|
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 - Shelma1
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 ... 116
1876
« on: March 11, 2015, 06:00 »
Masochists, perhaps. Slaves, no. There is still plenty of real slavery left in the world, and those people are not shooting landscapes with $3,000 cameras or sitting in their comfortable dining rooms drawing Christmas cards.
But do we deserve a bigger slice of the pie? When one or two people are multimillionaires or billionaires and we're making a teeny tiny fraction of that, but the billionaires are making all that money just selling our work, then yes. There needs to be some more equal distribution of profits. We're living in the age of the new robber barons.
1877
« on: March 10, 2015, 20:44 »
I read an article recently that quoted Oringer saying he's glad SS can offer a living to people in developing countries. It was clear he didn't see his crowd sourcing model as a sustainable source of income in expensive countries. I wish I could find the article.
1878
« on: March 10, 2015, 12:13 »
There are always job openings for reviewers there, all over the world. It seems to me that reviewers see work from their own geographical area.
1879
« on: March 10, 2015, 11:50 »
This would be great news if they had 83 contributors.
1880
« on: March 09, 2015, 17:32 »
Looks like Hibiscus to me.
1881
« on: March 07, 2015, 13:35 »
I think something new kicked in, with the filter and preview software. I just got this one today: "Do not included special characters in your title/caption/keywords. Please correct and resubmit."
The other seven from last week, went through just fine. When I looked I saw that I had used a "forbidden" character. In the title it shows as this (on the accepted files) Juan Pablo Garc?a and in the keywords, garcãÂa. Those passed, now the review caught it.
So I suspect you just ran into something the same? Look and see?
It was supposed to say - Juan Pablo Garcia without the character.
Now I have to go do some editing, because I missed it when I was adding the title, description and keywords. 
I dont get many rejections over the years and when I do, It was My fault Missing a clone mark or something and it's all good. just had rejections for "Titles Must be in English" I wouldn't know how to write in any other language!! . This is absolutely stupid...Really stupid. I won't re-submit. There not worthy of the Images if they can't even get that right.
I think their own system turns normal characters into "special" characters. I've seen similar strings of odd characters replacing an apostrophe in my titles, for example. Then my files are rejected for special characters. I have to force myself to not use apostrophes where they would normally go.
1882
« on: March 06, 2015, 14:47 »
Everyone has their own "good" and "bad." A few years ago I was happy to make a "Christmas bonus" with my drawings, so what I earned was "good." But now I'd like to draw full time, so my earnings, though much higher now than they were a couple of years ago, are "bad" now because I haven't reached my new earnings goal yet.
1883
« on: March 06, 2015, 14:43 »
The stock sites will automatically add a copyright line to your images. But you own the copyright as soon as you create something, as Sean said.
1884
« on: March 06, 2015, 11:21 »
It depends. On Veer they want a larger file, but iS and SS will accept 4000x4000 or 3000x5000 or similar. I was saving smaller so SS would accept it rather than rejecting for "poorly rasterized," because the larger the file the more likely "OOF" or "PR" rejections seem. But if you're not uploading a second copy of the jpg (they allow you to sell both formats separately) then the larger size is fine.
[rant] And now, a quick rant once again about how ridiculous those "poorly rasterized" rejections are, because SS offers the option to license the jpg instead of the eps now, and it's exactly the same jpg they reject as "poorly rasterized" if you upload it separately, yet the quality is perfectly acceptable if the buyer just clicks a different button. [/rant]
1885
« on: March 06, 2015, 11:13 »
Ft did pass iS for a bit. It was at 33 and iS was at 30. Looks like it changed today.
1886
« on: March 05, 2015, 11:21 »
I doubt any of this will have a meaningful impact, because iStock always seems to be grasping at straws. However, if it DID work, I'd be disinclined to spend time on it. Because honestly, I'd rather people find and buy my images elsewhere, since iS has the lowest royalties and lowest RPD.
1887
« on: March 04, 2015, 14:43 »
I actually have a lot more variation on iStock. Shutterstock can vary 10-20%, but on iStock my credit sales take really wild swings from one day to the next.
1888
« on: March 04, 2015, 14:09 »
The options would have to be REALLY discounted, because the stock is pretty volatile lately.
1889
« on: March 03, 2015, 15:00 »
I'm glad they have the space; it will feel comfortable and familiar to potential clients who work in the ad industry, where spaces like these are the norm.
But I find it a little sad, actually, that everyone's adopted the money-saving "open plan" concept, where you sit right next to someone at a long table and are expected to concentrate on your work despite the lack of space and privacy and the roar of the constant din around you.
When I started in advertising many moons ago, fresh out of college, I had a big window office in the Graybar building on Lexington Ave. Since then the spaces have gotten smaller and smaller and noisier and noisier. Glad to be in my own quiet window office today (AKA the dining room).
1890
« on: March 03, 2015, 11:53 »
Woow, I want that great work desk! 
If SS pays me 50% instead 30% I could go for yoga and massage too... No, I'm not jealous, I just get significantly less % than my middleman... Who was talking about a rise lately?
Love the adjustable desk. Would want it pulled up to a sofa, so I could use it as a coffee table for meetings and a work desk while being comfy.
1891
« on: March 03, 2015, 10:48 »
1892
« on: March 02, 2015, 11:59 »
It's a P.R. opportunity. I expect a press release as soon as they hit 50 mil.
1893
« on: March 02, 2015, 07:19 »
After complaining and asking to have "poor rasterization" pointed out to me, once againl my rejections were labeled "mistakes." Then for a week everything was approved. Then right back to "poor rasterization." I try very hard to be Zen about it, but it's really irritating. What a complete waste of time for me and the person who has to re inspect everything. Now I'm keeping track of these "mistakes." We'll see how it nets out by year end.
1894
« on: March 01, 2015, 19:44 »
1895
« on: March 01, 2015, 06:27 »
At least for me, the image page changed recently to include license FAQs and an offer to "get started for free" if you're not signed in to the site. Probably a test. I'm not sure what the offer really is...haven't checked it out. But as far as I know SS still pays you the same amount even when running a promotion.
1896
« on: February 27, 2015, 17:49 »
"Creative brands and agencies are looking for original image content from real people, creating a more impactful and sincere relationship with their customers."
As opposed to us fake people, creating weak, unimpactful and insincere relationships with customers...
1897
« on: February 27, 2015, 17:37 »
Yes, one of the articles mentions that there are far fewer images online than the number claimed.
1899
« on: February 27, 2015, 12:48 »
I see black and blue on my ipad and bluish/gold on my laptop.
1900
« on: February 27, 2015, 12:42 »
OK...signed in on my laptop. Found the search box, downloaded a "free comp." Huge watermark. OOF. Noise. Fringing. Apparently they get the images from Instagram?
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 ... 116
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
