|
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 - pancaketom
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67 68 ... 91
1551
« on: June 02, 2012, 11:38 »
Not bad for me, SS had a good # of sales but no EL, SOD, etc, so not all that good (barely less than May 11 which was a good month at the time). An almost BME at Alamy made up the difference. DT was on track to be a BME, but then it stopped for a few days near the end of the month - that site really does seem like a tap that they turn on and off.
123RF did well as did Canstock and Featurepics (for them - still pretty low). Veer had a decent number of sales but lots of subs and no ELs hurt there.
All in all a pretty good month.
1552
« on: June 01, 2012, 10:06 »
While not as large a jump, I went from 604 yesterday to 617 today. It is going in the wrong direction.
1553
« on: May 31, 2012, 23:37 »
How can the TOS give someone else the permission to claim copyright and give someone else permission to use/distribute, don't you at least need an EL for that?
1554
« on: May 31, 2012, 12:24 »
This is good to hear, thank you.
I see 604 of my images show up under "Creative Images" right now. Hopefully that number will now start going down instead of up.
1555
« on: May 31, 2012, 11:02 »
I am guessing increase in different buyer numbers - mainly because they have more ways to buy that aren't subscriptions, so it is a lower bar to become a buyer.
1556
« on: May 30, 2012, 19:43 »
Is there anyway to make it so that when they pin an image from your web site they actually get a different image - perhaps one that says "I am trying to steal content online", or maybe a really nasty porno image.
I agree that pinterest is not a good web citizen - their entire model almost requires that their uses break the law, and although they give it lip service they mostly just suggest you go trolling around the web pinning whatever you see.
I found one of my de-activated images from IS there and I tried to post a comment with a link to Featurepics where it is as an experiment. Pinterest wouldn't let me post the comment and haven't answered my inquiry yet.
1557
« on: May 29, 2012, 20:16 »
Download your stats at 123rf and look at the commissions you have received for each sale. Compare the commission amount to the size of the file and the price they charge. Can anyone in this forum claim a full price sale?
Right now you should receive...
50 cents for a Small
$1 for a Medium
$1.50 for a Large
$2 for an XL
$2.50 for an XXL Jpeg
$5.00 for an XXL Tiff
If they were paying us that it is still demoralizing and grossly undercutting the other sites for the same content. Take a look at your stats though...they aren't paying that. The closest I came was $1.41 for a large sale. Makes me feel dirty.
Mat
I have gotten .50 for sm, 1.50 for L, and 2.00 for XL this month, but they are the exceptions. They advertise credits as low as .68/credit - which at 50% would result in S = .34, M = .68, L = 1.02, XL = 1.36 ... Which still doesn't explain the .60 I got for a large. On DT I got .22 for an extra small last month, so they are not immune from returns below the expected.
1558
« on: May 29, 2012, 19:56 »
Nice, that captcha was annoying. It wasn't to protect our accounts or anything like that, it was to save bandwidth by blocking computer programs from logging in automatically - to aggregate stats or something like that.
1559
« on: May 29, 2012, 15:12 »
They can rig it all the want, in fact the more the better, if I become exclusive. At least once, I'd benefit from search algorithm rigging 
If they have to pay you more because you are exclusive they might rig it so your images are buried.
1560
« on: May 29, 2012, 12:07 »
The other thing is if SS starts rigging the search to promote either indy or exclusive content (it could go either way depending on what the bean counters think makes more sense for them). That would be the big game changer, it could kill or boost your sales overnight, and make any predictions completely invalid.
Personally I'd happily make a few of my images exclusive at SS - the ones that sell really well there and not so much at the other sites.
As I said earlier, I can't imagine they would make me an offer I can't refuse for overall exclusivity. It would cost them too much.
Although I disagree with some of the things that DT has done, I don't think they are in the same sleazy league that FT is king of.
1561
« on: May 29, 2012, 11:36 »
in order to maintain the same commission in future.. one needs to reach contributor level 5, that's 12 month credit total 5,000 - 19,999, what does it means does it mean I need to have a $5000 for 12 month total minimum?
it means 123RF now "Gives a stable, measureable, predictable and most important of all, specific milestones for achieving targets. Fosters healthy competition for new and old contributors alike." It means you have to average over 13 credits a day - either 13 sub and small sales, or some other mix according to the schedule posted on the captcha page. Of course they won't tell you exactly how many RC you have any given month or anything. The $ you earn are not exactly correlated to the credits, and it can vary widely. For example with just .36 subs you could hit 5000 RC with 1800$ For .60 large sales 5000 RC would be $1000 For 1.50 large sales it would take $2500 Obviously there would be some sort of mix. Of course with the "healthy competition" I shouldn't help explain any of this to you anymore.
1562
« on: May 28, 2012, 16:42 »
Sorry to hear such a non-answer from IS, although not surprising.
If IS images on pinterest are a legitimate affiliate use, that means that whoever is pinning them - the affiliate? is claiming copyright and giving permission to use those images to others - clearly something they cannot legally do unless there is something new in the IS TOS I am unaware of.
1563
« on: May 28, 2012, 01:02 »
Reviews no longer take a month, that is a plus.
Since reviews happen faster, you are less likely to get a month worth of uploads all rejected for the same thing in one review, that is a plus.
I haven't been hit by Attilla the reviewer since the faster reviews, that is a plus.
Sales are up slightly from last year, that is a plus.
I only have to redo the captcha each time I try to access my stats (assuming it has been over an hour or 2 since I last looked at the site) instead of having to re-login and redo the captcha, that is a small plus.
They are still planning on going with an RC scheme and thus dropping most contributor's commission percent. That is a big minus.
Unfortunately the last one seems to be the biggie. They do assure us that sales are going to pick up but they better do it soon or I won't be keeping my 50% next year.
1564
« on: May 27, 2012, 21:16 »
It is very confusing trying to follow the threads about sites that I don't use but am interested in. When you are discussing Alamy in this thread is it about RF or RM sales? Or, is this tread about both types of licenses?
Warren - you have both options. Basically if your RF images on MS are RF there. RM will be anything else you may want to have there.
I understand that, Mantis. What I was wondering is if "this" thread ... the commissions ... is about RM sales or RF sales? Or, is it the same for both?
My comment related to a RM sale through a Canadian website for use in a Canadian textbook. I have many more RM images on Alamy than I do RF
Mine was in response to an RF sale.
1565
« on: May 25, 2012, 17:31 »
No may ELs for me either. In fact sales other than regular subs are down a bit. (or maybe it is back to normal after the boost starting last fall).
Maybe if I complain I'll get some ELs or higher return single sales.
1566
« on: May 24, 2012, 23:26 »
I think there is also a place for a general picture library with no serious gaps, and it doesn't have to be one of the big sites.
I am on 3 of those sites and I have had good months on 2 of them, but also plenty of months with little to no sales. Maybe they aren't my niche.
I do think that it would make sense for buyers that only wanted something that a decent supplier had it would make sense to go there instead of somewhere like IS with high prices and low returns for the artist and probably impersonal service.
1567
« on: May 22, 2012, 19:01 »
I haven't uploaded anything so I don't know their system. Don't you have to do anything with the keywording/categories? If you do, that is costing time, if not then that is a very strong point in favour of them .... heck, if all I have to do is set up an FTP link and shove a couple of thousand files across then I might change my mind about not submitting.
Nope. No categories to assign or anything to do with keywords, etc. if they are already in your IPTC. If you don't have models then no releases to worry about. Just FTP, press one button to transfer the images from FTP, and then move on with your day
I think there is a 50 image a day limit, so you can FTP a heap, and then you just have to remember to hit some button every day to move the next 50 over. If you have no releases that is all you have to do, If you have releases then you need to deal w/ that. It is pretty quick and easy though.
1568
« on: May 22, 2012, 12:06 »
How will this effect the acceptance %. If they decide they were right and re-reject it do you get another rejection on your % - or if they decide they were wrong and accept it, do they remove the rejection and add an acceptance?
I think all sites should have some review of their inspection process.
1569
« on: May 22, 2012, 12:02 »
You say contributor exclusivity, but what Yuri and others talked about sounds more like image exclusivity.
I doubt they would be willing to offer what it would take for me to go exclusive. I could see a few images being exclusive, and if those work well I could see more.
1570
« on: May 21, 2012, 01:39 »
Reading this thread I got curious, started doing some image searches for my material and on the third search found one of my shots, on pinterest, sans watermark, sourced from cartoonsandcomics.co (whom I presume licensed it) and re-pinned 11 times.
Not sure how I or any stock agency could possibly benefit from that as there's no indication how anyone would go about buying the image legitimately.
That is where I see the problem, not with watermarked images pinned from the stock sites - so that if you click on them you are taken to where you can buy them. The problem is from some random site that by pinning it is saying they own the rights and are allowing others to use it. The more it gets re-pinned and then inserted in blogs the more it becomes an orphan work that is just used for free - seemingly legitimately - from pinterest. The only parties that benefit at that point are pinterest and the people using it for free.
1571
« on: May 18, 2012, 20:30 »
I have found one of my images w/ an IS watermark on there but the image has been removed from IS. It has been repinned a number of times. I doubt it is somehow going to lead to a sale at IS.
I think pinterest is playing fast and loose w/ copyright. The fact that you can use images on pinterest in your blog is completely bogus. I don't know how to search to find images that well on there. If you don't just stumble onto them or they aren't listed with your info then you might never see them.
IF watermarked images from sites were up there and the link took them to the site to buy the image and they couldn't be used for a blog, then that would be ok, but that isn't what the situation is. At least some of the watermarked images seem to lead back to the sites, but others don't. It is a mess.
There will be a messy pinterest lawsuit soon, and pinterest will try to pass the blame to the users, who will plead ignorance.
1572
« on: May 18, 2012, 19:39 »
My port has 1385 vs the 1430 it lists on my dashboard.
I do see an image I submitted 2-27-2012 on the public portfolio, but since it doesn't seem to be in chronological order there might be more recent ones. That does seem sort of slow. I would think once they actually review them it shouldn't take that long to get them live (I can understand a few days or even a week, but it shouldn't be longer than that).
1573
« on: May 17, 2012, 16:09 »
I have one listed for today.
1574
« on: May 17, 2012, 13:08 »
I'd love to see them expand, but I must say leaving me hanging in the wind for over a year with my application did not engender a lot of good will.
I have sent all my recent (last 3 years) stuff, but I am still not getting many sales, usually only one or 2 a month. I do remember talk of a "marketing push" a few years ago.
It does sound like your Flikr promotion has worked, which is good for you and for them.
1575
« on: May 16, 2012, 17:44 »
I've had a problem uploading there since the RC announcement.
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67 68 ... 91
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
