|
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 - Pixart
Pages: 1 ... 72 73 74 75 76 [77] 78 79 80 81 82 ... 131
1901
« on: May 14, 2009, 18:11 »
Bugger. I just got busted for a John Deere as well. My best selling photo at StockXpert is now offline.... Still for sale on Photos.com of course. Oh well, soon it will no longer sell for less than 31 cents anywhere...
1902
« on: May 13, 2009, 11:37 »
They seem to have some strange search rotation that moves much more slowly than any other site. Last month I had a BME (but still nothing to brag about) and this month it seems they perhaps went out of business. I don't expect much for sales before July.
[/b]
Why do you say that, pixart?
Because every good month I've had on BS is followed by 2 weak months, the first of which will is usually 50% of the high month. Lat month was a BME by a couple $ and in May if sales keep at this pace I will drop to 31% of my high on the last rotation.
1903
« on: May 12, 2009, 21:14 »
They seem to have some strange search rotation that moves much more slowly than any other site. Last month I had a BME (but still nothing to brag about) and this month it seems they perhaps went out of business. I don't expect much for sales before July.
1904
« on: May 12, 2009, 21:07 »
Thought you might find this interesting. Have you ever heard of Andrew Disney? He is working on the first feature film shot entirely on DSLR, a Canon 5D Mark II - but with Nikon Lenses. For recording sound they used HVX200 (whatever that is). There's some little teasers on their website, but no synopsis or much else. Movie Website http://searchingforsonny.com/
1905
« on: May 08, 2009, 18:17 »
1906
« on: May 08, 2009, 15:42 »
From PDN about the opt out avatars:
We aren't sure who, if anyone, organized the protest, but it might have actually gotten results.
Whoever you might be, it was quite genious. Do I look good in my sash, or should I take it off now? I'm always a little behind in fashion trends.
1907
« on: May 07, 2009, 16:30 »
Your 42 were on hold because the reviewers couldn't view their releases - it's being corrected as I write this, they will move shortly. Ah, that expains it. All my stuck stuff is people.
1908
« on: May 06, 2009, 11:15 »
Does Getty treat their traditional photographers this poorly? Anyone know what commissions they give our big brothers? Are they just trying to see what they can get away with? Kick us an see if we'll get up (or notice)?
1909
« on: May 06, 2009, 00:53 »
For some reason, the original purchase ($9) was never posted.
Just like they forgot to post Photos.com and JI earnings twice and for some reason failed to notice until people started chatting on the forums.
1910
« on: May 05, 2009, 23:02 »
One more Fair Warning:
Since Jupiter ate Stockxpert, and Getty ate Jupiter, there has been occasional rumbling on the StockXpert forum that our ability to "opt out" from the Photos/JUI deal might be soon removed. Well, I would'nt lose any sleep about it and could opt-out of StockXpert and the 4% permanently. I'd have a hard time quitting Istock though, my miniscule port at IS does remarkably well.
1911
« on: May 05, 2009, 14:34 »
I have become hyper-critical so I would say no, I am not a better photographer. Many times I have to remind myself that my clients (non-micro) are real people and not design firms and not to throw out so many shots that have too much shadow or a little specular highlight.
1912
« on: May 03, 2009, 21:10 »
Hm... well, I am more in favour of adding location than ever as I just checked and found another 8 dl's with the keyword "Saskatchewan" and 5 others from my port with no search term, but very Canadian with RCMP, grain elevators and wildlife.
Wouldn't it be a fabulous Sunday at DT if the 22 dls were XL and not all subs?
1913
« on: May 03, 2009, 15:15 »
If we were having this conversation a couple years from now I bet the subject would include "geotagging", but for now... the question is - do you put the location of your photograph in your keywords, subject or description? Does it belong on location shots? I've been drifting away from including locations, but does it affect sales?
I think about this from time to time, especially today with 9 DT sales all searched by the keyword "Manitoba". (A province in Canada). One day both Leaf and I had an abundance of Saskatchewan dl's - likely same buyer thanks to our common keyword.
I feel that a buyer deserves as much information as possible - but often location keywords are rejected. How would an editor in Romania know what a Manitoba is when they look at keywords? The newish (and quite progressive) Zymmetrical, removes the description field from our data which must make it tough to search for travel or scientifically labeled photos. So, what happens to the micro buyer who is proud to shop "local"? Or a buyer who is making a travel guide or making a local economics presentation? I'm guessing a very high percentage (over 95%) of buyers need generic, but what about these specific buyers? I don't deal with traditional agencies so I might be wrong, but I thought the trads require location tagging?
Before we get into it - I believe that if you can't "see" a keyword, it shouldn't be included. A family in a kitchen doesn't need a location tag. I would not put the "Manitoba" keyword on a house on a street, but I would definitely consider with a farmhouse backing onto a canola field with a perfectly flat skyline because it defines rural life on the prairies.
Your thoughts and own procedure?
1914
« on: May 02, 2009, 03:27 »
I just looked into my crystal ball and and I received an e-mail from the future We regret to inform you that we cannot accept your submission into the Istock collection BUT you better say WooYay Istock you're amazing because against our better judgement we will slog your crappy photo at our other dirty little distribution network, if you are lucky we might even throw you a few bones at the end of the month when we tally up our receipts.
1915
« on: April 30, 2009, 16:36 »
Here's a godaddy coupon code gdr0442p this one expires at midnight 3 May. It is for 15% off anything, no minimum purchase for once.
Their fine print: Not applicable to sale priced domain names, bulk domains, premium domains, Sunrise/Landrush domain registrations, discounted memberships or maintenance plans; additional disk space and bandwidth renewals, custom page layouts, Go Daddy Marketplace products, posters, die-cast cars or gift cards. Discount reflected in your shopping cart -- cannot be used in conjunction with any other offer or promotion. Offer expires Sunday, May 3, 2009 at midnight (Pacific Time).
1916
« on: April 30, 2009, 13:33 »
It is a very cool plug-in, hopefully it will be like webpayments pro (if I remember the title of the Paypal product) it took about 2 years and finally available in Canada - but now I don't want it anymore and I needed it then. Yes, Madelaide... almost American. But if you see us travel any where we always have the Canadian flag stiched somewhere so there's no mistake.  I just don't understand how we have such a strong economy right now and our dollar is worth 30 cents less than their though? ? ?
1917
« on: April 28, 2009, 21:32 »
Were sorry but the PayPal Plug-In is currently only available in the United States and is not offered in any other country at this time.
1918
« on: April 27, 2009, 13:47 »
We all cry the rejection blues from time to time, but the fact is that Veer Marketplace should have a very clear vision of what they are looking for. It's not to say that the rejected photos aren't good. It's unlikely that some rogue reviewer is arbitrarily rejecting photos because he is in a killing moood. I was under the impression that Veer is only taking the content that they want - not the whole catalogue. Am I mistaken, or isn't SV going to cease to exist in the near future? Why put photos online that Veer doesn't want?
1919
« on: April 23, 2009, 14:31 »
1920
« on: April 23, 2009, 14:01 »
Microstock is like vanilla cake. If you are looking for a Molten Lava Cake try www.deviantart.com . When we get something approved that is too beautiful or artistic it rarely ever sells.
1921
« on: April 23, 2009, 11:47 »
This is a pretty major reason not to upload there if you can't use Paypal:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/crestock-com/i-think-crestock-is-refusing-to-pay-me/
but why the diff, pixart? if you gave the contributors the choices of being paid at the point of terms of agreement, you should live up to the agreement.
i am sure if the shoe was on the other foot, ie. the contributor not living up to the agreement, the consequence would have been immediate deletion of your account, or whatever.
it should work both way bona fide. like any good business practice.
It's not my place to say don't upload to any site. I wanted to point out that "Moneybookers Artists'" are having great struggles getting paid. If you are in a Paypal country, take the risks because it looks like "Paypal Artists" are getting paid. But, if you can't trust a site to pay their bills, can you trust them to even record your earnings properly? Myself, I wouldn't personally upload to a new site that withholds earnings from artists for such lame excuses. Of course, the posters in the Moneybookers thread may be lying, but I doubt it. But still, I would be a big hypocrite if one of the top 3 agencies pulled the same trick, I think would be too attached to my payouts there to take a stand.
1922
« on: April 23, 2009, 09:36 »
1923
« on: April 22, 2009, 10:23 »
- 2005 I started buying so my status is quite old on some sites.
- 2006 (barely) with DT & FT
- 2007 Started to make some $ and joined the rest
- 2008 Joined Zym, likely my last new site unless something exciting turns up
- 2009 I've had an account at Canstock for years, I plan to actually upload some photos this year
- 2009 May upload to my Alamay account, although I doubt I will ever produce the volume for this site to have much effect for me.
1924
« on: April 16, 2009, 14:18 »
From Nikon Rumors yesterday: Note: BJP has removed the reference to the semi-pro camera. Was it a typo, or do they know a secret? Yes, the d5000 was disappointing!
What is BJP talking about?
By [NR] admin | April 15, 2009
This was published by BJP just few hours ago:
As BJP went to press, Nikon unveiled two new digital SLRs - one entry level and another semi-pro - as well as new lenses. Both new DSLRs come with a high-definition video mode, with the entry-level model, the D5000, also offering a swivel LCD screen - a first for a Nikon camera.
Is this a clue that the next Nikon semi-pro model (D400?) will have HD video?
1925
« on: April 12, 2009, 14:46 »
There are major endorsements from some big names NOT to purchase this camera because of the impossible price tag. The price dropped recently in Europe (500 pounds?) but not yet in North America, but I woudl think that a significant price drop is just around the corner.
If you are wondering about the legitimacy of that dealer, I would too. I can't see how a legitimate dealer can sell for that much less. Maybe one of those *deals* where it is just a body, no battery, no strap, no user manual... Also, their terms say they don't ship International - aren't you in Europe somewhere?
Pages: 1 ... 72 73 74 75 76 [77] 78 79 80 81 82 ... 131
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
