|
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 - Sean Locke Photography
Pages: 1 ... 66 67 68 69 70 [71] 72 73 74 75 76 ... 314
1751
« on: June 17, 2015, 13:22 »
... and I got booted.
1752
« on: June 17, 2015, 13:19 »
Maybe they're full? I used an anonymous name.
1753
« on: June 17, 2015, 13:04 »
1754
« on: June 17, 2015, 12:17 »
"With the new Adobe system customers can store extra images they select in the Adobe Creative Cloud, use them during the design stage of a project, keep them there for reference just in case, and not have to pay for any they downloaded until an image is actually used in a project. "
Uh, yeah, you can use comp images from any agency and not pay (license) to use them until you ... use them.
I'm missing the point too.
1755
« on: June 17, 2015, 09:58 »
Thanks for the great news Matt. I'm excited to see how this new move by Adobe affects sales!
If Fotolio is your only agency, then you should be excited, but otherwise I can't see how it could matter a squit. AS makes more sales; someone else makes less.
Not necessarily. Here's a built in market of application users that might not have been interested in licensing before.
1756
« on: June 17, 2015, 09:06 »
Mat, how long does the transfer from FT to AS take for new images?
1757
« on: June 17, 2015, 07:09 »
It is up to you to take it the way you want. You seem to believe that not being accepted by stocksy is a verdict on the quality of your work.
Stocksy only takes a small number of people because it is a very tiny agency. If they were as big as Shutterstock, they could take many more people...but I guess reading my post is probably too long...
I know many people who have applied to stocksy and were rejected and this is exactly what they told me how they felt.
Obviously, if you havent applied, why would you care? But there are loads of people who love stocksy and really want to join.
I have no issue with how Stocksy select their contributors, or what aesthetic or niche they are going for. My comments were in response to the comments you posted and the words/phrase you chose to use - it was condescending, and that shows through a lot with people who have been accepted into Stocksy. It also comes across from Stocksy contributors that it is they who seem to think that by being accepted it is an indication of the quality of their work, raising them above the people who haven't "got in". The whole phraseology of "being accepted" or "got in" indicates some sort of special club to aspire to joining rather than an indication of the size of the agency.
I really think you're overreaching here. Cobalt's comments are the least condescending of anything I read here.
1758
« on: June 16, 2015, 15:41 »
I have to be honest, I feel kind of crap that I am not able to sell my photos through Adobe. Missing out on good money, all because I wanted to protect my intellectual property.
Apply through the adobe site. The thing i would be most worried about is whether Adobe is relying on the likes of "The Chad" and that greedy Oleg to run adobe stock. That will be a disaster for adobe. There needs to be separate management structure.
The Adobe site just points to Fotolia.
1759
« on: June 16, 2015, 10:28 »
If you're a member, and you want to talk about your experiences, feel free to message Rob or myself, here, or there. Anonymously wouldn't be the best, but I wouldn't want anyone to feel threatened from concerns, valid or otherwise.
1760
« on: June 16, 2015, 06:56 »
1761
« on: June 16, 2015, 06:43 »
Wish I could get my CC app to work so I can update PS and see how this integrates.
Is there any way to see which DLs come from this source on the FT site - or how does reporting work?
Sounds like good news. Thanks!
1762
« on: June 15, 2015, 06:14 »
1763
« on: June 14, 2015, 11:43 »
I have emailed CM for a partial refund. Regardless of the discounted bundle, I still believe the quality should be to a certain standard.
Stocksy involvement aside, there is no guarantee or assurance of any kind of quality on CM. We all know (I think) that they do no kind of inspections or anything. I think it's buyer beware there.
1764
« on: June 14, 2015, 11:31 »
I don't know about demotix, but when an image is usually licensed for editorial use by a news agency, syndication is (sadly) included. ie, they can feed their story to anyone who wants to pick it up, and that includes the images.
1765
« on: June 14, 2015, 09:01 »
Lol, guess I never scrolled down far enough. Thanks for the smack.
1766
« on: June 14, 2015, 08:48 »
I'm serious. Where is the page that describes it? I can only find the page that says "1500 presets and some stock images" with the buy me button. I couldn't find a detail page anywhere. If there is one, I'd love to see it.
I don't know anything about the 'quality' of he images. I'm not an editor and don't have access to other work. It's known, though, that emotion and feeling can trump perfect focus during acceptance.
1767
« on: June 14, 2015, 08:34 »
Just curious... As a buyer, why would you spend $39 on something when you have absolutely no idea what you're getting?
1768
« on: June 13, 2015, 09:06 »
This is one of those "Honestly, why are you bothering?" sites.
1769
« on: June 13, 2015, 07:51 »
How about you first.
1770
« on: June 11, 2015, 17:05 »
1771
« on: June 11, 2015, 08:45 »
I wonder what do you guys found annoying about stock footage sites you are on (with names) and what could be done better?
The example could be: long reviewing times, poor interface to manage uploads, lack of customer service etc.
I would like to hear both contributors and those who buy (if we have any on forum) 
Peace!
This and the other video thread makes me infer that you're trying to start up a video stock site, or something. I'm amazed at how small the previews are on Pond, SS, etc. And they just aren't attractive sites to look at.
1772
« on: June 11, 2015, 08:43 »
I think it's an attempt to get the name in front of people who might not normally see it. The fact that the images are priced at thousands show that they aren't trying to sell them cheap. I think.
1773
« on: June 11, 2015, 06:46 »
No, there is no evidence in the file of whether you had a license when you used the software.
1774
« on: June 09, 2015, 12:47 »
Apparently, it's a legit promotion of some kind.
1775
« on: June 09, 2015, 12:07 »
Oh, haha. Didn't even notice that.
Now I see that there's a user called "Stocksy" selling packs... from Stocksy, I suppose. 
Using a competitor to sell your own images. That's a new strategy.
I just found my way through to that page. I'm checking on that, but I doubt it's real.
Pages: 1 ... 66 67 68 69 70 [71] 72 73 74 75 76 ... 314
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
