MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - Phil

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67
1551
Mostphotos.com / Re: Who has had sales at MostPhotos?
« on: February 22, 2008, 06:27 »
waiting a little longer, top see what happens :)

1552
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Gold!
« on: February 21, 2008, 22:20 »
Huzzah ... I made gold level at IS today with this sale:



It took me longer to get here than I anticipated, but things
should start to get better now that I can upload 30 images/wk!


congrats!

1553
congrats!

1554
General Stock Discussion / Re: 2B or not 2B, exclusive
« on: February 21, 2008, 20:21 »
gee, I saw the upload limits today and I really wonder about this.  It would only be profitable at diamond level for me at the moment but to only upload to one site would nice, the one site that makes the most money.  but... all the eggs in one basket...

Then again Yuri said the other day that 40% of earnings from istock, but it has less than 1/3rd of his portfolio and he would get 5x the upload limit, for someone like him he would likely increase his overall earnings within a few months  of changing...

1555
Alamy.com / Re: Alamy Questions
« on: February 21, 2008, 18:02 »
i do the alamy keywords, cut and paste into each section and pick out the most relevant for 50 character part.


rf / rm

if someone licences an image as rm they are supposed to be able to request what other uses it has been used for, even without paying the extra to use it exclusive they may want to check to make sure there competition hasn't used it, some other company isn't going to run an advert using the same image in the same media (even for a totally different product) etc etc.  Basically they want to make sure it aint going to go bad for them. 

there are a number of cases of problems with rf images ->  Dell and Gateway used the same image in a promotion, office supply companies using same image.  The blonde girl that colorvision used for all its product and packaging stuff was used on a number of porn sites and to advertise 'enlargement' medication by a couple of companies :)

thats the breaks when you use RF.  So if both of those companies has bought rf then too bad for them, and if both bought RM and haven't checked previous / current usage then again bad luck.  BUT if the one bought RF and the other RM, then one who bought RM is going to go straight back to the agency and ask questions.  Very simply they are likely to sue for all costs and damages, and I dont think the agency wont protect the photographer in these  cases.  Personally I wouldn't like to face someone like dell deciding I screwed up a national / international advertising campaign.

Just my thoughts :)

1556
Photo Critique / Re: Help with IS rejection
« on: February 21, 2008, 01:05 »
I could resubmit, and I have.  Funny you should mention IS "flower policy", as I don't have that many problems with flowers in IS (contrary to DT) and they are not that extraordinary.

Regards,
Adelaide

look pretty good to me :)

1557
2 different sheets of parchment was "italian breakfast" - perhaps they are making the point of cereal tasting like cardboard ??

and liquid metal got an image of a starfield titled 'bright star'

1558
Adobe Stock / Re: Can you reorder Fotolia keywords?
« on: February 20, 2008, 21:34 »
I agree, frustrating to find these things out now. explains why they are number 6 for me, only just above BigStock.

1559
Adobe Stock / Re: Can you reorder Fotolia keywords?
« on: February 20, 2008, 20:08 »
start rant...

what a croc of $%#@!!!

2000 images, hundreds that dont turn up in searches, so days spent reordering and no change.  Now it appears I have to delete them all and resubmit, going through their goddam horrible categories again, removing all the double words, etc etc.

I wonder how many of their 3million images actually turn up in searches.

I look through their ideas box and I dont think they have ever made 1 change based on what people have said.

Did v2 actually fix anything? anything at all?

what a bunch of backyarders!! geckostock in the uk is more professional than they are and thats 1 guy operating from home. God no wonder people go exclusive with Istock...

end rant...


1560
Photo Critique / Re: Help with IS rejection
« on: February 20, 2008, 18:14 »
I'm on my dodgy work monitor.  It is a beautiful image but at 100% the edges but detail seems smeared? dont know if that is the right word definetly looks to me like it has been noise ninja'd or had heavy noise reduction applied.

Did you shoot in raw? what software do you use? I find lightrooms noise reduction good (I just leave on default) but I used to use silkypix, that is the sort of look I got from that, its noise reduction was too heavy handed.

If you cant go back to raw, I think the downsizing may be the go.

1561
take a look at cushy stock.  it uploads, keywords and tracks your images.  it may be what you're after :)

(taking a look at it now too)

1562
General Stock Discussion / Re: iofoto: year 1 report- updated
« on: February 19, 2008, 20:13 »
deleted

1563
Yuri -

Your thread has ended up on John Harrington's Blog.  He isn't a big fan of microstock or the people who market in that arena.  On the post he referenced Lee Torrens specifically discussing this thread.

Duane


had a look at his blog, one whinge and complaint and negative comment after another.  God the guy needs to find some joy in his life.  It's not microstock he hates, he complains and takes delight in everyone and everythings failures. What a sad individual.

1564
I have

pile of raw images waiting to be processed to tif
pile of tif images waiting to go through photoshop
pile of images waiting to be keyworded
3 piles of images waiting to be submitted 1 pile is macro, 1 pile is istock because of there upload limits, 1 pile is all other micros.
then I have an archive of everything sorted by category.

I started keeping thumbnail size images of what got submitted / accepted at each site, but now I can't be bothered.
I just accept what gets through for each site, except for the odd image that I really want to get on, or images where I have missed a logo or something and everyone rejects then I may come back to that image and rework.

I also had a spreadsheet I tracked sales and acceptance with but gave up after about 200 images, because it was a pain (My wife was pushing me on the weekend to redo it and track again but I reckon tracked 2000+ images would be a hell of a lot of work).

so in answer to your question, I dont :)

Phil

1565
Off Topic / Re: hosting advice
« on: February 19, 2008, 03:59 »
thanks I'm going to check them both out now :)

1566
Shutterstock.com / Re: What is wrong with these keywords?
« on: February 19, 2008, 03:57 »
yep, the hard part of it too. is there is other words that could be in there like 'lines', 'wavey', 'waves?' on some but do you put them in?  What "type" of fractals are they? I dont know much about them but I have seen mandelbrot and julia and dont look like them to me? (just curious :) there again type of fractal could be keyword. but like you why can't they tell you. 

1567
Shutterstock.com / Re: 3 in a row
« on: February 18, 2008, 18:20 »
that would be quite a feat :):)

1568
Off Topic / hosting advice
« on: February 18, 2008, 16:22 »
hi,

I been using godaddy but I dont really like their site for management, I feel they are always trying to upsell and spam filtering is off on email accounts but it still gets filtered (arrghhh!)

So I'm after some advice for hosting. Can anyone recommend someone.

Regards
Phil

1569
this group is friendly, and the interface is easy / nice

1570
Shutterstock.com / Re: What is wrong with these keywords?
« on: February 18, 2008, 05:52 »
I have had a terrible run with ss and keyboards last 4-5 batches.

what annoys me is they dont tell you what word they object too. I had some images knocked back 3 times for keywords while I took guesses at what they didn't like.

'image' on illustrations
photo, photograph on photos.

both have been fine for 12 months but not now?

without seeing the image but a quick look at your very nice portfolio my guesses would be digital and maybe  illusion?

maybe be best to put it on the ss foirum?

Phil

1571
Shutterstock.com / Re: 3 in a row
« on: February 17, 2008, 19:30 »
Go to the anything goes forum and search for a thread called jackpot.



wow it goes for 34 pages!!!

1572
Shutterstock.com / 3 in a row
« on: February 17, 2008, 18:28 »
hi,

i click refresh and see

latest approved 3 images
latest downloads 3 images
waiting for review 3 images

sometimes I'm lucky and find that the middle three match and I get excited but I dont seem to have won anything.  Is there a list of prizes somewhere?  do I have take some pictures of cherries or lemons or playing cards? are three backgrounds / scenics etc not a winner??


1573
Alamy.com / Re: Alamy Questions
« on: February 17, 2008, 16:46 »
averaged over the past 6 months alamy has made about the same as dreamstime for me.

BUT most of my sales are images that wouldn't get into the micros for 'poor lighting' or 'not stock'.  If they did get into micros they wouldn't do well (but then there is a lot of stuff that doesn't sell, rather than 100 images each making $5 it is 2 images each make $250, 98 make $0)


1574
iStockPhoto.com / Re: 17% commission
« on: February 15, 2008, 18:00 »
thanks! one of those times that you are pleased to be wrong :)

1575
iStockPhoto.com / Re: 17% commission
« on: February 15, 2008, 15:55 »
but the photographer gets $1.3 x 20% = US$.26

I remember statements that the photographer gets 20% of the actual cost of a credit, not 20% of the costs in US$. That was mentioned during the short "let's screw Brits a bit" phase at the beginning of the year when photog got incredible large royalties from those British and European buyers ...

ok, so if someone pays the US$1.505 per credit, I will still get 20% so US$.30 ???

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors