|
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 - click_click
Pages: 1 ... 79 80 81 82 83 [84] 85 86 87 88 89 ... 119
2076
« on: November 09, 2010, 11:24 »
...Seems iStock is working hard to retain their position as the top microstock company, at least when it comes to site downtime, bugs, and slow speeds.
LOL.
2077
« on: November 09, 2010, 09:33 »
...In my case, the price per sale has dropped significantly over the past year (even without counting Novel Use) and I'm just wondering if it's the same with others.
On the last three RF sales I had I received a tenth of what the list price/commission was  Large resolution but micro pay. 
2078
« on: November 08, 2010, 14:25 »
Ha now I see it on the uploads page as well.
Thanks for the reference.
2079
« on: November 08, 2010, 13:32 »
I had issues uploading all morning until now 1:30pm EST.
Now uploads have been suspended. Ugh. What's going on NOW...?
Don't tell me that they are actually trying to fix any F5 bugs. If that's the case, just leave it the way it was, at least I can upload...
2080
« on: November 07, 2010, 09:05 »
Thanks for your help! Much appreciated.
2081
« on: November 07, 2010, 08:55 »
(125 credits) x (amount paid per credit by the buyer) x (your rate .20 for nonexclusives) = $
So according to the different credit values by iStock: http://www.istockphoto.com/rate_schedule.phpit would be: 125 x $0.95 to $1.52 x 0.2 = $23.75 to $38 ?
2082
« on: November 07, 2010, 08:45 »
Sorry for my uneducated question:
How much $$$ am I supposed to get for a 125 credits Unlimited Reproduction / Print Runs?
I've been researching my eyes bloody to figure out my EL commission rate as a non-excl.
I would greatly appreciate a response so I could contact support and ask for more $$$ if that's the case.
2083
« on: November 05, 2010, 14:25 »
Never had a sale at AlwaysHD but Clipcanvas looks promising...
2084
« on: November 03, 2010, 10:46 »
Did you try to play with the "active", "passive" setting?
I often had issues with FTP uploads because of those settings. Some FTP clients automatically switch to passive if active is not working correctly. Maybe you have to switch your client manually to passive.
2085
« on: November 02, 2010, 15:13 »
Posted By Jokia:
Hey guys, that was a complete oversight on our end - our Legal Counsel thought that had been removed from the Rules. One of our designers is fixing that asap, but we can assure you that you definitely retain copyright to any submissions! Sorry for the confusion!
Good to know that: a) their legal counsel thought (not checked - why should they, it only involves $20,000 in cash etc.) b) a "designer" is fixing a legal document. c) one retains copyright d) the files probably will still be used for promotional purposes without compensation. LOL
2086
« on: November 02, 2010, 12:28 »
Will be in Frankfurt next week, will have to check out those sites. From my understanding you need a couple of people to operate a RED camera. Has anyone used one?
Na, you're good by yourself. Just throw the camera on your left shoulder and the tripod on the other. Just tie a rope around your waste to drag the remaining equipment with you on a dolly like (lenses, monitor, cables, battery packs etc.). 
2087
« on: November 02, 2010, 08:52 »
IS does run "sales", up to 25% off credit prices (or even 30%?), which would shift the cost down to around there anyways. Frankly, if they want to discount, or offer sales, it should come out of their pocket. I don't see why we should have to eat their decisions.
Well, you know, it doesn't work that way, does it?
The term sweatshop comes to mind with the difference that we do it voluntarily 
2088
« on: November 02, 2010, 08:05 »
At most bigger agencies we have lost the overview of what credits are purchased or worth.
I for myself can only say how great SS is because (despite not getting a raise) I always get a minimum of .38 - no matter how cheap they sell their subscription plans.
The last 3 sales I had at Alamy for an RF image was 1/10th of the listed price. Large resolutions but very little pay - getting close to an Maximum price at DT.
IS, FT, Alamy and DT even try to keep big clients (or win them) by offering super discounts. I had 11 cents XS sales on IS - just imagine how it's going to be in January 2011?
2089
« on: November 01, 2010, 20:12 »
Well to put it short and what works for me is:
- MOV container format
- PhotoJPG for animations
- MotionJPG for filmed clips
- 95% quality
- Full HD 30fps
2090
« on: November 01, 2010, 11:22 »
thanks for the reply dnavarrojr
One thing that always confuses me is 30 fps compared to 29.97 fps. Sometimes people actually mean 29.97 fps when they say 30fps and other times 30 fps is actually 30 fps.
The 5d Mark II shot at an actual 30fps until a recent upgrade (I believe) and now it shoots at 29.97 fps ... or am I mistaken.
I'm under the impression that 24 or 30 fps are 23.976 or 29.97 fps respectively when going into broadcasting. Originally 30fps were used in the old black and white days. Once color came into the game they "slowed" it down to 29.97. Plenty of resources online about that stuff
2091
« on: November 01, 2010, 11:15 »
Does "No" imply that one opted in before but has now opted out? I'm confused.
2092
« on: October 31, 2010, 21:05 »
There isn't a way to make sure, as DT doesn't separate out what you got paid from partner programs (pixmac) and what they are paying you. At least I have not found a place where they report that. That's the big problem I have with the partner programs. And I don't think BigStock separates out what comes from colossus or media bakery or whatever, and what comes from their site.
That's right unfortunately. I also wish we could get reports separately from the resellers so we can decide if it's worth offering our images there or not. I dare to assume that the reseller sales numbers are small but in the end it means some sort of additional revenue for the agencies so they will keep offering their API to anyone who wants it.
2093
« on: October 29, 2010, 20:01 »
I see the "thumbnail" watermark from Pixmac on both of those images. What are you guys talking about?
2094
« on: October 29, 2010, 18:28 »
Crap, I was opted in. Now I'm opted out. 
Well, that explains a lot. However, some of my images (even from the same series) are listed in "Budget" and "Premium". This must pi$$ of some buyers for sure. I don't understand what the whole point of that is.
2095
« on: October 29, 2010, 18:17 »
2096
« on: October 29, 2010, 18:15 »
...So why is colossus from the Czech Republic, according to the page? Bigstock, I thought, was a US company.
I cannot answer this for you, but I suggest you contact Bigstockphoto AND Pixmac directly to get valid answers. I had this conversation (mentioned above) with Bigstockphoto earlier this year. Maybe things have changed...
2097
« on: October 29, 2010, 18:08 »
AFAIK "colossus" is a pseudonym for images from Bigstockphoto.
I'm pretty sure. I contacted them a while ago and they explained that they use the pseydonym due to the higher price point. They didn't want potential buyers to come straight to them, buying the images for a fraction compared to Pixmac prices.
I told them that I'm not happy about the fact that our names are not being used. But obviously that didn't matter to them in regards to the current handling of the files.
I just checked my old emails - it's Bigstockphoto. They used to post the images under the pseydonym "Mediabaker" which was discussed on some forums as well. Very confusing. But supposedly this is all legit.
2098
« on: October 27, 2010, 12:30 »
Im sure there is a post lurking here about the Agency collection but as some posts keep getting hijacked, I thought Id start another! I buy a lot from micro and macro, and I just went to look on istock for a generic image of 'colour'... OMG! 2nd page is full of 'Agency' stuff of an asian woman and a guy running with some fake clouds and skyline (both series stood out as obviously not correctly positioned and the price too, unbelieveable!), whole series of them, so frustrating I just quit out and went to Veer... Im sure there is more but I havent the time. If it wasnt for this site and being a contributor too I would never be aware of that stuff and would just think how awful they were, can this be turned off?
So.... 2 things.... as a user, they are going to really p**s people off, I havent the time to wade thorugh the s**t and 2 as a contributor this stuff is at the front of the best match search and is irrelevant, I really think this will hurt istocks reputation.
I think if iStock believes everything they do is good, it's about time that buyers provide some feedback as well to them. I understand that it's easier for a buyer to just switch to another agency without handing out some feedback. But it appears that basic issues like the OP mentions should be brought to IS attention from the buyer side - since these people put the money into their unsustainable pockets.
2099
« on: October 26, 2010, 07:54 »
I am a newbie for Alamy and l lot of questions about it.....
If I choose Licenced ,does it mean I can NOT upload this photo to somewhere?
You can still upload images everywhere else that are L (Licensed) but you cannot do that if you select License Protected (which means exclusivity).
Thanks a lot for reply...
Shouldn't that be 'RF' !? not 'L' ??
OK I wasn't very specific. Alamy is a non-exclusive agency. Therefore you can upload non-exclusive RF and L content. Licensed doesn't mean exclusive. It means that it is licensed differently than RF with other restrictions and requirements. That in itself has nothing to do with exclusivity. Preferably you should upload L content only to non-exclusive agencies that also offer L content (RM). However, most traditional agencies want their RM content to be exclusive. So be careful where you offer your L (RM) stuff. Usually if you contact the agency directly and ask them they will let you know if it's ok. License Protected means that the image is exclusive to Alamy. But even a buyer that wants an L image exclusively may contact Alamy and they will ask you if it's possible to license it exclusively. Then you would have to remove it from the other agencies so the buyer can be assured that it's exclusive to them.
2100
« on: October 25, 2010, 20:32 »
I am a newbie for Alamy and l lot of questions about it.....
1) Do Alamy using the ftp tool for contributor to upload photo? Seems they only using their tool to let us to upload photo right?
No FTP upload possible. Only the "Alamy Upload" tool is available for uploading. A new version is in beta testing right now. So it should be updated soon.
2) Any problem about Alamy server? I upload form Asia but 5 photo submmiting spend me more than 3 hours! I can not stand for it.
It never took me that long to upload. Sometimes an upload fails but it's never that slow for me. Contact your ISP maybe to find out more.
3) Which one mostly choosed for licence type? Royalty free/ Licenced or Licenced protected?
That depends on the image. Most licenses selected are RF and L (L protected means exclusivity).
If I choose Licenced ,does it mean I can NOT upload this photo to somewhere?
You can still upload images everywhere else that are L (Licensed) but you cannot do that if you select License Protected (which means exclusivity).
4) last question maybe not a question: what;s the price about licened photo selling?
Use the license calculator on Alamy to answer your question. It depends on many factors like type of use, print run, territory etc. No one here can answer that question.
Thanks a lot for reply...
Pages: 1 ... 79 80 81 82 83 [84] 85 86 87 88 89 ... 119
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
