume they got the copies? (which usually, from experience, means that if i decide to stop my partnership with Veer it'll be a hell of a task to get my images of your partner sites, can we have a timeframe guarantee?)
165
« on: March 31, 2011, 17:29 »
I can find my pictures on snapfish, but it only shows 315 of them while I have many more on Veer. Where are they lost?
I have the same issue...325 on Snapfish, but 423 on Veer. Maybe they are still in the process of feeding images over?
Probably still feeding over indeed, none of mine there yet (oh how wished it would stay that way). I hope the opt-out is still considered or on the agenda for consideration...?
166
« on: March 29, 2011, 15:34 »
apple or berry crumble! *drool*
167
« on: March 29, 2011, 15:04 »
they posted in the forums they're going to start culling drastically in similar series:
From Achilles:
Starting today we will begin to select portfolios that are dramatically affected by this issue and clean them of blatant similars, identicals, flipped images and small angle variations that have 0 downloads. We will try to be gentle but some users will see a significant amount of content being removed. Once they are reviewed they will be removed without refusals being counted in the approval ratio.
I also think their policy with similars is going a little too far (imho something very remotely similar is not similar, and decent variations from one shoot arent similar either), this is a decent step in unclogging the database, it'll be good to see those pages and pages with same results (apart from slight angle changes) gone.
168
« on: March 25, 2011, 05:17 »
I was amazed to see the amount of views it's got though, 46 million since February 10..
It even was in the news here as new internethype...worst song EVER 
169
« on: March 23, 2011, 17:12 »
... still wished we got a small % of it; without our images no protection plan to offer either.. sounds like the big i set the standard
170
« on: March 23, 2011, 17:10 »
Have you read on facebook though that they got elected 'best place to buy online images' by the readers of about.com? To "celebrate" credits are 10% off when using a certain code (guess who the 10% to 'celebrate' comes from). I almost vomitted at both.
They really can get away with A LOT it seems, with contributors (massive rip off) and buyers (site in shambles).
171
« on: March 23, 2011, 17:04 »
dittos, ACR, photoshop, i think you should include it
172
« on: March 23, 2011, 08:17 »
Dreamstime for me.
173
« on: March 22, 2011, 17:47 »
Yeah,i thought it could be a glitch; 5 digits look a bit odd. Thanks for passing it
174
« on: March 22, 2011, 12:01 »
hello Chelsey,
a bit off-topic, but now that you're here on the line...
i noticed my royalties on Veer now show like this: 3.5000 and 0.3500 etc. Is it intentional to have that many digits? It seems a bit useless... (no biggie though).
175
« on: March 18, 2011, 20:47 »
In addition, about your first question:
Are you asking if it is the same whether you set your old pictures to donate or disable?
If you select 'donate', you will give your photo's away for free in the free section of the website. If you set it to 'disable' it means as soon as the picture is old without sales, it will not be moved to the free section, but it will be deleted (disabled) from the database. The $0,20 is not relevant there as you received it at the time when you uploaded the picture as exclusive.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
