|
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 - ShadySue
15426
« on: October 22, 2009, 15:36 »
Some people finally understood that quantity only favor dilution effect.
The only way to make things better is for the agencies to delete old unsold files.
It's not the old, unsold files that are the rivals. Talking of iStock only, they will probably be at the bottom of most searches, unless they're of a subject in low supply/demand.
15427
« on: October 22, 2009, 15:33 »
I still see brick walls, isolated food and smiling peops with headset in the newest section of IS.
That's just worthless
There was a specific request for new images of mid-older people with headsets very recently so maybe the new acceptances are a response to that?
15428
« on: October 22, 2009, 11:04 »
[iStock exclusive] Although October will be my best month this year (thank goodness!), it's still way below, on both dls and $$$ what I had at this time last October. Every month this year has had lower dls and $$ from the corresponding month last year sometimes >30% lower. That's despite uploading almost 1000 images since Jan. doubling my port). Also fewer ELs this year; a few Vettas fill some of that gap though. I don't shoot the most popular types of images (no models, lights or studio): so I'm not up there with Sean & co; but it doesn't explain why my sales are going down, which can only be the vastly increased competition, both on iStock and elsewhere. 
15429
« on: October 20, 2009, 11:44 »
Not sure how writing breathlessly about himself is giong to help one way or the other.
I suspect he might have been typing with one hand 
LOL!!!
15430
« on: October 10, 2009, 10:33 »
If Brazil is supposedly '3rd World' and yet they're in the G20 ... where the bloody hell is the '2nd World'?
It referred to the Communist Bloc, when there was such a thing.
15431
« on: October 10, 2009, 08:54 »
Thanks for the input. So should I stick with mixing the RF/RM or decide on one or the other for each set of images?
You need to decide on one of the other for each set. Someone who has paid for exclusive use RM would rightly be annoyed to see 'similars' on sale as RF. (Not all RM is sold as exclusive use, but the possibility is there.)
FWIW, I have no sales on Alamy so far - 542 pics uploaded since April.
In my first six months at istock I had 306 dls/$218, and 206 uploads.
Doesn't prove much, as both collections have increased exponentially since then.
15432
« on: October 09, 2009, 16:01 »
deleted
15433
« on: October 09, 2009, 11:23 »
I am a bit annoyed that Alamy search is picking keywords inside composed keywords.
For instance, a search for "american airlines" resulted in two of my images showing. I have the keyword "airline" in them, but not american. I have however "south american" in my keywords, and I guess that's where the "american" was picked.
I wonder if such false results may affect my ranking, as my images were obviously not what the buyer wanted.
Not only that, but the Alamy search is still picking works out of the description. For instance, yesterday I had a view on one of my images under a search including Christmas. The buyer would rightfully have been annoyed at it being there. Christmas isn't one of the keywords, but it is relevant in the description, so I had it there.
15434
« on: October 03, 2009, 15:33 »
I just tried a search using the words "field of red maize" on iStockphoto, and I don't receive any results. But using the words field and red maize will give me results. Why does the word "of" ruin everything (I've been wondering about this for a while). It's not a big deal to me; I'm just curious.
"red maize" searched using quotation marks has no results, i.e. no-one has actually keyworded the maize in their image specifically as 'red maize'. red maize (no quotations) brings up any photos with both red and maize as keywords. These will not necessarily show red maize. And with spam still being rife, some have no red and/or no maize. No surprise there. 
15435
« on: October 02, 2009, 11:30 »
Yeah, that part was surprising. How many stock pictures are taken before 2000?
The entire Hulton Collection, otherwise some old photos which someone has model/property releases for.
15436
« on: October 02, 2009, 11:28 »
There are several contributers from Beijing and other parts, but I don't know if they have to do 'tricks' to access the site.
15437
« on: September 26, 2009, 15:46 »
I only tried to apply to IS once, they rejected my illustrations for being too simple - and indeed they are - and I suppose they are even more restrictive now. They don't take rasters either, so it's a pity.
They definitely take raster illustrations. Click Forum Home, and you'll see that the description of the Illustration forum is: "Discussion of vector, raster and 3D illustration tools and techniques" ... though there don't seem to be any recent raster threads. Also do a search with only photos ticked for illustration, and you get 44436 'illustration and painting' hits. It's a bit unfortunate that iStock chose to call vectors 'illustrations', as now they have the confusing situation that if you choose 'illustration' at the top you get vectors, but if you search on illustrations you get rasters.
15438
« on: September 24, 2009, 01:53 »
IMHO, most of these keywords are not directly relevant to your image.
However, if you post on the Keywords forum at iStock with your image and the rejected keywords you'll get peer opinion and if you're lucky, a detalled official breakdown from emyerson or ducksandwich from the keywords team.
15439
« on: September 23, 2009, 11:53 »
Isn't this discussion a lot like micros vs macros?
I don't see that. To me, it is more like "spec" work.
Which is exactly what stock photography/illustration is.
15440
« on: September 19, 2009, 04:18 »
Alamy do share all the search data, so it is easy to do your research as to what is selling and target your content, then upload RM, the scatter gun option might work for a photographer with a few thousand images.
David
As I understood it, the search data which is shared isn't quite 'all', but is taken from the searching of their top buyers. I have no idea what the difference between these two figures would be. Off-thread, one of the things I notice from my own Alamy stats is how often buyers are looking through well over a thousand images to make their choices. Granted, that's partly because of the poor keywording/search engine (no DA, no CSV) throwing up irrelevant images. But it's still intriguing considering how contributers on iStock firmly believe (and for all I know, may be right) that if the best match doesn't put their image on the first page, they are heavily losing sales. Example: this week, I had two sessions searching on 'Celtic' (no other keywords used). I have two photos relevant to Celtic football club, several Celtic crosses and several featuring celtic knotwork/designs. Without defining 'celtic' further, all these images came up for celtic, and between the two sessions, over 14000 images were viewed. Unbelievable - did the searcher - apparently one of Alamy's top buyers - not know how to refine their search? Or were they really looking at all possibilities for the word 'celtic'?
15441
« on: September 17, 2009, 18:02 »
FWIW we do sometimes refer to "summer holidays" here in the US, mostly talking about the three months the kids are off from school.
Three months!!! No wonder they call it the Land of the Free!!! (I'll get my application for a Green Card in the post.  )
15442
« on: September 16, 2009, 15:52 »
Here's a hypothesis for those of us who aren't seeing the usual big jump in Sept. sales....
Is it possible that due to the recession fewer designers went on holiday over the summer? My summer slowdown was hardly noticeable, which was nice. But it has the effect that Sept. sales are not significantly higher, as they were in past years.
Also, again with the economy, perhaps there just isn't the huge advertising budget to put into holiday advertising, unlike past years. Holiday sales are predicted to be low, so why spend a fortune advertising?
The first isn't the case for me; my July/Aug were lowest dls for two years. The second, yes, I guess so. It intrigued me that my safari pixs were being sold in Sept-Oct when I already had the following year's brochures in mid-August (UK). (Mind you, most UK wildlife travel companies use their staff or client's photos. Win-win - they get cheaper pics (usually just have a prize for the best) and potential clients see what they, not some professional, could get. Not so good for stock photogs, tho'.)
15443
« on: September 16, 2009, 11:15 »
I'd like to see them also offering to assist models in pursuing lawsuits against people who misuse images contrary to their permitted uses; e.g. that BNP abusage a couple of months badk.
15444
« on: September 16, 2009, 10:44 »
I'm only on iStock, but every month this year has had poorer downloads than the corresponding month last year, sometimes much lower. I was pinning a lot of hope in September because I uploaded a fairish whack this year and in '07 and '08, my downloads went up considerably in the last few days of August and shot up in September. But this year, my September so far is half of July and Aug this year, which were jointly my worst dl months for two years. It's very depressing and demotivating. I've hardly lifted my camera for four weeks, and I really think it's been a wasted 'investment'. I guess there will be people round soon telling us it's their BME. 
15445
« on: September 16, 2009, 02:12 »
Pity you're not in the Glasgow, Scotland area. 
15446
« on: September 16, 2009, 02:10 »
... so I reached out to the iStock critique forum for help.
Well said! That's how I got accepted too.
Other than the fact that OP doesn't want to show his work, I think the critique forum would work well 
Just as there are stages of grief, I think there are stages of rejection. Perhaps once the OP has moved on a stage or two he'll be ready
Yes, it's true! iStock evey has an article on just that: http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=2 - but you have to be at the right stage to be ready to take it on board. When I was getting rejections at the beginning which I didn't believe (I guess that's fairly common) I just wasn't 'in the place' which made the advice helpful. @OP: my beginning accceptance rate was below 50% - it hovered around 40% for a couple of weeks  . Now it's well over 90% (i.e. in recent months, not overall :'( ) (Also +1 that you post your rejections.)
15447
« on: September 10, 2009, 11:38 »
istock only: picking up from dismal July/August, but way below this time last year in downloads, like every other month this year so far.
15448
« on: August 30, 2009, 06:00 »
Adobe hates Europe. Prices are also higher in European countries!
It's true, I get my own back by only upgrading every second time the software does. Of course, I guess if there was some must-have new feature, I'd be cutting off my nose ... but some of the must-have features are no use for stock. @OP are you sure that you need Photoshop features which aren't in Elements, which is a whole lot cheaper - I got a full (latest) version with my scanner.
15449
« on: August 30, 2009, 03:20 »
Given the rate my downloads are decreasing this year, will it tell me when I get into negative equity?
15450
« on: August 28, 2009, 17:57 »
That's a great milestone.  Congrats!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
