|
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 - Jo Ann Snover
Pages: 1 ... 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 87 ... 291
2027
« on: September 23, 2016, 12:46 »
Bizarre site - they have watermarked previews for download. Anyone can get those from the sites themselves...
http://www.freestockhere.com/downloads/summer-3d-dimensional-texts-standing-in-beach-sand-with-sky-and-sun-rays-background-with-flying-colorful-balloons-umbrella-starfish-sunglasses-and-beach-ball-illustration/
and if you click on dowload button on your right you get this image in high quality and without watermark
Got it. And I found one two of mine. I've notified Shutterstock support with details and asked them to try and get the site shut down. It'll take forever if we have to individually file DMCA notices one at a time. The image number FreeStock showed was the Shutterstock image number. I did see some other search results with DepositPhotos previews - so I assume those items were stolen from DP. Seems somewhat ironic given DP's origins. In an incognito window I tried a download. They make money from selling ads (the "free" service) or selling you a "premium" to get faster ad-free downloads. After watching two ads I got a notice that I had to buy a premium as the "file's owner" had disabled free downloads. Total frauds. Edited to ad that I just (Sept 30th, one week after contacting SS) received the standard "We take copyright infringement and theft very seriously...." reply from SS compliance. The images are still up at FreeStockShare. Either there's such a huge flood of infringement and theft cases that they can't even get out the boilerplate reply quickly in spite of their large staff, or they have little to no concern with resolving these problems. Seems to me they just tolerate a certain amount of "shrinkage" as part of doing business
2028
« on: September 23, 2016, 11:22 »
2030
« on: September 21, 2016, 12:42 »
...when is 20,000 tomatoes by example enough???...
The count is even scarier  For all media types, it's 1,371,634
For photos only, it's just 1,285,086... That's a lot of tomatoes.
Even marijuana photos are up to 52,257
The current phase of taking almost anything has rendered the Most Recent search useless - there's so much rubbish to wade through. And here we have someone new wondering why he has no sales - one look at the accepted files explains that.
That doesn't mean there are 1.371.634 images of single tomatoe. That inclued all kinds of food etc...
I don't think nitpicking the details alters the overall point, but in the service of precision: Isoslated tomato (photos only) 342,338 Tomato (photos only, exclude keywords sauce,pasta,soup,bowl,pie,sandwich ) 661,793 There's a lot of terrible keywording (if you search newest first you'll see much more of that) so you could take 25% off the totals assuming that there's not a tomato in sight in some of those images. Bottom line, it's a lot of tomatoes and a lot of repetition
2031
« on: September 20, 2016, 12:44 »
Not only can you sell images yourself (it's finding the buyers that's the hard part!) but you can choose how you license and price them.
Some people have chosen to do a single use license with no size-based pricing. Some follow the model of the major microstock sites with size based prices and extended licenses for multiple seats, items for resale and so on.
The other consideration regarding prices is that you could keep prices reasonable and still collect a lot more from a sale because there's no agency taking a cut (just hosting/web site overhead and PayPal fees). Bear in mind that it's trivial to find out where images are available for sale, so you're not likely to sell many from your own site if the prices are significantly higher than at agency sites - unless you're bundling more rights or adding value in some other way
2032
« on: September 20, 2016, 00:21 »
Do those of us that Fotolia banned have the option to open an Adobe Stock account or are we still unwelcome?
2033
« on: September 19, 2016, 21:41 »
...when is 20,000 tomatoes by example enough???...
The count is even scarier For all media types, it's 1,371,634 For photos only, it's just 1,285,086... That's a lot of tomatoes. Even marijuana photos are up to 52,257 The current phase of taking almost anything has rendered the Most Recent search useless - there's so much rubbish to wade through. And here we have someone new wondering why he has no sales - one look at the accepted files explains that.
2034
« on: September 19, 2016, 15:30 »
Looking at your tutorial page - it'd be nice if your examples were larger as you really can't see much from those tiny screenshots - I don't think you can possibly do the sort of work needed to manage stock photos automatically https://guru.axonimage.com/tutorialWhat is "Auto Awesome"? Some variation of the automatic contrast and color balance that apps like Photoshop provide? Fine for selfies and instagram but not if you want to submit stock for sale. I find it hard to accept that there is any way you can sift through images to decide which are good ones to upload - what are your criteria? I'm not asking for trade secrets, just some sort of overview. With keywords, your example of a tree is pretty straightforward - how do you deal with lifestyle images or those where a specific location or other technical information is essential? Shutterstock's auto-keywording feature is probably helpful for some images (particularly for a non-native speaker) but I can't imagine that you can tell Portland Maine from Portland Oregon or handle a multi-ethnic business meeting or food prep or... And do you handle releases? There's only a time saving if the information provided is any good - otherwise you have an automated way to consign images to oblivion. Good keywords are critical.
2035
« on: September 19, 2016, 09:23 »
...1042s from shutterstock is not suitable because it is not government organization...
As far as I know, the IRS never issues paperwork about money earned or taxes withheld from it - that is always done by the company that paid the earnings and withheld the tax (and Shutterstock has to file paperwork with the IRS to pay them the money Shutterstock withheld from you). The IRS does have a Russian language help section if that helps: https://www.irs.gov/russian
2036
« on: September 17, 2016, 11:50 »
2038
« on: September 10, 2016, 18:38 »
If you had bothered to look around a bit, you'd have seen that these files are offered at other agencies, not just Shutterstock. Both are at 123rf.com, for example, and they are 10 credits each for the vector file (which is what you want, not a PSD, so you can scale it to any size).
Perhaps you're not really aware of how the market works, but you could do some basic legwork to find out what your options are for prices - and as noted it's $29 for two files at Shutterstock, not $50. If you can't afford $20 or $29, then perhaps you should explore other options.
2039
« on: September 09, 2016, 18:10 »
...PicturEngine is released to the public with a few features disabled. To turn on all the bells and whistles, visual search, More Like This, real-time search deduping, phone and tablet front-end formatting, and more, we must first get PicturEngine to the market.
Great that this project is still going, but I don't really understand the above - what does getting PicturEngine to market actually entail and when will that happen? You mention a public campaign - when will that happen and what sort of activities will be included. If I look at the information on the web site, I see this (color added by me): PicturEngine is much more than a search engine. We bring content creators and buyers together to find and license the best work. Our intuitive search and discovery tools take the buyer through a journey to find the best image for their projects and concepts. Real-time data and analytics ensure that content creators are submitting work that sells and is in demand among buyers. PicturEngine features unbiased searches with never-before-seen images from new sources, as well as images from traditional agencies. With a click, buyers can license straight from the source. That sounds as if you're filtering out some of a contributor's work - is that the case and if so, how is that done and what are the criteria? I have no idea what platforms you support for advertising only and couldn't find a list in the FAQ. There is nothing explaining what, if anything, PicturEngine does for the Advertising Only package other than show images in a search if someone happens upon the site. Some details on what the monthly fee is purchasing would be helpful. What are the criteria used to order images in search results? You don't offer a choice and there's clearly some sort of clustering of agencies based on some quick checks I did and multi-word searches have results that don't even include all the words higher up than those with all of the words, suggesting some sort of ranking other than by the search terms. Some of the results didn't appear to have any of the keywords - possibly there are still some bugs? Given the large number of images returned, some sorts of filters (people/no people, horiz/vert/square, photo/illustration, exclude keywords) would be helpful - are those in the works? Right now I'm not seeing much beyond a basic keyword search. Perhaps you can fill in more details - on the site FAQ or here - so we can see if this is a good fit?
2040
« on: September 09, 2016, 12:18 »
...With the release of the new tools (coming soon) you'll be able to select RF editorial too.
Cheers
James A
I've been holding off uploading more to Alamy hoping for the release of these new tools and went to their forums today to see if there was any news. A couple of days ago another contributor started a topic to ask if there was a date yet and the answer was no - they're "coming soon", but no date. Rushing things out without testing them has tripped other agencies up and clearly isn't a good thing. On the other hand, we're six months down the road from the original mention of these tools and still not close enough to give any kind of target date for release. If these tools are another year away because they really aren't a high priority, then it'd make sense to go through the very painful process of using the current Manage Images tool to get stuff online. It would be a courtesy to contributors to give some sort of timeframe (and this is done regularly by software companies; this isn't a pie-in-the-sky request) so we can figure out how best to proceed.
2042
« on: September 07, 2016, 11:59 »
Over 93 million royalty-free stock images / Over 800,000 new stock images added weekly
Probably they are going to slow down now.
They don't update that number, but if you look at any image, scroll down to see a live total. Right now it says: 99,917,192 royalty-free stock images / 837,058 new stock images added this week We should roll over the 100 million mark some time tomorrow? Edited a few hours later as we're now at 99,936,641!! Perhaps later today if the Marijuana port/endless identical icons port and the random geometric shape vector ports get busy Huge seas of crap with probably about 60 million worthwhile items... I've uploaded over the last week and have seen mostly acceptances - often within 2 minutes of submitting. A batch of 10 images doesn't get looked at by a human in 2 minutes, so that has to be a fully automated "review". There was one batch with a few rejections - much more like earlier in the year - but otherwise they were taking everything. Other than "SS review is a total crapshoot" I really can't draw any conclusions
2043
« on: September 05, 2016, 19:21 »
I'm not even started my sales itself.All my graph shows Zero "0".Why??[https://www.shutterstock.com/g/r_D_r]
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/r_D_r
If I read your post correctly you have had no sales.
No sales= no data to plot that's why your graph is showing zeros
Your rite, but how i will showcase my data to customers can you please & to survive in photography
Please read this thread about work uploaded to Shutterstock, I think by you, that includes the work of another artist (Santa Claus illustration). http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/find-a-port-on-ss-with-stolen-images/msg463324/#msg463324If this is you, you need to immediately remove all work you've uploaded (on other sites if you've done that) that includes the work of other people. That is copyright infringement and you will have your account closed at the agency if you're found to be uploading work that is not your own - every element must have been created by you. As you (I think) said you haven't had sales and appear to be new to this, you might get the benefit of the doubt if you act immediately to fix this serious error.
2045
« on: August 29, 2016, 20:44 »
Maybe we should all start re-uploading the photos that are missing?
They're still there - just temporarily hidden by broken code. No need to upload (they automatically check for images already in the portfolio and will reject if you try it)
2046
« on: August 29, 2016, 19:17 »
How can you loose a photo, if you bookmark direct link to that file?
Links with the image ID in them - like this one - work even though the image can't be found via a search or in my portfolio. I don't know about the other link forms as I don't have any to hand. I don't know if downloading would work as I don't have a buyer account to test it out.
2047
« on: August 29, 2016, 18:56 »
They have clearly done something awful in "improving" the site.A search I've been monitoring over the last month or two that should return about 24K results now returns about 3.5K and my portfolio of just over 2K images shows as 384
Idiots
2048
« on: August 27, 2016, 13:49 »
This is a very helpful survey for the community to have. I encourage everyone to respond.
As this is your first post on MSG, I wondered who you were - is this you? http://blog.johnlund.com/2011/05/photographer-shannon-fagan-answers.htmlhttp://www.shannonfagan.com/If it is, why would microstock issues be of interest - do you contribute to any of the microstock agencies? A little more explanation about why you think this survey would be helpful to the contributors here might be helpful (if you're hoping to increase responses from this group)
2049
« on: August 26, 2016, 13:42 »
Well, I just made $13 from a $25 download, so hooray for that. One of those a day will make me happy with GL.
Glad to hear it. Have you seen any increase in sales volume since the pricing change? I was feeling positive about new owners until they went for the one-price model. I thought I'd just see what happened with sales -haven't had any recently. If I see any sales at all, I might start uploading again (I haven't for a very long time at GL Stock), but otherwise, it seems there's no point. My previous sales were more small and medium than large, and those just effectively went up in price (I've just left pricing alone, meaning any size is $10). Lowering prices to accommodate bloggers means giving away bus-wrap size for a pittance, which I don't want to do. I think (for photographers anyway) one price makes no sense for a general purpose site.
2050
« on: August 25, 2016, 16:24 »
Whats an API?
I read a little on the site and the owner said he dropped $250K to buy the domain, and then added 57K photos from one photographer.
Application Programming Interface. Lots of their images are just from Deposit Photos web site - you can see the watermark on them. Possibly that's why the site's so slow to load search results. It's also worth noting that there is no contributor or copyright credit shown. There is nothing I could find about royalties or contributor terms on the site (I wasn't going to create an account to see). I don't know how you could contribute directly, but if you're with Deposit Photos, you're there as well (I assume DP still has its opt out for partner arrangements, allowing those who don't want to participate to skip it). Lee Torrens is shown as one of the founders - not sure how this fits with his involvement with Canva, but perhaps they aren't seen as a competitor so Canva doesn't mind. What is the point of a site with similar pricing to Deposit Photos using Deposit Photos content? Seems like a waste of time unless there's some marketing money to try and find a pool of buyers from somewhere. And given the bargain basement pricing, not sure it's good for contributors to have yet another middleman siphoning off buyer cash - some for stockphoto.com, some for Deposit Photos and whatever's left for the poor schmuck who actually created the product...
Pages: 1 ... 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 87 ... 291
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
