|
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 - MxR
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14
176
« on: June 18, 2015, 06:53 »
Ok, thanks, it worked. I changed XS price from 1 to 3, and all other sizes automatically changed too. Before that, I only changed X price from 30 to 100 and other prices remained the same.
I still have one question though, if I change my mind, and change the status of exclusive files to non-exclusive, can I upload them to other sites or do I have to wait some time before I can do that?
I think to 99% you can do this immediately after going to non-exclusive.
You have a nice port. Hope you sell this exclusive pics. A commission raise from 3 Credit for XXL-File-Sale to 9 :-)
If you were fullex, your commision would be 16,2 /$ !
That is what non-ex-contributors who were at many agencies often not will see.
At FL you raise up from 3 /S for XXL-Sale to 16,2 /$ (if you are only silverranked)!
de.fotolia.com/Info/Contributors/Royalties
Yes... but 75% of fotolia sales are subs... and exclusives and not exclusives have the same commission...this is waht no exclusives people see... and why buy and xxl for 36 credits when you have ten images in DPC...
177
« on: June 17, 2015, 11:28 »
Matt... why EXCLUSIVES contributors:
1. They do not get better subscription fee than no exclusives
2. Do not get better seacrh results
3. Can upload best works to infinite
178
« on: April 30, 2015, 04:16 »
Horrible:
1. Now it is much harder sort keywords by relevance.
2. No recalls previous categories
179
« on: March 17, 2015, 04:42 »
when I was 20 years i did to many stupid things...
180
« on: March 13, 2015, 12:59 »
Is not a improve question, is 100 images of one shot, 10 acepted, next 10, rejected, next 9/10 acepted, then, 7/7 rejected... im not newbie... i ususally have 80-90% acepted or more (95-100% acepted in fotolia for example)
Is inconsistent...
181
« on: March 13, 2015, 05:56 »
Simply have rejected absurdly.
Yesterday they all in... today rejected all.
it's not funny, it's my * job.
182
« on: March 13, 2015, 04:45 »
I demand an official response.
shutter stock are teasing me and disrespecting me this.
10/10 shots taken at ISO 100 with 3 flashes and 6 models rejected by noise with a full frame Nikon 610
im tired and sad...
183
« on: March 11, 2015, 06:31 »
bad in fotolia (25% of earnings... ) great in other sites 
184
« on: March 06, 2015, 06:44 »
The problem is that it is easy Shutter that support people isolated, apples studio shots, smling flashed people with forced poses ... and other "news".
If you do something realistic, natural light or not in high key usually have more rejections ... rejection buttons "noise" and "poor lighting" are clubbed like the jostick pad of a videogame.
There are several options that I think wickedly:
- SS is stupid and goes against the trends
- Reviewers do not want competition with your photos
- We are reviewed by the robot Skynet
So I'm not afraid about approved millions of photos per minute, because what most agree is repetitive stocky shots...
185
« on: February 28, 2015, 07:15 »
First; i hate Fotolia and Shutter: these two agencies invented ways to pay less for our work...
All microstocker from europe who i know are growing in fotolia more han Shutter.
Why people are Shutter fan and them cry when they rejects photos for stupid reasons?
Now thanks to shutter the average price of a photo is 40 cents and thanks to fotolia can buy a photo for a dollar.
And both are successful and are imitated
186
« on: February 26, 2015, 06:21 »
A rise? you knowBigstockphoto ? because those are his intentions...
Nothing is forever, when Shutter begin losing money, losing clients, we will see changes... bad or good changes?... i dont know but they copy the Istock RC sistme to Bigstock sort time ago...
187
« on: February 23, 2015, 03:38 »
This photo is fit for Stocksy... with an istagram filter!!
188
« on: February 02, 2015, 02:21 »
Uf... this girl ooks like a minor.
189
« on: February 01, 2015, 08:01 »
In percentege on earnings : Fotolia 3 Shutter 4
In downloads Fotolia 2 Shutter 3
For me is a question of time. Terrible.
Subscriptions make Shutter n1
Dollar Club +subscriptions make fotolia future number 1
190
« on: January 30, 2015, 18:02 »
that stupid megapixels war ...
191
« on: January 29, 2015, 09:28 »
from outside it seems that people from united states always try to retire and be rich denouncing and ruining someone...
The hot coffee burning ... burns!
Sliding wet floor ... slides!...
The sexy photos used with sexy purpose ... ARE SEXY!
Sorry for my english... but do not make me a lawsuit report for it...
192
« on: January 28, 2015, 09:40 »
Remember: Inspectors are contributors (of differents levels)and contributors are human.
first recognize that 80% of the stock photos are horrible, (because 80% of payments are miserable ...ok) but if something is true is that only shutterstock has the worst reputation for arbitrary rejections.
We must also recognize that sometimes horrific photos are approved ... or sometimes you can see a portfolio with 11000 similar pictures from yogurt approved.
it's crazy. I do not care about the mass rejections because I do uploads mass number of photos.
193
« on: January 28, 2015, 08:53 »
Funny not very offensive (can be for something...)
I see worst incorrect uses for stock photos...and he bought the images.!
194
« on: January 27, 2015, 02:47 »
1-. Upload to Bigstock is to show that whenever Shutterstock can get off the commissions because we are fools. Bigstock is a Shutter test to see how idiot we can be...(profit system like ISTOCK and 123RF...but less money).
2-. Bigstock is an example of photographic devaluation and you have to be a fool to spend so much time in so little benefit. It is more profitable watch TV than upload bigstock
195
« on: January 15, 2015, 08:43 »
I thought the exciting news would be closing the bad joke of Bigstock (mixing worst of subscriptions with the worst of RC istockphoto) ... and more money ....
196
« on: January 14, 2015, 10:45 »
you are very boring people.
Istock remains between 85% and 55% of photographers money.
This large percentage is to pay INSPECTORS to control exclusivity among other things besides eating oysters and light cigars with money.
Do not be so foolish as to make them work for free. Those photos are clich millions across the image banks.
197
« on: December 06, 2014, 06:31 »
I had two keywords problems in the past...
1-. Warning with google translations!!
Example: Spanish "padre coge a beb" Google Translator "Father f/u/cks baby" Correct "father lifting baby"
or "Mujer madura" Google say: "MILF woman" correct is "mature woman"
2-. Shutterstock Suggest Keywords: this is the biggest keywords spam problem. Is easy that not relationed keywords appearin your photos.
198
« on: November 26, 2014, 09:33 »
he only was a newbie... a little fish... IKEA furniture (uncle Yuri) or wall papers mosaics are registered with someone and do not close the account for this designs.
Other contributor who sold designs with pictures of other contributors but it was more important was treated better
199
« on: November 26, 2014, 09:16 »
I know one spanish person with photos of gift box images with "ferrero Moncheris Desingn" who Shutter close his account an get his money.
He take make first and last mistake an in one day his account was closed... did not act in bad faith but forget erase original box design
200
« on: November 18, 2014, 03:25 »
Files Exclusivity is not so bad.
Example: everyone wants to get into Stocksy !!
Microstock prices have dropped to have the same files on 20 sites competing with each other...
If a buyer needs a particular file will not mind paying a little more.
But... I think the exclusive content must be quality content.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
