|
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 - Noedelhap
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67 68 ... 90
1551
« on: May 14, 2015, 08:42 »
"But again, I get that some of the mapping options are funky looking, but they dont impact search negatively. In fact, we put their content in front of way more searches for free".
That is the best way we can explain it. We are not stripping or spamming images with keywords. Actually, the flunky mapping options putting content in front of more searches IS in fact sort of spamming. Because these images will appear in irrelevant searches. Let's take an example from one of my images: 
Very realistic shiny chrome ball. Gradient mesh used.Veer keywords: balls, reflections, shiny, spheres, drawings, shadows, silver color, nobody, white background, three dimensional My original keywords: chrome, ball, bullet, metallic, metal, silver, gray, steel, blurry, reflective, reflection, shiny, realistic, photorealistic, realism, clean, sphere, spherical, vector, illustration, drawing, white, shadow, light, shape, object, gradient mesh(In bold are the (completely) missing ones.) When I search for "chrome ball", my image doesn't come up, but colored web 2.0 buttons, rugby balls, soccer balls, stairs and chrome pens do.
1552
« on: May 13, 2015, 08:48 »
I consider the automatic keyword tagging an annoying feature. At first I had to manually remove all automatic keywords, which takes time.
Point is, I know perfectly well which keywords to use and a computer simply doesn't. Keywording is a task that should never be automated; it generates too many spammy and generic keywords.
1553
« on: May 13, 2015, 08:37 »
I'm getting more sales than in April (which was truly dead). So for me the opposite is true.
1554
« on: May 12, 2015, 12:00 »
You said earlier that sales were falling back ("0 sales in 10 days") and now suddenly it's going well again?
1555
« on: May 11, 2015, 14:49 »
I still upload a JPG separately. Primarily because it's a force of habit, and sometimes buyers want another size or they're looking in the Illustration section instead of the Vector section.
1556
« on: May 11, 2015, 10:09 »
I'm a newbie video contributor myself, and just like you I started out as a vector contributor. I now have a portfolio of 50 videos, but I've had a handful of sales across sites.
Sales are indeed a little scarce compared to vector images, something I already expected; after all, the video market is not as huge as the vector/photo market and also more expensive for buyers. Perhaps animations are sold even less than actual footage.
Looking at your portfolio I'd say the quality is there. If I were you I'd try to diversify your portfolio. You have a lot of looping background animations, but that genre is oversaturated.
1557
« on: May 11, 2015, 09:46 »
When looking at my Finance page, it says this below 'Purchase date':
undefined 0NaN
1558
« on: May 10, 2015, 14:49 »
I think it's not outsourced, it's just an automated process. Most keywords are made plural, and some generic but irrelevant keywords (like 'nobody') are added. Most relevant keywords are randomly stripped.
1559
« on: May 10, 2015, 13:08 »
Ahahaha, I'm sorry, this is just laughable.
This '25 keywords' thing has got to be one of the worst new policies ever. Changing and screwing up my carefully keyworded images (they apparently even retro-actively changed keywords of accepted images) is not only rude, it's blatantly stupid.
They won't be receiving any new images from me. If they really want to play it the hard way, I'll just drop them. Their subscription sales are worthless anyway.
1560
« on: May 08, 2015, 12:00 »
Credit sales at IS are becoming only slightly more frequent than sightings of Loch Ness Monster.
 @miladin14: I would advise against opting out of the PP. Even though the PP has been a bad development for iStock (low commissions, no RC's, eroding credits sales), it is now a necessary evil if one wants to make any money at all. PS. My condoleances, becoming exclusive at the wrong time and then experiencing falling sales must be tough.
1561
« on: May 07, 2015, 11:13 »
How about waiting a few more weeks (or even months) to evaluate your sales, instead of jumping to conclusions after a mere 10 days? Rome wasn't built in one day.
1562
« on: May 05, 2015, 17:13 »
Fully agree with Shelma here.
I do think it matters Noedelhap. Would you like it if they published your earnings?
No, but in this case, no specific amount was mentioned; just that he didn't make payout this month. If he had said something like: 'yeah you just made $211.53 this month, you're gonna get paid' or 'you only made $76.22, slightly less than last month', it would have been a different story (too many details). I do think KelvinJay could have handled it more discreetly, then again, it doesn't surprise me one bit. Both Lobo and KelvinJay are completely tactless when it comes to contributor/client communication.
1563
« on: May 05, 2015, 16:53 »
I now see the new ADP for the first time and the page takes about 2 secondes to load. Same goes for the enlarged image (3 seconds). The old page with description took less time to load. It seems iStock knows how to defy the laws of internet speed; displaying less content takes longer to load, instead of the opposite.
Even scrolling up and down stutters instead of flowing smoothly. It makes navigation an actual nightmare. I hope it's just a temporary thing, but I'm afraid not.
I don't understand the 5 keywords at the top either. Completely useless and redundant information.
1564
« on: May 05, 2015, 07:25 »
They're giving away more rights for the same price. I'd say we lose more.
1565
« on: May 05, 2015, 04:11 »
Lobo's censorship and Kelvinjay's censorship and snooping into our accounts make me sick.
Snooping into our accounts. What do you mean ?
He's probably referring to this sort of snarky post that appeared from Kelvinjay on iS five minutes ago, indicating that moderators can (and do) access account details:
Posted By XXXXXX:
Am I missing something? Shouldn't payment be done at 25 of april? I still didn't get mine!?
Hi,
Yes, what you seem to be missing is that your balance wasn't over $100 on the last day of March, therefore you didn't get paid in April. We have a thread here explaining everything, please take a look.
I don't consider access to accounts a bad thing per se. They're sort of a support desk as well and closely working together with other departments (finance/accounting, dev team, etc). I don't like the snarky comment ("what you seem to be missing...") either, but that's typical of any company without morals.
1566
« on: May 04, 2015, 10:11 »
iStock let's you opt out of ThinkStock (as far as I'm aware? - please correct me, I'm new in this).
You can only opt out of the PP/Thinkstock if you're an exclusive contributor. If you're an independent contributor, your files will be opted in automatically. SS is the most trustworthy agency of the three you mentioned (can ANY agency stoop as low as FT and IS? DP perhaps).
1567
« on: May 04, 2015, 09:57 »
IS average: $1,59 per sale
SS average: $0,55 per sale
My overall income at SS is currently 9% higher than my overall income at IS (I joined SS 9 months after IS).
Yours may be - my RPD on IS is nothing remotely like that as the bulk is from PP. If you exclude PP you may as well exclude subs from the SS figures.
You're right, I forgot to include the PP sales in the IS average. My bad. Fixed it.
1568
« on: May 04, 2015, 06:52 »
One year later. Has anything changed in the microstock business?
A lot has changed, but at least DPC has not gained the market share we all feared they would gain.
1569
« on: May 03, 2015, 17:23 »
IS average: $1,59 per sale $0,60 per sale (including PP and image subscriptions)
SS average: $0,55 per sale
My overall income at SS is currently 9% higher than my overall income at IS (I joined SS 9 months after IS).
1570
« on: May 03, 2015, 12:57 »
Istock treats contributors very badly and has slashed prices regularly. Coupled with some very bad management decisions (now and in the past) regarding their site updates and pricing plans, their future looks very bleak from a contributor's perspective. As an exclusive, you'd be tied with your hands behind your back, in my opinion. My vector images give me a royalty of $1,50 to $2 nowadays (because vector contributors are at 20%). SS does have subscription sales mainly, but no other agency has come even close in terms of sales volumes. So that makes SS very attractive; in fact, it's my best earner. Besides, On Demand sales and Single Downloads will net you significantly higher royalties: On Demand earns me $2,70 per sale and Single Downloads may vary from $4-$100+ if you're lucky. Enhanced Licenses will net you $28. So it's not just a few cents 
1571
« on: April 30, 2015, 08:23 »
I neither hate nor love it.
1572
« on: April 30, 2015, 07:25 »
This is what my april stats look like: 
1573
« on: April 29, 2015, 06:13 »
Is the uploader out of order again?
1574
« on: April 29, 2015, 06:06 »
ME's upload is kinda buggy lately. File previews sometimes fail and elements don't always get published. 
1575
« on: April 28, 2015, 05:03 »
I've had problems uploading as well. Both on the site and with Stocksubmitter they did upload but they just don't appear in the list.
Edit: FTP didn't connect either.
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67 68 ... 90
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
