|
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 - tubed
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
201
« on: November 08, 2008, 12:08 »
Yes that is correct.. What were you expecting? Photos.com is a subscription service unless you get a x-large or bigger download.. 
I got a sale from photos.com (on my balance it says "photos.com subscription"), but they gave me only 30 cents.
Is it correct ?
Thanks
202
« on: November 08, 2008, 10:01 »
Lucky you, I havn't had any PPD'd yet.. Looking forward to getting a few.. CCaetano, it is. Especially taking into account how these bigger sized PPDs bring in per-image incomes easily compared to ELs elsewhere.
p.s.: And lately they're more frequent (at least in my case) as well.
203
« on: November 07, 2008, 23:39 »
Wow, what a drastic change.. I think it's unfortunate for Istock if they continue the same as it will only kill contributor confidence and people will stop uploading.. I have recently uploaded last week my quota and they were almost all accepted, but they have all been burried and only 1 download of any of them and all other ones that are somewhat new get almost no dl's.. My only saving grace with them are previously popular files that continue to get dl's, if it weren't for the old high dl files I'd be close to zero.. Hopefully they figure things out.. Thanks for sharing this info Jon.. Hi All,
Just an example of what happens when Istock buries your work. I made over $4000 dollars over the past 3 weeks at three other Micro stock agencies with 1400 new uploads and the sales are growing daily. At the same time I made $105 dollars at Istock over the same period fulfilling my weekly quota of 15 images with my strongest work and my RPI is dropping there. I am making less at Istock this month than I was there with 30 images nine months ago. My new work is so deep in the search I have trouble finding it. Please read the comments I made on the Key wording blog this is the strangest part of the ongoing puzzle of how to make money at IS.
To be fair I was able to upload 1400 images to the other sites or at least two, the others are in progress. Giving me a much bigger presence at the competitors. If you do the RPI from just the past three weeks I am making twice as much per image at the other sites and I think the 1400 will return more in the long run than the 115 images I have at Istock.
I really think they are doing the math back at Getty and changes will take place. That is my take on it for what it's worth.
Hang in there,
AVAVA
204
« on: November 07, 2008, 19:24 »
I would say yes.. Although they are .30 subs, I have a few sales daily as well as some regular downloads, which are normally a couple dollars each.. They are my 3rd best seller.. Like Lisa said now that the controversy and bugs have been dealt with..
205
« on: November 07, 2008, 12:49 »
"This is Chumley aka Jonathan aka AVAVA aka The Jackal." Hey there Jonathan.. Good to see you again.. We missed you.. 
206
« on: October 23, 2008, 03:00 »
Can't stand this site.. They are low paying/sales and high rejections (super high rejections) You have better luck getting your images through Getty.. I stopped bothering long ago..
207
« on: October 17, 2008, 14:46 »
Another argument: only uploading a version of some micro best sellers to offer them to a wider public with a wider licence, hence a "better" product in terms of what you can do it with it?
Again just the way I think and everyone has their own twist to life, but I think that would be better than just uploading all micro images in your port.. I guess just use your best judgement.. tubed,etc...what do you all think?
Me personally I think that that would be the conciencious thing to do.. I would say that if you put the stuff up on Alamy, and then decide to delete it from the micros, if it is on both for a couple of months it won't kill anybody.. I guess the point I have been trying to make all along is just to be conciencous, not necessarily like Mr. rule follower.. Really it's just like this to me - if we all watch out for our industry and do things to help it grow and prosper and don't undercut for a quick $ then we will all have more to enjoy for longer, no more no less.. I want to be able to have something still worth doing in 5 years, but that depends on us the photographers and how we treat our industry.. I don't think a few of the better micro images on Alamy is going to kill anybody either, I'd just hate to see the search results pulling up all the same images in all the same searches..
208
« on: October 17, 2008, 10:56 »
I had downloads finaly logged today and some that showed from previous.. But what I am concerned with and wondering about is I see a photos.com pay per download for .30 - what's up with that? Aren't the pay per downloads supposed to be more than the subscription prices?
I am starting worry, plus I have opted out of subs yesterday, shouldn't be getting subs today..
209
« on: October 16, 2008, 17:37 »
I just opted out of subscriptions.
Me too.. That is a really stupid way to treat your supply chain.. This is not Minor, I havn't seen anything for more than half a month.. This is a business and if you are selling subscriptions and making money and your suppliers are not being paid for their part in the roll and you cannot account for their downloads, that is nothing more than theft in my book.. Bugs are acceptable, but letting them sit around and especially with such a big bugand not making it a priority is unacceptable..
210
« on: October 16, 2008, 15:37 »
tubed,
would it not make sense if say, you give the same images to both,
but only Alamy gets the XXL, which they have to anyway .
and the micro gets only XS 600 by 900 to say M (3 MP) at the largest;
both being RF of course.
this way if a buyer wants 4MP and up, they have to go to Alamy.
Well, yes I guess in theory that could be one way to do it.. But just like you upsize your images to get onto alamy, what's to stop the designer from buying your micro image and upsizing it? Or if they only need a websize from Alamy? or 1/8 pg? It's ultimately up to you.. I was just throwing some what if in the future scenarios out there.. It's a free world (for the most part)..
211
« on: October 16, 2008, 11:59 »
I read an argument for RF images on Alamy that states it doesnt devaluate Alamy since its RF license is broad enough to justify its cost. Also the image is guranteed to be of high technical quality at the highest resolution, given their "strict" technical editing: this adds value as well. How much truth is there in this argument in our opinion?
Well in theory, yes I think this does have some validity to it.. But this poses the argument that designers and others actually strictly follow the guidelines with RF licenses.. Really I being a designer and knowing lots of others, whether they buy from micro or other places, RF is pretty much free reign of usage.. I really doubt that many designers even read the licenses.. So like I said it's kinda a valid argument if you believe that everyone follows the rules.. I'm not really saying that anybody putting up micro on Alamy should be shot  or anything like that.. Really I'm just saying think about how your actions will affect yours and others future.. I personally like being able to choose to send some images to Macro and others to Micro.. I'd like to think there is a future for both, but we as a photography community need to watch out and care for our outlets for distributing.. If we all load up Alamy with Micro images what do you think it will become? Micro?
212
« on: October 16, 2008, 01:21 »
Hi Adelaide, Alamy sells 60 - 70 percent (L) licensed images.. RF will probably sell quicker and seem to show higher in the searches, but also can hinder as well.. If you are attached to the shot or it is unique I would sell as Licensed, although licensed can actually sometimes be less $$ depending on usage or could be a butt load of money if it is a cover on a huge print run.. RF is a flat fee, but you could get the mother of all sales with a Licensed.. So it is really up to you.. My first sale on Alamy was RF of a Irish landscape =) so you never know.. Editing tightly, keywording well and quality is your ticket to success.. I think Micro images on Alamy hurts the Photographers in the long run.. Yeah you might sell a couple of micro images there for some $$ but you also devalue Alamy and sooner or later you won't have Alamy, you just have another Micro when they decide they can't hold their price structure anymore.. I'm not saying do it or don't do it, because they don't have a rule against it, I'm just saying think about yours and everyone elses' future as Photographers and try to help keep our business and good sites like Alamy going.. Micros are great and Macros are great and they both have their place, but if you don't respect what they are and exploit the loop holes for a quick $$ you only are hurting yourself and your fellow photogs in the long run.. Just some food for thought.. Good luck Adelaide with your Alamy port, you have great work so I'm sure you'll do well.. I have been accepted to Alamy months ago, but didn't upload anything after that because of the lack of watermarks.
Now that I plan to finally start making images ready for them, I would like to know what is people's experience with RF vs RM there. Most of what I will upload will be travel images, either urban or nature or wildlife. My tendency is to have all of those as RM, but I would like to know people's experiences.
For those of you who have been having sales in Alamy, what are your experiences with RM in Alamy?
Regards,
Adelaide
213
« on: October 13, 2008, 14:32 »
I do not see any download on my account since Oct 2nd. If this a bug when it's going to be fixed?
And are all the earnings that havn't posted going to be given to us or does this bug screw us out of the past months sub earnings? Obviously I too have not had any and usually one every day or at least every other day..
214
« on: August 21, 2008, 10:36 »
I think pretty much every macro that has middleman does this kind of %.. It does suck, but it's also business.. If there weren't cuts there wouldn't be distributors..
215
« on: August 20, 2008, 19:31 »
Out of interest do you find that what they want according to their submissions list is completely different to what they generally accept / reject ? I didn't really think of it like that before but now that I'm thinking about it.. Yes.. I sent in a couple of shots that were textbook "Requested Shots" from their guidelines, actually some of my personal best images and not easy shots to do and I got a "Not what we are looking for".. Which seems to be their response to every rejection but it's all good, I've tried to leave my ego at the door after a couple of years with micro rejections.. But in actuallity they have accepted a good amount of my shots so I'm not complaining, although they could use a stats area to see views and such, all I see is $0.00  .. Rob
216
« on: August 20, 2008, 17:19 »
I would mention though that their admin staff are very helpful if you ever need them. That's good to know, it is important to have a good contributor relation. They are picky for sure.. As I think they are pretty specific in what images they want in their collection, but I think that is good as it cuts down on the crap and overload factor.. Thx 4 the response..
217
« on: August 20, 2008, 15:27 »
Hey Guy's
I have a few images with Inmagine, but no sales.. I was just curious if anyone has anything with them or has had anything with them in the past and would like to share their experience.. Any sales? Is it worth uploading more to them?
Anyone have any good Macro sites other than Photoshelter, Alamy, Getty, Corbis? Just curious if you have a particular collection that might be not as mainstream you thought was worth giving a shot?
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
