|
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 - mike123
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10
201
« on: March 04, 2017, 07:46 »
I think 123 is worth it only when you can consistently stay at level 4 or above. Otherwise the royalties are too low, not percentage-wise but money-wise due to their low prices. As I had a small portfolio of less than 100 images when they introduced the new royalty system in 2013, I figured the best I can do is to reach level 2, so I deleted all my images there. A year later with twice as many images I gave them a new year-long try, which lead me to a conclusion that I might reach and be able to keep level 3, but will never get to level 4 (i'm doing stock only part-time). Thus I deleted my images by end of 2014 once more. Since then I didn't bother with 123 and it looks like it has been the right desicion 
202
« on: January 07, 2017, 16:25 »
Thanks for looking into this forum GraphicLeftovers! I've sent you a PM with a detailed description of the "unreachable email" problem and also of my original email verification problem.
203
« on: January 07, 2017, 10:06 »
Hello guys, was anyone able to get through to GLStock via email? My problem is that they apparently sent the verification email to a wrong email address (must have been originally my fault by giving them a wrong email address with a minor typo - but then how were I able to open an account with a wrong email address?..). Anyway, since November I've tried multiple times to reach GLStock by email (via info@graphicleftovers.com) and/or via the contact form on their site. Every email fails to be delivered due to "unreachable server". After a longer break, yesterday I've made a new email attempt, but with the same result  . Hope someone managed to reach them and can give me a hint how to do that..
204
« on: July 11, 2016, 16:21 »
I am opted out of Enhanced Licenses and today got an email request from SS for 3 of my images. When I asked about the royalty for this particular download, they said 2.30$ for each image  ... I asked if this was a typo and they said "no, this is real".
I'm glad I opted out...
I would expect that would have been reported as a SOD not an EL, another reason to opt out.
I thought the same, even though they specifically asked for an Enhanced License Download. At least they bothered to ask me, the only positive thing about it
205
« on: July 11, 2016, 13:46 »
I am opted out of Enhanced Licenses and today got an email request from SS for 3 of my images. When I asked about the royalty for this particular download, they said 2.30$ for each image ... I asked if this was a typo and they said "no, this is real". I'm glad I opted out...
206
« on: March 20, 2016, 09:18 »
i have a question....
Before this change... it was someone that could control how many copies the buyer makes?
I have an image that sold multiple times in a row as an extended download 1-2 years ago. I guess the buyer wanted a certain number of copies, which was not covered by a single extended licence. Sure, the buyer must have been a honest one, but I also have the feeling people buying extended licences are more "serious" about their business then the average buyers. Compared to the unlimited usage Dreamstime introduced recently, back then me (and also the agency) got 4-6 times as much as if the sale would have happen now. I'm staying opted out of extended downloads on DT, unless they drop the unlimited number of copies (which I don't believe).
207
« on: March 10, 2016, 05:03 »
I used to get ELs on Dt from time to time. Last one was in February, which was a P-EL and netted me 15,77$. I only used to manually activate ELs for images in levels 3, 4 and 5, because in lower levels the contributor share is just pathetic. Now I deactivated ELs for all of my images. P.S. I just checked my earnings from extended licences on DT. Got one P-EL sale on a level 5 image last year, which was paid with 50 credits and only netted me 8.10$. I would say not much to lose by deactivating ELs
208
« on: February 18, 2016, 17:27 »
@mike123, please send me an email with your login name or account number and I will take a look for you.
Kind regards,
Mat Hayward
email: mhayward@adobe.com
Just sent a mail.. Mat, thanks for coming here and for looking into this!
209
« on: February 18, 2016, 06:35 »
It could have been a DPC sale if I was on DPC
210
« on: February 18, 2016, 06:27 »
And how are the usual Adobe stock sales reported?
Same way as Fotolia subs. Based on the commission you can see that this was an Adobe Stock sale, e.g. 3.30 Credits for a single sale (33% of 10 credits price).
211
« on: February 18, 2016, 06:09 »
Actually I don't know for sure since the contributor interface doesn't differentiate between Fotolia sub sales and Adobe Stock sales. And this sale is reported the same way the usual Adobe Stock sales are reported.
Maybe Mat could provide some info what kind of sale this is?
I hope it is not an extended sale via Adobe Stock, because 16.50 credits/Euro would be a big pay cut compared to the Fotolia extended sales (I set my files to 100 credits extended price).
212
« on: February 18, 2016, 05:11 »
Just got a sale from Adobe Stock netting me 16.50 credits (I'm an European contributor).
Is it an extended license sale?
213
« on: October 02, 2014, 16:35 »
Dirkr this really might be the only possible explanation. I didn't even think that Fotolia could take the quota into account.
Well better this way then having real time reporting but fixed commission regardless of how many images of the subscription quoty the buyer really used.
This, or Fotolia came up with some new type of "subscriptions", probably for some chosen clients.
214
« on: October 02, 2014, 15:29 »
Hello folks,
got a strange Fotolia sub sale today on one of my images... Netted me 5 credits commission (which is not bad of course). But do you know what kind of sale it might be?
I am opted out of DPC, so it shouldn't (hopefully) be some kind of DPC extended sale.
Thanks for your help!
215
« on: May 24, 2014, 07:33 »
That's the "curation."
Thanks Shelma1. Probably I'm messing up something, but I thought curated images will show up in the search when clicked on the "curated" label (on the left of the page, next to "recent"). My images don't show up there, instead only in the standard search, thus I understood that they weren't curated.. 
216
« on: May 24, 2014, 06:33 »
I'm a bit confused...
I uploaded several images a few days ago and soon received an email saying that my work has been promoted as a featured gallery and that my images will appear in the search. But as I understand this is not what Crated calls "curation", right? Would the review for curation be the next step?
217
« on: May 20, 2014, 16:16 »
It seems your problem is that you don't count the subscription downloads the same way Fotolia does... The "downloads" in the ranking display are calculated as follows: 1 credit download is counted as 1 ranking "download", 1 subscription download is counted as 1/4 ranking "download".
218
« on: May 17, 2014, 08:31 »
Got a 1.20 credits commission on an XXL sub sale. I'm opted out of DPC, so the buyer must have paid 6 credits for my image. Previously I would have gotten 0.29 credits for the same sale -> 4.83% commission.. what a scam 
219
« on: May 09, 2014, 18:55 »
Opted out my small portfolio (180 files)
220
« on: April 20, 2014, 10:54 »
I shoot travel images, often with tripod and on ISO 100. I used to downsize 16mp files (Nikon D7000) to 12mp. And now I downsize 36mp files (Nikon D800) to 12mp.
Only partly because of approval issues, mostly because I don't see the point of selling 36mp files for subscription prices. Probably for lifestyle images it doesn't really matter, but in my opinion for landscape and travel it does... The full-res files I only use in POD shops. Also 500px Prime has my full-size images, but it remains to be seen if they can sell anything at all.
221
« on: August 09, 2013, 05:51 »
Well I am non-exclusive bronze contributor at Fotolia and I have 2 images uploaded in May 2012 (so not yet 24 months old), which never sold. One of the images has the standard pricing (XS 1 until XL 8 ) and the other the reduced pricing (XS 1 to XL 5)...
222
« on: April 29, 2013, 18:36 »
I'm not sure what to do now... I don't think IS will change its agreement with TS just because some crappy independent contributor with a small port complains about it.. So just swallow the pill and live with fact that there is essentially no size restriction for online usage at all (no matter what agency the image was bought at, because you can never know whether it's from TS or not)? Or just drop IS and loose a decent amount of earnings?... Will have to think about it...
223
« on: April 29, 2013, 18:15 »
Actually in the IS ticket I did say that the images are freely available on Facebook for everybody to share and download. They didn't address that issue in their answer at all...
224
« on: April 29, 2013, 17:44 »
Just received an answer from Istock to my ticket regarding the web size restrictions at TS: Thanks for contacting us.
Please be advised that there is not a size restriction for online usage with the Agreement granted by Thinkstock.
Seems like a lot of usage rights for 28 cents... Maybe I should start thinking about dropping IS...
225
« on: April 19, 2013, 13:33 »
It seems the whole Facebook vs. stock images license issue is a total mess...
Since recently FB offers users the possibility to print every shared photo e.g. on a coffee mug. Who knows what business models involving posted images they will come up in the future...
I will contact IS and ask them about the max web resolution for images sold via TS.
And I will tell the buyer that by posting professional high-resolution images to FB they are playing with fire, since if something goes wrong, FB and TS will make the buyer responsible.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
